1. INTRODUCTION

As individual forms of lexical information, some properties of the naive picture of the world are represented by oppositions of various descriptors of the conceptual structure of language [Boldyrev, 2008]. Since each area of the language device includes a rich material for studying lexical information, we will consider diverse nominative units in the so-called “historical-ethnographic” interpretations [Narochnickij, 1988, p. 121].

According to the historical and ethnographic reference, the simplest form of cooperation in Dagestan led to the preservation of natural labor [5, p. 123], allowing justifiably streamline some properties of the naive model of the world with a variety of interpretations and a subset of meaningful forms of the surrounding reality. The space of meanings with a subset of linguistic nominations of sociopolitical terms is, above all, a real taxonomic reflection of public consciousness in the conceptual space of gender interpretations. The material of socio-political terms with a subset of figurative meanings and meaningful interpretations turned out to be dispersed in the conceptual space of the gender of Russian and Dagestan languages, however restored by means of similarity and contiguity.

2. MAIN PART

The first and basic principles of the study of social metaphor terms are based on the methodological foundations of Russian language [Balashova, 2014, p. 193]. The juxtaposition of the initial oppositions of social metaphor in the system of synonymous associations between Russian and Dagestan languages allowed us to reveal the semantic field of socio-political terms, or their clusters.

Image 1
Image 1

Here, we rely on the structure of the subject interpretations of social metaphors with the correlates of the figurative meanings of woolen craft (see Table 1):

Table 1

It is known that our scientific ideas about the naive picture of the world are realized in the linguistic signs of the centrifugal and centripetal substitute [Baranov, 2014, p. 44]. The task of the cognitologist is consistently describing the substitute for social connections and systematizing the model of the behavior of the centrifugal and centripetal semiotics signs [Sakhno, 1991, p. 21]. Analysis of the research of semiotics signs shows that the “social” metaphors of the Russian language of the 11th-15th centuries delimit the characteristics of the basic metaphorization models (see Table 2):It is known that our scientific ideas about the naive picture of the world are realized in the linguistic signs of the centrifugal and centripetal substitute [Baranov, 2014, p. 44]. The task of the cognitologist is consistently describing the substitute for social connections and systematizing the model of the behavior of the centrifugal and centripetal semiotics signs [Sakhno, 1991, p. 21]. Analysis of the research of semiotics signs shows that the “social” metaphors of the Russian language of the 11th-15th centuries delimit the characteristics of the basic metaphorization models (see Table 2):

The considered semantic primitives explain the interpretation of socio-political terms [8, p. four]. Semantic primitives with oppositions of sociopolitical terms group various lexemes of cloth production: dyeing wool yarn; make the basis for woven products; dissolve (about knitted / embroidered things) [Shikhalieva, 2016]. These numerous oppositions of the diverse tokens of cloth production form the semantic area of social relations in the system of socio-political terms of Russian and Dagestan languages [Shikhalieva, 2016] (see Table 3).

For this semantic domain of social and political terms, the source of their replenishment is urgent, i.e. the context of the subject index used in social relations and those between “male traders and female carpet weavers”. If in the frequency of the use of social and political terms to systematize the source of replenishment of the social context, then the demarcation of the grouping of terms is clearly revealed in the cluster of Russian metaphors [Balashova, 2014, p. 12].

The next stage of the semantic grouping of terms revealed the characteristics of numerous lexemes in the genetic commonality of Dagestan languages: fiber murslar, carpet barhal, lint free carpet sumah, pile carpet from seamy side halav, carpet fleece wool halachi, and pile carpet bisihalachi [Shikhalieva2015]. The analysis of the above lexemes allowed us to simplify the opposition of the terms of Russian language in the hierarchy of form understanding [Telia, 1986, p. 104]. Systematic meanings of the Russian language reveal a generalization of nominations in the genetic commonness of Dagestan languages.

