Indagando sobre las NET

A remarkable work of Yu. Lotman «Conversations on Russian Сulture. Life and traditions of Russian nobility (XVIII – early XIX century)» can be called a kind of projection of the world of Russian society. Since 1) any text is a particular type of semiosis; 2) any text is a model for reproducing the image of the world, recreating of objective reality due to this an actual question arises how the linguistic worldview looks like during described linguistic-cultural situation and what position the individual worldview of Yu. M. Lotman himself occupies in the text.

«A system of key concepts and invariant key ideas connecting them shapes the linguistic worldview (as if they give a «key» for its comprehension)» (Zaliznyak 2012, p. 12). There are typical key concepts for Russian linguistic worldview such as «Soul,» «Destiny,» «Anguish,» «Happiness,» «Separation,» «Justice,» «Truth,» «Love.» In «Conversations on Russian Culture» some of these concepts are represented, but the concept «Family» occupies an exceptional position.

The core of the concept “Family” forms its conceptual meaning as 1) «a group of relatives living together (a husband and a wife, parents with children)» and as 2) «a unity, union of people connected by common interests»(Ozhegov 2012, p. 1063) as well as «the smallest social group - integrity based on marriage, cognation,

Modern Journal of Language Teaching Methods ISSN: 2251-6204

Vol. 9, Issue 1, January2019

Page 63

adoption is also possible and connected by stable personal relationship usually by common mode of life; generally about a small and close group of people living with common interests» (p. 571). The focus on the usage frequency allows making an initial opinion about the position and the role of the concept «Family» in the text. On three hundred ninety-three pages of the main text with page-based footnotes an eponymous lexeme is used 56 times in various forms, other «representatives» of the same word-formation cluster: «family (adj.)» - 23, «family (n.)» - 15, «features describing family relations»- 3,»family-type»- 0. There are numerous groups of words that reveal the content of the concept «Family» in the first meaning (let's mention some of them): «origin»- 81, «relative» - 29, « a parent» - 28, «to be born» - 18, «to give birth» - 13, «kinfolk» - 14, «having kinship ties» ”- 12, «related by blood» - 4 etc. «Family» as a community related to marriage is also convincingly represented in the text: «a wife» - 124, «a husband» - 91, « a bride» - 54, «marriage» - 40, «wedding»- 36, «a groom» - 33, «to get married» - 20, «divorce» - 19, «to be married» - 16, «conjugal» - 8 etc. Even a quick observation of words usage frequency representing the concept «Family» in a text, notwithstanding family relations in the specified period of time, can indicate many things. Lifestyle of family, kinship ties designate special relationship between people: both managing a common household and full support of each other both in financial situations (in achieving ranks, high status), in spiritual (difficult life situations, particularly relations between husbands wives, children and parents) and introducing the noble feelings (loyalty, devotion, love, respect). Moreover, moral guidelines of Russian people of that era are laid down in the family: honoring of folk traditions and openness to new trends, fond of reading and the desire to imitate the noble actions of ancient and romantic heroes. In general, a positive family image of that period is created and affirmed in Lotman's text. Thus, the concept «Family» which cannot be categorically called the only essential for the linguistic worldview reconstruction according to Lotman’s text nevertheless is recognized as a fundamental concept on which life and traditions of Russian society are based. The family has always played a significant role both in economic and in the moral life of Russia being an economic and moral basis of people's lives [Fatkullina 2017). Family, kinship ties, close family ties to them form the culture of people, constitute its originality, help to explain and understand the peculiarities of national linguistic worldview (broader - mentality).

While describing the concept “Family” it is necessary to take into account the bilateral nature of its reflection in the text “Conversation on Russian Сulture” as a collective concept inherent in the national worldview, and as an individual, reflecting the peculiarities of the individual linguistic worldview, Yu. M. Lotman ’s peculiar cognitive perception. Yury Mikhaylovich was steadfast to his family, and his relatives and friends evidence it. The scientist being an elite linguistic personality is seeking opportunities to express his ideas about family values and his attitude to the events described. Choosing a correct lexeme: “Serf harems were strangeness (oddity) demonstration (manifestation) of life of this era (italics of the authors of the article)” [Lotman Talks, p. 105], a parenthetical construction such as “... Marrying a beautiful girl without life and secular experience, without money and even, apparently, without love for him...” (Lotman 1997, p. 72), a direct comment: "You should not hurry with condemnations of Suvorov’s wife which were late for more than two hundred years... " (Lotman 1997, p. 277) and other means which help Yu. M. Lotman not only to acquaint the reader with the concept "Family" in the Russian linguistic worldview but also to form an attitude corresponding to his manifestations.

