Verbalization of the Concept "TEACHING" in Ukrainian, Russian and German

Abstract.

VERBALIZATION OF THE CONCEPT "TEACHING" IN UKRAINIAN, RUSSIAN AND GERMAN

Halyna Palytsya

Department of Language and Intercultural Communication, Drohobych Ivan Franko National Pedagogical University, Drohobych, Lviv region, Ukraine

Available 25 September 2013.

Abstract

Relevance

The research of the paroemia linguistic world images of different linguistic cultures is a vivid conviction of this fact because the paroemias reflect the specificity of perception of the objective reality by the representatives of different ethnos in general and each fragment in particular. More over, paroemia is an archetype unit that reflects an ancient culture, traditions of each nation, represents mentality expressed in the language consciousness. All the above mentioned items are projected on the pedagogical sphere of a person’s activity, illustrating some peculiarities of vision of certain pedagogical situations by different aspects of the teaching-educational process.

Purpose

Purpose of the research is to investigate the peculiarities of verbalization of the concept "TEACHING" in the paroemia world image in Ukrainian, Russian and German.

Tasks

The tasks of the research: 1) to single out the constituents of the concept "TEACHING"; 2) to analyze Ukrainian, Russian, German paroemias from the point of view of presentation of the teaching process participants, its artefacts, types of a teaching activity and the results.

Novelty

The novelty of the analysis consists in the analysis of a pedagogical paroemia taking into account the verbalization of the concept "teaching".

Theoretical value consists in the contribution to the investigation of a national specificity of paroemia world image.

Practical value

The results of the research may be used in linguoculturology, contrastive lexicology, paroemiology.

Conclusion

The specificity of verbalization of certain aspects of the concept "TEACHING" is connected with lingual, socio-linguistic, historical, economic and spiritual factors that influenced the status of verbalization of a pedagogic activity.

Perspective

The subject of a further investigation consists in a linguistic explication of the concept "EDUCATION".

Research highligts

► The article focuses on the analysis of the paroemia language world image fragment: the peculiarities of modeling "pedagogical" paroemias have been traced in Ukrainian, Russian and German from the point of peculiarities of the concept "TEACHING" verbalization in the language consciousness of different ethnic groups; certain constituent parts have been singled out, such as: "an artefact of the teaching process", "a participant of a teaching process", "type of teaching", "result of teaching".

Keywords: concept, language consciousness, paroemia language world image, "pedagogical" parоemia, verbalization.

References

Kosmeda, T. (2000). Aksiolohichni aspekty prahmalinhvistyky: formuvannya i rozvytok katehoriyi otsinky. L'viv: LNU im. Ivana Franka.

Maslova, V. (2001). Ligvokul'turologija. Moskva: Akademija.

Mats'kiv, P. (2007). Kontseptosfera BOH v ukrayins'komu movnomu prostor. Kyyiv –Drohobych: Kolo.

Palytsya, H. (2011). Pedahohichna paremiya yak efektyvna skladova pedahohichnoho dyskursu (na materiali ukrayins'koyi, rosiys'koyi ta nimets'koyi mov). Naukovi zapysky. Filolohichni nauky (movoznavstvo), 96 (1), 352-355. Kirovohrad.

BELTZ Lexikon Pädagogik, (2007). BELTZ Lexikon Pädagogik. Weinheim, Basel: Beltz Verlag.

Sources and Abbreviations

HRNP, (2006). Halyts'ko-rus'ki narodni prypovidky: [u 3 tt.]. L'viv: VTs LNU im. I. Franka.

Miz. (2005). Mizin, K. Nimets'ko-ukrayins'kyy frazeolohichnyy slovnyk (ustaleni porivnyannya). Vinnytsya: Nova knyha.

PNM, (2005). Kudina, O. Perlyny narodnoyi mudrosti. Vinnytsya: Nova knyha.

RNZPP, (1990). Russkie narodnye zagadki, poslovicy, pogovorki. M.: Prosveshhenie.

