Main functional features and originality of lexical metaphor in modern cognitive linguistics

Cover Page

Cite item

Abstract

the presented article is written on a relevant topic. In modern cognitive linguistics, there are a considerable number of works of various volumes on the role of lexical metaphor both in a close contextual environment and in an isolated form. Meanwhile, the author managed to reveal the main functional features of the object under study within the framework of the article. They turned out to be quite remarkable, partly valuable not only for specialists, but also for the average mass reader. Several aspects are of particular interest, which under the author’s pen actually turn into strongholds, a kind of outposts. As one of the first and most important points, the real possibility of lexical metaphor to act as various parts of speech in the modern Russian literary language is named. They are not simply listed, but also shown in combination with the provision of appropriate examples. Further, when indicating the functioning of this type of metaphors within the boundaries of the lexical-semantic, temporal, emotive field of activity, its significance in the role in the texts of fiction is clearly shown. The statement, as they say, is worth a lot because it directly testifies to the emotionality of the entire statement as a whole. Metaphor is only a part of it, but in the examples given, it is very significant. Finally, the lexical metaphor is given in various contexts with comparison and assimilation. The article selects such vivid examples that this becomes a kind of its “highlight”, since comparison and assimilation are essentially a separate layer of research, stylistic figures or tropes. But both common points of contact and differences are shown, supporting this with the opinions of authoritative linguists, both modern and past. All this undoubtedly enriches the article. It meets all the necessary requirements, is distinguished by a creative search, is written in a scientific, but quite accessible language.

About the authors

Gyunay Telman gyzy Mirzoeva

Azerbaijan University of Tourism and Management, Azerbaijan

References

  1. Аристотель. Поэтика. М.: Художественная литература, 1979.
  2. Бабенко Л.Г., Казарин Ю.В. Лингвистический анализ художественного текста. М.: Наука-Флинта, 2006. 496 с.
  3. Бикертон Д. Введение в лингвистическую теорию метафоры // Теория метафоры. М.: Прогресс, 1990. С. 284 – 306.
  4. Виноградов В.В. Лексикология и лексикография. М.: Наука, 1977. 264 с.
  5. Виноградов В.В. О поэзии Анны Ахматовой. М.: Наука, 1976. 497 с.
  6. Власенков А.И., Рыбченкова Л.М. Русский язык. Грамматика Текст. Стили речи. М.: Просвещение, 2002. 349 с.
  7. Потебня А.А. Из записок по русской грамматике. М.: Наука, 1958. 548 с.
  8. Тимофеев Л.И., Тураев С.В. Словарь литературоведческих терминов. М.: Просвещение, 1974. 509 с.

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Согласие на обработку персональных данных

 

Используя сайт https://journals.rcsi.science, я (далее – «Пользователь» или «Субъект персональных данных») даю согласие на обработку персональных данных на этом сайте (текст Согласия) и на обработку персональных данных с помощью сервиса «Яндекс.Метрика» (текст Согласия).