“MOTIONS” OF GODFATHER
Abstract
The work offers joint cognitive semantic and interdiscursive approach to the religious phenomenon of baptism, particularly the prime participant of situation of baptism – godfather. The lexical unit godfather is a core of investigation according to its unique and original genesis regarding its meanings within the situation of baptism, post-baptism period, and its application in other spheres of human activity. The unit evokes structures relating to BAPTISM gestalt, the cognitive area uniting information on baptism ritual, its pre, and post stages. The latter is analyzed regarding its cognitive and situational representation through sequential frame, semantic, and definitive analysis in terms of onomasiological and semasiological interpretations. The action frame structure is selected as a “container” of organized information about events, participants, and the actions connected with situation of baptism in general and godfather in particular. The issue of opposite “motions” of meanings is translated through cognitive images of nominative unit godfather and is researched with respect to the unit's cognitive structures evoked by its inderdiscursive objectivations. The scientific platform ScienceDirect and the mass-media (cinematography) are viewed as the potential sources of overlapping discourses and are regarded as valuable interdiscursive spaces, which include various crystallizations developed by investigated nominative unit. The “motions” of godfather lexical unit are verbalized via interdiscursive explications of its meanings and are interpreted through action frame structural images. The paper includes the discussion of opposed direction “motions” demonstrated by interdiscursive crystallizations of meanings the nominative unit godfather actualizes. The investigated meanings in their turn are analyzed in terms of cognitive images constructing new situations evoked by them. Additionally, the investigation outlines the presumable linguistic and extra linguistic factors influencing the opposed “motion” processes declared. The notion of ”hollywoodization” is mentioned as one having direct impact on the “motion” revealed.
References
2. Croft W., Cruse D.A. Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 2004. 356 p.
3. Fairclough N. Discourse and Social Change. Cambridge : Polity Press, 1992. 259 p.
4. Fairclough N. Critical Discourse Analysis: Critical Study of Language (2nd ed). London : Longman. 608 p.
5. Fillmore Ch.J. Frame Semantics. Linguistics in the Morning Calm Selected Papers from SICOL-1981. Vol. 1. Seul: Hunshin Publishing Company. P. 110–137. URL: http:// brenocon.com/Fillmore%201982_2up.pdf (date of access: 20.10.2018).
6. Jianguo WU. (2011). Understanding Interdiscursivity: A pragmatic Model. Journal of Cambridge Studies. No. 2–3. P. 95–115.
7. Kuhrt W.G. Believing in Baptism: Christian Baptism, its Theology and Practice, Mowbray. 1987. 191 p.
8. Lakoff G. Linguistic Gestalts. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, 13, Chicago, 1977. P. 236–287.
9. Zhabotynska S.A. (2010). Principles of building conceptual models for Thesaurus Dictionaries. Cognition, Communication, Discourse International On-line journal. Vol. 1. P. 75–92. URL: http://sites.google.com/site/ cognitiondiscourse/vypusk-no1-2010 (date of access: 30.01.2019).
