Abstract

This paper makes analyses of the main categories and provisions of linguoculturology. On this major both methodological and theoretical basis of  the linguoculturology has been analyzed. To conclude with, outcomes and drawbacks of the issue has been pinpointed to get better investigations in further.

Introduction

The origin of linguoculturology comes with a "paradigm shift" eventually was the result of an anthropocentric paradigm. The term "paradigm shift" was first introduced by the American philosopher Thomas Kuhn in the monograph "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions" (1962) [1], in his opinion, the contradictions of “old” theories serve as the basis for the formation of "new" theories, which gradually occupy a dominant role.

The philosophy and research directions underwent a series of shifts in contemporary linguistics. Nonetheless, we intentionally focus our attention only on the major changes that are relevant to the aim of our current research. It is our intention in this chapter to thoroughly discuss the period when the pendulum has swung from systemic-structural paradigm to the anthropocentric model leading to the emergence of Linguoculturology as a recent yet indispensable discipline that aims at investigating connections between language and cultural insights. Let's briefly discuss the constant and gradual development of Linguistics at that period.

Systemic-structural paradigm is traditionally distinguished in the form of language as structure or language as system with rigid rules and conventions. In the 19th century, the systemic-structural approach dominated in the field of language science, which determined the position focused on the human role in the study of discourse. This paradigm is associated with the name F. Saussure, it is also considered traditional linguistics, F. Saussure in the center of the object of linguistics, as already mentioned, defined “A language is a system in which all the elements fit together, and which the value of any one element depends on the simultaneous coexistence of all the others” [2]. In his work "Course of General Linguistics", he considers language as a structure, as some signs, for example, he writes “Language is only a part — true, the most important part — of speech activity. It is a social product, a set of necessary conventions adopted by the team to ensure the implementation, functioning of the ability to speech activity that exists in every native speaker”[3]. Thus, F. Saussure ravages "language" and "speech" (Fr. langue et parole). As Saussure denotes speech is an activity of the individual; language is the social manifestation of speech. Language is a system of signs that evolves from the activity of speech.

Main part

Another definition to the term language is by Richard and Rodgers, they have denoted the language like so “ Language was viewed as a system of structurally related elements for the encoding of meaning, the elements being phonemes, morphemes, words, structures, and sentence types.”

So according to Saussure we can differentiate language and speech like so: language is a link between thought and sound, and is a means for thought to be expressed as sound. Thoughts have to become ordered, and sounds have to be articulated, for language to occur. Saussure says that language is really a borderland between thought and sound, where thought and sound combine to provide communication. Whereas, spoken language includes the communication of concepts by means of sound-images from the speaker to the listener. Language is a product of the speaker’s communication of signs to the listener. Saussure says that a linguistic sign is a combination of a concept and a sound-image. The concept is what is signified, and the sound-image is the signifier. The combination of the signifier and the signified is arbitrary; i.e., any sound-image can conceivably be used to signify a particular concept.

F. Saussure identified many unexplored problems in linguistics, discovered important aspects in the study of language, the researcher concentrated on the closed system of language “Language is a self-contained”. His research further gave the predominant development of structural linguistics. However, his works have many contradictions, according to Maslova, science has moved to a new stage of development, a person becomes the center of everything, according to the anthropocentric paradigm, cognition occurs through oneself, that is, through vital activity. Maslova notes the “way out of the impasse” is the emergence of a new anthropocentric paradigm, where language is viewed from two directions: 1) a person in language 2) language in a person. From her position, a person is considered both as a subject and as an object, but the main idea is the cognition of the concept-person in the language [4].

Also, the first ideas of the anthropological paradigm can be found in the works of Wilhelm von Humbold, for the first time he noted that “Language is, as it were, the outer appearance of the spirit of a people; the language is their spirit and the spirit their language; we can never think of them sufficiently as identical.” [5]. A person becomes an individuality only through language, in which the creative primal forces of a person, human deep capabilities operate. Language is the common spiritual energy of the nation [6]. The scientist considers language not just as a means of communication, he connects language with spiritual culture, through creativity, which mirrors the character of the people, thus, the development of language and worldview occurs through the knowledge of society.

Thus, the formation of the anthropocentric paradigm was the development of linguistic problems towards a person and place in culture, since the focus of culture and cultural tradition is the linguistic personality in all its diversity [7]. Obviously, within the framework of this anthropocentric concept, a modern direction of linguistics - linguoculturology is being formed, which is "focused on the cultural factor in the language and on the linguistic factor in the person."

Analyzes and discussions

Culture refers to the cumulative deposit of knowledge, experience, beliefs, values, attitudes, meanings, hierarchies, religion, notions of time, roles, spatial relations, concepts of the universe, and material objects and possessions acquired by a group of people in the course of generations through individual and group striving.

