Category: Issue #28

Alexander Iliadi
Volodymyr Vynnychenko Central Ukrainian State Pedagogical University
E-mail: alexandr.iliadi@gmail.com
ORCID ID https://orcid.org/0000–0001–5078–8316
DOI: https://doi.org/10.24195/2616-5317-2019-28-9

Key words: etymology, derivative, word-formation, prototype, comparativehistorical linguistics.

The paper deals with the findings of the research dedicated to the study of word-building in the Iranian and Slavonic languages in the comparativehistorical aspect. The task of the article was comparative analysis of Iranian and Slavonic lexemes with common Indo-European roots in diachrony and synchrony. Particularly, their etymology and peculiarities of functioning have been reviewed. In the course of the research the hypothesis of the common Indo-European legacy for word-building of the two language groups (Iranian and Slavonic) has been proved. At the same time the evidence for the common innovations for the age of Slavonic and Iranian contacts has been found. The prototypes and derivatives have been analyzed in detail with the selection of typologically common and specific linguistic features of derivation. The methodology of this research involved the inductive and deductive methods, the method of contrastive analysis and ethnic methodological conversation analysis. The analyzed word-building parallels and the conclusions are of great relevance for both comparative and historic and general linguistics. Comparativistics also employs the typological reference point. It is not only the presence of morphologically identical and chronologically similar complexes (combinations of morphemes) in two typologically not distant languages that is important. There should also be typological similarity of the processes of the word structure modification in case one and the same element is used. This proves the potential possibility of the equal development of the group of non-distantly related units in different languages. The perspective is seen in reviewing this issue in the different groups of the Indo-European languages.

REFERENCES

1. Abaev V. I. Istoriko-jetimologicheskij slovar’ osetinskogo jazyka [Tekst] / V. I. Abaev. — M. ; L. : Izd-vo AN SSSR; Nauka, 1958–1989. — T. I–IV.
2. Ety’mologichny’j slovny’k ukrayins’koyi movy’: v 7 t. / [za red. O. S. Mel’ny’chuka]. — K. : Nauk. dumka, 1982–2012. — T. 1–6.
3. Iliadi A. I. Etimologicheskie zametki po slavyanskoj leksike. 45–49 / A. I. Iliadi // Aktual’nye problemy lingvistiki. — Surgut : RIO SurGPU, 2012. — Vyp. V. — S. 56– 62.
4. Iliadi A. I. K sravnitel’no-istoricheskoj leksikologii slavyanskih i iranskih yazykov / A. I. Iliadi // Indoevropejskoe yazykoznanie i klassicheskaya filologiya-XXI = Indo-European Linguistics and Classical Philology- XXI : materialy chtenij, posvyashchennyh pamyati professora Iosifa Moiseevicha Tronskogo (26–28 iyunya 2017 g., Sankt-Peterburg) / [otv. red. N. N. Kazanskij]. — SPb. : Nauka, 2017. — S. 310–323.
5. Livshic V. A. Sogdijskij yazyk / V. A. Livshic, A. L. Hromov // Osnovy iranskogo yazykoznaniya: Sredneiranskie yazyki / [pod red. V. I. Abaeva]. — M. : Nauka, 1981. — S. 347– 514.
6. Lur’e P. B. Istoriko-lingvisticheskij analiz sogdijskoj toponimii: Diss.... kand. filol. nauk / P. B. Lur’e. — SPb., 2004. — 305 s.
7. Rastorgueva V. S. Srednepersidskij yazyk / V. S. Rastorgueva. — M. : Nauka, 1966. — 164 s.
8. Rastorgueva V. S. Srednepersidskij yazyk / V. S. Rastorgueva, е. K. Molchanova // Osnovy iranskogo yazykoznaniya : Sredneiranskie yazyki. — M. : Nauka, 1981. — S. 6–146.
9. Rastorgueva V. S. Etimologicheskij slovar’ iranskih yazykov / V. S. Rastorgueva, D. I. Edel’man. — M. : Vost. literatura, 2000–2015. — T. 1–5.
10. Sokolov S. N. YAzyk Avesty (Uchebnoe posobie) / S. N. Sokolov. — L. : Izd-vo Leningrad. un-ta, 1964. — 414 s.
11. Sokolova V. S. Rushanskie i hufskie teksty i slovar’ / [otv. red. I. I. Zarubin]. — M. ; L. : Izd-vo AN SSSR, 1959. — 334 s.
12. Slovar’ russkih narodnyh govorov [Tekst] / [pod red. F. P. Filina i F. P. Sorokoletova]. — M. ; L. ; SPb. : Nauka, 1965–2018. — Vyp. 1–50.
13. Sreznevskij I. I. Materialy dlya Slovarya drevnerusskogo yazyka [Tekst] / I. I. Srezevskij. — M. : Kniga, 1989. — T. I–III.
14. Steblin-Kamenskij I. M. Etimologicheskij slovar’ vahanskogo yazyka [Tekst] / I. M. Steblin-Kamenskij. — SPb. : Peterb. Vostokovedenie, 1999. — 480 s.
15. Trubachev O. N. K prarodine ariev (Po povodu vyhoda knigi: YU. A. SHilov. Prarodina ariev, Istoriya, obryady i mify. Kiev, 1995) / O. N. Trubachev // Voprosy yazykoznaniya. — 1996. — No3. — S. 3–12.
16. Fasmer M. Etimologicheskij slovar’ russkogo yazyka: v 4 t. [Tekst] / [per. s nem. i dop. chl.kor. AN SSSR O. N. Trubacheva; pod red. i s predisl. prof. B. A. Larina]. — M. : Progress, 1986–1987. — T. I–IV.
17. Cejtlin R. M. Materialy dlya izucheniya znachenij priimennoj pristavki sǫ- v slavyanskih yazykah / R. M. Cejtlin // Uchenye zapiski Instituta slavyanovedeniya. — M. : Izd-vo AN SSSR, 1959. — S. 208–247.
18. Chernyh P. YA. Istoriko-etimologicheskij slovar’ sovremennogo russkogo yazyka: v 2 t. [Tekst] / P. YA. CHernyh — M. : Rus. yaz., 1999. — T. I–II.
19. Edel’man D. I. Iranskie i slavyanskie yazyki: Istoricheskie otnosheniya / D. I. Edel’man. — M. : Vost. literatura, 2002. — 230 s.
20. Edel’man D. I. Horezmijskij yazyk // Osnovy iranskogo yazykoznaniya : sredneiranskie i novoiranskie yazyki. — M. : Vost. lit. RAN, 2008. — S. 6–60.
21. EtyimalagIchnyi sloўnIk belaruskay movyi [Tekst] / [red. V. V. Martyinaў, G. A. Tsyihun]. — Mensk : AkademIya navuk BSSR ; Belaruskaya navuka, 1978–2010. — T. 1–13.
22. Etimologicheskiy slovar slavyanskih yazyikov: Praslav. leks. fond [Tekst] / [pod red. O. N. Trubacheva i A. F. Zhuravleva]. — M. : Nauka, 1974–2018. — Vyip. 1–41.
23. Yagnobsko-russkiy slovar / [sost. M. S. Andreevyim, V. A. Livshitsem i A. K. Pisarchik] // Andreev M. S., Peschereva E. M. Yagnobskie tekstyi. — M. ; L. : Izd-vo AN SSSR, 1957. — S. 217–391.
24. Yaroslavskiy oblastnoy slovar: Ucheb. posobie / [nauch. red. G. G. Melnichenko]. — Yaroslavl : YaGPI im. K. D. Ushinskogo, 1991. — Vyip. 10. — 108 s.
25. Bartholomae Chr. Altiranisches Wörterbuch [Text] / Chr. Bartholomae. — Strassburg, 1904. — 1022 s.
26. Pokorny J. Indogermanisches etymologisches Wörterbuch [Text] / J. Pokorny. — Bern ; München, 1959. — Bd I. — 434 s.
27. Skok P. Etimologijski rječnik hrvatskoga ili srpskoga jezika [Text] / P. Skok. — Zagreb, 1971–1973. — Knj. I–III.

