THE SEMANTIC FIELD "FAMILY" AS A WAY OF ORGANIZING LANGUAGE EXPERIENCE (BASED ON THE GERMAN LANGUAGE)

Druzhina N.L.

Vitebsk State University
Vitebsk, Belarus
e-mail: natalia.druzhina@mail.ru

 

A semantic field is a structural-semantic association that organizes a language's thesaurus and constitutes a component of the axiological worldview. The mechanism for constructing a statement presupposes reference to a specific sphere of experience, the method of dividing which is a value unit that belongs simultaneously to language and culture—the semantic field. Yu. N. Karaulov, in his book "General and Russian Ideography," writes about the interdependence of the use of linguistic units and the activation in consciousness of the semantic context of these units [4].

From the standpoint of psycholinguistics, «[…] the «semantic field» that is evoked by each word is quite real, and […] therefore both the process of naming and the process of perceiving a word […] should be considered as a complex process of selecting the desired «closest meaning of the word» from the entire «semantic field» evoked by it” [5, p. 44].

Family is a fundamental value category in most linguistic and cultural communities. It is a complex, self-regulating system that serves as a hub for the transmission of social and cultural values, norms, and traditions from generation to generation, a key to the prosperity and development of society. Globalization, the growth of information flows, the advancement of technology and medicine, and the rise of feminism are all impacting traditions, changing the axiological picture of the world, enabling the emergence and open existence of alternative relationships between people, changing gender identities, and more. In the 21st century, all of this undoubtedly impacts the institution of family in the traditional sense, which has faced and is undergoing a value crisis: a reassessment of roles, conditions, and forms of existence. Nevertheless, family is a social group protected by the state, which requires a detailed study of underlying processes and a rethinking of current events through the prism of linguistic categories that broadly reflect the culture and national values of modern society.

Recently, the number of studies that examine the functioning of language in periods of social change and global world trends has increased.

Crises affecting the cultural and value orientations of each individual and society as a whole are a priority challenge for the functioning of the family institution. Therefore, a discursive and systemic-structural approach to the study of linguistic facts within the semantic field of "family" is essential for identifying the linguacultural specificity of the phenomenon of "family." The relevance of scientific research in the field of studying the semantic field of "family" is also determined by its connections with other sciences. Research of this kind touches on such areas of scientific knowledge as linguistics, cognitive linguistics, psycholinguistics, linguaxiology, pedagogy, psychology, sociology, philosophy, discourse theory, and others.

Within the context of such interdisciplinary scientific research, our study reflects the key sociocultural conditions characteristic of the 21st century. This research aims to develop a key problem in philology: a comprehensive approach to studying semantic fields and the units within them. The relevance and timeliness of this work stem from the importance of comprehensively exploring new characteristics of the semantic field "family," which arise in connection with the specific development and functioning of modern society.

Having set ourselves the goal of analyzing the specifics of the semantic field «family» in order to penetrate the conceptual picture of the world of native German speakers, we found ourselves faced with the need to clarify complex, but solvable by modern science, issues concerning axiological attitudes and the national specificity of value pictures of the world.

Having analyzed a number of works by domestic and foreign scientists, we came to the conclusion that the semantic field «family» implements a hierarchy of values through lexical units and serves as a way of organizing the linguistic experience of representatives of a certain linguistic culture.

The methodological basis of our work, related to the reconstruction of the axiological specificity of the value "family" in German journalistic discourse, consisted of a continuous sampling method of factual material, discourse and qualitative-quantitative component analysis, lexical-semantic analysis, and elements of stylistic analysis. Furthermore, a key step in achieving this goal was modeling, the stages of which were developed by Professor V.A. Maslova and verified within the framework of the BRFFR-GRNF International Grant "Pan-Slavic Values in the Mirror of the Region (Vladimir and Vitebsk Regions): Language as the Main Spiritual Value.".

The category of value is a multidimensional phenomenon that occupies a special place in the segment of the philosophical, anthropological, linguistic, and sociocultural experience of humanity.

The origins of scientific interest in understanding the most important component of human culture – values – can be found in the philosophical works of antiquity, where the triad of «truth–goodness–beauty» served as the axiological basis of existence [1, p. 230]. The religious picture of the world in the Middle Ages determined the characteristics of human consciousness and worldview, putting forward divine providence as an axiological priority. Philosophers of the Modern Age (F. Bacon, R. Descartes, T. Hobbes, etc.) actualize the value field in which man, reason, freedom, and progress dominate. In the 19th and 20th centuries, the issue of values became a leading one in the works of famous philosophers (F. Brentano, I. Kant, F. Nietzsche, G. Rickert, M. Scheler, etc.), and a research direction – axiology – was formed (the term belongs to the French scientist P. Lapie).