A society’s culture consists of whatever it is one has to know or believe in order to operate in a manner acceptable to its members, and do in any role that they accept for any one of themselves. Culture … does not consist of things, people, behavior or emotions. It is rather an organization of these things. It is the forms of things that people have in mind, their models for perceiving, relating and interpreting them.

At the same time, culture is associated with communication, and its study is focused on sociological concepts that explain cultural and linguistic phenomena within social practices. Culture is analyzed as dynamic, a procedural phenomenon as a discursive construct. In the framework of sociolinguistics, cultures are considered from the point of view of the characteristics of their manifestation. Culture may function in different social spheres - social practices. In this direction culture may be considered from political, religious, scientific, economic, legal and other aspects of the culture.

It would be wise to make a concise summary of the components that culture hold to itself. If we compile the graph , holding the main elements it would look like this..

Since the new approach takes into account the role of the human factor in the language, let us consider the definitions of the science of "linguoculturology" from the point of view of linguistic scientists.

Linguists, V.V. Vorobiev, V.A. Maslova, S.G. Vorkachev, V.I. Karasik, M.M. Makovsky, Yu.S. Stepanov, V.N. Telia devoted their research activities to study the main provisions of linguoculturology and made a significant contribution to the development of this interdisciplinary science. For example, V. Maslova defines the essence of science as follows: Cultural linguistics is a science that arose at the intersection of linguistics and culturology, which explores the manifestations of the culture of the people, reflected and fixed in the language"[10]. V. N. Telia believes that linguoculturology is a science devoted to the study and description of the correspondence of language and culture in their synchronous interaction. “The object of linguoculturology is studied at the crossroads of two fundamental sciences: linguistics and cultural studies" [11] V.V. Vorobyov relies on the fact that “linguoculturology studies the national-cultural semantics of linguistic units in order to understand the content and shades of language and culture, as well as to get as close as possible to the perception of the world of a native speaker”[12]. By his definition, linguoculturology is an aspect of linguistics that studies the problem of reflecting national culture in a language. Also, V.Vorobyov asserts in his definition that “Linguoculturology is a complex scientific discipline of a synthesizing type that studies the relationship and interaction of culture and language in its functioning and reflects this process as an integral structure of units in the unity of linguistic and extra-linguistic content using systemic methods and with an orientation to modern priorities and cultural institutions. With this approach, linguoculturology is: an aspect of linguistics, studying the problem of reflection of national culture in the language; section of semasiology, as it defines and describes nationally labeled linguistic units; studying understanding of speech in the context of intercultural communication, the scientist describes not only the relationship between culture and language, but also defines the place of linguoculturology in the systemic complex of humanitarian knowledge - a scientific discipline, which accordingly entails the presence of its own subject and object of study. Thus, linguoculturology is designed to study nationally labeled language units and speech understanding processes in conditions of intercultural communication.

It should be noted that linguoculturology as an interdisciplinary discipline has links with a number of sciences. But before we go deep into the analysis of particular discipline lets use give some notion to the term ‘interdisciplinary’.

Dr Nick Monk speaks on interdisciplinary as the combining of methods and insights of two or more academic disciplines into the pursuit of a common task, such as a research project. It is typically characterized by the crossing of ‘traditional boundaries’ between academic disciplines or schools of thought to address new and emerging issues. Often, interdisciplinary is applied in cases where traditional disciplines are unable to address the problem, such as women’s studies or sustainability. It can likewise be applied to complex subjects that can only be understood by combining the perspectives of two or more fields.

Roberta Frank (1988, cited in Klein, 1996, p. 8) places the origin of the term interdisciplinary within the Social Science Research Council, when the term was used as a kind of ‘bureaucratic shorthand’ for research involving two or more professional societies.

Arguments for interdisciplinary generally stem from debates surrounding disciplinarily. Within arguments for interdisciplinary, two main threads can be found. The first argues for interdisciplinary normatively, positioning it either in terms of filling the gaps that disciplinarily leaves vacant or in terms of transcendence surpassing what disciplinarily can ever hope to achieve.

Since we have lightly denoted the term interdisciplinary, it is time to examine the link of linguoculturology with other disciplines.

- Ethnography and ethnology have been the main object for research for linguoculturology as well, because they study the history of the emergence of ethnic groups, their culture and way of life. These are, as a rule, descriptive sciences based on the collection and analysis of empirical data, which are necessary, among other sciences and linguoculturology

-Cultural anthropology is of the same descriptive character, which studies, first of all, the cultures of primitive, traditional communities, which is undoubtedly valuable for etymology - the most important aspect of linguoculturological research.

- The philosophy of culture, which studies the most general approaches to the study of the essence, goals and values of culture, the conditions of existence and forms of their manifestation, is the methodological basis of linguoculturology, especially in that part of it that is interested in the patterns of development and expression of the meaning of culture.