Druzhyna Tetyana
State Institution “South Ukrainian National Pedagogical University named after K. D. Ushynsky”, Odesa, Ukraine
E-mail: t.a.druzhyna@gmail.com
ORCID ID https://orcid.org/0000–0002–2679–713X
DOI: https://doi.org/10.24195/2616-5317-2019-28-8

Key words: literary text, translation, psycholinguistic text analysis, contentanalysis.

The article deals with the approach to the psycholinguistic analysis of the original text (the text fragment of the novel “The Light between Oceans” written by M. L. Stedman) and the text of the translation (the Ukrainian translation performed by N. Khaietska). Psycholinguistics is aimed at studying the language as a phenomenon of the mentality, at “disclosing” the work of the translators, their actual actions on the psychological level. The three stages of translation are also of the psychological nature (the understanding of the source text, the “comprehension” of the forms of the source language and the choice of the forms of the target language). Any perception occurs in the field of the psychological science, that’s why there arises the need to highlight the psycholinguistic assumptions of the analysis and the interpretation of a literary text. The employment of the psycholinguistic analysis of a literary text is very useful and appropriate, since it can be used to investigate how professional translators transmit the emotional content of the text to other languages. The method of psycholinguistic text analysis is focused on the study of the linguistic and stylistic characteristics of the texts. The following main categories are taken into account: the scope of the text; the number of sentences; their average size; the coefficient of vocabulary (lexical) diversity; the coefficient of verbiage / aggressiveness; the coefficient of logical connectivity; the coefficient of embolism. The psycholinguistic text analysis has revealed that the text of the translation corresponds to the original text. The difference between the main categories is rather insignificant and can not affect the perception of the translated text by the recipients. The content-analysis has shown that the translated text contains all the categories of the original text and the number of the analyzed words is identical. This proves the correspondence and adequacy of the translated text, its high ability to reproduce fully the author’s intention.

