Structural and semantic features of ethno-stereotyping of space-time relations in different linguistic cultures

Purpose of research. The article is aimed at determining the features of the linguistic fixation of space-time relations in languages with different structures, identifying unique characteristics that form an integral part of the culture of the people, the specifics of the national mentality represented in the language. Based on the material of differently structured Kabardian-Circassian, Russian and English languages terms of space and time are analyzed in a comparative aspect.

Methods. The use of a complex of general scientific and linguistic methods, including methods of comparative, lexical-semantic, etymological and conceptual analysis, made it possible to identify the features of linguistic objectification of ethnocultural information in the languages under study, to explore the features of national thinking in the process of linguistic projection of culturally significant information, to establish differences in the perception and interpretations of details of the surrounding world by different peoples, as well as the role of language in the formation of national and cultural identity.

The results of the study revealed linguocultural differences in the perception and linguistic objectification of time among different peoples, in particular, structural and semantic features of fixation of temporal concepts in the language, as well as the projection of the use of a certain referential system in the language and at the cognitive level. The introduction of new language material into scientific use promotes further research in linguoculturology, since, as noted by many researchers, not a single linguoculture is capable of providing comprehensive information.

Conclusion. A comparative analysis of the spatial coding strategies used (absolute and relative systems of reference) reveals the representation in the native language of the way of thinking of its speakers, as well as the influence of language on the perception of the surrounding world. The temporal categorization of reality explicates the peculiarities of national worldview. The presence in a language of a large number of time-specifying details can be seen as an indicator of the meaning that an ethnic community attaches to time.

1. Langacker R. Foundations of cognitive grammar. Vol. 1: theoretical prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford University Press; 1987. 540 p.

2. Wierzbicka A. Semantics: Primes and Universals. New York: Oxford University Press; 1996. 500 p.

3. Luk'yanchenko E.A. On the issue of expressing the concept of time in various linguistic cultures. MGIMO Bulletin = Vestnik MGIMO. 2012;(6):328–329. (In Russ.).

4. Tenbrink T. Space, time, and the use of language: An investigation of relationships. Researchgate.net; 2024. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228757191_Space_time_and_the_use_of_language_An_investigation_of_relationships

5. Levinson S. Space in language and cognition: Explorations in cognitive diversity. Cambridge; 2003. 389 p.

6. Borodai S.Yu. Language and Cognition: An Introduction to Post-Relativism. Moscow: Sadra: Izdatel'skii Dom YaSK; 2020. 800 p. (In Russ.).

7. Deutscher G. Through the language glass: why the world looks different in other languages. New York: Henry Holt and Company; 2010. 320 p.

8. Evans N.D. A Grammar of Kayardild: With Historical-Comparative Notes on Tangkic, Berlin, New York: De Gruyter Mouton; 1995. 837 p.

9. Whorf B.L. Language, thought, and reality: Selected writings of Benjamin Lee Whorf. Technology Press of Massachusetts Institute of Technology; 1956. 278 p.

10. Leavitt J. Linguistic relativies. In: Ch. Jourdan, K. Tuite (eds.) Language, culture and society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2006. P. 47–81.

11. Bgazhnokov B.Kh. Essays on the ethnography of communication of Adyghes. Nal'chik: El'brus; 1983. 229 p. (In Russ.).

12. Brown P., Levinson S.C. ‘Uphill’ and ‘downhill’ in Tzeltal. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology. 1993;(3):46–74. (In Russ.)

13. Haspelmath M. From Space to Time. Temporal Adverbials in the World's Languages. München – Newcastle: Lincom Europa; 1997. 188 p.

14. Sinha C., Gärdenfors P. Time, space and events in language and cognition. A comparative view. Annals of the New York Academy of Science. 2014;1326(1):72–81. https://doi.org/10.1111/nyas.12491

15. Steiner G. After Babel: Aspects of Language and Translation. Oxford University Press, 1998. 538 p.

16. Pavlovskii I.V. Time and space in the European and Russian picture of the world. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Lingvistika i mezhkul'turnaya kommunikatsiya = Bulletin of Moscow University. Linguistics and intercultural communication. 2013;(2):119–132. (In Russ.).

17. Ter-Minasova S.G. War and peace of languages and cultures: issues of theory and practice. Moscow: AST: Astrel': Khranitel'; 2007. 286 p. (In Russ.).

18. Pobedash E.V. The category of time in the cultural aspect and the definition of the “current hour” as a linguocultural marker. Vestnik Irkutskogo gosudarstvennogo tekhnicheskogo universiteta = Bulletin of Irkutsk State Technical University. 2012;(10):370–373. (In Russ.).

19. Sukhina E.I. Space and time in modern British and Russian self-awareness through the prism of the press (based on materials from The Times, The Daily Telegraph, Nezavisimaya Gazeta and Arguments and Facts). Moscow; 2004. 184 p. (In Russ.).

20. Larina T.V. English and Russians: language, culture, communication. Moscow: Yazyki slavyanskikh kul'tur; 2013. 360 p. (In Russ.).

21. Zaliznyak A.A., Shmelev A.D. Time of day and types of activities. In: Logicheskij analiz yazyka. Yazyk i vremya = Logical analysis of the language. Language and time. Moscow: Indrik; 1997. 352 p. (In Russ.).