러시아어에서의 분노의 정서개념 의미 연구 ―전치사의 공간 은유와 정서범주의 원형효과― = On Semantics of Emotion Concept of Anger in Russian ―Metaphoric Conceptualization of Spatial Prepositions and Prototype Effects of the Categories of Emotion―

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The goal of the study is to explore the internal structure of emotion concept of ``anger`` in Russian. I classified four types of anger: (i) savage anger, i.e., jarost`, beshenstvo, neistovstvo, (ii) righteous anger, i.e., gnev, negodovanie and vozmushchenie, (iii) silent introvertive anger, i.e., dosada and razdrazhenie, (iv) malicious anger, i.e., zloba and zlost`. These emotion concepts display common metaphors and metonymies, such as fire, hot fluid in container, an opponent in a struggle, and physiological effects of body heat, agitation, redness, loss of speech, etc. In view of the prototypical scenario of anger(Lakoff 1987) and the frequency of attestation, cognitive saliency in native speakers` mind as well as the collocational distribution, the conceptual prototype of anger in Russian is gnev. The study confirms that the membership of conceptual categories of emotion have gradience, which cannot be explained by all-or-none category membership. The prototype effects are verified by the spatial metaphors of prepositions, specifically ot, s, iz. While ot is the unmarked causal preposition of most emotion words including anger, the prepositions s and iz are found more often with peripheral concepts, such as dosada, zloba, zlost`. The preposition s prefers dosada, while iz prefers zloba most. The emotion concepts having cumulative, durative semantic features which are embedded in a person`s character tend to prefer iz, whereas the emotion concepts which are instantly triggered and directed to instigators of the emotion as a retributive reaction tend to prefer ot. The preposition s is in-between and the emotion concepts compatible with this preposition do not implicate immediate retributive reactions, nor are they deeply embedded in the experiencer`s cognitive structure. These semantic distinctive features are in iconic relationship with the primary spatial meanings denoted by these prepositions, and the metaphoric semantic extensions therefrom yield subtly differentiated causal meanings for the emotion concepts.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 Засорина, Л. Н., "Частотный словарь русского языка" Русский язык 1977

2 Ушаков, Д. Н., "Тольковый словарь русского языка(в 4-х томах)" Государственное издательство «Советская энциклопедия» 1940

3 Вежбицкая, Анна, "Сопоставление культур через посредство лексики и грамматики" Языки славянской культуры 2001

4 Ожегов, С. И., "Словарь русского языка(20-е издание)" Русский язык 1988

5 Успенский, В. А., "О вещных коннотациях абстрактных сущест- вительных, In Семиотика и информатика, 35" Языки русской культуры 146-152, 1997

6 "Национальный корпус русского языка"

7 Апресян, В. Ю., "Метафора в семантическом представлений эмоций" 3 : 27-34, 1993

8 Lakoff, George, "Women, Fire and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind" The University of Chicago Press 1987

9 Lindner, Sue, "What Goes Up Doesn’t Necessarily Come Down: The Ins and Outs of Opposites" 305-323, 1982

10 송은지, "Universal and Culture-Specific Conceptualization of Anger in Russian" 러시아연구소 19 (19): 179-212, 2009

11 Jakobson, Roman, "Two Types of Language and Two Types of Aphasic Disturbances, In Fundamentals of Language" Mouton 55-82, 1956

12 Croft, William, "The Role of Domains in the Interpretation of Metaphors and Metonymies" 4 : 335-370, 1993

13 Osmond, Meredith, "The Prepositions We Use in the Construal of Emotions: Why do we say fed up with but sick and tired of?" 111-134, 1997

14 Wheeler, Marcus, "The Oxford Russian-English Dictionary" The Clarendon Press 1992

15 Niemeier, Susan, "The Language of Emotions" John Benjamins Publishing Company 1997

16 Lakoff, George, "The Invariance Hypothesis: Is abstract reason based on image schemas?" 1 : 39-74, 1990

17 Lakoff, George, "The Contemporary Theory of Metaphor, In Metaphor and Thought" 202-251, 1993

18 Radden, Günter, "The Conceptualization of Emotional Causality by means of Prepositional Phrases" 275-294, 1998

19 Ortony, Andrew, "The Cognitive Structure of Emotions" Cambridge University Press 1988

20 Langacker, Ronald W., "Subjectification" 1 : 5-38, 1990

21 Athanasiadou, Angeliki, "Speaking of Emotions: Conceptualization and Expression" Mouton de Gruyter 1998

22 Radden, Günter, "Spatial Metaphors Underlying Prepositions of Causality, In The Ubiquity of Metaophor" John Benjamins Publishing Company 177-207, 1985

23 Wierzbicka, Anna, "Sadness and Anger in Russian: The Non-Universality of So-Called ‘Basic Human Emotions’" 3-28, 1998

24 Iordanskaja, L., "Russian Expressions Denoting Physical symptoms of Emotions: An Example of Two-Argument Lexical Functions" 69 : 245-282, 1986

25 Mostovaja, Anna D., "On Emotions that One Can ‘Immerse into’, ‘Fall into’, and ‘Come to’: The Semantics of a Few Russian Prepositional Constructions" 295-329, 1998

26 Goossens, Louis, "Metaphtonymy: The Interaction of Metaphor and Metonymy in Expressions for linguistic Actions" 1 (1): 323-340, 1990

27 Lakoff, George, "Metaphors We Live By" The University of Chicago Press 1980

28 Kövecses, Zoltán, "Metaphor and Emotion: Language, Culture, and Body in Human Feeling" Cambridge University Press 2000

29 Rosch, Eleanor, "Human Categorization, In Advances in Cross-Cultural Psychology, 1" Academic Press 1-49, 1977

30 Talmy, Leonard, "How Language Structures Space, In Spatial Orientation: Theory, Research, and Application" Plenum Press 225-282, 1983

31 Fillmore, Charles J., "Frames and the Semantics of Understanding" VI (VI): 222-254, 1985

32 Fillmore, Charles J., "Frame Semantics, In Linguistics in the Morning Calm" Hanshin Publishing Company 111-137, 1982

33 Langacker, Ronald W., "Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, 1" University Press Stanford 1987

34 Dirven, René, "Emotions as Cause and the Cause of Emotions" 1997

35 Fehr, Beverley, "Concept of Emotion Viewed from a Prototype Perspective" 113 (113): 464-486, 1984

36 Regier, Terry, "A Model of the Human Capacity for Categorizing Spatial Relation" 6 (6): 63-88, 1995