REFERENCES

1. Zhynkyn N. Y. Rech kak provodnyk ynformatsyy. M. : Nauka, 1982. 157 s.
2. Zasiekin S. V. Psykholinhvistychni universalii perekladu khudozhnoho tekstu : monohrafiia. Lutsk : Volyn. nats. un-t im. Lesi Ukrainky, 2012. 272 s.
3. Krylov A. A. Praktykum po obshchei, eksperymentalnoi y prykladnoi psykholohyy / A. A. Krylov, S. A. Manychev. — SPb. : Pyter, 2000. 560 s.
4. Corpas Pastor G. Translation Universals : Do they exist? A corpus-based and NLP approach to convergence / G. Corpas Pastor, R. Mitkov, N. Afzal, L. Garcia Moya. Proceedings of the LREC (2008) Workshop on “Comparable Corpora”. LREC-08. Marrakesh, Morocco, 2008.

STUDY MATERIAL

1. Stedman M. L. The Light between Oceans. Дата оновлення : 10.10.2018. URL : https:// ru.scribd.com/doc/97833263/The-Light-Between-Oceans-A-Novel-by-M-L-Stedman (data zvernennia: 10.10.2018).
2. Stedman M. L. Svitlo mizh dvokh okeaniv : roman / per. z anhl. N. Khaietskoi. Kharkiv: Knyzhkovyi klub “Klub Simeinoho Dozvillia”, 2016. 304 s. Data onovlennia : 06.11.2018. URL : https://www.rulit.me/books/svitlo-mizh-dvoh-okeaniv-read-442797–1.html (data zvernennia: 08.11.2018).

Donets Paul
State Institution “South Ukrainian National Pedagogical University named after K. D. Ushynsky”, Odessa, Ukraine
E-mail: dp85@ukr.net
ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000–0001–6759–0920
DOI: https://doi.org/10.24195/2616-5317-2019-28-7

Key words: immortalism, cyberpunk, cyberspace, posthuman, science fiction, transhumanism.

The article examines stylistic devices in which American-Canadian writer William Gibson expresses transhumanist ideas. The author is famous for being one of the pioneers and brightest representatives of science fiction subgenre, known as cyberpunk. His debut trilogy “Sprawl”, which touches upon social, moral and ethical issues of using advanced technologies, has been chosen as an object to be studied. It is found out that the message translated by the author is controversial: while having some obvious transhumanist indications, it also has various alarmist traits, which can be observed at stylistic and lexical level. In its simplest form, this is manifested in the special use of epithets, metaphors, similes, hyperbolas and other stylistic means. In some cases the series rather opposes transhumanism than reproduces its techno-optimistic discourse. It follows the warning trends of modern English-language science fiction, relying on such classic dichotomies as “natural / artificial” and “human / non-human”. The tropes and figures of speech used by the author are in most cases emotionally expressive, that is, they contain elements of value (both positive and negative).

REFERENCES

1. Baeva, L. V. E-Homo sapiens: virtual’nyj mikrokosm i global’naya sreda obitaniya / L. V. Baeva, I. YU. Alekseeva // Filosofskie problemy informacionnyh tekhnologij i kiberprostranstva. — Pyatigorsk: PGLU, 2014. — № 1. — S. 86–97.
2. Voronkova, V. G. Koncepcii vzaimosvyazi cheloveka, soznaniya, razuma v kontekste virtual’no-informacionnogo prostranstva / V. G. Voronkova // Filosofiya i kosmologiya. — Poltava: Poltavs’ky’j literator, 2013. — S. 170–182.
3. Delyoz, Zh. Anti-Edip. Kapitalizm i shizofreniya / Zh. Delyoz, F. Gvattari. — еkaterinburg: U-Faktoriya, 2008. — 672 s.
4. Cheklecov, V. V. Chuvstvo planety. Internet Veshchej i sleduyushchaya tekhnologicheskaya revolyuciya / V. V. CHeklecov. — M.: Rossijskij issledovatel’skij centr po Internetu Veshchej, 2013. — 130 s.
5. Enciklopediya fantastiki. Kto est’ kto / Sost. Vl. Gakov. — Mn.: Galaksias, 1995. — 694 s.
6. Alvarado, R. C. Science Fiction as Myth: Cultural Logic in Gibson’s Neuromancer / R. C. Alvarado // Science Fiction and Computing: Essays on Interlinked Domains. — Jefferson: McFarland, 2011. — pp. 205–213.
7. Benedikt, M. Cyberspace: Some Proposals / M. Benedikt // Cyberspace: First Steps. — Cambridge: MIT Press, 1992. — pp. 119–224.
8. Brians, E. The ’Virtual’ Body and the Strange Persistence of the Flesh: Deleuze, Cyberspace and the Posthuman / E. Brians // Deleuze and the Body. — Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2011. — pp. 117–143.
9. Carr, J. The Dirty Joke of Cyberpunk or the Humanism of Posthumanism in the Cyberpunk Tradition: Epigenetic Memory and Technology in Gibson’s Neuromancer and Stephenson’s Snow Crash / J. Carr. — Tempe: Arizona State University, 2013. — 60 p.
10. Clark, A. Natural-Born Cyborgs: Minds, Technologies, and the Future of Human Intelligence / A. Clark. — Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003. — 229 p.
11. Graham, E. L. Representations of the Post/human: Monsters, Aliens and Others in Popular Culture / E. L. Graham. — Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2002. — 259 p.
12. Hayles, N. K. How We Became Posthuman: Virtual Bodies in Cybernetics, Literature, and Informatics / N. K. Hayles. — Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999. — 350 p.
13. Kellner, D. Media Culture: Cultural Studies, Identity, and Politics between the Modern and the Postmodern / D. Kellner. — London: Routledge, 1994. — 368 p.
14. Roberts, A. Science Fiction / A. Roberts. — London: Routledge, 2006. — 159 p.
15. Thomas, D. Old Rituals for New Space: Rites de Passage and William Gibson’s Cultural Model of Cyberspace / D. Thomas // Cyberspace: First Steps. — Cambridge: MIT Press, 1991. — pp. 30–48.
16. Young, S. Designer Evolution: A Transhumanist Manifesto / S. Young. — Amherst: Prometheus Books, 2006. — 417 p.

