Definition of the concept of language from various sources. Dictionary of linguistic terms

Language is a unique collection of sounds and symbols, each of which has a specific meaning. Language is an important tool for human interaction and communication. Thanks to language, we can express our thoughts in tangible speech form.

Language is not only a means of communication, it is also the historical memory of every people. Each language reflects the spiritual culture and centuries-old history of each nation.

Language is a social phenomenon, because it is impossible to master it without social relations. A person does not have the gift of speech from the moment of birth. After all, a small child begins to talk only when he manages to learn to repeat the phonetic sounds that the people around him make, and thanks to the ability to think, he gives them the correct meaning.

The emergence of language

In the first stages of its emergence, language consisted of inarticulate sounds made by primitive people and was accompanied by active gesticulation. Later, with the advent of Homo sapiens, language takes on an articulated form, thanks to his ability to think abstractly.

Thanks to language, primitive people began to exchange experiences and plan their joint actions. Articulate language brought ancient people to a new stage of their evolutionary development, and became another factor that could bring humans to a higher level from other biological species.

Also during this period, the language acquired a mystical coloring; ancient people believed that certain words had magical properties that helped stop an impending natural disaster: this is how the first magic spells appeared.

Functions of modern language

The main functions of modern language are communicative and mental. The main one, of course, is communicative: thanks to language, people can communicate with each other, convey the necessary information to each other, express their thoughts, feelings, and wishes.

With the help of the mental function of language, a person not only has the opportunity to convey his thoughts to others, but also forms his own with the help of language.

Along with those mentioned above, there is also such a function of language as epistemological or cognitive - a person analyzes all the information received from other members of society, thanks to this the process of scientific knowledge of the surrounding world arises.

Language also has an aesthetic function, which is most often used in works of art. Thanks to its use in literature, such a language gives people a feeling of aesthetic pleasure, it provokes them to emotions, makes the human soul worry.

Language development and society development

The development of language is inextricably linked with the development of society. Language is a living organism that is influenced by historical, political and social changes in the life of the public.

Under the influence of time, some words die out and go out of use forever; in their place, new words come into the language that best meet the requirements of the time.

Language is, of course, a huge gift for humanity. Therefore, we must appreciate it, try not to litter it with profanity and parasitic words, because by doing this we are causing great harm, first of all, to the centuries-old culture of our people and our personality.

The meaning of the word LANGUAGE in the Large Modern Explanatory Dictionary of the Russian Language

A mobile, elongated muscular organ in the oral cavity in humans and vertebrates, with the help of which the process of chewing and swallowing food is carried out and its taste qualities are revealed.

Ott. Such an organ is like an organ of taste.

Ott. Such an organ involved in the formation of speech sounds (in humans).

A muscular organ of some animals (usually cow, veal or pig).

Ott. A dish prepared from such a muscular organ of some animals (usually cow, veal or pork).

A metal rod in a bell or bell that, when struck against a wall, produces a ringing sound.

The name of something that has an elongated, elongated shape.

A historically established system of verbal expression of thoughts, which has a certain sound, lexical and grammatical structure and serves as a means of communication in human society.

Ott. Such a system as a subject of study or teaching.

A set of means of expression in verbal creativity.

Ott. A type of speech that has certain characteristic features.

Ott. A manner of expression characteristic of someone.

The ability to speak, expressing one's thoughts verbally.

A system of signs conveying information; something that serves as a means of interactive communication, description and presentation of programs and algorithms for solving problems in a form that allows them to be executed and solved by computer means.

Something that expresses or explains something.

An enemy captured in order to obtain from him any necessary information.

IV m. obsolete

the same as people, nationality, nation

V m. outdated

Translator, guide.

Large modern explanatory dictionary of the Russian language. 2012

Language, communication and thinking.

Let's start with the final part of the definition. The main social function of language is to facilitate communication. Since humans are the only living beings who have the ability to communicate through language, only they have been able to accumulate knowledge. It would be impossible to preserve from generation to generation anything like human culture without such a flexible means of communication as language. Linguistic communication is equally necessary for the functioning of society within the life of one generation. Without the use of language, it is impossible to imagine the coordination of activities even in any one production facility.

Interpersonal communication is not the only important function of language. Without language, thinking could not reach the level of complexity inherent in humans. A person thinks in language, silently “talking to himself.” Language (less obviously) also facilitates perception. A person perceives things more easily for which he has verbal symbols. For example, if a Gothic cathedral is viewed by a person who is familiar with such concepts as “flying buttress”, “pointed arch” and “Gothic vault”, he will see more than someone who does not know any of this.