-Sociology of culture, studying the structure and functioning of culture in connection with social institutions, helps to comprehend the socio-historical conditions for the formation of linguoculturology

- Historical culturology studies the results of the cultural activities of mankind, embodied in "texts" (works of art, treatises). Science is mainly interested in the individual facts of culture. Culturology studies culture as an integrity, in the center of its interests is not so much the fact or event itself, but the cultural, human, value-semantic status of this fact. The named objects are so close to linguoculturology that without addressing them, it loses its categorical features. And yet, linguoculturology studies not only and not so much the facts of culture as the mechanisms of verbalization of the culturally marked human meaning. History studies the outstanding achievements of human culture; culturology studies culture as a spiritual state of a person and society (culture of everyday life).

Despite the interdisciplinary connection with a number of sciences, Maslova notes “If culturology studies the self-consciousness of a person in relation to nature, society, history, art and other spheres of his social and cultural life, and linguistics considers the worldview, which is displayed and fixed in the language in the form of mental models of the linguistic picture of the world, then linguoculturology has its subject and language and culture in dialogue, interaction " [7. p 9] Generally, the independent status of science is highlighted here by the fact that it studies exactly the synchronization of language and culture, the subject helps us to deeper reveal the knowledge of the world based on the study of the traditions and customs of different people of the world.

Today the young science of linguoculrurology considers three stages of its formation;

The first stage is the period of preconditions for the development of science. At the end of the 19th and the beginning of the 20th centuries, the origins of linguoculturology appeared. According to the theory of American scientists Edward Sapir and his student Benjamin Lee Whorf, language and culture are inextricably linked, and ideas about the perception of the picture of the world arise under the influence of languages. In Edward Sapir's article The Status of Linguistics as a Science (1928), he says: The "real world" is largely unconsciously built on the basis of the language habits of a particular social group. Two different languages are never so similar that they can be considered a means of expressing the same social reality. The worlds in which different societies live are different worlds, and not at all the same world with different labels attached to it ... We see, hear and generally perceive the world around us in this way and not otherwise, mainly due to the fact that that our choice in its interpretation is predetermined by the linguistic habits of our society "from here we understand that societies using different languages have different views of the world, the cognitive activity of understanding the" picture of the world "is based on linguistic norms. In other words, the process of language activity affects the cognition of reality ...

The second stage is the period of formation of linguoculturology as an independent field of research. In the 90s of the 20th century, the leading place in scientific research began to be occupied by "Language and Culture", the appearance of works by V.A. Maslova, V.N. Telia, V.V. Vorobieva, V.M. Shakelein, significantly contributed ideas for the development of the discipline. V.V. Vorobiev in his dissertation "Theoretical and applied aspects of linguoculturology" was one of the first to use the term "linguoculturology", thereby giving the definition of linguoculturology - it is "a complex scientific discipline that studies the relationship and interaction of culture and language in its functioning and reflects this process as an integral structure of units in the unity of their language and ... cultural content "[13] . Also, the direction of linguoculcurodology as an independent distillery is associated with the name of V.N. Telia (head of the Moscow phraseological school). According to her definition, linguoculturology is "a part of ethnolinguistics, which is devoted to the study and description of the correspondence of language and culture in their synchronous interaction"[11, p 217]. Thus, at this stage, linguoculturology is going through a period of design and formation, according to V.N. Telia, science studies the communication processes and the connection of the language expressions used with the synchronously acting mentality of the people.

Due to Maslova's works, it is possible to predict the third stage of the formation of science as the emergence of fundamental interdisciplinary science. At this stage, scientific works are published, as well as textbooks by N.F. Alefirenko, V.A. Maslova, A.T. Khrolenko and others.

During this period, Maslova defined the object of linguoculturology as "the study of language, which is a translator of cultural information, culture with its attitudes and preferences of a person who creates this culture using language"[14], E. Sapir maintains almost the same opinion, arguing that language "has the ability to directly influence the formation and development of folk culture"[17] in that case, studying the language, the culture of the people is revealed to us, a certain impression is created about the life of the given people, thus Maslova and E.Sapir defined the "language" as the object of the study of linguoculturology. However, it should be emphasized that the existence of language outside of culture is impossible, just as culture cannot exist outside of language, V.V. Krasnykh noted "The fact that culture is 'included' in language is an indisputable fact, since language as a means of communication takes into its meaning everything that is associated with the cultural and traditional competence of its speakers, transmitted through language from generation to generation"[15]. So, we can conclude that culture reflects human activity, material and spiritual, while language demonstrates the final result of cognitive thinking. The most important thing is that the imagery of the surrounding reality is displayed and over time becomes an unchanging fixed meaning in the form of various mental stereotypes and models that are components of the linguistic picture of the world. Linguoculturology studies in detail the specific imagery and vision of the world through the prism of national mentality and national language. It is essential that the language is labeled as a functional mechanism and acts as the keeper of the peculiarities of the national color of self-awareness.