RPiP, (1988). Russkie poslovicy i pogovorki. M.: Hudozhestvennaja literatura.

UPP, (1978). Ukrayins'ki prysliv"ya ta prykazky. K.: Dnipro.

UPPiTI, (1993). Ukrayins'ki prykazky, prysliv"ya i take inshe. K.: Lybid'.

Dud., (1998). Duden. Redewendungen und sprichwörtliche Redensarten. Wörterbuch der deutschen Idiomatik, B. 11. Mannheim; Leipzig; Wien; Zürich: Dudenverlag.

Correspondence: gpalytsya@mail.ru

Vitae

Halyna St. Palytsya is Candidate of Philology, Associate Professor, Head of Department of Language and Intercultural Communication in Drohobych Ivan Franko National Pedagogical University. Her areas of research interests include linguoculturology, paroemiology and functional grammar..

Article.

Halyna Palytsya

УДК 81’1=161.1=161.2

VERBALIZATION OF THE CONCEPT "TEACHING"

IN UKRAINIAN, RUSSIAN AND GERMAN

The article focuses on the analysis of the paroemia language world image fragment: the peculiarities of modeling "pedagogical" paroemias have been traced in Ukrainian, Russian and German from the point of peculiarities of the concept ″TEACHING″ verbalization in the language consciousness of different ethnic groups; certain constituent parts have been singled out, such as: "an artefact of the teaching process", "a participant of a teaching process", "type of teaching", "result of teaching".

Keywords: concept, language consciousness, paroemia language world image, "pedagogical" parоemia, verbalization.

The topicality of the investigation. Recent decades illustrate the process of widening of the boundaries of the language investigation that is caused by the appearance of the researches connected with the interrelation not only thought and consciousness but with culture and ethnos outlook [Мацьків 2007: 5]. This aspect of a language functioning is considered to be important because the every culture plays an important role in the formation of a personality and language is the only content and means able to help interfere in the concealed sphere of mentality because it investigates the way of the world's division in this or that culture [Маслова 2001: 114].

Teaching is a very important fragment of an objective reality that is reflected in a human being's consciousness and is expressed in linguistic means of each language. But "the language world image in each language is unique, peculiar is determined with social, cultural, psychological, spiritual peculiarities of the nation, the tradition etc., that is a national specificity" [Космеда 2000: 231], that explains some differences in the presentation of the investigated sphere in Ukrainian, Russian and German. The research of the paroemia linguistic world images of different linguistic cultures is a vivid conviction of this fact because the paroemias reflect the specificity of perception of the objective reality by the representatives of the different ethnos in general and each fragment in particular. More over, paroemia is an archetype unit that reflects an ancient culture, traditions of each nation, represents mentality expressed in the language consciousness. All the above mentioned items are projected on the pedagogical sphere of a person's activity, illustrating some peculiarities of vision of the certain pedagogical situations by different aspects of the teaching-educational process and are nominated as pedagogical paroemias [Палиця 2011].

The degree of the problem studying. A huge theoretical contribution to the elaboration of this problem has been made by M. Alefirenko, N. Amosova, O. Babkin, Yu. Hvozdaryov, I. Hnatyuk, V. Mokiyenko, O. Molotkov, V. Uzhchenko, V. Teliya and the others. In recent years the investigation of the paroemia world image in the linguistic cultural aspect has been made by M. Alekseyenko, I. Hnatyuk, O. Levchenko, V. Maslova, Yu. Pradid, T. Osipova and the others. But inspite of a great number of scientific researches paroemias on pedagogical situations have not been analyzed thoroughly. This fact inclined the author of the scientific research to choose this linguistic phenomenon the subject of the investigation.

The purpose of the research is to investigate the peculiarities of verbalization of the concept teaching in the paroemia world image in Ukrainian, Russian and German.