If language plays a significant role in thought and perception, one might expect that radical differences between languages would result in equally distinct differences in the way speakers of those languages see the world. In our century, this idea was strongly defended by the American linguist and cultural scientist Benjamin Lee Whorf. Whorf argued that the language of the North American Hopi Indians imposes on their perception different concepts of time and space than those found in European languages. In any case, the indisputable fact is that languages divide the color continuum differently. Thus, the part of the spectrum denoted by the English word blue (French bleu, German blau, etc.) in Russian corresponds to two different words: blue And blue. There are also such languages (for example, Turkic), where there is only one word covering the part of the spectrum for which there are two adjectives in English: blue and green. Experiments show that people tend to sort colored cards into groups according to the color system of their language.

Although interpersonal communication is not the only function of language, in a number of respects this function is primary. First, since a child must learn his native language through interaction with elders, he must learn to communicate with other people before he can use the language in his thinking. Second, although we may never know how language began, it seems plausible that language began with attempts at communication rather than with individual, private thought. Thirdly, thinking can be considered as a special type of communication, when the speaker and the listener are the same person, and linguistic means, without being voiced, are not perceived by others.

Non-linguistic signs.

Language is not the only means of communication. Feelings can be conveyed by a smile, a grimace or a gesture; information can be conveyed to motorists using picture signs; The driver signals the departure of the train with a whistle. To see the distinctive features of linguistic communication, we must relate words and sentences to non-linguistic entities that can serve the purposes of communication. Consider the following examples of non-linguistic notation:

1) clay shards as a sign that people lived in a given place;

2) noise as an indication of poor contact in the wired connection;

3) diagram of an internal combustion engine;

4) photo of Aunt Susie;

5) the elephant as a symbol of the US Republican Party;

6) a whistle signaling the departure of the train.

Now compare these examples with the two sentences given as examples of linguistic notation:

7) “Preference” is the name of the card game;

8) “Deviant” means “deviating from the norm.”

In the first two cases, designation is carried out through a causal relationship. Clay shards are a sign of human habitation simply because pottery is made by humans; similarly, noise arises from poor contact and therefore signals the latter. In examples 3 and 4, the representation of some content is carried out due to similarity. A circuit is like an engine, at least in terms of the arrangement of parts, and that is what makes it useful. The photograph of Aunt Susie resembles the original in an even more literal sense.

Linguistic units differ sharply from units of these two types. The word “preference” in no way resembles a game, just as there is no causal connection between the game and the word “preference”. The word "preference" owes its meaning to a certain social arrangement, a convention, according to which it is used to designate a certain type of game. The terms "understanding" and "convention" commonly used in this connection can be misleading, since they may give the impression that words derive their meanings from some explicit agreement. However, except in technical terms, this almost never happens. The process by which words acquire their meanings remains largely unknown, but it is clear that there can be no talk of any agreements or legislative acts. It would be more accurate to talk about the established practice in society of using the word “preference” to denote the corresponding game, or about the existence of a certain rule of unknown origin, the essence of which is that the word should be used in this way. Understood in this way, social convention, supported by the practice of use, and not by any natural properties or limitations, is what gives the word its meaning.

For the three varieties of designation that we have identified, the American philosopher Charles Sanders Pierce used the terms “index”, or “indexical sign”, in relation to cases 1 and 2, “icon”, or “iconic sign”, in relation to cases 3 and 4, and “symbol”, or “symbolic sign”, in relation to cases 7 and 8. However, simply pointing out that words are largely symbolic rather than iconic or indexical signs is not enough to reveal the distinctive properties of a language. Examples 5 and 6 show that there are also non-linguistic symbols: an elephant was chosen as a symbol of the US Republican Party, and a locomotive whistle was chosen as a signal for the departure of a train. As with linguistic meanings, these representations depend on social practice, and they can be replaced by others if convention is changed. What makes the word “preference,” as opposed to a locomotive whistle, a linguistic symbol? Yes, only that the word “preference” is part of the language, i.e. system with a certain type of organization. The next step is to describe what kind of organization it is. SYMBOL.

Language structure.

