FRAME STRUCTURE OF THE EVALUATIVE UTTERANCE
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32589/2311-0821.2.2019.192447Keywords:
frame, evaluation, evaluative utterance, sender, recipient cognitivecommunicative fieldAbstract
Introduction. The paper focuses on the study of the framework of the evaluative utterance. Frame composition can be considered as an autonomous configuration consisting of a body, a setof standard patterns of speech acts, members of speech situation.
Purpose. The aim of this research is to explore the updating of frame structure that realizes the evaluative potential.
Methods. The research was carried out by means of the methods of Speech act analysis, framing technique, structural, semantic and contextual analysis.
Results. The notion “frame” is used mainly for the description of such elements of consciousness, which are composed for demonstrating situations in object-human cognitive activity. Frame structure can be viewed as a specific formation consisting of a core, a number of standard models of speech acts, participants of speech episode. Also, a significant place
occupies the objective, plan and consequent. So, the evaluative situation can be associated with the frame, as it consists of appraisal of the objects of the outer world and depicts the cohesion of concepts of the object and the subject, materialized in the system of parts of speech, as well
as all the components of utterances that constitute the situation. The paper looks at the evaluative utterance as the result of a certain perception pattern, picture, and script in the communicative
activity. According to socio-role position relations between participants of communication are spread chiefly in the social domain of communication, where social role demonstrates interactional rules between the subject of communicative process and its object.
Conclusions. The realized scheme of the evaluative utterance is related to the accomplishment of the frame pattern of a typical communicative act in the form of a holistic multi-layered creation – functional-semantic formation. Materialization of a frame pattern occurs on the background of social interplay, where the functional-semantic representation of the evaluative frame is benefited by resolving in its structure such components as the illocutionary act-event, topical proposition and conventional grammatical construction.
References
Arutyunova, N. D. (1990). Referentsiya. Lingvisticheskiy entsiklopedicheskiy slovar. Moskva: Sov. entsikl., 411-412.
Bakieva, G. F. (1998). Freim i modelirvanie situatsii. Dokladu IV Mezhdunar. konf. “Semantika yazukovuh edinits”, 1, 6-7.
Dijk, T. A. van. (1989). Yazuk. Poznaniye. Kommunikatsiya. Moskva: Progress.
Zhabotynska, S. A. (1999). Kontseptualnuy analiz: tupu freimov. Visnyk Cherkaskogo un-tu: Ser. “Filol. nauki”, 11, 12-25.
Zhabotynska, S. A. (2013). Imya kak tekst: kontseptualnaya set’ leksicheskogo znacheniya (analiz imeni emotsii). Cognition, communication, discourse, 6, 47-76.
Kus’ko, K. Ya. (2001). Freimovi strategii u riznozhanrovomu inozemnomovnomu duskursi. Movni і kontseptual'ni kartunu svitu, 5, 210-214.
Minskiy, М. (1988). Ostroumie i logika kognitivnogo, bessoznatelnogo. NZL. Moskva: Progress, 23, 281-309.
Pankrats, Yu. G. (1992). Propozitsional’nuye strukturu i ih rol’ v formirvanii yazukovuh edinits raznuh urovney (na materiale slozhnostrukturirovannuh glagolov sovremennogo angliyskogo yazuka). (Avtoref. dis. d-ra filol. nauk). Moskva: IYa RAN.
Pocheptsov, G. G. (1986). О kommunikativnoy tipologii adresata. Rechevuye aktu v lingvistike i metodike. Pyatigorsk: Gos. ped. in-t inostr.yaz., 10-17.
Prihodko, G. I. (2016). Kategoriya otsinki v konteksti zminu lingvistuchnuh paradigm. Zaporizhzhya: Krugozor.
Romanov, A. A. (1988). Sistemnuy analiz regulyativnuh sredstv dialogicheskogo obsheniya. Moskva: IYa RAN.
Samohina, V. O. (2012). Zhart u suchasnomu komunikatuvnomu ghjstori Velukoi Brutanii ta SSHA. Harkiv: HNU imeni V. N. Karazina
Fillmore, Ch. (1988). Freimu i semantika ponimaniya. NZL. Moskva: Progress, 23, 52-92.
Shelovskih, T. I. (1995). Rechevoy akt soveta: funktsionalno-pragmaticheskiy analiz. (Avtoref. dis. kand. filol. nauk). Voronezh: Voronezhsk. gos. un-t.
Benthem, J. V. (1991). Linguistic Universals in Logical Semantics. Semantic Universals and Universal Semantics. Berlin: Max Niemayer.
Kintsch, W. (1988). The Role of Knowledge in Discourse Comprehension: A Construction-Integration Model. Psychological Review, 5, 163-182.
Kroon, C. (1998). A Framework for the Description of Latin Discourse Markers. Journal of Pragmatics, 30, 205-223.
LITERARY SOURCES
Aldington, R. (1968). Death of a Hero. L.: Sphere.
Capote, T. (1974). The Grass Harp. М.: Progress Publishers.
Durrell, G. (1987). My Family and Other Animals. M.: Progress Publishers.
Priestley, J. B. (1974). Angel Pavement. M.: Progress Publishers.
Salinger, D. (1998). The Catcher in the Rye. M.: Apt + N.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
1. Authors take full responsibility for the content of the articles as well as the fact of their publication.2. All the authors must follow the current requirements for publication of manuscripts. Plagiarism itself and its representation as the original work as well as submission to the editorial office previously published articles are unacceptable. In case of plagiarism discovery the authors of the submitted materials take all the responsibility.
3. Authors shall inform the editor of any possible conflict of interests which could be influenced by the publication of the manuscript results.
4. The editorial board has the right to refuse publication of an article in case of non-compliance with these requirements.