Derik Ilona
State Institution “South Ukrainian National Pedagogical University named after K. D. Ushynsky”
E-mail: ilonaderik@gmail.com
ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000–0003–1476–2391
DOI: https://doi.org/10.24195/2616-5317-2019-28-5

Key words: sacred texts, linguistic paradigm, strategies and techniques, contrastive analysis.

The presented article is aimed at elaborating the problem of translating sacred texts in the contemporary linguistic paradigm. The main objective of the paper consists in investigating sacred texts as the object of translation studied in accordance with the communicative and translational aspects. The results of the carried-out research have proved that there exist common strategies and techniques of interpreting and rendering religious texts. The practical value of the research lies in the fact that the conclusions may be applied in the translation activity.
The urgency of this paper arises from the need for global synergetic all-sided review of sacred texts as a mental phenomenon in general and in contemporary translation studies. The object of the work is a sacred text viewed in the aspect of its translatability. The subject is the unique nature of sacred texts with their immanent features (coherence, cohesion and intertextuality). The immediate tasks of the article have been predetermined by the above-mentioned objective and include respectively: the disclosure of the specifics of sacred text; the outline of the
typologically common strategies and tactics of translating sacred texts.
The methodology of this research involved the inductive and deductive methods, the method of contrastive analysis and ethnic methodological conversation analysis. In the course of the research it has been concluded and experimentally and statistically proved that there exist common strategies and tactics of translating sacred texts into different languages. It has also been postulated that the pragmatic and the expressive potential of sacred texts is preserved and rendered in translation.
The perspective is seen in reviewing this issue in different Germanic and Slavic languages. The further research in the matter of possible cooperation of philosophers and translators in the study of the sacred texts also seems promising.

REFERENCES AND NOTES

1. Aitchinson, J. (2003). Words in the Mind. An Introduction to the Mental Lexicon. Oxford: Blackwell. Retrieved February 10, 2019, from https://www.scirp.org/ (S(351jmbntvnsjt1aadkposzje)) /reference/ References Papers. aspx ? Reference ID=1583352.
2. Gaus, A. (1991). The Unvarnished New Testament: A New Translation From The Original Greek. Retrieved March 23,2019, from https://www.amazon.com/Unvarnished-NewTestament-Translation-Original/dp/0933999992.
3. Lakoff, G. (2016) Language and Emotion. Retrieved March 23, 2019, from https://www. researchgate.net/publication/302072517_Language_and_Emotion.
4. Stolze, R. (2011). The Translator’s Approach — Introduction to Translational Hermeneutics. Berlin: Frank & Timme. Retrieved February 10, 2019, from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/291059009_The_Legal_Translator’s_Approach_to_Texts.

Svitlana Gruschko
State Institution “South Ukrainian National Pedagogical University named after K. D. Ushynsky
E-mail: svetagrushko64@gmail.com
ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000–0001–9940–7780
DOI: https://doi.org/10.24195/2616-5317-2019-28-4

In the article the phenomenon of translation is regarded as mental interpretation activity not only in linguistics, but also in literary criticism. The literary work and its translation are most vivid guides to mental and cultural life of people, an example of intercultural communication. An adequate perception of non-native culture depends on communicators’ general fund of knowledge. The essential part of such fund of knowledge is native language, and translation, being a mediator, is a means of cross-language and cross-cultural communication. Mastering another language through literature, a person is mastering new world and its culture. The process of literary texts’ translation requires language creativity of the translator, who becomes so-called “co-author” of the work. Translation activity is a result of the interpreter’s creativity and a sort of language activity: language units are being selected according to language units of the original text. This kind of approach actualizes linguistic researching of real translation facts: balance between language and speech units of the translated work (i.e. translationinterpretation, author’s made-up words, or revised language peculiarities of the characters). The process of literary translation by itself should be considered within the dimension of a dialogue between cultures. Such a dialogue takes place in the frame of different national stereotypes of thinking and communicational behavior, which influences mutual understanding between the communicators with the help of literary work being a mediator. So, modern linguistics actualizes the research of language activities during the process of literary work’s creating. This problem has to be studied furthermore, it can be considered as one of the central ones to be under consideration while dealing with cultural dimension of the translation process, including the process of solving the problems of cross-cultural communication.