The peripheral zone of the concept "Family" is made up by symbolic representations and cultural data. The concept "Family" is closely connected with such concepts as "Customs and rites of Russians" ("Matchmaking", "Wedding"), "Rank", "Character and behavior of a person", "Game", "Feelings", in other words, It forms a person and surrounds him all his life (Fatkullina 2015).

Note that active author’s appeal to the intertextuality phenomenon is author’s peculiarity in the representation of the concept “Family” in the book “Conversation on Russian Culture” that is to say, the author wants the reader to have a complete, reliable and unbiased view of family in the Russian linguistic worldview.

Appealing to intertextuality, or "creation linguistic constructions" text in text "and" text about text ”is connected with the active placing dialogues which allow him to go beyond its sphere of subjective, individual consciousness, and add in the text several subjects of utterance which are the agents of different artistic systems" (Fateeva 2012, p. 4). The author states that the Text and the Reader are in a state of dialogue: the text is created taking into account the intended audience, and the latter makes efforts to understand the cultural codes embodied in the Text. According to Yu. M. Lotman, understanding cultural tradition is the basis of intertextuality in its cultural sense: "The memory of the text is the sum of contexts in which a given text

Modern Journal of Language Teaching Methods ISSN: 2251-6204

Vol. 9, Issue 1, January2019

Page 64

becomes meaningful, and they in a certain way incorporated in it. Semantic space created by the text enters into a certain relationship with the cultural memory (tradition), put in the audience consciousness. As a result, the text regains its semiotic life" (Lotman 1997, p. 162).

Yu. M. Lotman uses different ways of incorporating the precedent texts into the main text: an exact quotation indicating the source, retelling, and implication. However, the important thing is the choice of particular texts, which serve as objective evidence of the author’s view of that time family. The family appears to be a controversial factor uniting native people, organizing their life and place in society, oppressive in some cases (concerning women), and bringing up the best qualities in a person (loyalty). Most of the intertextual elements in the text "Conversation on Russian Culture" are related to the description of family life patterns and has a literary origin. The “family thought” was expressed in Russian literature to its full extent. The material from foreign literature was also drawn for comparison.

Yu. M. Lotman also refers to the memoir literature, evaluating it quite critically, abundantly commenting, "And yet Lubzina’s memoirs are a valuable resource for the historian. He will not see a comprehensive, objective worldview here. Here he will find eyes that look at this world"(Lotman 1997, p. 313).

Further, folklore material is used as a correlation with a noble conception of family relations: “At the beginning of the 19th century, nobility showed a tendency to come closer to ritual folk customs, even though in a specifically modified form” [Lotman 1997, p. 112].

Acquaintance with archival materials allows Yu.M.Lotman to give extensive historical references, to talk about real facts from the lives of famous and little-known people: "So, Pushkin, preparing for the wedding, arranged a stag night in Moscow with Vyazemsky, Nashchokin and other friends. After dinner, we went to the Gypsies to listen to their songs. This episode is colorfully described by the gypsy woman Tanya in her artless memories, remained in writer B. M. Markevich’s records ... " (Lotman 1997, pp. 112-113).

In general, the concept “Family” in this article appears in Yu. M. Lotman text as a basis, the foundation of the whole lifestyle of a man of that time. Established family relationships, in some cases surprising by inconsistency, hide in themselves both positive and negative traits. The main thing is to recognize that the actions of the best people of Russia, formed due to family values have become the guarantee of Russian culture blossoming.

