Contexts of the realization of discursive words communicative senses (as evidenced by the lexeme якось)  

Abstract.

CONTEXTS OF THE REALIZATION OF DISCURSIVE WORDS COMMUNICATIVE SENSES (AS EVIDENCED BY THE LEXEME ЯКОСЬ)

Florij Batsevych

The Department of General Linguistics, Ivan Franko Lviv National University, Lviv, Ukraine.

Yarosalva Sazonova

The Department of English Phonetics and Grammar, Skovoroda Kharkiv National Pedagogical University, Kharkiv, Ukraine.

Abstract

Background: Recent studies of discursive words (DW) within the scope of communicative and functional approaches analyze them as the elements of a language code that unites the content of the narration and the means of its textual representation. However, their content organization remains mainly unclear, first, because of the indistinct concord of their semantic and pragmatic elements. Moreover, the pragmatic features of these language code units often remain inexplicit.

Purpose: The analysis shows that the content narrative unfolding of DWs depends on the series of other contexts, first, of the inter-narrative nature. The article aims at analyzing these aspects of the general problem.

Methods: To detail the specificity of the content organization of the lexeme of discursive character (якось) we compare its explicated semantic-pragmatic objectivations that, first, are detected in oral speech and appear in texts in The Ukrainian Language Corpus, second, are defined in dictionaries.

Results: Lexeme якось is used in narrative proper and narrative-dialogic contexts of current and retrospective narrations and explicates communicative senses of mental and psychological uncertainty, indefiniteness of embodiment, lack of obligation of the exact definition of the essence and quantitative characteristics of what is being discussed in the narrative story. Accounting for these contexts allows considering the absence of homonymous connections in the structure of communicative senses of the analyzed discursive word, which are postulated in explanatory dictionaries. We identify several contexts of the DW use: 1) as the dominants of moduses of a narrator’s world perception and cognition: perceptive, mental, psychological; 2) functional-communicative context: narrative, descriptive, considerations, dialogic; 3) content proper: dynamic / static, the nearest verbal, textual, modal unfolding of a narrator’s world perception.

Discussion: The study of functional-communicative varieties of DWs and DPs will allow identifying and taking into account the typology of contexts that influence the realization of the semantic potential of the means of the language code of texts. It will also contribute to the formalization of their content structure description in explanatory dictionaries of the active type.

Keywords: text, discourse, narrative, discursive words, discursive phrases, communicative sense.

Vitae

Florij Batsevych is a Doctor of Philology, Professor, the Head of the Department of General Linguistics and the Honoured Professor of Ivan Franko Lviv National University. The scientific interests: general linguistics, theoretical semasiology and onomasiology, communicative linguistics, genology, linguistic pragmatics.

Correspondence: batsevich.florij@gmail.com 

Yarosalva Sazonova is a Doctor of Philology, Associate Professor, the Head of the Department of English Phonetics and Grammar of Skovoroda Kharkiv National Pedagogical University, Prof. Batsevych’s mentee. The scientific interests: theory of language, text linguistics, communicative linguistics, linguistic pragmatics.

Correspondence: sazonova.yaroslava.hnpu@gmail.com 

Article.

References. 

1.    Бацевич, Флорій. Нариси з лінгвістичної прагматики. Львів: ПАІС, 2010. 336 с.

[Batsevych, Florij. Narysy z linhvistychnoyi prahmatyky. L’viv: PAIS, 2010. 336 s.]

2.    Бацевич, Флорій. Частки української мови як дискурсивні слова. Львів: ПАІС, 2014. 288 с.

[Batsevych, Florij. Chastky ukrayins’koyi movy yak dyskursyvni slova. L’viv: PAIS, 2014. 288 s.]

3.    Глібчук, Н., Добосевич, У. «Визначення міжчастиномовних омонімів та їх класифікація» [У:] Словник міжчастиномовних омонімів сучасної української мови. Львів: Апріорі, 2016, 9–20.

[Hlibchuk,N., Dobosevych, U. «Vyznachennya mizhchastynomovnykh omonimiv ta yikh klasyfikatsiya» [U:] Slovnyk mizhchastynomovnykh omonimiv suchasnoyi ukrayins’koyi movy. L’viv:Apriori, 2016, 9–20.]

4. Добосевич, У. «Критерії та прийоми визначення частиномовного статусу морфологічних транспозитів». Вісник Львівського університету. Серія філологічна 57, 2012: 37–47.

[Dobosevych,U. «Kryteriyi ta pryyomy vyznachennya chastynomovnoho statusu morfolohichnykh transpozytiv». Visnyk L’vivs’koho universytetu. Seriyafilolohichna 57, 2012: 37–47.]

5. Кушлик, О. П. Омонімія незмінних класів слів: автореф. … дис. канд. філол. наук.: 10.02.01. Львів, 2000. 16 с.

[Кушлик, О. П. Омонімія незмінних класів слів: автореф. … дис. канд. філол. наук.: 10.02.01. Львів, 2000. 16 с.]

6. Ситар, Г. Синтаксичні фразеологізми в розрізі конструкційної граматики. Вінниця: ТОВ «Нілан-ЛТД», 2017. 460 с.

[Sytar,H. Syntaksychni frazeolohizmy v rozrizi konstruktsiynoyi hramatyky. Vinnytsya: TOV «Nilan-LTD», 2017. 460 s.]