The most remarkable property of the structure of language is the ability to construct an infinite number of means of communication (sentences) from a finite supply of elements (words). Outside of language, each symbolic means of communication—the bugle signal, the road sign, the Republican elephant—is an isolated incident. However, when learning their mother tongue, no one has to learn one sentence of the language one by one. Instead, a potentially infinite variety of sentences is constructed according to rules that determine how words can be combined within a sentence. There are two types of rules. Syntax rules determine which combinations of units are valid. So, for the English language, the combination Article + Name + Intransitive verb gives an acceptable sentence (for example, The boy fell “The boy fell”), but the combination Verb + Name + Article + Preposition does not (for example, Ran boy the on). Semantic rules determine how the meaning of a more complex construction (syntactic group or sentence) is derived from the meanings and organization (syntax) of its constituent words. The semantic structure of language is extremely complex. Let's give two examples to illustrate what is meant here. First, the meaning of a sentence may depend on word order: cf. sentences John hit Jim “John hit Jim” and Jim hit John “Jim hit John” (in English the difference is only in word order). Secondly, ambiguity can arise from the fact that the constituents in a syntactic group interact differently with each other, for example, copper kettle is a boiler made of copper, whereas copper mine is not a mine made of copper, and a place where copper is mined.

The complex and at the same time systemic nature of language is clearly manifested in elements smaller than syntactic units, and even smaller than words. Words themselves have a complex structure, and this structure is characterized by a certain regularity. Many words consist of several meaningful units - morphemes, the meanings of which are combined according to certain rules in the meaning of the word. So, for example, the past tense morpheme -ed in English will modify the meaning of any verbal morpheme to which it is attached. The suffix -en in English converts adjectives into verbs: from the adjective cheap “cheap” the verb to cheapen is formed, which means “to make cheaper”; from the adjective worse “worst (comparative degree)” – verb to worsen “to worsen”, etc. A morpheme is the smallest significant element of language. The morphemes themselves consist of elements of the sound system of the language - phonemes, which are transmitted in writing, although not completely sequentially, in the form of letters. There are no semantic rules that would determine the construction of morphemes from phonemes, since the latter have no meaning. However, every language has general principles that determine which combinations of phonemes are possible and which are not (a kind of syntax). In English, for example, "fgl" is not a valid sequence, while many combinations, such as "faba", are quite possible from the point of view of the phonology of that language (although they are not words, i.e. have no meaning).

Language thus exhibits a hierarchical organization in which units at each level except the lowest are assembled according to certain regular patterns from units at lower levels. Specific branches of linguistics study different levels of this hierarchy and the interaction of these levels with each other. Phonology studies the elementary sounds of a language and their combinations. Morphology is the study of the morphemes of a language and their compatibility. Syntax studies the formation of phrases (syntactic groups) and sentences. Semantics deals with the meanings of morphemes and words and the various ways in which the meanings of larger units are constructed from the meanings of smaller units.

There is no consensus on how exactly the structure of language should be represented. The method of presentation proposed here is one of the simplest; many experts believe that more complex methods of representation are needed. However, whatever the details of these or those descriptions, linguists agree that language is a complex system, organized in such a way that, having mastered a certain visible set of elements and the rules for their combination, a person acquires the ability to produce and understand an unlimited number of specific messages . It is this flexibility that provides language with the exceptional position it occupies among other means of communication.

Typically, linguists limit their attention to auditory language and, more specifically, to the sounds produced by the human vocal apparatus. In principle, however, such a restriction is not mandatory. An organization similar to that just described may be inherent in systems of visual signs, smoke signals, clicking sounds, and any other perceptual phenomena used for communication purposes. The corresponding capabilities are exploited both in the written language and in semaphore signals. It is important, however, that all existing languages either consist of vocal sounds or are derived from a spoken language. Written language is better thought of as a system for recording sound language than as a distinct language in its own right. In the course of development of both society and the individual, sound language appears first, and writing appears later - as a means of preserving linguistic messages. Literate people often make the mistake of lamenting the inconsistency in the pronunciation of written words, instead of lamenting the inconsistency and imperfection of the written recording of spoken words. SEMANTICS; WORD; MORPHOLOGY.

The abstract nature of language.

The primacy of auditory language has led linguists to place speech sounds at the center of their research and, in practice, to begin the study of language by collecting and classifying various specific examples of sounds produced by the human vocal apparatus. However, no matter how justified such a path of research may be, it should not obscure the abstract nature of language. Language does not consist of specific sounds produced at a specific time in a specific place, but of sound types, or sound patterns. To make the appropriate distinction, C.S. Peirce introduced the terms “instance” (token) and “type” (type), which have received wide recognition in philosophy. Both of these terms refer to more than just language. A "type" is a general pattern or pattern, and an "instance" of that type is a specific thing or event that matches that pattern. For example, paella in Valencian is a type of food represented by many specimens, i.e. specific sets of necessary ingredients, properly prepared in accordance with a general recipe template. If I say that in Spain I always eat the same dish, meaning that I always eat Valencian paella there, then I am talking about type. Obviously, I don't re-eat the same grains of rice, the same seafood, etc. In the same sense, a phoneme, morpheme, syntactic group, or sentence type represents a general sound pattern, while an instance of any of these types represents a specific sound corresponding to that pattern, produced in a specific place at a specific time. Terms for linguistic units such as "word" are ambiguous and can refer to either type or instance; in most cases, their ambiguity is resolved by context. Let's say I uttered the sentence: “Its length is not very large, but its width is very large.” How many words were spoken? The answer depends on whether we count type words or instance words. In the first case, the answer is six, in the second, nine (each of the word types “his,” “length,” and “very” is represented by two instance words).