The tasks of the research include: 1) to single out the constituents of the concept "TEACHING"; 2) to analyze Ukrainian, Russian, German paroemias from the point of view of presentation of the teaching process participants, its artefacts, types of a teaching activity and the results.

The novelty of the analysis consists in the analysis of a pedagogical paroemia taking into account the verbalization of the concept "teaching". Theoretical value consists in the contribution to the investigation of a national specificity of paroemia world image. The results of the research may be used in linguoculturology, contrastive lexicology, paroemiology.

Teaching is a process directed to aquiring knowledge and skills, it embraces different types of activity dependent on teaching aims, in particular contemplation, listening, practice, control, search and training [Beltz Lexikon Pädagogik 2007: 455]. The resulting aim in this process in different cultures and periods is aquiring knowledge aimed at their further practical use. The concept "TEACHING" is explicated by means of the following constituents in Ukrainian, Russian and German paroemias: 1) the participant of the teaching process; 2) his artefact; 3) the type; 4) the result.

Traditionally the participants of the process are the following a person who teaches (a teacher), a person who is taught (a pupil). The concept "A PERSON WHO TEACHES" is verbalized by means of the lexeme "A TEACHER". A school teacher in Ukrainian, Russian and German linguistic cultures is a compulsory participant of a teaching process, the reliable, authentic source of knowledge that is confirmed by the following examples, compare: Ukr: Один учитель краще, ніж дві книги [Міз. 2005: 215], Учитель і дерево пізнають із плодів [Міз. 2005: 250], Rus.: От учителя наука [РНЗПП 1990: 311], Учитель один не считает годин [РПиП 1988: 14], Ger.: Ein Lehrer ist besser als zwei Bűcher[ПНМ 2005: 90]. The presentation of the teacher differs in Ukrainian and Russian, on the one hand, and in German – on the other hand. The difference is based on the fact that a teaсher is compared to a father in Ukrainian and Russian. This is illustrated by the correspondent opposition «a teacher : a father», let’s compare: Ukr.: Шануй учителя, як родителя[УПП 1978: 174]; Rus.: Шануй учителя, как родителя [РНЗПП 1990: 312], but in German this stable comparative construction is not illustrated, for instance: Die uns lehren, sollen wir ehren [ПНМ 2005: 76]. It's evident that Ukrainian and Russian paroemias were formed at the time when the status of a teaсher was very high in the society and teaching was considered to be a luxury, not available for all who wanted it.

The Russian, German pedagogical paroemias that verbalize the concept "THIS WHO TEACHES" have the lexeme майстер (Ukr.), мастер (Rus.), Meister (Germ.). This noun traditionally nominates a tutor, a person who is good at his work and may serve the example for immitation, compare: Rus: Всяк мастер на выучку берёт, да не всяк доучивает [РПиП 1988: 54]; Ger.: Wer sein eigener Meister sein will, hat einen Narren zum Schűler [ПНМ 2005: 231].

In the investigated paroemias the concept "THIS WHO TEAСHES" sometimes is verbalized imaginally actualizing the means of a secondary nomination.

In Ukrainian, Russian and German the paroemias are singled in which a teacher is compared to a hen and a pupil is compared to an egg, compare: Rus: Курицу яйца не учат [РпиП 1988: 157]; Ger: Das Ei / Küken will klüger sein als die Henne [Dud. 1998: 168]; Ukr.: Курку яйця не вчать [Міз. 2005: 239].

The concept "THIS WHO TEACHES" is verbalized by means of similar lexico-semantic means, the expression is the fact that teacher is compared to "a father" in Ukrainian and Russian and the conceptual opposition "a teacher : a father" is actualized.

The concept "THIS WHO IS TAUGHT" is verbalized by means of lexemes учень (Ukr.), ученик (Rus.), Shüler, Lehrling (Ger.), compare: Ger.: Fleißige Schüler machen fleißige Lehrer [ПНМ 2005: 107], Gute Lehrlinge werden gute Meister [ПНМ 2005: 120]. Ukr.: Прийде Май, (школярів) не займай, а юль хоч плюнь [УППіТІ 1993: 287]; Rus.: По ученику и об учителе судят [РпиП 1988: 256].

