Metaphor in Ossetian Literary-Critical Text
https://doi.org/10.24224/2227-1295-2024-13-4-93-110
Abstract
The article is dedicated to the study of metaphor as a means of forming scientific concepts and creating expressive-illustrative context. The research aims to identify types and sources of metaphorical transfers in Ossetian literary-critical texts and analyze their functioning as an important part of the language of these texts. The novelty of this study lies in the first-ever analysis of metaphor types in Ossetian literary-critical texts, verbalizing scientific concepts and creating an expressive field specific to scientific discourse. Sources of metaphors and their functions are identified. The study reveals that the main types of metaphors in the language of the texts under investigation are nominative, figurative, poetic (individual), and cognitive. Sources of metaphors include nature-mimetic and anthropocentric, acoustic, visual, and spatial groups, artifacts, symbols, etc. Metaphors are integrated into the content of the texts as essential linguistic material capable of creating a scientific context and reflecting the scientific worldview of the people. Many scientific concepts and a range of artistic-illustrative means in the analyzed texts can be considered borrowings from the Russian language, indicating a connection between the two languages in the scientific sphere of communication.
About the Authors
R. G. Tsopanova
North Ossetian State University named after Kosta Levanovich Khetagurov
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Rita G. Tsopanova, Doctor of Philology, Professor, Department of Ossetian Language
Vladikavkaz
F. A. Tsarikaeva
North Ossetian State University named after Kosta Levanovich Khetagurov
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Fatima A. Tsarikaeva, PhD in Pedagogy, Associate Professor, Head of the Department of Ossetian Language
Vladikavkaz
E. S. Kachmazova
North Ossetian State University named after Kosta Levanovich Khetagurov
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Ezetkhan S. Kachmazova, PhD in Philology, Associate Professor, Department of Ossetian Language
Vladikavkaz
References
1. Arsenyeva, I. A. (2022). Reconstruction of metaphorical conceptualization of nouns with abstract semantics. Philological sciences, 6: 31—41. DOI: https://doi.org/10.20339/PhS.6-22.031. (In Russ.).
2. Arutyunova, N. D. (1999). Language and the human world, 2nd ed., ispr. Moscow: Languages of Russian Culture. 896 p. ISBN 5-7859-0027-0. (In Russ.).
3. Arutyunova, N. D. (1990). Metaphor and discourse. In: The Theory of metaphor: A collection. Moscow: Progress. 5—32. ISBN 5-01-001599-4. (In Russ.).
4. Bally, Sh. (1961). French stylistics. Moscow: Publishing House of Foreign Literature. 394 p. (In Russ.).
5. Black, M. (1990). Metaphor “Models and Metaphors” (1962). In: The theory of metaphor. Moscow: [b. i.]. 153—172. (In Russ.).
6. Chudinov, A. P. (2006). Political linguistics: a textbook. Moscow: Flint: Nauka. 256 p. ISBN 978-5-89349-897-4. (In Russ.).
7. Gak, V. G. (1998). Linguistic transformations. Moscow: Shk. “Yaz. rus. kultury”. 763 p. ISBN 5-7859-0063-7. (In Russ.).
8. Gusev, S. S. (1984). Science and metaphor. Leningrad: LSU Publishing House. 152 p. (In Russ.).
9. Imasheva, O. A. (2023). Metaphor and its interpretation in scientific discourse. Russian Linguistic Bulletin, 6 (42): 1—8. DOI: 10.18454/RULB.2023.42.34. — DOI: https://doi.org/10.18454/RULB.2023.42.34. (In Russ.).
10. Khalikova, N. V., Nikitin, O. V. (2021). Image of Subject of Research in Discussions оn the Russian of Soviet Period (Imagery as a Linguistic and Stylistic Category of a Scientific Text). Nauchnyi dialog, 2: 147-161. DOI: 10.24224/2227-1295-2021- 2-147-161. (In Russ.).
11. Kozhina, M. N. (1972). On the speech consistency of scientific style in comparison with some others: studies. The manual. Perm: [B. I.]. 395 p. (In Russ.).