Elements of a particular language, such as English, should be considered types, not instances. The following arguments can be given to support this.

Firstly, language demonstrates a certain constancy and continuity, although, of course, it is not immune to change. English has existed as the same language for centuries; it has changed relatively little over the past hundred years. Sound instances, however, do not have such constancy. Each instance word, each instance of uttering, for example, the definite article the, exists only for a moment. The word-instance is consumed at the very moment of its production. If one were to assume that language is constructed from instances, then the consequence of such an assumption would be two possibilities that are equally unacceptable. If a language - say, English - exists only as long as the existence of its constituent instances lasts, then at different moments of its existence it will not be identical to itself at the previous moment, i.e. an object such as a language that maintains its identity over time will simply be impossible. Another possible alternative would be to understand language as an ever-increasing fund of instances, then at each moment in time the language (again, for example, English) would be considered to consist of all those English words-instances that have been produced (spoken and written) up to that moment. This interpretation allows us to talk about the constancy and expansion of the language, but not about its change - say, the merging of the former forms of the nominative case thee and the indirect case thou into a single form of the second person singular pronoun you. Changes would only be possible if specimens could not only be included in the fund, but also dropped out of it, but once a specimen has been produced, nothing can be done about this fact. Moreover, the claim that something is added to the language every time a new word instance is produced is simply not true. We can talk about addition only when the language acquires a new word-type or a new syntactic construction; Simply saying “It’s cold today” will not make my language any richer.

Secondly, the knowledge that a person acquires by learning a language cannot be represented as knowledge of specific instances. To learn a language is to acquire the ability to use suitable sentence types to express whatever someone wants to say, and the ability to interpret the sentence types used by others. When studying, for example, French, a person learns that using a sentence like “Quelle heure est-il?”, one can ask what time it is. It is impossible to say that the parrot has learned French, even if it repeats Quelle heure est-il? eighty times a day. More precisely, he “knows” this expression. But for the parrot it remains only an endlessly repeated instance; it never becomes a type for him: he does not abstract from it, say, the form of a French interrogative sentence, which he could then use to, for example, ask what the date is today. Knowledge of a language consists of knowledge of its inherent type system; and only thanks to knowledge of the forms and relationships within the language is a person able to produce utterances (instances) suitable for a particular case.

Finally, the abstract nature of language is also manifested in the relationship between a word-type and its variable implementations as an instance. Note that a “noise-type,” such as a squeak, is defined as a specific kind of sound. All of its instances sound similar, and it is precisely because of this kind of auditory similarity that they are creaking instances. The word-type, however, is relatively independent of its sound implementation. The word house can be pronounced as or in various American dialects. Why are and not and (the phonetic form of the word louse “louse”) considered forms of the same word house, despite the fact that it sounds more similar to than to? For functional reasons. Namely, it plays the same role in the communicative acts of a resident of Virginia as in the communicative acts of a resident of the Midwest. However, two sound types are not necessarily variants simply because they have the same meaning. English cemetery and graveyard (both words mean “cemetery”) are not considered the same word (like Russian “cemetery” and “pogost”). There is no single criterion according to which two words are recognized as instances of the same word type. Considerations taken into account here include phonemic composition (sound), meaning, origin (which became different in the course of dialectal development of the word and have a common ancestor) and grammatical status (English to, too and two are clearly distinguished as, respectively, a preposition, an adverb and numeral). Thus, the word-type is more abstract than this or that specific sound; it can be realized in different sound models and still remain the same word.

Thus, language should be treated as a system of types, consisting of formal, abstract elements of sound, grammar and vocabulary and distinct from any particular, concrete examples (instances) of these types. The first to emphasize this difference was the Swiss linguist Ferdinand de Saussure, introducing a contrast between “language” (langue) and “speech” (parole), roughly corresponding to our distinction between “type” and “instance”. A similar distinction is made by American linguist Noam Chomsky, who uses the terms “competence” and “performance.”

PROBLEMS OF MEANING

The ability to convey meaning is the most important property of language. The phonological and syntactic structures of language are important precisely because they make it possible to construct an infinite variety of meaningful utterances from a observable set of elements. But the semantic side of language is understood less than anything else. The nature of linguistic meaning is vague and contradictory, and it would not be a big mistake to say that linguists are still only groping their way to capturing the essence of this concept (linguistics has advanced quite significantly along this path over the past three decades).