Among the analyzed paroemias the investigated concept is verbalized by the help of authoroponums-names of people spread in correspondent languages. In Ukrainian – that is Іван, German – Hans represented as well the diminutive forms (Ukr.: Івась; Ger.: Hänschen) that are usually used to dominate children, compare: Ukr.: Чого Івась не научиться, того і Іван не буде вміти [УППіТІ 1993: 283]; Ger.: Was Hänschen nicht lernt, lernt Hans nimmermehr [Dud. 1998: 310] and nouns – names of animals, compare: Ukr.: До смерті учиться чоловік [УППіТІ 1993: 283]; Ger.: Die Jugend soll erwerben, was das Alter verzehrt [ПНМ, 69]; Rus.: Ученому и книги в руки [РПиП 1988: 314].

In Russian and Ukrainian the concept "THIS WHO IS TAUGHT" sometimes is verbalized by the lexemes: дурак, дурний (Ukr.), дурак, глупый (Rus.), that represent a negative estimation of a person, compare: Rus.: Глупого учить, что мертвого лечить [РПиП 1988: 62]; Ukr.: Хто дурним народився, той і в Києві не навчиться [Міз. 2005: 261], Дурному й лопатою в голову розум не накладеш [ГРНП ІІ 2006: 94].

The meaning "a stupid person" is verbalized by the forms of substantivized adjectives and this fact illustrates a higher degree of an axiological expression. The German paroemias with the element dumm (stupid / fool) are numerous but they don’t concern the sphere of education and are projected on different situations.

The person who is taught may be reprinted with image linguistic means. A vivid example of this phenomenon in German is lexeme Geiger – "a vialin player", for example: Ein Geiger zerreisst viele Seiten, eh’er Meister wird [ПНМ 2005: 86].

So, the concept "THIS WHO IS TAUGHT" is verbalized by means of a primary and secondary nomination. The Russian and Ukrainian paroemias differ from the German ones in this aspect. In Ukrainian and Russian paroemias the participant of a teaching process is a dull pupil.

The concepts-artefacts of a teaching process are objectivized, as a rule, with the nouns that nominate the objects relevant to a teaching activity. The noun school realizes its main meaning "an educational institutions", compare: Ukr.: Школа всяким странним дім єсть вольний [УППіТІ 1993: 287]; Школа дом вольний, а не своявольний [УППіТІ 1993: 287]; Ger.: Die Schule soll ein Ziehhaus, aber kein Zuchthaus sein [ПНМ 2005: 74]. The main meaning has a number of specific senses in the investigated languages, for instance, in Ukrainian on the one hand, the process of making the concept sacral by representing a concept opposition "school : church", expressing a positive estimation, for example: Ukr.: Школа – церковний угол [УППіТІ 1993: 287], on the other hand – there appear negative estimation senses ("school : poverty"), for example: В нашій школі, як на татарськім полі: єсть і де сісти, та нічого їсти [УППіТІ 1993: 287], Школа гола: є де сісти, та нема де їсти [УППіТІ 1993: 287].

The lexeme a book illustrates the artefact-concept "A SOURCE OF KNOWLEDGE" that is traced Ukrainian, Russian and German paroemias, compare: Ukr.: Не на користь книжку читать, коли вершки лише хапать [ПНМ 2005: 35], Книга вчить на світі жить [Міз. 2005: 251]; Ger.: Buch macht klug [ПНМ 2005: 35], Bücher fressen und nichtverdauen ist ungesund [ПНМ 2005: 35]; Rus.: Испокон века книга растит человека [РНЗПП 1990: 310], Книги не говорят, а правду сказывают [РНЗПП 1990: 310]; Не красна книга пером, красна умом [РНЗПП 1990: 311].

