Phraseological units in the Tatar language containing the component of can (küñel) (SOUL)

Abstract

In the modern Tatar linguistics, a great interest is manifested to studying the language as a unique cultural code of particular linguocultural communities.Phraseological combinations used in the Tatar poetry that have direct lexical equivalents in the language can be extended in the contest due to the same circumstances as their lexical equivalents.The meaning of a combination itself is not replenished in any way, but such extension of boundaries of stable phrases can affect its meaning in a certain context by contributing additional sense aspects into it, which are absent in its general language variant.An attempt to discover the national identity of emotional sensations of the Tatar people is made in this article by using such general research methods as induction, deduction, observation, as well as analysis and synthesis of empirical materials.Phraseological units of the Tatar language with emotionally expressed components have been analyzed, which makes it possible to assess and evaluate how the Tatar people imagine and visualize the world.The findings of this research prove that in the Tatar linguistic vision of the world, as well as in the Eastern linguistic culture, the human, his emotions and speech are striving for harmony by mutually complementing each other.Tatars' life, routines, and emotions appear to be seriously influenced by Islamic traditions.The significance based upon a comprehensive analysis of phraseological units reveals the national specific vision of the world, the methods for nomination and segmentation of the emotional world, as well as the human image featured in the Tatar language phraseology.The research findings make it possible to represent such significance for the general theory of linguistic science.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 4 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.