Key words: translation, mental activity, interpretation, literary work, artistic presentation.

REFERENCES

1. Komissarov, V. P. Teoriya perevoda (lingvisticheskie aspekty) / V. N. Komissarov. — M.: Vysshaya shkola, 1990. — 253 s.
2. Rouling, Dzh. K. Garri Potter i filosofskij kamen : roman / Dzh. K. Rouling ; per. s angl. I. V. Oranskogo. — M. : Rosmen-Press, 2002. — 399 s.
3. Rouling, Dzh. K. Garri Potter i Tajnaya komnata : roman / Dzh. K. Rouling ; per. s angl. M. D. Litvinovoj. — M.: Rosmen-Press, 2002. — 473 s.
4. NII “Garri Potter” [El. resurs]. — Rezhim dostupa hntp://www.harrvpottcr.p\v/.
5. Popovic, L. The Concept “Shift of Expression” in Translation Analysis / A. Popovic // The Nature of Translation. Essays on the Theory and Practice of Literary Translation. — Bratislava, 1970.

Zhmayeva Natalya 
State Institution “South Ukrainian National Pedagogical University named after K. D. Ushynsky”
E-mail: zhmaeva@gmail.com
ORCID ID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3382-0155
DOI: https://doi.org/10.24195/2616-5317-2019-28-2

Blidar Olena
State Institution “South Ukrainian National Pedagogical University named after K. D. Ushynsky”
E-mail: hopusoctopus@gmail.com
ORCID ID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8338-4588
DOI: https://doi.org/10.24195/2616-5317-2019-28-2

Key words: lexical colloquialisms, general colloquialisms, slangisms, vulgarisms, degree of ethical depth, neutralization.

The article is devoted to the analysis of translation techniques of English lexical colloquialisms into Ukrainian. Lexical colloquialisms are widely represented in the modern fiction that is caused by the tendency to maximal naturalness. Artistic relevance of lexical colloquialisms in a literary text (imitation and stylization of colloquial speech, characteristics of a hero, his / her attitude to the reality) proves the importance of their adequate rendering in the target text. The degree of ethical depth serves as a criterion for singling out the categories of lexical colloquialisms. The lowest degree is attributed to general colloquialisms, the highest one to vulgarisms and the medium degree to slangisms. Stylistic equivalent, descriptive translation, compensation, omission, cause and effect substitution, generalization, antonymic translation, addition are proved to be the main techniques of translating lexical colloquialisms. Significant neutralization of stylistically reduced words in the Ukrainian translation is revealed. The degree of ethical depth of a considerable number of lexical correspondences is proved to be higher than the one of the units of the original text. Decrease of expressiveness (increase of the degree of ethical depth) is extremely evident when translating vulgarisms. Euphemisation of vulgarisms is applied by the translator three times more than disphemisation. The general number of the units of the lexical colloquialisms translated with the preservation of the degree of ethical depth makes 52,6 %, while decrease of the degree of the original ethical depth amounts to 8 % and increase of the related parameter makes 39,4 %. 19,5 % of the units of the English lexical colloquialisms are not rendered into Ukrainian at all. These facts prove distortion of the speech of the main hero caused by its artificial ennoblement.