Meaning and reference.

Any understanding of meaning presupposes a distinction between meaning and reference, i.e. correlation of linguistic form with reality. The fact that the word “deviant” means “deviating from the norm” is a fact of the Russian language, just as the fact that the highly learned English word ostentatious, similar in stylistic coloring, means the same as the simple English word showy “ostentatious” is a fact of English language, and both of these facts are in no way related to the use of these words by speakers in specific situations. As for reference, it is carried out by speakers in very specific speech acts. Further, the difference between meaning and reference is that reference is not predetermined (although usually conditioned in some way) by the structure of language. For example, a proper name like "Charlie" can be used without any restrictions to refer to anything, say, to someone's favorite Greek vase. That is, the function of a proper name is purely referential. A definite description (that is, a combination of a noun with a definite article or demonstrative pronoun, for example, “this is a chair”) is more limited in its referential capabilities, since its constituent words have some independent meaning.

The confusion of the concepts of meaning and reference led to fruitless attempts to find a referent in linguistic expressions of any kind. Philosophers and logicians have debated endlessly the problem of whether a common name such as "pencil" refers to the collection of all pencils (is a name for them) or to the property of being a pencil. Likewise, a lot of ingenuity has been wasted in trying to determine what the names of the coordinating conjunction "and" (or English and) or, say, the sentence "It's cold today" are names. And the realization that reference (the correlation of a linguistic form with some specific entity) is only one of many tasks for which words are adapted was the first manifestation of wisdom in semantics. That language should be suitable for talking about the external world is undoubtedly essential, but to assume that every unit of language is always used to refer to something in the external world would be an enormous simplification.

Polysemy.

The structure of the semantic structure of language is complicated by the fact that some arbitrarily chosen word usually has more than one meaning (ambiguity, or polysemy). Thus, the English verb to run means, in particular, “to run”, “to launch”, “to stretch”, “to force”, etc. Two mechanisms usually help language messages avoid ambiguity. First, the choice of word meaning is often determined by other elements of the sentence. In the English sentence Run the engine now, run can only mean “to run,” whereas in the sentence The boundary runs to this tree, the verb run must be interpreted as “to extend.” Sometimes the linguistic context allows for more than one meaning, as in the English sentence John will run the mile event, which can mean either that John is going to take part in a mile race, or that John is going to organize or lead such a race. In such cases, the context of the utterance will usually make it clear which interpretation was intended, and if this is not the case, further clarification can be provided.

Uncertainty.

Another property that makes meaning a particularly complex phenomenon is its inherent property of uncertainty. Most words do not have clearly defined criteria for their applicability. Their meanings are surrounded by a certain transition zone, within which their applicability or inapplicability remains unclear. Exactly how many inhabitants must there be in a populated area for us to be able to speak of a “large city” as opposed to a “small town” and a “rural settlement” (English village)? What height exactly makes a person “tall”? How accurate must the audio reproduction be to qualify as high-quality (“hi-fi”)? The meaning of these words in those respects implied by the questions listed is uncertain. This means that the exact definitions of such words (for example, “city, a populated area with more than 50 thousand inhabitants”) will not reflect their true nature.

Metaphor.

Another characteristic of meaning that is fraught with many difficulties is the possibility of metaphorical transfer. A fundamental property of language is the ability to successfully convey the desired meaning by using a word in a meaning other than that usually associated with it in the language. Most often this is done by exploiting the similarity between what the words mean in their standard senses and what the speaker wants to say. In the statement: “Religion has been corroded by the acid of modernity,” the verb “corrode” is not used in the usual sense, in which this verb does not mean anything that could be related to religion. This proposal, however, is quite understandable, since it is not difficult to see in the impact of modern life on religion some similarity to the process of corroding metal with acid. Metaphor is one of the main mechanisms determining the development and change of language. What appears as a metaphor is capable of penetrating into general usage and becoming part of the standard semantic tools of the language. “Sheet of paper,” “table leg,” and “wing of a building” undoubtedly began as metaphorical transfers of the original uses of “leaf,” “leg,” and “wing,” but they are now ubiquitous.