From the point of view of the philosophical-psychological approach, value is a «factor of empirical reality» – a special product of human needs [2, p. 4]. The American anthropologist K. Kluckhohn interprets values as a concept of the desired (сonception of the desirable) and believes that this phenomenon is connected with individually varying ideas, beliefs and ideals of people [12]. According to the researcher, value is a representation of what is desired, which determines the choice of forms, means and goals of action.

Of undoubted interest is the definition of value in the work of M. Weber («value is a norm that has a certain significance for a social subject» [2, p. 474]), since a similar interpretation of this phenomenon is found in various sciences. Thus, despite certain differences in theoretical views, the majority of works on pedagogy and psychology assert the point of view that «value is everything that has meaning for an individual, corresponds to his attitudes, beliefs, ideals, interests, and meets his current needs» [11]. Encyclopedic sources on sociology provide an interpretation of value based on the definition of the term in relation to such concepts as man and society («value is the property of a social object to satisfy certain needs of a social subject (a person, a group of people, society)» [7, p. 609]).

Z.K. Timergazina, having summarized various points of view on the essence of value, extrapolates them into a current research direction – linguistic axiology: «An object is a bearer of value, and a subject (a person or a group of people) evaluates the object, i.e., establishes its value and gives it a certain meaning. In other words, value is the meaning of an object for a subject – goodness, kindness, beauty, etc., and evaluation is the emotional-intellectual identification of this meaning by the subject – the experience of goodness, the verdict of conscience, the judgment of taste, etc.» [10, p. 21].

We adopt this approach in our work, considering the semantic field as a confirmation of the real existing connections between words in the mind: the object is the family, the subject is the representatives of the German linguacultural community, where the new vision of the family presupposes linguistic inclusiveness, that is, inclusion in the linguistic and cultural space of all family and partnership relations [3, p. 24].

As sources of practical research material, we used a number of German socio-political print media: «"BILD", "DIE ZEIT", "Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung", "Frankfurter Rundschau" and "Süddeutsche Zeitung"» (2010–2019), from which we collected a thematic corpus of 1,352 contexts using the continuous sampling method.

V.A. Maslova has successfully developed a methodology for analyzing values from the perspective of the linguistic and psychocognitive characteristics of field constituents. She proposed and verified a model for describing axiological phenomena. According to V.A. Maslova, the structure of a field includes: 1) the center – the value, i.e., the name of the value concept, and the «immediate environment»: common synonyms; 2) the near periphery – a special informational and conceptual layer containing diverse factual information; 3) the distant periphery – the interpretative field [6, p. 110]. The distant periphery presents the greatest difficulties in description, since the figurative component is often implicitly reflected in the processes of metaphor formation.

Our analysis of the factual material showed that the core of the value under study includes the name of the field Familie / family (here and below our translation is presented in italics after the slash) and a number of synonyms that implement the secondary nomination: Verwandtschaft / relatives; Anhang / close relatives; Leute / relatives, people; Haus / family, clan, dynasty; Sippschaft / relatives, kinsmen; Mischpoke / relatives and others.

The semantics of the field's peripheral components are more complex than those of the core ones. This segment of the field structure includes a unique associative set of universal and specific family characteristics. Analysis of the factual material allowed us to identify several thematic groups:

1. Family is a component of the system of social relations – the joint life of people connected by kinship and family relations: Family ist die soziale Middle unserer Gesellschaft/ Family is the social center of our society; Family bildet einen Eckpfeiler unserer Gesellschaft / Family is the cornerstone of our society; Die Family ist das Ssystem zwischenmenschlicher Beziehungen, die soziale Acceptance befördert / Family is a system of interpersonal relationships that promotes integration into society.
2. Family is a community, a group, a network:

a) basis – kinship: Im weiteren Sinne gehören zur Family GroßEltern zoom Beispiel / In a broad sense, family includes grandparents, for example; Oma, Oops, Tante, Onkel and night viele weitere Generationen gehören zoom Begriff der Family / Grandmother, grandfather, aunt and many other generations belong to the concept of family; Zwei Mütter, zwei Väter oder nur eins von beidem. Family kann ganz unterschiedliche Formen haben / Two mothers, two fathers or only one of the two. The family can take different forms; Eine Family ist ein Paar mit mindestens einem Kind / Family – is a couple who have at least one child.

b) the basis is emotional closeness: Neben der classic Kernfamilie and day Blutsverwandten gehören vor allem für Singles auch enge Friend and sogar Haustiere zur Family / Along with the classic nuclear family and blood relatives, the family for single people also includes close friends and even pets.