REFERENCES

1. Komissarov V. N. Obschaya teoriya perevoda: lingvisticheskie aspektyi (General Theory of Translation: Linguistic Aspects) // V. N. Komissarov. — M.: Vyisshaya shkola. 1990. — 250 s.
2. Levyiy I. Iskusstvo perevoda (The Art of Translating) / Irzhi Levyiy. — M., 1974. — 152 s.
3. Sdobnikov V. V. Osnovnyie sredstva perevoda stilisticheski snizhenoy leksiki (Means of Translating Stylistically Reduced Vocabulary) / V. V. Sdobnikov // TeorIya I praktika perekladu: Resp. mizhvidom. nauk. zb. — K., 1993. — Vip. 19. — S. 141–147.
4. Venhrenivska M. A. Shche raz pro movnu kulturu perekladu (On the Issue of the Language Culture of Translation) // M. A. Venhrenivska, A. D. Hnatiuk. Tvorcha maisternia perekladu: Navch. posibnyk. — K.: RVTs “Kyivskyi universytet”, 1998. — S. 3–6.
5. Zorivchak R. Slovesnyi obraz u khudozhnomu perekladi (Literary Image in Translation) / Roksoliana Zorivchak // “Khai slovo movleno inakshe...”: [statti z teorii, krytyky ta istorii khudozhnoho perekladu]. — K.: Dnipro, 1982. — S. 51–65.
6. Korovushkin V. P. Nestandartnaya leksika v angliyskom i russkom voennyih pod’yazyikah (ponyatiynyiy apparat sotsioleksikologicheskogo opisaniya) (Nonstandard Vocabulary in the English and Russian Military Sublanguages) / V. P. Korovushkin // Vestnik Orenburgskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. — 2003. — # 4, S. 53–59.
7. Homyakov V. A. Nekotoryie tipologicheskie osobennosti nestandartnoy leksiki angliyskogo, frantsuzskogo i russkogo yazyikov (Some Typological Peculiarities of Nonstandard Vocabulary in English, French and Russian) / V. A. Homyakov // Voprosyi yazyikoznaniya. 1992. — # 3. — S. 94–101.
8. Korovushkin V. P. Angliyskiy leksicheskiy substandart versus russkoe leksicheskoe prostorechie (opyit kontrastivno–sotsiolektologicheskogo analiza) (English Lexical Substandard versus Russian Lexical Colloquialisms): [Monografiya] / V. P. Korovushkin. — Cherepovets : Cherepovetskiy gosudarstvennyiy universitet, 2008. — 167 s.
9. Merkulova E. N. Pragmaticheskiy aspekt subkollokvialnyih otsenochnyih nominatsiy (amerikanskiy variant angliyskogo yazyika) (Pragmatic Aspect of Subcolloquial Evaluative Nominations) : Monografiya / E. N. Merkulova. — Nizhniy Novgorod : 2013. — 145 s.
10. Tkachenko T. V. Zasoby stylizatsii rozmovnosti v prozi Mykhaila Stelmakha (Means of Stylization of the Spoken Language in M. Stelmakh’s Prose): Avtoref. dys... kand. filol. nauk: 10.02.01 / T. V. Tkachenko ; Nats. ped. un-t im. M. P. Drahomanova. — K., 2006. — 20 s.

Volodymyr Glushchenko
State Institution “Donbass State Pedagogical University”
E-mail: sdpunauka@ukr.net
ORCID ID https://orcid.org/0000–0001–5545–7452
DOI: https://doi.org/10.24195/2616-5317-2019-28-3

Keywords: historic and phonetic works, genetic ties between languages, phonetic law, analogy.

The main goal of the presented article is the analysis of M. M. Sokolov’s methodological conclusions about O. O. Potebnia’s scientific legacy from the point of view of their objectivity and faithfulness, particularly, to what extent the true achievements and drawbacks of O. O. Potebnia’s historic and phonetic works have been rendered. The tasks of the research included the following: to explain the meaning of M. M. Sokolov’s statements concerning the interpretation of O. O. Potebnia’s views on the genetic ties between languages, the phonetic laws and analogy. There has been also made an attempt to assess M. M. Sokolov’s definitions from the point of view of modern methodology, linguistic historiography and comparative linguistics. In our opinion, the suggested by M. M. Sokolov critical review of O. O. Potebnia’s views on the genetic ties between the languages, the phonetic laws and analogy is one-sided and simplified. The findings of the research have proved that the interconnection between the East-Slavic and Old Slavonic languages was described in O. O. Potebnia’s works from the point of view of the comparative historic method. O. O. Potebnia studied the interconnected phonetic laws which in his interpretation were postulated as exact, true not only for separate sounds but also their features (the conception of the “qualitative consonant shifts”). The critical review of M. M. Sokolov ’s judgments was predetermined by the fact that the scholar treated O. O. Potebnia’s historic and phonetic legacy not from the point of view of historical linguistics but according to “the assimilation of the past”. The theses postulated by M. M. Sokolov didn’t reflect the views of other representatives of Moscow linguistic school. The perspective of the further research is seen in the more detailed study of O. O. Potebnia’s scientific legacy as well as views of other representatives of Kharkiv linguistic school in the context of the linguistics of XIX cent. — early XXІ cent.

