Modern Problems of Linguoculturology
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14611023Keywords:
linguoculturology, thesis, modern problemAbstract
The division of linguistic science into various schools since the beginning of the 19th century, and into separate multidisciplinary fields since the beginning of the 20th century, was accompanied by very serious discussions. Since the beginning of the new century, the generalizing tendencies towards various schools and fields with the logic of “Thesis-antithesis-synthesis” have been strengthening. However, this is not a mechanical, but an analytical-methodological generalization that allows us to determine the limits of activity and problems of each school and field. The relevance of the article is precisely this aspect, namely, the illumination of the successes and difficulties encountered by linguoculturology as a multidisciplinary field over several decades of experience from a modern perspective. Although linguoculturology takes its scientific and methodological roots from ethnolinguistics, since the end of the last century it has been developing as an independent multidisciplinary field within the boundaries of linguistics and culturology. This field, which already has a rich material base and a fairly wide range of research technologies and methods based on its application to languages of various systems, is strengthening its position in Azerbaijan. The first experiences of Azerbaijani linguoculturology confirm that the Azerbaijani language, which is generally of Turkic origin, is a fertile object in this respect, also because here - in the Azerbaijani language - there are very rich linguoculturological connections of elements of both Turkic, Arabic and Persian origin. This creates an extremely attractive, and at the same time interesting "landscape" for the researcher from a system-structural and pragmatic point of view.
Downloads
References
Abdullayev Ə. (2006). Koqnitiv dilçiliyin əsasları. Bakı:“Sabah”.
Adilov M., Verdiyeva Z., Ağayeva F. (2019). Dilçilik problemləri. Bakı: “Elm”.
Adilov M., Verdiyeva Z., Ağayeva F. (2020). İzahlı dilçilik terminləri lüğəti, Bakı: “Elm və təhsil”.
Axundov A. (2006). Ümumi dilçilik. Bakı: “Şərq- Qərb”.
Boas F. (2013). “Amerika hindu dillərinə dair əl kitabı”na giriş. BakıAzAtam.
Cəfərov Q. (2020). Ümumi dilçilik müntəxabatı. Bakı: “Elm və təhsil”.
Cəfərov N. (2016). Etnoloji etüdlər, Bakı: “Elm və təhsil”
Cəfərov N. (2023). Ümumi dilçilik. Bakı: “Təhsil”.
Rəcəbli Ə. (2021). Koqnitiv dilçilik. Bakı:“Elm və təhsil”.
Sössür F. (2018). Ümumi dilçilik kursu. Bakı: Azərbaycan Tərcümə Mərkəzi.
Veysəlli F. (2015). Koqnitiv dilçilik: əsas anlayışları və perspektivləri. Bakı: “Mütərcim”
Звегинцев В.А. (1960). Теоретиколингвистические предпосылки гипотезы Сепира – Уорфа. – Новое в лингвистике, выпуск 1, М., изд. иностранной литературы, стр. 111- 134.
Маслова А.Ю. (2001). Лигвокультурология, М., Академия
Маслова А.Ю. (2007). Введение в прагмалингвистику, М., «Флинта», «Наука».
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 EUROASIA JOURNAL OF SOCIAL SCIENCES & HUMANITIES
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.