UDC

81’27

DOI

10.37482/2687-1505-V091

Authors

Olesya F. Tsibernaya
Chelyabinsk State University; ul. Brat’ev Kashirinykh 129, Chelyabinsk, 454001, Russian Federation;
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3747-4790 e-mail: igoshevaolesya@gmail.com

Abstract

Continuous development of technologies and globalization result in transfer of knowledge: knowledge about the world is transmitted between bearers of different linguocultures, as well as from generation to generation within one linguoculture. In the course of various transfer procedures, knowledge undergoes structural and qualitative changes. The nomenclature of possible transfer procedures and the essence of some procedures vary for different types of transfer. Configuration is one of the main procedures for knowledge transfer. Its implementation can be observed through structural changes in the units of knowledge transfer, such as works of art, terms, loanwords, etc. If a concept is considered as such a unit, configuration can be traced in the dynamics of the macrostructure, categorical structure and field description of the concept. Thus, the analysis of linguistic units representing a concept allows us to identify changes occurring in the minds of linguoculture-bearers over time. This paper aimed to study configuration as one of the main procedures of intracultural transfer of knowledge within the Russian worldview, with regard to everyday sphere of knowledge. The material of the research included representations of the concept of human in journalistic publications. The study is based on a complex methodology, including descriptive, comparative historical, and comparative methods, as well as statistical analysis and conceptual analysis. The research allowed us to identify the implementation of the configuration procedure in the course of knowledge transfer in the everyday sphere of knowledge, as well as to confirm its non-identity for the everyday and scientific spheres of knowledge by comparing our results with the data obtained earlier by other researchers. The study contributes to solving the problem of linguocultural transfer of knowledge and can be used in accomplishing many linguocognitive tasks.
For citation: Tsibernaya O.F. Configuration as a Procedure of Intracultural Knowledge Transfer (Exemplified by the Dynamics of the Concept of Human in the Russian Linguistic Worldview). Vestnik Severnogo (Arkticheskogo) federal’nogo universiteta. Ser.: Gumanitarnye i sotsial’nye nauki, 2021, no. 2, pp. 92–98. DOI: 10.37482/2687-1505-V091

Keywords

intracultural knowledge transfer, Russian linguistic worldview, knowledge transfer procedures, concept of human, everyday sphere of knowledge, diachronic linguistics

References

1. Dem’yankov V.Z. O kognitsii, kul’ture i tsivilizatsii v transfere znaniy [On Cognition, Culture and Civilization in Knowledge Transfer]. Voprosy kognitivnoy lingvistiki, 2016, no. 4, pp. 5–9.
2. Novikova E.Yu. Mezhdunarodnyy turisticheskiy diskurs kak lingvokul’turnyy transfer [International Tourist Discourse as a Linguocultural Transfer]. Volgograd, 2017. 332 p.
3. Tsibernaya O.F. Transfer znaniy v kitayskoy yazykovoy kartine mira (na primere kontsepta “chelovek”) [Knowledge Transfer in the Chinese Linguistic Worldview (Based on the Example of the Concept “Human”)]. Vestnik Yuzhno-Ural’skogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Ser.: Lingvistika, 2019, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 69–73. DOI: 10.14529/ling190210
4. Tsibernaya O.F. Puti i protsedury vnutrikul’turnogo transfera znaniy v russkoy yazykovoy kartine mira [Ways and Procedure of the Intra Cultural Transfer of Knowledge in the Russian Language World View]. Professional’nyy proekt: idei, tekhnologii, rezul’taty, 2019, no. 1, pp. 73–77.
5. Shchedrovitskiy G.P. Sintez znaniy: problemy i metody [Synthesis of Knowledge: Problems and Methods]. Na puti k teorii nauchnogo znaniya [Towards the Theory of Scientific Knowledge]. Moscow, 1984, pp. 67–109.
6. Avtonomova N.S. Poznanie i perevod. Opyty filosofii yazyka [Knowledge and Translation. Experience of the Philosophy of Language]. Moscow, 2008. 704 p.
7. Postovalova V.I. Puti i printsipy transferizatsii znaniya v gumanitarnykh naukakh [Ways and Principles of Knowledge Transfer Within the Humanities]. Feshchenko V.V. (ed.). Lingvistika i semiotika kul’turnykh transferov:
metody, printsipy, tekhnologii [Linguistics and Semiotics of Cultural Transfers: Methods, Principles, Technologies]. Moscow, 2016, pp. 36–60.
8. Leont’ev A.N. Deyatel’nost’. Soznanie. Lichnost’ [Activity. Consciousness. Personality]. Moscow, 1977. 304 p.
9. Furs L.A. Vzaimodeystvie kognitivnogo i metakognitivnogo urovney v formirovanii kompleksnogo znaniya [The Interplay of Cognitive and Metacognitive Levels in the Formation of Complex Knowledge]. Voprosy kognitivnoy lingvistiki, 2018, no. 2, pp. 74–78. DOI: 10.20916/1812-3228-2018-2-74-78
10. Dzyuba E.V. Lingvokognitivnaya kategorizatsiya v russkom yazykovom soznanii [Linguocognitive Categorization in Russian Linguistic Consciousness]. Yekaterinburg, 2015. 286 p.