Thus, the concept “Family” takes the worthy place in Russian linguistic worldview and, being insufficiently presented in the existing works on concepts or constants of Russian culture, it will be the subject of keen interest of researchers. Valuable material can be found in Yu. M. Lotman’s work, which has a unique approach to the study of culture (through the details of everyday life). In our opinion, it requires linguistic and cultural perception, which later allows to include the missing elements in the general mosaic presentation of Russian linguistic worldview in the diachronic aspect.

Scientific and methodical researches in the description of concepts gain topicality nowadays. And it seems to us that in the world where material often acts as a decisive factor, and "fate" of the separate linguistic and cultural concepts characterizing "specifics of culture as the sets of human achievements in all spheres of life opposed to the nature" (Karasik 2007, page 28) causes serious fears, the concept “Love” deserves close attention. “It directly relates to the human sense of life as the goal, the achievement of which is beyond its immediate individual existence” [ibid.].

This concept holds a special place in the Russian linguistic worldview.

On the one hand, all native speakers seem to have an idea about the content of the concept “Love”: 1) feeling of self-sacrificing, hearty attachment to man; 2) tendency, addiction to something (Ojegov 2012, page 506). The linguistic and cognitive, linguistic and cultural history of "Love" is less definite. According to Yu.S. Stepanov, "in Russian culture the concept "Love" is conceptually not developed … or chastely is not discussed" (Stepanov 1997, page 438). Among 80 concepts characterizing spiritual, mental, material spheres of human life, concept "Love" did not find reflection in "Russian ideographic dictionary." In our opinion, this is the case when the absence of a fact (on the background of dictionary representing the description of such concepts as “Soul”, “Good”) it eloquently demonstrates the complexity of its isolation and rational description, a certain illusiveness of its existence, understatement and lack of expression in Russian linguistic worldview.

On the other hand, at the turn of XX – XXI centuries, as if in opposition to the observed signs of spiritual crisis in society, the attention of researchers to study the concept "Love" on the rich empirical material has increased. Comparative historical research allows to note changes in the content of the concept “Love,” due to the loss of

Modern Journal of Language Teaching Methods ISSN: 2251-6204

Vol. 9, Issue 1, January2019

Page 65

its religious understanding and the gradual transition into the category of strictly anthropocentric categories (Sakaeva et al. 2017)].

The enhancement of the concept "Love" description leads to a change in its status, in particular to the representation as a text concept. Moreover, it occupies a dominant position in the hierarchy of text concepts and acts as the main sign of the anthropocentrism of an artistic text (Fatkullina 2002). The concept “Love” as a multifaceted phenomenon can represent a fragment of character’s original world and can be an element of the textual sphere of concepts, but first of all, it can serve as an individual concept in the author’s language view, a kind of key to understanding his linguistic identity.

An increased interest in the description of key concepts in the individual cognitive space of prominent representatives of Russian culture became a regular stage in the development of linguistic personalities branch in modern domestic science.

In this work, we single out some essential issues which do not pretend to be a complete review of the current studying of the emotional component of Russian linguistic worldview.

First of all, the concern in the category of emotiveness in the language is determined to some objective factors, primarily the formation and development of the anthropocentric paradigm in linguistics.

Nowadays rich material has been accumulated which allows making profound theoretical conclusions about origin peculiarities, definition, functioning and content of the concept “Love” in Russian linguistic worldview. Despite the diversity of research materials, scientists come to the similar conclusion: love is a strong and deep feeling that cannot be rationally explained and controlled, which can change a lot in the attitude and behavior of a person, make him perform noble and improper actions. It can be the highest good, pleasure, but also can be evil. Happy love needs reciprocity. “Love” converges other important concepts of Russian worldview such as “friendship,” “kinship,” “family,” “sacrifice,” “pity,” “passion,” “hate.”

The similar-named concept is acknowledged as key in the emotional sphere of Russian worldview; therefore, its study is of paramount importance for the knowledge of the national mentality of the people as a whole. This concept is undoubtedly linguistic-cultural since its content, and national and cultural traditions, historical experience, and people's world perception determine it.