Logicians who are professionally committed to precision and rigor usually consider the properties of polysemy, vagueness, and metaphor that complicate semantics as shortcomings of language. In the ideal language they envision, every word would have one precise meaning, and words would always be used in their literal sense. Whatever the needs of formal logic, however, all these unpleasant properties - ambiguity, vagueness and metaphoricality - are extremely important for communication. Polysemy allows speakers to get by with fewer words. If there were a separate word for each fundamentally distinguishable meaning, the vocabulary of a language would become unimaginably cumbersome. The vagueness of the meaning of a word is often quite consistent with the nature of the message. For example, there is much evidence that the overcrowding and crowded conditions that characterize living conditions in a large city lead to additional mental stress. No one, however, is ready to say exactly what number of inhabitants makes a city “crowded,” and it is difficult to imagine. how one could measure the level of mental stress. There are other reasons for making less precise statements than is generally possible. A diplomat might, for example, make the following statement: “If provocations continue, my government is ready to take decisive action.” How long to continue? How decisive is the action? The government may have good reasons not to undertake any specific obligations. The relatively vague expressions “continuation” and “decisive” are exactly what is needed in this case. As for metaphor, then (even leaving aside its role in the development of language) poets, of course, would recall its ability to convey what remains inexpressible without it. When an American poet T.S. Eliot speaking of the merits of the English playwright John Webster, wrote that he saw “a skull under the skin,” this was not just a vivid image found by Eliot, but the only way to adequately convey the essence of the playwright’s achievements.

Other problems.

Although some progress has been made in understanding some of the characteristic components of language, or (which is probably the same thing) in finding more precise ways of describing these components, many questions and conflicting opinions remain regarding the nature and essence of language. What is the origin of language? How do words acquire meaning? Is thinking possible without language? Is language a reflection of reality, or, on the contrary, does it determine the conditions for its perception, or, as the Austrian philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein believed in his later works, language is a kind of “game” that has no relation to reality and is played according to its own rules and with your own funds? Is language a product of learned associations, the development of behavioral reflexes, or is it a natural, inevitable expression of structures and mechanisms inherent in human consciousness? Due to their highly speculative nature, these questions are not easily resolved. There is much less hope for obtaining definitive answers to them than for the emergence of ever more accurate ways of formulating these questions and contradictions themselves.

Literature:

Bloomfield L. Language. M., 1968
Chomsky N. Language and thinking. M., 1972
Saussure F. de. General linguistics course, in the book: Saussure F. de. Works on linguistics. M., 1977
Jacobson R. Language in relation to others communication system, in the book: Jacobson R. Selected works. M., 1985
Sapir E . Selected works on linguistics and cultural studies. M., 1993
Reformatsky A.A. Introduction to Linguistics. 5th ed., M., 1996
Plungyan V.A. Why are languages so different?? M., 1996
Maslov Yu.S. Introduction to linguistics. 3rd ed. M., 1998

1. Ya (English language) - a system of signs of any physical nature, serving as a means of human communication and thinking) in the proper sense of Ya words - a phenomenon that is socially necessary and historically conditioned. One of the immediate natural manifestations of language is speech as vocal and verbal communication.

2. Ya (English tongue) - an anatomical term denoting a muscle growth at the bottom of the oral cavity; takes part in the actors and is the organ of taste.

I-CONCEPT (eng. self-concept) is a developing system of a person’s ideas about himself, including: a) awareness of his physical, intellectual, characterological, social, etc. properties; b) self-esteem, c) subjective perception of external factors influencing one’s own personality. The concept of I-k. was born in the 1950s in line with phenomenological, humanistic psychology, whose representatives (A. Maslow, K. Rogers), in contrast to behaviorists and Freudians, sought to consider the holistic human self as a fundamental factor in behavior and personality development. Symbolic interactionism (C. Cooley, J. Mead) and the concept of identity (E. Erikson) also had a significant influence on the formation of this concept. However, the first theoretical developments in the field of Ya-k. undoubtedly belong to W. James, who divided the global, personal I (Self) into the interacting I-conscious (I) and I-as-object (Me).

I-k. often defined as a set of attitudes aimed at oneself, and then, by analogy with attitude, three structural components are distinguished in it: 1) a cognitive component - “self-image”, which includes the content of ideas about oneself; 2) the emotional-value (affective) component, which is the experienced attitude towards oneself as a whole or towards individual aspects of one’s personality, activities, etc.; This component, in other words, includes a system of self-esteem (English: self-esteem), 3) a behavioral component, which characterizes the manifestations of cognitive and evaluative components in behavior (including in speech, in statements about oneself).

I-k. - a holistic education, all components of which, although they have a relatively independent logic of development, are closely interconnected. It has conscious and unconscious aspects and is described from the point of view. the content of ideas about oneself, the complexity and differentiation of these ideas, their subjective significance for the individual, as well as internal integrity and consistency, coherence, continuity and stability over time.