There are paroemias in Russian in which the meaning "not each book teaches a good lesson" is verbalized. Additional, axiological, opposite meanings: "good – bad" are added to the meaning of the lexeme a book, for instance: Иная книга ума прибавит, иная последний отшибёт [РНЗПП 1990: 310], Иная книга обогащает, иная – с путисовращает [РНЗПП 1990: 310].

The concepts-artefacts of a teaching process are also verbalized by the lexemes бук, ремінь (Ukr.), бука, кулак, палка (Rus.); Rute (Germ), compare: Ukr.: За невміння деруть реміння [УППіТІ 1993: 285], Аз, буки – бери граматику в руки [УППіТІ 1993: 286], До науки служать і буки [ГРНП ІІ 2006: 585]; Rus.: Учить дураков – не жалеть кулаков [РПиП 1988: 314], Азбука наука, а ребятам бука [РНЗПП 1990: 309]. This kind of paroemias is numerous in Ukrainian and Russian. It can be explained by the fact of their modelling during the period when children were physically punished. This kind of punishment was considered as a means of a pedagogical influence. There is no this kind of paroemias in German. We may provide an example of only one paroemia, but it doesn’t belong to an educational sphere: Rute macht kein Beulen [ПНМ 2005: 73].

The concepts-artefacts of a teaching process, represented in the paroemias, illustrate the peculiarities of the linguistic culture that consist in making something sacred on the one hand, and the verbalization of a negative estimation – on the other hand the concept «school» is verbalized by the conceptual oppositions "school : church", "school : poverty". In Russian the lexemes a book has got a wide representation as compared to Ukrainian and German and additional axiological senses are added "good : bad"; in Ukrainian and Russian "pedagogical" paroemia function the lexemes "бук, ремінь (Ukr.), бука, кулак, палка (Rus.). These lexemes are not typical for German pedagogical paroemia.

The types of a teaching activity are modelled in "pedagogical" paremias by means of the lexemes писати, читання, читати, повторювати.... Writing as a type of a teaching activity acquires the widest presentation in Ukrainian, compare: Ukr. Пише, як сорока лапою (…сорока по тину) [УППіТІ 1993: 286]; Написав, мов курка лапою [УППіТІ 1993: 286]; Писав, писав, чим запечатував [ГРНП ІІІ 2006: 707], Написав, як чорт до Арехви [УППіТІ 1993: 286], Пише як маком сіє [ГРНП ІІІ 2006: 707]; Як напише дурень, то не розбере й розумний [УППіТІ 1993: 286]; Rus.: Нацарапал, как курица лапой [РНЗПП 1990: 311], Писать – не языком чесать [РНЗПП 1990: 311]; Ger.: Willstdu nicht lernen mit der Feder schreiben, so schreib’ mit der Mistgabel [ПНМ 2005: 244]).

The paroemias with the components читати, читання function in three investigated languages: readingrepresents the meaning "the basis of teaching", compare: Ukr.: Не на користь книжку читать, коли вершки лише хапать [ПНМ 2005: 147], Не всякий, хто читає, в читанні силу знає [ПНМ 2005: 147]; Ger.: Lesen ohne Verstandversäumt und ist ’ne Schand [ПНМ 2005: 147], Lesen und nicht verstehen ist ein halbes Müßiggehen [ПНМ 2005: 147], Viel lesen macht viel wissen [ПНМ 2005: 189], Wer viel liest und nicht behält ist wie der, der viel jagt und nicht fängt [ПНМ 2005: 190]; Rus.: Грамота черкнёт и памяти не надо, прочтёшь – и спрашивать не надо [РНЗПП 1990: 309], Книги читай, а дела не забывай [РНЗПП 1990: 310], Учился читать да писать, а выучился петь да плясать [РНЗПП 1990: 312], Чтенье – лучшее ученье [РНЗПП 1990: 313]. The lexeme "revision" verbalizes the activityconsidered to be a successful studying, compare: Ukr.: Повторення – мати навчання [ПНМ 2005: 243], рос.: Повторение – мать ученья [РПиП 1988: 257]; Ger.: Übung macht den Meister [Dud. 1998: 744], Wiederholung ist derMeister des Studierens [ПНМ 2005: 243].

