ON THE PRAGMATIC ASPECT OF INTERJECTIONS STUDY
https://doi.org/10.21603/2078-8975-2017-1-217-221
Abstract
The article contains a study of the most controversial problems in interjections theory – the criteria of classification and the issue of semantics of these specific linguistic elements. The paper argues that traditional parameters – prototypical, morphosyntactic, semantic and grammatical – are not relevant for all subclasses of interjections. The common claim about the meaning of interjections as signifying feelings or states of mind is too narrow and couldn’t be referred to such categories as volitive (conative) and etiquette interjections. As new criterion common for all subclasses the attitudinal reference is suggested, which definitely separates this heterogeneous class from all other parts of speech with denotative or descriptive reference. To name these two main groups of linguistic signs the neosemantization of rarely used linguistic terms is offered: “pragmeme” (for interjections) and “semanteme” (for the linguistic signs with denotative meaning).
About the Author
T. M. Shkapenko
Immanuel Kant Baltic Federal University
Russian Federation
14, A. Nevskogo St., Kaliningrad, Russia, 236041
Russian Federation
14, A. Nevskogo St., Kaliningrad, Russia, 236041
References
1. Wierzbicka A. Semantika mezhdometii [The semantics of interjections]. Semanticheskie universalii i opisanie iazykov [Semantic universals and language description]. Moscow: Nauka, 1999, 611 – 647.
2. Kustova E. Iu. Frantsuzskoe mezhdometie: leksiko-grammaticheskie aspekty, semiogenez i interaktsional'nye funktsii. Avtoref. diss. doktora filol. nauk [The French interjection: lexical-grammatical aspects, semiogenez and interactional functions. Dr. filol. Sci. Diss. Abstr.]. Voronezh, 2010, 42.
3. Petkova Z. A. Russkie zvukopodrazhatel'nye slova v zerkale nositelei bolgarskogo iazyka. Avtoref. diss. kand. filol. nauk [Russian onomatopoeic words in the mirror of Bulgarian language speakers. Cand. filol. Sci. Diss. Abstr.]. Moscow, 2011, 19.
4. Rosch H. E. Cognitive representation of semantic categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 104(3) (1975): 192 – 233.
5. Shkapenko T. M. K probleme lingvisticheskoi kategorizatsii mezhdometii [On the aspect of linguistic categorization of interjections]. Izvestiia vysshikh uchebnykh zavedenii. Seriia: Gumanitarnye nauki = The News of Institutes of Higher Education. Series: Humanities, 7, no. 2 (2016): 141 – 146.
6. Sperber D, Wilson D. Relevantnost' [Relevancy]. Novoe v zarubezhnoi lingvistike. Vyp. 23. Kognitivnye aspekty iazyka [The News of Foreign Linguistics. Iss. 23. Cognitive aspects of language]. Moscow: Progress, 1988, 212 – 233.
7. Wharton T. Interjections, language, and the 'showing/saying' continuum. Pragmatics & Cognition, 11, no. 1 (2003): 39 – 91. doi: 10.1075/pc.11.1.04wha
8. Sharonov I. A. O novom podkhode k klassifikatsii emotsional'nykh mezhdometii [About new approach to classification of emotive interjections]. Komp'iuternaia lingvistika i intellektual'nye tekhnologii. Trudy mezhdunarodnoi konferentsii «Dialog 2006» [Computer linguistics and intellectual technologies: Proc. Int. Conf. «Dialog 2006»]. Moscow, 2006, 561 – 566.
Review
For citations:
Shkapenko T.M. ON THE PRAGMATIC ASPECT OF INTERJECTIONS STUDY. The Bulletin of Kemerovo State University. 2017;(1):217-221. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.21603/2078-8975-2017-1-217-221
Views:
683
Email this article 