The Concept of Other in the Consciousness of Persian Speakers (Based on the Results of Psycholinguistic Experiment)
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##
Abstract
The goal of the paper is to determine the content of the concept of OTHER as a member of “self – other” binary opposition in the consciousness of Persian speakers based on the results of psycholinguistic experiment and their further cognitive interpretation. The need for studying the conceptual structure of this opposition by means of psycholinguistic experiment is determined by the fact that it substantially affects both interpersonal contacts of representatives of a given linguistic society and intercultural relations as a whole. Two methods of psycholinguistic analysis of word semantics have been used in the research, viz. free word association test and the method of direct interpretation of a word meaning. In total 102 Persian speakers of different age and social status took part in the experiment. The associative field of the concept was formed based on the results of processing of the data collected during the 1st stage of the experiment. Its semantic field was determined after analysis of unabridged predications in the course of explanation of the proposed words. Result data were processed using special method of grouping language material based on content-analysis: the benchmark words repeated in the answers of different participants were taken as units of the analysis and regarded as key concept features. At the final stage the cognitive interpretation of the data was performed after the principle of “construing” the meaning of linguistic expressions stipulated by R. Langacker. The obtained results demonstrate that the perceptions of Other in Persian language consciousness completely match the common worldview, in which the notions of Self and Other play an important role in conceptualization of human value system.
How to Cite
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##
concept of OTHER, “self – other” binary opposition, Persian language, Persian language consciousness, psycholinguistic experiment
REFERENCES
Baranov A. N. (2001), Vvedeniye v prikladnuyu lingvistiku, Editorial, Moscow. (In Russian).
Bargiela-Chiappini F. (2003), “Face and Politeness: New (Insights) for Old (Concepts)”, Journal of Pragmatics, Vol. 35, Issues 10–11, pp. 1453–1469. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00173-X
Beeman W. O. (2001), “Emotion and Sincerity in Persian Discourse: Accomplishing and Representation of Inner States”, International Journal of the Sociology of Language, Vol. 148, pp. 31–57. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/ijsl.2001.013
Beeman W. O. (2020), “Ta’ārof: Pragmatic Key to Iranian Social Behavior”, in Östman J.-O. and Verschueren J. (eds), Handbook of Pragmatics, John Benjamins Publishing Company, Amsterdam, pp. 203–224. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/hop.22.taa1
Belyanin V. P. (2003), Psikholingvistika, Flinta, Moskovskiy psikhologo-sotsial’nyy institut, Moscow. (In Russian).
Butakova L. O. (2012), “Znacheniye slova kak dostoyaniye individa (na primere eticheski znachimykh leksem pravda / lozh’)”, Vestnik Kemerovskogo gosuniversiteta, No. 4 (52), Vol. 1, pp. 198–204. (In Russian).
Eslami Z. R. (2005), “Invitations in Persian and English: Ostensible or genuine?”, Intercultural Pragmatics, Vol. 2, Issue 4, pp. 453–480. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/iprg.2005.2.4.453
Goroshko E. I. (2001), Integrativnaya model’ svobodnogo assotsiativnogo eksperimenta, RA-Karavella, Kharkiv and Moscow. (In Russian).
Hofstede G. (2011), “Dimensionalizing Cultures: The Hofstede Model in Context”, Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, Vol. 2, No. 1, available at: https://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/orpc/vol2/iss1/8/ (accessed December 1, 2021). DOI: https://doi.org/10.9707/2307-0919.1014
Izadi A. (2015), “Persian honorifics and im/politeness as social practice”, Journal of Pragmatics, Vol. 85, pp. 81–91. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2015.06.002
Izadi A. (2016), “Over-politeness in Persian professional interactions”, Journal of Pragmatics, Vol. 102, pp. 13–23. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2016.06.004
Izadi A. (2019), “An investigation of face in Taarof”, Journal of Researches in Linguistics, Vol. 10, pp. 67–82.
Keshavarz M. H. (2001), “The role of social context, intimacy, and distance in the choice of forms of address”, International Journal of the Sociology of Language, Vol. 148, pp. 5–18. DOI: 10.1515/IJSL.2001.015
Koutlaki S. A. (2002), “Offers and expressions of thanks as face enhancing acts: Tӕ’arof in Persian”, Journal of Pragmatics, Vol. 34, Issue 12, pp. 1733–1756. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(01)00055-8
Koutlaki S. A. (2009), “Two sides of the same coin: how the notion of ‘face’ is encoded in Persian communication”, in Bargiela-Chiappini F. and Haugh M. (eds), Face, communication and social interaction, Equinox, London, pp. 115–133.
Langacker R. W. (2008), Cognitive Grammar. A basic introduction, Oxford University Press, New York. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195331967.001.0001
Selivanova O. O. (2012), “Opozytsiya sviy-chuzhyy v etnosvidomosti (na materiali ukrayins’kykh paremiy)”, in Selivanova O. O., Svit svidomosti v movi. Mir soznaniya v yazyke, Yu. Chabanenko, Cherkasy, pp. 196–218. (In Ukrainian).
Sharifian F. (2007), “L1 cultural conceptualizations in L2 learning. The case of Persian-speaking learners of English”, in Sharifian F. and Palmer G. B. (eds), Applied Cultural Linguistics: implications for second language learning and intercultural communication, John Benjamins Publishing Company, Amsterdam, Philadelphia, pp. 33–51. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/celcr.7.04sha
Sharifian F. (2013), “Cultural conceptualisations in learning English as an L2: Examples from Persian-speaking learners”, Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research, Vol. 1, Issue 1, pp. 90–116.
Sternin I. A. (2007), “Psikholingvistika i kontseptologiya”, Voprosy psikholingvistiki, No. 5, pp. 37–46. (In Russian).
Zalevskaya A. A. (2001), “Psikholingvisticheskiy podkhod k probleme kontsepta”, in Sternin I. A. (ed.), Metodologicheskiye problemy kognitivnoy lingvistiki, Izdatelstvo VGU, Voronezh, pp. 36–44. (In Russian).
Zhabotinskaya S. A. (2013), “Imya kak tekst: kontseptual’naya set’ leksicheskogo znacheniya (analiz imeni emotsii)”, Kognitsiya, kommunikatsiya, diskurs, No. 6, pp. 47–76. (In Russian). DOI: https://doi.org/10.26565/2218-2926-2013-06-04
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.