MODULATION OF THE LEXICAL MEANING OF ENGLISH VERBS OF THE POSITIVE ASSESSMENT GROUP IN THE ASPECT OF THE CONCEPT OF A VALUE REFERENCE POINT

Introduction

Our work is devoted to modern linguistic research aimed at studying the semantics of linguistic units in relation to cognitive structures. Currently, the language is considered directly with its native speaker. Anthropological linguistics studies the indissoluble unity of man and language. The category of estimation is recognized as the initial basic category of anthropological linguistics [1]. Evaluation is one of the most “anthropocentric” phenomena, since evaluation is a reflection of reality “in the mirror of subjective modality” [5].

In the philosophical dictionary, the following definition of evaluation is given: “Evaluation is a way of establishing the significance of something for an acting and cognizing subject”. At the same time, three types of significance are distinguished: theoretical (epistemological assessments), value (axiological assessments), practical (implementation of epistemological and axiological assessments through the volitional impulses of the subject in the systems of subject and communicative actions). The subject of evaluation in axiological assessments are the properties of objects and the objects themselves in their ability or inability to meet the needs and requests of the subject. The evaluation results in value representations and orientations in the world of significance [10].

The evaluation of the objects of reality is reflected in the language, in particular, in the word. In the linguistic literature, the tri-ambiguity of a language assessment is distinguished depending on its nature (basis): neutral, positive and negative. This separation of three types of evaluation is due to the nature of the attitude of the subject of evaluation to the cognizable object and, consequently, the recognition of evaluation as an obligatory component of the structure of the meaning of the word.

E.M. Wolf gives the following formula of the evaluation structure:A (the subject of evaluation) believes that B (the object of evaluation) is “good / bad” [3, P. 5-6]. We adhere to the point of view of N.D. Arutyunova, who notes that in evaluative structures, an additional meaning is introduced into the statement, which is conventionally represented as “and I understand that you understand that this is good/bad” [2]. Therefore, the evaluation structure is considered by us as a complex consisting of the subject of evaluation (who evaluates), the object of evaluation (what is evaluated), the basis of evaluation or evaluation attitude (norm or standard of evaluation). N.D. Arutyunova distinguishes two groups in the classification of estimated values: general and partial estimated values. The gradation of private evaluation values is based on the principle of the basis of evaluation, its motivation [2]. In this group of private assessments, in addition to other categories, the researcher includes ethical assessments. In turn, combining them together with the aesthetic group of sublimated evaluations. Aesthetic assessments are “associated with the satisfaction of a sense of beauty”, ethical assessments “associated with the satisfaction of a moral sense” are guided by the moral code, moral norms adopted in the social community [2, P. 76]. V.I. Karasik emphasizes the fact that some types of evaluation are not motivated at all (taste, emotional, aesthetic), and some evaluations are motivated by a pronounced or unexpressed code of conduct or a code of preferences (ethical and utilitarian evaluations). A person making a motivated assessment relies on a system of preferences. While making an assessment the speaker assigns himself a certain status, that is, he acts not only as an individual, but as a representative of a collective that shares a particular system of preferences [7].

The category of ethical evaluation is one of the main ones, defines moral orientations, forms a kind of axis of consciousness. The concept of ethical assessment implies the establishment of a value relationship between the subject and the object of the assessment, between the nature of the assessment and its basis. The norm of ethical evaluation inherent in human nature is created in society and manifests itself in a communicative act. Undoubtedly, language reflects the mental activity of the individual and the objective reality surrounding us. At the same time, language influences the content of the leading motives of the personality, beliefs, predisposes the individual to experience and evaluate the universe in a special way.

Thus, the concepts defining evaluative meanings are based on the value picture of the world and the semantics of language units in their interaction. Evaluation as one of the most important aspects of a person's communicative and cognitive activity can be fixed in the semantic structure of a word, forming a component of its meaning, or when describing the conditions for using a word. [5]. For example, V. V Kuzmina. identifies such a differential sign of evaluation as Standard/Norm in the structure of the right-sided actant in the English motivational verbs [8].

The purpose of our study is to identify the parameters of motivation for the subject's assessment of the object of the English verbs of the «respect» group and to differentiate the nomination area of verb units close in meaning. Since the information presented in dictionaries does not always reflect the features of a denotative situation requiring the use of a verb. As a rule, the interpretation of the meaning of verbal units occurs by introducing cross-references and synonymous, which makes it difficult to choose the optimal verbal unit in a particular context. In this article we will consider the semantic features that make up the content of the right-sided actant in English verbs of the group of positive assessment (“respect”, “regard”, “admire”, “esteem”, “appreciate”, “value”). They are frequent lexemes, which reflect the systematic semantic relations of the stative types of verbs and their inherent characteristics, but they have their own peculiarities.