The concept "TYPE OF A TEACHING ACTIVITY" is verbalized by similar means; the exception is the Ukrainian paroemia that depict writing from the point of view of the form and content. Teaching is a process directed mainly to the result. An educated person served the result and the aim of teaching. This fact is confirmed by many paroemias with the lexemes грамота, вчення, наука, знання (Ukr.); грамота, ученье, наука, знання (Rus.); Klugheit, Verstand (Ger.), that are the features of an educated person, compare: Rus.: Ученье без уменья не польза, а беда [РНЗПП 1990: 312], Ученье в счастье украшает, а при несчастье – утешает [РНЗПП 1990: 312], Ученье и труд – все перетрут [РНЗПП 1990 312]; Ukr.: Хто береться до вчення, тому курка печена, а кому вчитися ліньки – їж з корита усвинки [ПНМ 2005: 147]; Вчення – світ, а невчення – тьма [ПНМ 2005: 245]; Ukr.: Науки не носить за плечима [УППіТІ 1993: 284], Без науки нема муки [УППіТІ 1993: 284], Наука в ліс не йде [УППіТІ 1993: 284]; Ukr.: Божьейволей свет стоит, наукой люди живут [РНЗПП 1990: 311], Наука хлеба не просит, а хлеб дает [РНЗПП 1990: 311]; Ger.: Die Wurzel der Wissenschaft ist bitter, um so süßer ihre Früchte [ПНМ 2005: 77], Wissenschaft ist ein guter Wanderstab [ПНМ 2005: 245]; Rus.: Кто грамоте гаразд, тому не пропасть [РНЗПП 1990: 310], Грамотеучиться всегда пригодиться [РПиП 1988: 71], C грамотой вскачь, без грамоты хоть плачь [РНЗПП 1990: 312]; Ukr.: Знання красить, а незнання – смішить [УППіТІ 1993: 124], Хто знання має, той мир зламає [УППіТІ 1993: 124]; Rus.: Знание – лучше богатства [РНЗПП 1990: 310], Знание да наука на вороту не виснут [РНЗПП 1990: 310]; Ger.: Wissen ist Macht [ПНМ 2005: 245], Wissen macht bescheiden [ПНМ 2005: 245].

The lexemes розум (Ukr.), ум (Rus.), Klugheit, Verstand (Ger.) express concepts that imply a life experience as well as teaching. That is why not all examples with this component indicate the sphere of education, compare: Ukr.: Не штуканаука, а штука розум [УППіТІ 1993: 285], Лучший розум природжений, як научений [УППіТІ 1993: 285]; Rus.: Умслабый не желает науки, а хочет век прожить без скуки [РПиП 1988: 312], Ум без разума – беда [РПиП 1988: 311], Ум добро, а два – и лучше того [РПиП 1988: 311]; Ger.: Klugheit geht über Stärke [ПНМ 2005: 143], Verstand ist das beste Kapital [ПНМ 2005: 188]. The concept "THE RESULT OF TEACHING" has got a similar verbalization in the investigated languages. This concept contains the lexemes that denote qualities relevant to a teaching process regardless of ethnic peculiarities and epochs.

Conclusion. The concept "TEACHING" in "pedagogical" paroemia represents the following constituents: 1) the participant of a teaching process; 2) the artefact; 3) the type; 4) the result. The specificity of their verbalization is connected with lingual, socio-linguistic factors – historical, economic and spiritual that influenced the status of verbalization of a pedagogic activity (a respect for a pupil in Ukrainian and Russian linguistic cultures; a high status of school as an educational institution, on the one hand, poverty in the country, – on the other hand; the specifity of a pedagogical process (a physical punishment that used to be in Ukrainian schools). These facts are not peculiar to German paremia because Germany was progressive not only in the sphere of economy but in cultural, educational spheres either. That is why German paroemia illustrates a modern traditional view of teaching process.