In the literature there is no single scheme for describing the complex structure of the ego. Eg.* R. Berne represents J-k. in the form of a hierarchical structure. The top is the global I-k., which is concretized in the totality of the individual’s attitudes toward himself. These attitudes have different modalities: 1) the real I (what I think I really am); 2) ideal self (what I would like and/or should become); 3) mirror IXhow others see me). Each of these modalities includes a number of aspects - physical self, social self, mental self, emotional self.

The discrepancy between the “ideal self” and the “real self” is the basis for self-esteem feelings and serves as an important source of personality development, however, significant contradictions between them can become a source of intrapersonal

conflicts and negative experiences (see Inferiority complex).

Depending on what level - organism, social individual or personality - a person’s activity manifests itself, in the I-k. distinguish: 1) at the “organism-environment” level - a physical self-image (body diagram), caused by the need for the physical well-being of the organism; 2) at the level of the social individual - social identities: gender, age, ethnic, civil, social-role, associated with a person’s need to belong to a community; 3) at the level of the individual - a differentiating image of the Self, characterizing knowledge about oneself in comparison with other people and giving the individual a sense of his own uniqueness, providing for the needs for self-determination and self-realization. The last 2 levels are described in the same way as the 2 components of Y-k. (V.V. Stolin): 1) “connecting”, ensuring the unification of the individual with other people and 2) “differentiating”, promoting his isolation in comparison with others and creating the basis for a sense of one’s own uniqueness.

Also distinguished are the dynamic “I” (how, according to my ideas, I change, develop, what I strive to become), the “presented I” (“I-mask”, how I show myself to others), the “fantastic I”, the triad of chronological I: I -past, present self, future self, etc.

The most important function of the I-k. is to ensure the internal consistency of the individual and the relative stability of his behavior. The I-k itself is formed under the influence of a person’s life experience, primarily child-parent relationships, but quite early it acquires an active role, influencing the interpretation of this experience, the goals that the individual sets for himself, the corresponding system of expectations and forecasts regarding future, assessment of their achievement - and thereby on their own formation, personality development, activity and behavior. Correlation of concepts I-to. and self-awareness is not precisely defined. They often act as synonyms. At the same time, there is a tendency to consider I-k. as a result, the final product of the processes of self-awareness. (A.M. Parishioner.)

Language

A commonly accepted set of symbols or gestures that allows us to convey information and communicate with other members of our culture who speak the same language. The main problem with this definition is the degree to which it is stretchable. The debate surrounding attempts to teach animals human language leaves open the question of whether language can truly serve as a universal means of communication or whether linguistic subtleties are unique to human beings.

LANGUAGE

tongue, glossa) - an organ formed by striated muscle tissue; attached to the diaphragm of the mouth. In a language, there are apex, body and root. The skeletal muscles of the tongue connect it with the mental spine of the lower jaw, the hyoid bone and the styloid process of the temporal bone. The surface of the tongue is covered with a mucous membrane, which passes into the mucous membrane of the oral cavity and pharynx. On the lower surface of the tongue, the mucous membrane forms a fold - the frenulum of the tongue (frcnulum linguae). The surface of the tongue is covered with papillae (papillae), which give the tongue a rough appearance (see figure); the papillae are outgrowths of the lamina propria of the mucous membrane, covered with epithelium. Language performs three main functions. It helps move food through the mouth during chewing and swallowing, is an organ of taste, and plays an important role in articulate speech. Anatomical name: tongue (glossa).

LANGUAGE

Everyone knows the meaning of this term - language is what we speak, a set of arbitrary conventional symbols with which we convey meaning, a culturally determined pattern of vocal gestures that we learn by virtue of growing up in a certain place and time, the medium through which we encode our feelings, thoughts, ideas and experiences, the most unique and human of behaviors and the most common behavior of people. However, in reality, the term can mean all of the above, none of these, or even things very different from these. The conviction that we know the meaning of the word language lasts only as long as we refrain from trying to clarify what we know. In order to appreciate the problems associated with the definition and use of this term, consider the following questions, (a) Is the system of manual signs used by completely deaf people a language? (b) Are synthetic systems designed to program computers real languages? (c) Can the invented coding systems of sociopolitical reformers, such as Esperanto, be classified as languages? (d) Should sequences of motor movements, body postures, gestures and facial expressions that convey meaning be considered language? (e) Is there a good reason to call the communication systems of other species, such as bees, dolphins, or chimpanzees, languages? (f) At what point can we conclude that the vocalizations produced by the infant have become language? These questions, and many others like them, are not easy to answer. They are given here to illustrate the complexity contained in this word, a complexity that renders any simple definition useless. See linguistics, paralinguistics, psycholinguistics, sign language, and related terms.