3. Family – household: Von einer Family ist regelmäßig auszugehen, wenn ein gemeinsamer Haushalt besteht / A family is recognized as a fact in the case of running a joint household; Eine durchschnittliche German Family gibt jetzt weniger Geld aus / The average German family has started spending much less.

In the German-language journalistic space, the first thematic group has the greatest representation in quantitative terms (651 contexts).

Of particular interest is the content of the lexical layer, which includes alternative family configurations of the 21st century: Stieffamilie, Mischfamilie / blended family; Zweitfamilie, Fortsetzungs- oder Folgfamilie / re-family, Patchwork Family / patchwork family, gleichgeschlechtliche Partnerschaft / same-sex partnership; Regenbogenfamilie / same-sex family, nicht legalisierte Gemeinschaft / illegitimate cohabitation. Thus, the idealization of the patchwork model is associated with nostalgia for the multi-generational family and the topicalization of loneliness in modern society. The "patchwork" family is presented as Bund miteinander vertrauter Menschen / union of people close to each other, capable of providing warmth and confidence in a world where the focus on achieving individualistic goals prevails.

Some nominations, for example, Homo—Ehe / homosexual marriage, were legally incorrect until 2017, since same-sex marriage was not a legally recognized concept. From 2001 to 2017, the only possible legal way to register same-sex relationships in Germany was through a registered civil partnership (eingetragene Lebenspartnerschaft). Since 2017, same-sex marriage has been legalized thanks to the "Marriage for All" movement and the support of 75% of the country's population. The new version of the German Civil Code defines marriage as "a union of two people, concluded between people of different sexes or of the same sex.".

An analysis of the interpretive field allows us to assess the specific organization of the linguistic experience of German speakers and evaluate the pragmatic meanings of the perception of family in German linguistic culture. The meanings relevant to native speakers are realized in the following metaphorical expressions: Transparency / transparency; Solidarität / solidarity; Ultimate Rückzugsort / the best refuge, place of solitude; eine echte emotionale Heimat / true emotional homeland; Zusammengehörigkeit / cohesion; Wärme / warmth, Lebenssinn / meaning of life; Nähe / closeness; Geborgenheit / security; Vertrauen / trust; Liebe / love; Stabilität / stability; Unterstützung / support; Hilfe / help; Partnerschaftlichkeit / partnership; Schutz / protection; Nestwärme / family comfort.

In the media discourse, not only a positive assessment of family realities is present; the pragmatic potential of metaphors is characterized by its diversity: Auslaufmodell / discontinued model; Minenfeld / battlefield; Chaos / chaos; Teufelkreis / vicious circle; Fesseln / shackles. The material under study contains expressions that could potentially act as aphorisms: Es gibt ein Family, es gibt Friend and es gibt Friend, die zur Family werden / There are friends, There is family and there are friends who become family.; Family ist die Treppe, die Neu and Alt verbindet / Family is a ladder that connects the new and old, not recorded in lexicographic sources. This trend is characteristic of the phenomenon we are studying, which is in a phase of active transformation and acquisition of new meanings: Eine moderne Family ist eine Mischung aus Nest— and Wechselfamilie mit einer Tendenz zoom pendelnden Patchwork and Ansätzen von Hippiekommune / The modern family is a mix of traditional and alternative families with a tendency towards guest patchwork and features of hippie communes.

It should be noted that in the late 1960s and early 1970s, a certain transformation of values occurred in Germany, as in a number of other developed Western countries. The level of growth in prosperity after World War II, the development of education, and the advent of television pushed such priorities as work, religiosity, and the need to gain recognition from others into the background. Materialism gave way to post-materialism, which led to a change in the value field, which included individualistic values of self-determination and self-development. We believe that the transformation of the value field had a significant impact on the formation of a new view of the family, its essence and forms. We also agree with the point of view of V.A. Maslova, who asserts that "the formation of the worldview of a certain social and territorial group is closely linked to its culture, therefore the same phenomena of the surrounding reality are presented differently in different territories, in different regions" [8, p. 6].