REFERENCES

1. Belorussov I. M. Sintaksis russkogo yazyka v issledovaniyah A. A. Potebni. Orel, 1902. 258, HII s.
2. Berezin F. M. Russkoe yazykoznanie konca XIX — nachala XX v. / otv. red. F. P. Filin. M. : Nauka, 1976. 366 c.
3. Bulahovskij L. A. Potebnya-lingvist. Uch. zap. Mosk. un-ta. 1946. Vyp. 107. T. 3. Kn. 2. S. 36–62.
4. Glushchenko V. A. Metodologіya doslіdzhen’ O. O. Potebnі v іnterpretacії M. M. Sokolova. Naukovі pracі : naukovo-metodichnij zhurnal. T. 221. Vip. 209. Fіlologіya. Movoznavstvo. Mikolaїv : Vid-vo CHDU іm. Petra Mogili, 2014. S. 16–19.
5. Glushchenko V. A. Principi porіvnyal’no-іstorichnogo doslіdzhennya v ukraїns’komu і rosіjs’komu movoznavstvі (70-і rr. HіH st. — 20-і rr. HKH st.) / NAN Ukraїni, іn-t movoznavstva іm. O. O. Potebnі ; vіdp. red. O. B. Tkachenko. Donec’k, 1998. 222 s.
6. Glushchenko V. A. Sistematizacіya іstoriko-fonetichnogo materіalu v studіyah O. O. Potebnі. O. O. Potebnya j aktual’nі pitannya movi ta kul’turi : zb. nauk. prac’ / vіdp. red. V. YU. Franchuk. K. : Vidavnichij dіm Dmitra Burago, 2004. S. 173–180.
7. ZHiteckij P. I. Ocherk zvukovoj istorii malorusskogo narechiya. K., 1876. IV, 376 s.
8. Kolesov V. V. Sravnitel’no-istoricheskij metod v trudah A. A. Potebni. Naukova spadshchina O. O. Potebnі і suchasna fіlologіya. Do 150-rіchchya z dnya narodzhennya O. O. Potebnі : zb. nauk. prac’ / vіdp. red. V. YU. Franchuk. K. : Nauk. dumka, 1985. S. 25–39.
9. Kolosov M. A. Obzor zvukovyh i formal’nyh osobennostej narodnogo russkogo yazyka / M. A. Kolosov. Varshava, 1878. X, 270 s.
10. Kolosov M. A. Ocherk istorii zvukov i form russkogo yazyka s XI po HVI stoletie / M. A. Kolosov. Varshava, 1872. 192 s.
11. Potebnya A. A. Dva issledovaniya o zvukah russkogo yazyka: і. O polnoglasii, іі. O zvukovyh osobennostyah russkih narechij. — Voronezh, 1866. — 156, ііі s.
12. Potebnya A. A. K istorii zvukov russkogo yazyka : etimologicheskie i drugie zametki. Varshava, 1880. CH. 2. II, 31, 70, 25 s.
13. Sokolov N. N. [Rec. :] Sintaksis russkogo yazyka v issledovaniyah Potebni : izlozhil I. Belorussov. Orel, 1902. Izv. Otd-niya rus. yaz. i slovesnosti. 1903. T. 8. Kn. 2. S. 347–366.
14. Fasmer M. Etimologicheskij slovar’ russkogo yazyka : v 4-h t. Izd. 2-e. M. : Progress, 1986. T. 2. 672 s.
15. Fortunatov F. F. Russkij filologicheskij vestnik. 1879 g. № 1-j ([Rec. :] Potebnya A. A. Etimologicheskie zametki. Nachal’nye sochetaniya ly-, ry-, lu-, ru- = osnovnym *al, *ar). Kriticheskoe obozrenie. 1879. № 7. S. 33–35.
16. Franchuk V. YU. O. O. SHahmatov і naukova spadshchina O. O. Potebnі. Movoznavstvo. 1974. № 3. S. 36–44.
17. Franchuk V. YU. Oleksandr Opanasovich Potebnya. K. : Nauk. dumka, 1975. 92 s.

Akkurt Vladyslava
State Institution “South Ukrainian National Pedagogical University named after K. D. Ushynsky”, Odesa, Ukraine
E-mail: ladyboss2105@gmail.com
ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000–0003–3542–3428
DOI: https://doi.org/10.24195/2616-5317-2019-28-1

The speech always contains more information than what it says directly. In addition to the literal sense, each statement has a communicative intention, one of the types of which is suggestion. The article considers the main points of view on the suggestion as a linguistic phenomenon, as well as the basic concepts related to this field of study. Each statement performs a communicative function, one of the types of which is suggestion. The study of the suggestive function of discourse is part of the field of study of linguistic influence, which as a science was formed due to the dynamic development of psycholinguistics, pragmatic linguistics, communication theory, rhetoric, logic, language psychology, social psychology and other scientific fields. Linguistic influence can be understood in broad and narrow sense. In this article, it is considered in the narrow sense: under the linguistic influence implies the influence on the consciousness and behavior of the individual with the help of a language characterized by specific objective goals of the speaker. To achieve verbal control of human behavior, different methods of influence are used, in which the classifications are divergent. We distinguish 3 types of linguistic influence: belief, suggestion and induction (will). Suggestion, or indirect suggestion, implies influence on subconsciousness, emotion and sense of the addressee and is characterized by unconsciousness of assimilation of the reported information. The purpose of a suggestion is to introduce an object of influence into a trance and to instill something, to induce certain actions. An intentional or suggestive language act of any illocutionary force may be if its purpose is to influence the psyche, the senses, the will and the mind of person and to decrease the degree of consciousness, analyticity and criticality in the perception of the information to be invoked.

