Structure of the Semantic Field of Procedurality in the Ukrainian Language

© The Editorial Council and Editorial Board of Linguistic Studies

Linguistic Studies
Volume 40(1), 2020, pp. 
81-92

Structure of the Semantic Field of Procedurality in the Ukrainian Language

Sulуma Olesya

Article first published online: December 01, 2020 


Additional information

 Author Information: 

Sulуma Olesya, Candidate of Philological Sciences, Associate Professor at the Department of Ukrainian Language of National Pedagogical Dragomanov University. Correspondence: olesiasulyma@gmail.com

Citation: 
Sulуma, O. Structure of the Semantic Field of Procedurality in the Ukrainian Language [Text] // Linhvistychni Studiyi / Linguistic Studies : collection of scientific papers / Vasyl' Stus 
Donetsk National University; Ed. by Anatoliy Zahnitko. Vinnytsia : Vasyl' Stus DonNU, 2020. Vol. 40(1). Pp. 81-92. ISBN 966-7277-88-7

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.31558/1815-3070.2020.40.1.6

Publication History:

Volume first published online: December 01, 2020
Article received: July 01, 2020, accepted: August 01, 2020 and first published online: December 01, 2020

Annotation.

У дослідженні розглянуто структуру семантичного поля процесуальності, репрезенто¬ваного дієслівною лексикою, іменниками, фразеологізмами, словосполученнями та вислов¬леннями, в українській мові. З’ясовано специфіку центральних лексем, встановлено специфіку ближньої та дальньої периферії, зокрема окреслено втрату акціональними дієсловами семи дії та набуття ними власне процесуального значення, встановлено субстантиви та фразео¬логізми, а також словосполучення, здатні формувати процесуальну семантику висловлення.

Keywords: conceptual field, archiseme, center, periphery, lexeme, idiom, mononuclear sentence.



Abstract.

STRUCTURE OF THE CONCEPTUAL FIELD OF PROCEDURALITY IN THE UKRAINIAN LANGUAGE

Olesia Sulyma

Department of Ukrainian Language of National Pedagogical Dragomanov University, Kyiv, Ukraine.

Abstract

Background: The study of the conceptual field of procedurality is actual in modern linguistics due to insufficient study of this problem. Outlining the specifics of the semantics of procedurality, the means of its implementation, the allocation of central and peripheral components of the field allows us to distinguish a separate, procedural group of verb semantics in contrast to the available classifications of verbs in the scientific literature.

The purpose: The purpose of the analysis is to investigate the conceptual field of procedurality, the center, near and far periphery of its means of verbalization.

Results: The conceptual field of procedurality is a complex structure that covers elements of different structure: from tokens to a complex syntactic whole. The center of the field includes verb vocabulary that directly denotes a procedural feature implemented outside the will of the subject. This group includes verbs related to changes in the state of nature, objects, phenomena, persons, verbs of sound, smell, social processes, and so on.

The near periphery includes verbs that lose the main seme – mostly actionality – and acquire procedural semantics. These verbs are characterized by a high degree of semantic bleaching and meta­phorization. In addition, the near periphery is also formed by nouns that denote natural phe­nomena that appear in simple sentences, and idioms with the main component - the procedural verb.

The far periphery is formed by idioms with the main components of different part-of-speech affiliation, descriptive constructions, correlated with sentences and a complex syntactic whole.

The far periphery of the conceptual field of procedurality is constantly replenished by creating descriptive structures in the texts of artistic style, and therefore further research can be directed to this area.

Key words: conceptual field, archiseme, center, periphery, lexeme, idiom, mononuclear sen­tence.

 

Vitae

Olesia Sulyma is Candidate of Philological Sciences, Associate Professor at the Department of Ukrainian Language of National Pedagogical Dragomanov University. Her areas of research interests include functional linguistics, cognitive linguistics, linguistic pragmatics, and psycholinguistics.

Correspondence: olesiasulyma@gmail.com


Article.

References. 

References

1.      Antomonov, Alexei. “Issledovanie strukturnoj organizacii leksiko-semanticheskogo polja (Study of the structural organization of the lexical-semantic field)”. Diss. Kiev, 1987. Print.