Like any emotional concept "Love" is multifaceted, subjective, especially in the peripheral zone, and its description is inexhaustible from any point of view. Analysis of this particular concept requires a special sensitivity and delicacy from the researcher. "Love" is often expressed in understatement, in the incompleteness of any action, so it can not have an unambiguous and definitive interpretation, either in common understanding or in the scientific perception in Russian linguistic-cultural aspect. Thanks to the achievements of modern linguistic thought and linguistic-cultural studies, interesting opportunities are opening up for further study of the concept “Love” in Russian linguistic worldview.

Let us further consider the conceptualization of proper names in “Conversation on Russian Culture."The individual names presented in this work gradually “outgrow” their original status defined for them in the language in which the onomastic space makes up the names of real-life, hypothetical and fantastic objects and their separate states perceived objectively, including individual living beings. , collectives, inanimate objects, places on the surface of the earth, underground and outside the Earth, sounds, movements, ideas. In the individual linguistic worldview, proper names find their place according to linguistic-cultural characteristics, caused, in our understanding, by the role played in the cultural space, by the degree of recognition (precedence) among similar ones, to the significance of the native speaker. Thus, the process of transition of such names into the category of precedent, now understood as individual names associated with well-known texts or with precedent situations (Khairullina et al. 2017) looks logical. For example, in “Conversations on Russian culture,” the names perceived by the author (and, after him, the reader) as precedent can be included such as "A. S. Pushkin", "Onegin," "Peter I," "Chatsky," "M. I. Kutuzov," "Borodino," "Europe," "Russia." Thus, their use reveals natural connection and relationships, which in their peculiar way represent the author’s worldview.

The concept, denoted by the proper name, naturally combines the characteristics of the concept in a linguistic- cultural sense (as mental education, characterizing "the specificity of culture as a totality of human achievements in all spheres of life opposed to nature") (Karasik 2009) and the proper name itself. Thus, not all precedent names can claim to be concepts. We believe that the recognition of a name as a concept is based on such factors:

1) possession of complete and comprehensive information relating to this name;

Modern Journal of Language Teaching Methods ISSN: 2251-6204

Vol. 9, Issue 1, January2019

Page 66

2) the formation of their own opinions, yet allowing a critical attitude on the carrier of this individual name; 3) the frequency of addressing (both explicitly and implicitly) to him in the process of speech ;

4) a high degree of significance for the individual, manifested in a constant "presence" in personal life and professional activities;

5) choosing it as a kind of sample in their behavior, even the “measure” of events, the actions of other people which have become the subject of reasoning and evaluation.

Thus, the concept represented by a proper name denotes an individual name that carries linguistic-cultural information, which is a precedent for a given native speaker and for other members of the linguistic and cultural community, having an increased degree of importance in the linguistic worldview of a person, in his speech and communication activities.

In “Conversations on Russian Culture” one can find such precedent names that have survived the process of conceptualization in Yu. M. Lotman’s worldview. Among them, first of all, it should be called toponyms and anthroponyms, or personalities. In our case, the study of proper names having conceptual significance, judging by the text “Conversations on Russian Culture,” makes it possible to designate values for Yu. M. Lotman’s linguistic personality.

In the Lotman's worldview, “Pushkin” is an unconditional concept: his very name in the text “Conversations on Russian Culture” ranks first among proper names regarding frequency — 426 times (including five times in quotations and once as “Alexander Sergeevich”). Further, Lotman’s perception of Pushkin is much deeper than an ordinary member of the modern linguistic-cultural community, for whom he is “a Russian national poet, a model of humanity and honor, absolute authority in all deeds, thoughts, and words, whom they want to equal, never reaching his level and strength” (Karasik 2009). Concept “A. S. Pushkin” is revealed in the text as a multidimensional phenomenon, acting in the frame of precedent phenomena and intertextual relations. In “Conversations on Russian Culture”, Pushkin appears primarily as a man of his time, leaving numerous testimonies with great value in the eyes of a modern researcher: “Pushkin’s words about the Decabrists: “Brothers, friends, comrades” - exclusively characterize the hierarchy of intimacy in relationships between the people of the Decabrist camp ”(Lotman 1997, p.369).

In the eyes of Lotman, Pushkin is undoubtedly the great Russian poet, whose work became the property of the Russian people: “With his approach to the norm, to the ideal, he recalls Pushkin’s contribution to Russian