12. Kubryakova, E. S. (2004). Language and knowledge: On the way to gaining knowledge about language: parts of speech from a cognitive point of view. The role of language in cognition of the world. Moscow: Yaz. Slavyan. Culture. 555 p. ISBN 5-94457-174- 8. (In Russ.).
13. Lakoff, J., Johnson, M. (1990). Metaphors that we live by. In: The Theory of metaphor: A collection. Moscow: Progress. 387—415. (In Russ.).
14. Lavrinenko, I. Yu. (2023). Structural Features of Metaphors in English Aphorisms within Philosophical Discourse. Nauchnyi dialog, 12 (6): 65—87. https://doi.org/10.24224/2227-1295-2023-12-6-65-87 (In Russ.).
15. Levin, Yu. I. (1998). Selected works. Poetics. Semiotics. Moscow: School of “Languages of Russian culture”. 824 p. (In Russ.).
16. Loseva, O. M. (2015). Metaphor in scientific and technical text. Philological sciences: Questions of theory and practice, 8 (50), Part. III, pp. 118-121. (In Russ.).
17. Mishankina, N. A. (2010). Metaphor in science: paradox or norm? Tomsk: Tomsk University Press. 282 p. (In Russ.).
18. Molchanova, G. G. (2023). The meaning-transforming role of metaphor in the context of radial expansion. Bulletin of the Moscow University. Series 19. Linguistics and intercultural communication, 26 (2): 9—23. (In Russ.).
19. Nikitin, M. V. (2001). The metaphorical potential of the word and its realization. In: The problem of the theory of European languages. St. Petersburg: Trigon. 37—38. ISBN 5-8100-0079-7. (In Russ.).
20. Ortega y Gasset, J. (1990). Two great metaphors. In: Theory of metaphor. Moscow: Progress. Pp. 68-81. (In Russ.).
21. Popova, T. G., Kurochkina, E. V. (2015). Metaphor as a linguistic and mental mechanism. Language and culture, 1: 45—53. (In Russ.).
22. Riker, P. (1990). Metaphorical process as cognition, imagination and sensation. In: Theory of metaphor: Collection. Moscow: Progress. 416—34. (In Russ.).
23. Shitikov, P. M. (2021). New methods of identifying metaphors in various types of discourse (review of publications). Philological Sciences. Scientific reports of the higher school, 6 (1): 19—31. DOI: 10.20339/PhS.6-21.019. (In Russ.).
24. Sklyarevskaya, G. N. (1993). Metaphor in the language system. St. Petersburg: Nauka, St. Petersburg. publishing house. Firm. 150 p. (In Russ.).
25. Tamerian, T. Y. (2011). Numerical code of Ossetian linguoculture: monograph. Vladikavkaz: Publishing House of SOGU. 172 p. ISBN 978-5-8336-0678-0. (In Russ.).
26. Telia, V. N. (1988). Metaphor as a model of semantic production and its expressive and evaluative function. In: Metaphor in language and text. Moscow: Nauka. 26—52. (In Russ.).
27. Theory of metaphor: Collection. (1990). Moscow: Progress. 512 p. (In Russ.).
28. Vezhbitskaya, A. (1996). Language. Culture. Cognition. Moscow: Rus. words. 411 p. (In Russ.).
29. Weinrich, H. (2001). Formen der Wissenschaftssprache. In: Sprache, das heißt Sprachen. Mit einem vollständigen Schriftenverzeichnis des Autors 1956—2001. Tübingen: Narr. S. 221—252. (In Germ.).
30. Zanina, M. A. (2012). Metaphorization in popular science discourse. Bulletin of the St. Petersburg State University. un-ta. Series 9, 3: 72—77. (In Russ.).
Review
For citations:
Tsopanova R.G., Tsarikaeva F.A., Kachmazova E.S. Metaphor in Ossetian Literary-Critical Text. Nauchnyi dialog. 2024;13(4):93-110. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.24224/2227-1295-2024-13-4-93-110
Views:
349
Email this article 