Perspective. The subject of a further investigation consists in a linguistic explication of the concept "education".

References.

Космеда 2000: Космеда, Т. Аксіологічні аспекти прагмалінгвістики : формування і розвиток категорії оцінки : [моногр.] [Текст] / Т. Космеда. – Львів : ЛНУ ім. Івана Франка, 2000. – 350 с.

Маслова 2001: Маслова, В. Лингвокультурология : [уч. пос. для студ. высш. учеб. зав.] [Текст] / В. Маслова. – М. : Академия, 2001. – 351 с.

Мацьків 2007: Мацьків, П. Концептосфера БОГ в українському мовному просторі [Текст] / П. Мацьків. – Київ – Дрогобич : Коло, 2007. – 330 с.

Палиця 2011: Палиця, Г. Педагогічна паремія як ефективна складова педагогічного дискурсу (на матеріалі української, російської та німецької мов) [Текст] / Г. Палиця // Наукові записки. – Випуск 96 (1). – Серія : Філологічні науки (мовознавство) : зб. наук. пр. – Кіровоград : РВВ КДПУ ім. В. Винниченка, 2011. – С. 352-355.

BELTZ Lexikon Pädagogik 2007: BELTZ Lexikon Pädagogik [Text] / [hrsg. von H.–E. Tenorth und R. Tippelt]. – Weinheim, Basel : Beltz Verlag, 2007. – 786 S.

Sources and Abbreviations

ГРНП 2006: Галицько-руські народні приповідки : [у 3 тт.] / [зібрав, упорядкував і пояснив др. Іван Франко]. – Львів : ВЦ ЛНУ ім. І. Франка, 2006. – 2-е вид. – Т. 1. – 818 с. – Т. 2. – 813 с. – Т. 3. – 699 с.

Міз. 2005: Мізін, К. Німецько-український фразеологічний словник (усталені порівняння) / К. Мізін. – Вінниця : Нова книга, 2005. – 304 с.

ПНМ 2005: Кудіна, О. Перлини народної мудрості / О. Кудіна, О. Пророченко. – Вінниця : Нова книга, 2005. – 320 с.

РНЗПП 1990: Русские народные загадки, пословицы, поговорки / [сост., авт. вступ. ст., коммент. и слов Ю. Круглов]. – М. : Просвещение, 1990. – 335 с.

РПиП 1988: Русские пословицы и поговорки / [под ред. В. Аникина]. – М. : Художественная литература, 1988. – 431 с.

УПП 1978: Українські прислів’я та приказки / [упор. та передм. В. Бойка]. – К. : Дніпро, 1978. – 291 с.

УППіТІ 1993: Українські приказки, прислів’я і таке інше / [уклав М. Номис]. – К. : Либідь, 1993. – 764 с.

Dud. 1998: Duden. Redewendungen und sprichwörtliche Redensarten. Wörterbuch der deutschen Idiomatik / [bearb. von G. Drosdowski und W. Scholze-Stubenrecht]. – Mannheim ; Leipzig ; Wien; Zürich : Dudenverlag, 1998. – B. 11. – 864 S.

У статті проаналізовано фрагмент паремійної мовної картини світу; простежено особливості моделювання "педагогічних" паремій української, російської та німецької мов з огляду на специфіку вербалізації концепту "навчання" в мовній свідомості представників різних етносів; виокремлено такі його складові, як "артефакт навчального процесу", "учасник навчального процесу", "вид навчальної діяльності", "результат навчання".

Ключові слова: мовна свідомість, паремійна мовна картина світу, "педагогічна" паремія, концепт, вербалізація.

Available 25 September 2013.