Thus, the use of the method of reconstruction of the semantic field gave us the opportunity to analyze the specifics of the organization of the linguistic experience of native German speakers in the area of meanings designated by the name-value family / Family, highlighting the fields in the structure:

– a core with a field name and lexemes implementing secondary nominations (Verwandtschaft / relatives; Anhang / close relatives; Leute / relatives, people; Haus / family, clan, dynasty; Sippschaft / relatives, kinsmen; Mischpoke / relatives);

– the immediate periphery, which is represented by associative series with the following meanings: 1) family as a unit of the system of social relations (48.2% identified contexts); 2) family as a community of people united by kinship or emotional closeness (36.8% of the total amount of text material studied); 3) family as joint family and economic activity (15% contexts);

- the distant periphery with zones of emotional-evaluative relationships and metaphorization.

Literature

1. An S.I., Belinova O.A. Conceptualization of value as a philosophical category // Bulletin of Kemerovo State University. 2014. No. 2–1(58). P. 230–234.
2. Weber M. Selected Works / Edited by Yu.N. Davydov. Moscow: Progress, 1990. 808 p.
3. Druzhina N.L. Universal and idioethnic in the perception of the family phenomenon by Russians, Belarusians and Germans // Philological sciences. 2016. No. 2. P. 21–26.
4. Karaulov, Yu.N. General and Russian Ideography. Moscow: Nauka, 1976. 355 p.
5. LuriaA.R. Language and consciousness. Rostov n/d, 1998. 413 p.
6. MaslovaV.A. The hydronym Dvina as a value and concept in the linguistic consciousness of the residents of the Vitebsk region // Regional onomastics: problems and prospects of research. 2016. P. 110–113.
7. Russian Sociological Encyclopedia / Ed. by G.V. Osipov. Moscow: NORMA-INFRA-M, 1999. 672 p.
   8. Slavic Values in the Communicative Space of the Regions / Ed. by V. A. Maslova, M. Vas. Pimenova. Minsk: UP "Encyclopedics", 2017. 268 p.
   9. Surzhenko L.V. Personal values: philosophical and psychological analysis of the concept // Scientific journal of the Kuban State Agrarian University. 2011. No. 65(01). P. 1–11.
   10. TemirgazinZ.K. Selected works on linguistics: In 2 volumes. Vol. 1. Pavlodar, 2010. 310 p.
   11. Encyclopedic Dictionary of Psychology and Pedagogy [Electronic resource]. URL: http://med.niv.ru/doc/dictionary/psychology-and-pedagogy/index.htm.
   12. Kluckhohn C. Values and Value Orientation in the Theory of Action. An Exploration in Definition and Classification // Parsons, T. @ Shils, E. Toward a general Theory of Action. Cambridge: Harvard Univ. Press, 1951, pp. 388–433.

• References

1. An S.I., Belinova O.A. Conceptualization of value as a philosophical category // Bulletin of Kemerovo State University. 2014. No. 2–1(58). P.230–234.
2. Weber M. Selected Works / Ed. Ju.N.Davydova. Moscow: Progress, 1990. 808 p.
3. Druzhina N.L. Universal and idiosyncratic in the perception of the family phenomenon by Russians, Belarusians and Germans // Philological sciences. 2016. No. 2. P. 21–26.
4. Karaulov,Ju.N. General and Russian Ideology. Moscow: Nauka, 1976. 355 s.
5. Lurija AR. Language and consciousness. Rostov n/D, 1998. 413 s.
6. Maslova VA. The hydronym Dvina as a value and concept in the linguistic consciousness of Vitebsk residents // Regional onomastics: problems and prospects of research. 2016. P. 110–113.
7. Rossijskaja sociologicheskaja jenciklopedija / Pod red. GV Osipova. M.: NORMA-INFRA-M, 1999. 672 s.
8. Slavic values in the communicative space of regions / Ed. V. A. Maslova, M. V. Pimenovoj. Minsk: UP "Jenciklopediks", 2017. 268 p.
9. Surzhenko LV. Personal values: philosophical and psychological analysis of concept // Scientific journal of Kuban State Agrarian University. 2011. No. 65(01). P. 1–11.
10. 10.Temirgazina ZK. Selected works on linguistics: In 2 volumes. Vol. 1. Pavlodar, 2010. 310 pp.

11. EJenciklopedicheskij slovar' po psihologii i pedagogike [Jelektronnyj resurs]. URL: http://med.niv.ru/doc/dictionary/psychology-and-pedagogy/index.htm.
12. Kluckhohn C. Values and Value Orientation in the Theory of Action. An Exploration in Definition and Classification // Parsons, T. @ Shils, E. Toward a general Theory of Action. Cambridge: Harvard Univ. Press, 1951, pp. 388–433