LANGUAGE

a system of signs that serves as a means of human communication, mental activity, a way of expressing self-awareness, transmission from generation to generation and storage of information. Historically, Japan arose thanks to labor and joint activities of people. It exists and is realized through speech, which has successivity (linearity), presuppositionality (reference to encyclopedic knowledge), situationality, and incompleteness. Inaccuracy in the expression of thoughts may. cause of conflicts. Therefore, the poorer a person’s self, the smaller his vocabulary, the more difficult it is for him to organize good communication, the more often conflicts may arise. "My tongue is my enemy". Conflicts also arise due to the use of conflict-generating words, expressions and gestures. Ya plays an important role in the activities of conflict experts and other persons in conflict resolution. All information impact of a conflictologist on the participants in the conflict is carried out mainly with the help of the Self. Conflictology as a science is information recorded with the help of the Self. See Language of Conflictology

Language

A system of signs that serves as a means of interhuman communication and mental activity, a way of expressing a person’s self-awareness, transmitting information from generation to generation. Language exists and is realized through speech. The English neuropsychologist Critchly (M. Critchly, 1974) considers language as “the expression and perception of thoughts and feelings through verbal symbols.”

LANGUAGE

a system of signs of any physical nature that serves as a means of human communication, mental activity, a way of expressing self-awareness, and transmission. information from generation to generation. Historically, the basis for the emergence of the self is labor and the joint activities of people. The language can be natural (the language of words) or artificial (the language of programming, the language of mathematics, the language of descriptions of operator activities, etc.). One of the direct manifestations of the natural self is speech as vocal and verbal communication.

LANGUAGE

1) a system of signs of any configuration, serving as a means of human (including national) communication, as well as thinking; 2) a means of storing and transmitting information; 3) one of the means of controlling human behavior; 4) one of the foundations of ethnicity, ensuring the unity of both the ethnic group, the state, and the entire society as a whole. The language of words is a socio-psychological phenomenon, socially necessary and historically conditioned. The natural manifestation of the language is speech. The national language is a means of communication, accumulation and expression of experience by representatives of specific ethnic communities, influencing their national-psychological characteristics (q.v.) and forming their national self-awareness (q.v.). Self lies at the basis of culture, expresses it, is the most important mechanism of formation, self-determination, differentiation ethnos, a means of social advancement. Along with religion, it ensures the development of ethnic identification. A change in identity or its loss stimulates assimilation (see), acculturation (see) of the ethnic group. The characteristic features of identity are: specificity, determined by ideas about its uniqueness and independence; social prestige, which is based on communicative value (prevalence). The functions of the self are varied - communicative^ and integration, political. With the help of language, channels of communication with a foreign ethnic environment and familiarization with other cultures of other peoples are created. Attachment to the native language determines the painful reaction to persecution of the language, the ease of mobilization in the corresponding movements, and the readiness to respond to the call to speak out in its defense. On the basis of language, ethnolinguistic communities are formed, and the ethnic group is divided into parts united by a single language. German is spoken by Germans and Austrians, Spanish is spoken by Spaniards and the peoples of Latin America, English is spoken by the British, Americans, Australians, New Zealanders, Kabardian-Circassian is spoken by Kabardians and Circassians, Belgians speak French and Walloon, Mari - Mountain Mari and Lugomari, Mordovians - to Moksha and Erzya. Language is part of the symbolic resources of power (political and ethnic), along with the banner, coat of arms, etc. The right to speak and write in one’s native language is part of collective, ethnic rights. The status of the ethnic group determines linguistic equality or inequality, and reflects the general position of the ethnic group in society (privileged, dominant or discriminated against). The language issue most often becomes aggravated with high consolidation of an ethnic group and with the implementation of a policy of language imposition. On this basis, ethnolinguistic movements arise. Language exists in various forms: oral, colloquial or literary, unwritten and written; operates at the level - national, local, local. Accordingly, the following are distinguished: the language of interethnic communication; official, used in government; regional; local, including tribal, dialects; autochthonous or national, native or foreign.

Definition of the concept of language from various sources. Dictionary of linguistic terms

The emergence of language

Functions of modern language

Language development and society development

The meaning of the word LANGUAGE in the Large Modern Explanatory Dictionary of the Russian Language

See also interpretations, synonyms, meanings of words and what LANGUAGE is in Russian in dictionaries, encyclopedias and reference books:

Language, communication and thinking.

Non-linguistic signs.

Language structure.

The abstract nature of language.

PROBLEMS OF MEANING

Meaning and reference.

Polysemy.

Uncertainty.

Metaphor.

Other problems.

Language

LANGUAGE

LANGUAGE

LANGUAGE

Language

LANGUAGE

LANGUAGE