2.      Vasil'ev, Leonid. Teorija semanticheskih polej (Theory of Semantic Fields). Voprosy jazykoznanija (Linguistic issues) 5(1971): 105-113. Print.

3.      Zahnitko, Anatoliy. Struktura ta iierarkhiia valentnykh znachen diieslova (Structure and hierarchy of valence meanings of verbs). Kyiv: NNK VO, 1990. Print.

4.      Kutnia, Halyna. Predykaty protsesu v suchasnii ukrainskii movi: semantyko-syntaksychni struktury z implitsytnym sub’iektom na poznachennia zmin u navkolyshnomu seredovyshchi (Predicates of the process in the modern Ukrainian language: semantic-syntactic structures with an implicit subject to denote changes in the environment). “Naukovi zapysky” Vinnytskoho derzhavnoho pedahohichnoho universytetu im. M. Kotsiubynskoho. Seriia: Filolohiia ("Scientific notes" of Vinnytsia State Pedagogical University. M. Kotsyubynsky. Series: Philology) issue 10, vol. 1. (2008): 206-211. Print.

5.      Lomtev, Timofej. Predlozhenie i ego grammaticheskie kategorii (Sentence and its grammatical categories). Moskva, 1972. Print.

6.      Meshhaninov Ivan. Glagol (Verb). Leningrad, 1982. Print.

7.      Slovnyk ukrainskoi movy: u 11 tomakh. (Dictionary of the Ukrainian language). Kyiv, 1970-1980. Print.

8.      Slovnyk frazeolohizmiv ukrainskoi movy (Dictionary of phraseology of the Ukrainian language). Kyiv, 2008. Print.

9.      Sulyma, Olesia. Slovotvirnyi potentsial protsesualnykh diiesliv (Word-forming potential of processual verbs). Molodyi vchenyi (A young scientist) 3(79.1) (2019): 71-76. Print.

10.  Suchasna ukrainska literaturna mova (Modern Ukrainian literary language). Kyiv, 1997. Print.

11.  Porzig, Walter. Wesentliche Bedeutungsbeziehungen. Wortfeldforschung: zur Geschichte und Theorie des sprachlichen Feldes. Darmstadt, 1973. Print.

12.  Trier, Jost. Altes und Neues vom sprachlichen Feld. Mannheim, Zürich, 1968. Print.

13.  Ullmann, Stephen. Semantik: Eine Einführung in die Bedeutungslehre. Frankfurt am Main, 1973. Print.

 

 

List of Sources

1.      Antikor – Naczional`ny`j antikorupczionny`j portal (National anti-corruption portal). Web. 24 Sep. 2020

2.      Dovzhenko, Oleksandr. Zacharovana Desna. Opovidannia. Shchodennyk (1941-1956) (Enchanted Desna. Story. Diary (1941-1956). Kyiv: Dnipro, 2001. Print.

3.      Onatska H. Ivolzi vesna nasnylas (Orioles dreamed of spring). Khmelnytskyi, 2017. Print.
4.      Patrioty Ukrainy (Patriots of Ukraine). Web. 24 Sep. 2020.
5.      Radio Mariia (Radio Maria). Web. 24 Sep. 2020. 
6.      Radio Svoboda (Radio Liberty). Web. 24 Sep. 2020.
7.      Senchenko K. Moia dusha i plache, i smiietsia (My soul both cries and laughs). Web. 22 Sep. 2020.
8.      Shkliar V. M. Zalyshynets. Chornyi voron (Black Raven). Kharkiv, 2011. Print.

9.      Stanislavska A. Virshi, proza, analityka, ohliady (Poems, prose, analytics, reviews). Web. 12 Sep. 2020.

10.  Ukrainska pravda (Ukrainian Pravda). Web. 24 24 Sep. 2020.

11.  UNN – Ukrainski natsionalni novyny (Ukrainian national news). 24 Sep. 2020.

12.  Vinhranovskyi, Mykola. Virshi (Poems). Web.  27 Aug. 2020.

13.  Viche (Chamber). Web. 24 Sep. 2020.

14.  VolynPost. Web. 24 Sep. 2020.

15.  Zhylenko I. HOMO FERIENS: Spohady (Memoirs). Kyiv, 2011. Print.