The study is based on the material of approximately 2000 units taken from the lexicographic sources of modern English, the English American literature, the British National Corpus, the Corpus of Contemporary American English and the information from the informants (native speakers), the results of the tests.

The following methods are used in the work: hypothetical-deductive method, methods of analysis and synthesis, method of quantitative calculation, method of semantic interpretation, method of component, definitional, distributive, valence analysis, semantic experiment.

The leading concept for the interpretation of the verbs under consideration is “motivation of the subject's assessment of the object”. The system of preferences on which the subject relies when making an assessment is defined by us as a “system of value orientations”, the unit of which is a “value reference point”.

We think that the concept of “value reference point” correlates with the category of “spatial deixis” in a metaphorical sense. Deixis is a universal category of language, since the main components of the speech situation indicated by deixis (interlocutors, place, time) are mandatory for communication in any language. [6]. In our work, the concept of “value reference point” is associated with the category of “spatial deixis” on the basis that “space” can be understood as the whole set of physical, mental, social, biological and other realities in which any object or phenomenon is or may be, any state, process or action takes place. [9]. Thus, while describing relational relations in the semantic structure of the English verbs of the group of leaving, A.S Dautova shows that when the right-sided actant is changed, there is a change in a cognitive structure, which leads to a different perception of the concept of “space” and to the appearance of lexical modulation of the verb “desert” [4].

 As our research has shown, the concept of an Object for the analyzed verbs is complex and can be described as: The Object “manifests” or “displays” some of his/her/its qualities; the Subject “observes” them, perceives such “displays” and makes his/her assessment; there is a “Space” around the Subject, which denotes the so called “value system” that underlies the subjective assessment of the Subject of the Object. So, we consider that the Subject-Object relations in the verbs of positive assessment are represented by three actants of the situation: S (the subject of evaluation), O1 (the object of evaluation), O2 (the “value reference point”). We defined the semantic role of O1 as the “Source”, the essence of which is that O1 is a source of information being evaluated.

During the search tests, we have asked the informants to comment on the sentences and answer to the questions: Does the answer to the question “Can these activities be the source of your assessment?” sound normal in the following sentences, “What is the source of your assessment?”

According to the informants' estimates, the following sentences sound normative:

1. She had always been honest with me, and I respect her for that. [13].

2. She was highly regarded as a sculptor. [13].

3. They all admired her courage. [11].

4. Living in the city has taught me to appreciate the differences between people. [11].

5. Although the works of the Impressionist painters are esteemed today, they met with scorn when they were introduced. [11].

6. The after-sales service was highly valued by customers [13].

During the analysis, it was determined that the use of various verbal lexemes depends on a change of understanding the "value reference point", that is, the content of the semantic role of О2, which we consider as “Value reference point”. Its essence is that О2 determines the 'qualitative parameters" of the assessment. Such “qualitative parameters” can be the following: a given socially determined norm (financial situation, public opinion): There are degrees in society which we must respect. “O Lord, help me to do something worthy before I die – something to make these people respect me”. [12]; stable subjective positive attachment to the object as a whole and positive assessment of his all qualities regardless of his property, financial situation (according to the informants, the verb “esteem” assumes a higher positive assessment than “respect”, close to admiration: I more than respect your lawyer – I esteem him. (Example of an informant). Native speakers proposed using “I hold him in high esteem” instead of the verb “esteem”, because of its rare use in modern English): He was honest, obedient, active and good- natured, hence he was esteemed by his master; and being beloved by all his companions. I say, that I admire, esteem, and love them both. The bride's father, our good friend there, is a noble person, and I am proud to know him. “She shall know you. She shall esteem you” [12]; assessment in every concrete situation (“situational value reference point”): … whom I regard with so much brotherly affection. She had always regarded herself with a fair degree of complacency as possessed of no mean stock of courage. Diodorus informs us that dreams were regarded in Egypt with religious reverence [12]; getting pleasure from sensory perception of an object: But it is a pleasure to me to admire him at a distance. His queen never admired him in this trim [12]; meeting personal requirements and requests: Poe’s own country has been slow to appreciate him. But that is because all people have not the capacity to appreciate his merits. Man, of feeling that he is, and one who appreciates the importance of symbols… [12]; naming a universal value: The beautiful girl who at once warned him to run away as fast as possible if he valued his life. The blessings we receive daily from God make us not to value or not praise Him because they be common» [12].

Understanding the cognitive-semantic structure of the analyzed predicative units will help us to reflect the features of a denotative situation requiring the use of a verb.