Among the generalized nominations of Russian and Dagestan languages, models of a historical product are regularly recorded: workshop // manufactory // place where dyed yarn is artil // karhana. Contrasting models of Russian metaphor allows specifying the historical information of the product [1, c. 12]. This semantic area reflects the hierarchy of social relations, i.e. understanding of the forms and values of social and political terms by developing a conceptual model of the Russian language. Occasional significance of social metaphors reflects the possibility of further development of the hierarchical model of the Russian language. In the meantime, not all conceptually significant characteristics of the Russian metaphor develop the conceptual and linguistic form of gender models of the Dagestan languages.

In order to correctly simplify the semantics of nominative units of socio-political terms, consider the forms and meanings through a logical approach:

3. CONCLUSIONS

The preference given to this classification is since the connotative aspect of the semantics of nominative units allows the elimination of overlays, i.e. cases of attribution of the same names to different terminology headings at the same time, as well as the division of the scope of concepts in inter-language definitions “the language of men vs. the language of women”. The method of streamlining sociopolitical terms considers the anthropometric gradation of social ties and relations “the language of men ↕ the language of women”. Among the generalized nominations of the Russian and Dagestan languages, historical product models are regularly recorded: workshop // manufactory // place where the yarn is dyed. On the contrary, the models of the Russian metaphor allow us to concretize the information of the historical product. This semantic area reflects the hierarchy of social relations, that is, understanding of the forms and values of social and political terms by developing a conceptual model of Russian language. Occasional significance of social metaphors reflects the possibility of further development of the hierarchical model of the Russian language. While not all conceptually significant characteristics of the Russian metaphor develop the conceptual and linguistic form of gender models of the Dagestan languages.

REFERENCIAS

Aslanov G.N. (1990). Eastern Turkic Vocabulary in Dictionaries of the Russian Language (end of XVIII-first half of XIX centuries), Baku

Balashova L.V. (2014). Russian Metaphor, Past, Present, Future, M.

Baranov A. N. (2014). Descriptors Metaphor Theory, M.:

Boldyrev N.N. (2008). International Congress on Cognitive Linguistics: Sat. mat / editor, Tambow: TGU, pp. 234-239

Kharchenko V.K. (2009). Portable Meaning, Metaphor Words in Poetry and Prose, M.: Librokom

Narochnickij A.L. (1988). History of Peoples of North Caucasus Late 18th Century-1917, M.: Nauka

Sakhno S.L. (1991). Your and Other People’s in Conceptual Structures. Logical Analysis of Language. Cultural Concepts, M.: Science. pp. 95-102

Shikhalieva S. Kh. (2016). The Term Nature in the Context of the Professional Translator (To a Question of the Bible Linguistic Map), Journal of Language and Literature, Vol. 7, Issue 2, pp. 234-242.

Shikhalieva S.Kh. (2015). Cult and Culture of the Caucasus in the Palestinian Context: Speech Segment and

Substrate Anomaly. The Social Sciences (Pakistan), .. 10, Issue 3, pp. 226-229

Telia V.N. (1986). Connotative Aspect of the Semantics of the Nomination, M.: Nauka

Información adicional

CITAR COMO: Shikhalieva, S. K., DibirovI. А., Ibragimova, M. O., Sulaeva, Z. A., & Khalidova, R. S. (2019). Gender-Concealed Concepts in Conceptual Space Languages of Dagestan. Religación. Revista De Ciencias Sociales Y Humanidades, 4(13), 209-213. https://revista.religacion.com/index.php/religacion/article/view/211Shikhalieva, S. K., DibirovI. А.,Ibragimova, M. O., Sulaeva, Z.A., & Khalidova, R.S.(2019). Gender-Concealed Concepts in Conceptual Space Languages of Dagestan. Religación. Revista De Ciencias Sociales Y Humanidades, 4(13), 209-213. https://revista.religacion.com/index.php/religacion/article/view/211

Enlace alternativo

https://revista.religacion.com/index.php/religacion/article/view/211 (html)