Научный журнал “Вестник НИИ гуманитарных наук при Правительстве Республики Мордовия”
The journal “Bulletin of the Research Institute of the Humanities by the Government of the Republic of Mordovia”
Mosina N. M., Kaderova S. A.
Introduction. The article is devoted to the study of the semantics of verb units that convey the relations of possessiveness in the Moksha and English languages. The goal of the article is to analyze and compare verbs with the seme “possessiveness” in languages of different structure with an emphasis on predicative constructions characterized by static. In this study, static in possessive relations refers to a state of owning/possessing, which is stable, non-developing in nature. The relevance of this study is due to the need for a comprehensive study of the lexicosemantic group of verbs in the Moksha and English languages in order to identify common and specific features inherent in these linguistic cultures. The obvious insufficiency of comparative studies also explains the study of verbal units that contain the semantic component “possessiveness”.
Materials and methods. The research material was illustrative examples in the Moksha and English languages, obtained as a result of a continuous and partial sampling of texts of various genre and functional styles, including printed media, scientific and educational publications, various dialect and folklore texts included in the linguistic corpus of the Language Bank of Finland (Kielipankki) and British National Corpus (BNC). In the course of the study, the methods of semasiological, comparative, component, descriptive and contextual analysis were used.
Results and discussion. The meaning of possessiveness is realized at different levels of the language system: lexico-grammatical, morphological, morphological-syntactic, syntactic. One of the central lexical means that convey possessive relations in many languages are predicative constructions, since it is in the semantics of verbs that possessive relations find the most vivid representation. The article analyzes the semantic characteristics of static verbs of the Moksha and English languages, in which the seme of “possessing, owning, and belonging” is revealed.
Conclusion. The study made it possible to reveal the concepts of “possessing”, “owning”, “belonging” existing in linguistics, to conduct a semantic analysis of their explication, namely to identify verbal lexemes with static possessive semantics on the material of the Moksha and English languages, which have different structures. As a result of the study, 17 groups were identified, which included verbs of the Moksha and English languages with common semantics.
Keywords: possessiveness, semantic analysis, verbs, static, Moksha language, English language
For citation: Mosina NM, Kaderova SA. Semantics of Verb Units in the Aspect of Reflection Possessive Relations in the Moksha and English Languages. Bulletin of the Research Institute of the Humanities by the Government of the Republic of Mordovia. 2023;15(2):198—208. EDN MKGHDG
1. Bondarko AV. Possession. Introductory Remarks. Theory of Functional Grammar. Locativity. Beingness. Possession. Conditioning. St. Petersburg;1996:99—100. (In Russ.)
2. Vikulova AG. Means of Expressing Possessiveness in Russian and English. Language: Categories, Functions, Speech Impact. Proceedings of the International Scientific Conference. Moscow; Kolomna;2021:25—28. (In Russ.)
3. Davletshina SM. The Category of Possessiveness in Language and Speech (Based on the French and Russian Languages). Cand. Sci. (Philology) Dissertation. Ufa;2008. (In Russ.)
4. Edygarova SV. The Category of Possessiveness in the Udmurt Language. Cand. Sci. (Philology) Dissertation. Tartu;2010:(In Russ.)
5. Koprov VYu. Semantic-Functional Field of Possessiveness in Russian and English. Comparative Methods in Linguistic Research. Interlanguage and Intralinguistic Comparison. Proceedings of the Russian International Scientific Conference. Voronezh;2020: 169—174. (In Russ.)
6. Krasnoshchekov EV. The Category of Possessiveness in the Synchronous-Diachronic Aspect. Dr. Sci. (Philology) Dissertation. Taganrog;2020. (In Russ.)
7. Kudashova LA. Possession in the Erzya and Finnish languages. Cand. Sci. (Philology) Dissertation. Saransk;2001. (In Russ.)
8. Linkova YuI. Possessive Relations of Preservation and Loss of an Object in Russian and English. Eurasian Union of Scientists. 2015;(9):84—86. (In Russ.)
9. Milovanova MV. Linguistic and Cultural Characteristics of the Category of Possessiveness in Russian and German. Dr. Sci. (Philology) Dissertation. Volgograd;2007. (In Russ.)
10. Milovanova MV. The Semantics of Verb Units in the Aspect of Reflecting the Features of Modeling Possessive Relations in the Russian Language in Vomparison with the German Language. Siberian Journal of Philology. 2007:(4):120—130. (In Russ.)
11. Mosina NM, Kaderova SA. Attributive Means of Expressing Possessiveness in English. International Journal of Humanities and Natural Sciences. 2022(11—5):162—164. (In Russ.)
12. Mosina NM, Fedorova YuA. Attributive Means of Expressing Possessiveness in the Erzya and Finnish Languages. Humanities and Education. 2018:9(1):127—131. (In Russ.)
13. Polyakova NV. Means of Expressing Possessive Relations in Dialects of the Selkup Language. Tomsk Journal of Linguistics and Anthropology. 2015(4):51—54. (In Russ.)
14. Feoktistov AP. The Category of Possessiveness in the Mordovian Languages. Saransk;1963. (In Russ.)
15. Tsygankin DV. The Category of Belongingness and Its Features in the Dialects of the Erzya Language. Finno-Ugric Studies. 1978(1):116—149. (In Russ.)
16. Bendix EH. Componential Analysis of General Vocabulary: the Semantic Structure of a Set of Verbs in English, Hindi, and Japanese. The Hague;1966. (In Eng.)
17. Heine B. Possession. Cognitive Sources, Forces and Grammaticalization. Cambridge;1997. (In Eng.)
18. Miller GA, Johnson-Laird PN. Language and Perception. Cambridge;1976. (In Eng.)
19. Newman J. Give: a Cognitive Linguistic Study. Berlin;1996. (In Eng.)
20. Stassen L. Predicative Possession. Oxford;2009. (In Eng.)
21. Viberg Å. The Verbs of Perception. Language Typology and Language Universals. An International Handbook. Berlin;2001:1294—1309. (In Germ.)
22. Viberg Å. Towards a Lexical Profile of the Swedish Verb Lexicon. The Typological Profile of Swedish. Thematic Issue of Sparachtypologie und Universalien Forschung; 2006:103—129. (In Germ.)
The article was submitted 29.03.2023; approved after reviewing 10.04.2023; accepted for publication 14.04.2023.
Information about the authors:
Natalya M. Mosina, Professor of the Department of English for Professional Communication, National Research Mordovia State University (68/1 Bolshevistskaya Str., Saransk 430005, Russia), Doctor of Sciences in Philology, Associate Professor, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1742-5438, email@example.com
Svetlana A. Kaderova, Postgraduate Student, Teaching Assistant of the Department of English for Professional Communication, National Research Mordovia State University (68/1 Bolshevistskaya Str., Saransk 430005, Russia), ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0007-7351-8766, firstname.lastname@example.org
Contribution of the authors:
Mosina N. M. — concept development, methodology development, scientific editing of the text, writing the initial version of the article;
Kaderova S. A. — data collection and literature analysis.
Conflict of interests: the authors declare no conflict of interests.
The authors read and approved the final version of the manuscript.