REFERENCES AND NOTES
1. Aristotel’. Ritorika / per. s drevnegrecheskogo i prim. O. P. Tsybenko. M.: Labirint, 2000. S. 147.
2. Artemchuk A. F. Tselitel’nyye vozmozhnosti lecheniya sredstvami dushi, vnusheniya, psikhoterapii. Psikhiatriya i religiya na styke tysyacheletiy. Khar’kov, 2006. T. 4. S. 10–12.
3. Bekhterev V. M. Ob”yektivnaya psikhologiya. M.: Nauka, 1991. S. 336.
4. Golovin S. YU. Slovar’ psikhologa-praktika: 2-ye izd. Minsk: Kharvest, 2003. C. 223.
5. Grinder Dzh., Bendler R. Formirovaniye transa: tekhnika formirovaniya i ispol’zovaniya gipnoticheskikh sostoyaniy: per. s angl. M.: KAAS, 1994; Bendler R. Ispol’zuyte svoy mozg dlya izmeneniya. Neyrolingvisticheskoye programmirovaniye: per. s angl. Novosibirsk: Izd-vo Novosib. un-ta, 1992.
6. Zheltukhina M. R. Tropologicheskaya suggestivnost’ mass-medial’nogo diskursa: o probleme rechevogo vozdeystviya tropov v yazyke SMI: monografiya. M.: In-t yazykoznaniya RAN; Volgograd: Izd-vo VF MUPK, 2003.
7. Kabachenko T. S. Metody psikhologicheskogo vozdeystviya: Ucheb. Posobiye. M.: Ped. o-vo Rossii, 2000.
8. Lozanov G. K. Suggestopediya pri obuchenii inostrannym yazykam. Metody intensivnogo obucheniya inostrannym yazykam. Vyp. 1. 1973. S. 9–17.
9. Novyy slovar’ metodicheskikh terminov i ponyatiy (teoriya i praktika obucheniya yazykam). Pechatnoye izdaniye M.: Izdatel’stvo IKAR, 2009. [Elektronnyy resurs] “GRAMOTA. RU”. URL: http://www.gramota.ru/slovari/info/az/ (data obrashcheniya: 02.02.2019).
10. Pankratov V. N. Manipulyatsii v obshchenii i ikh neytralizatsiya. M.: Izd-vo In-ta psikhoterapii, 2000.
11. Parshin P. B. Rechevoye vozdeystviye: osnovnyye formy i raznovidnosti // Reklamnyy tekst: semiotika i lingvistika. M.: ID Grebennikova, 2000. S. 53–55.
12. Porshnev B. F. Sotsial’naya psikhologiya i istoriya. M.: Nauka, 1979. [Elektronnyy resurs] // URL: http://aleksandr-kommari.narod.ru/Porshnev_Sotsialnaya_psihologiya_i_istoriya.htm (data obrashcheniya: 01.03.2019).
13. Ryumshina L. I. Manipulyativnyye priyemy v reklame: ucheb. posobiye. M., 2004.
14. Sternin I. A. Osnovy rechevogo vozdeystviya. Uchebnoye izdaniye. Voronezh: Istoki, 2012. S. 50.
15. Sternin I. A. Rechevoye vozdeystviye kak teoreticheskaya i prikladnaya nauka // Teoreticheskiye i prikladnyye problemy yazykoznaniya. Voronezh: Istoki, 2008. S. 244–245.
16. Tarasov Ye.F. Metodologicheskiye i teoreticheskiye problemy rechevogo vozdeystviya // Optimizatsiya rechevogo vozdeystviya / Pod red. R. G. Kotova. M.: Nauka, 1990. S. 5–18.
17. Tarasov Ye.F. Rechevoye vozdeystviye kak problema rechevogo obshcheniya // Rechevoye vozdeystviye v sfere massovoy kommunikatsii / Pod red. F. M. Berezina, Ye.F. Tarasova. M: Nauka, 1990. S. 7.
18. Termin vzyat iz stat’i Petrenko V. F., Kucherenko V. V. Iskusstvo suggestivnogo vozdeystviya, ili nekotoryye mysli vprok // Zhurnal praktikuyushchego psikhologa / Pod red. A. F. Bondarenko. Vyp. 6 2000. 2009. S. 73–84.
19. Unadze D. N. Obshcheye ucheniye ob ustanovke // Psikhologicheskiye issledovaniya. M.: Nauka, 1966. S. 140–152, 164–169, 180–183.
20. Cherepanova I. YU. Dom koldun’i. Nachala suggestivnoy lingvistiki. Perm’: Izd-vo Perm. un-ta, 1995.
21. Shelestyuk Ye.V. Rechevoye vozdeystviye: ontologiya i metodologiya issledovaniya. M.: FLINTA: Nauka, 2014. S. 43–45.
22. Yagodkina M. V., Ivanova A. P., Slastushinskaya M. M. Reklama v kommunikatsionnom protsesse. SPb: Piter, 2014. S. 124.