Let's consider what trends have formed in the process of formation and development of linguoculturology;

1. Comparative linguoculturology, examines common patterns among similar cultures;

2. Diachronic linguoculturology, explores and reveals the transformation of the linguoculturological components of a particular nation in diachrony;

3. Linguocultural lexicography, the purpose of which is the formation of cultural dictionaries;

4. Comparative linguoculturology - the study of mentality by representatives of another nation.

Like any independent science, cultural linguistics has a subject, object, goals and objectives. As a subject, V.A. Maslova singles out the study of the cultural semantics of linguistic signs, which is formed by the interaction of two different codes - language and culture, since each linguistic person is simultaneously a cultural person. [7.p.30] According to E.E. Yurkov, the entire set of speech actions, events, situations in which a culturally significant choice of linguistic means is manifested and the nature of the construction of which is distinguished by cultural marking can be attributed to the object of linguoculturology. also E.E. Yurkova noted that the purpose of linguocultural studies should be considered the description and explanation of the peculiarities of the language and its functioning as a culturally conditioned phenomenon [Yurkov 2003: p14-15]. The main task of this science is to study and describe the relationship between language and culture, language and ethnicity, language and folk mentality. E. Benveniste identified the basis on which cultural linguistics is built - "triad" - "language, culture, human personality"[ Бенвенист Э. Общая лингвистика. М., 1974. p 45]

Conclusion

Overall, cultural linguistics is a humanitarian discipline that studies the culture of a certain people, through the language used. Science makes it possible to establish and explain how one of the fundamental functions of language is carried out - to be an instrument for the creation, development, storage and transmission of culture.

References

1. Askoldov S.A. Koncept i slova // russkaya slovestnost': Ot teorii slovestnosti k structure texta. Anthology. M.; Academia, 1997. Russian culture. pp. 267-279.
2. Aksenova G.N., Kojurkova N.E., Sharapa A.A. Ponyatie "language" and "culture", ix sootnoweniya v sovremennoy lingvokulturologii (thesis)// Teoriya i praktika prepodavaniya russkogo yazika kak inostronnogo; dostigeniya, the problem of I perspective development. Minsk, 2006. P. 48-49
3. Babaeva, E.V. Lingvokulturologicheskie kharakteristiki russkoy I nemeckoy axiologicheskoy kartini mira; dis. Doctor of Philology, Volgograd, 2004. P.110-111.
4. Vorkachov, S.G. Lingvakulturilogia, yazikovaya lichnost'; stanovlenie antrop-koy paradigm v yazikoznanii// Filologichiskie nauki.-2001.-#1. P. 43-44
5. Vejbikskaya V.A. Yazik. Culture. Poznań. M., 1996. P.97
6. Galieva M.R. metaphorical-reprezentacziya-koncepta // slovo v khudojestvennom tekste// Uzbekskiy Gosudarstvenniy Universitet Mirovich Yazikov. — 2020. — No. 2 (31). — p. 139-152
7. Kurbyakova E.S., Yazik i znanie. (2004) p.14
8. Karasik V.I. Modelnaya lichnost kak linguokulturniy concept // Philology I culture. Mat-li III mejdunarodnoy conferencii. Ch. 2- Tambov: Izd-vo TGU, 2001-s. 98-101.
9. Karasik, V.I. Yazikovoy krug; language, concept, discourse [text] / Gnozis, 2004 p-389
10. Karasik, V.I. the concept of culture; problema cennostey/Yazikovaya lichnost. Volgograd, 1996/ p.4
11. Karasik, V.I. Inaya mentality // O.G. Prokhvacheva, Ya.V. Zubkova, E. VGrabnova-M.; Gnozis, 2005. P. 27
12. Kurbyakova, E.S., Dem'yankov V.Z., Pankpatc Yu.G., Luzina L.G. Kratkiy slovar' kognitivnix terminov- M., 1996. s-90
13. Kurbyakova, E.S. Nachalnie etapi stanovleniya cognitivizma; linguistics, psychology, cognitive science// Voprosi yazikoznaniya-1994. #4. S-34-38
14. Maslova A.V. Vvedenie v kognitivnuyu lingvistiku: Uchebnoe posobie -M.: Flingla:Nauka, 2004.- p.269
15. Stepanov U.S., Constanti. Slovar Russkoy kulturi. Opit Issledovaniya. M. 1997. pp. 40-43
16. Ter-Minasova S.G., Language and multicultural communication // S.G. Ter-Minasova-M 2000.S.25.