The lexico-semantic representation of the binary oppositions ‘truth’ and ‘lie’
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.47526/3107-3085.423Keywords:
binary oppositions, ‘truth’ and ‘lie’, semantic oppositions, lexical oppositions, literary language, socio-cultural norms, linguistic analysis.Abstract
The study of binary oppositions allows us to better understand the structure of
language, the mechanisms of its perception, and the role it plays in social processes. The article
outlines the role of binary oppositions as a fundamental mechanism for organizing language and
thought. Three main groups of linguistic binary oppositions are analyzed: semantic, lexical, and
syntactic. The main focus is on semantic binary oppositions and their manifestations in literary
language. The research examines how binary oppositions reflect the norms and values of society
and identifies the differences between the oppositions ‘truth’ and ‘lie’ in literary language. The
purpose of the study is to determine the lexico-semantic features of the binary oppositions ‘truth’
and ‘lie’ in the English literary language and to identify their linguocultural functions in structuring
the language system and sociocultural norms.
The methods of literary analysis and modeling were used to classify binary oppositions and
determine their meanings in language. The study analyzed the manifestations of the lexico-semantic
binary oppositions ‘truth’ and ‘lie’ in the English literary language. To identify differences in the
functioning of binary oppositions in English literature, their influence was determined through a
linguocognitive analysis of sociocultural norms and literary style.
The results of the study showed that the binary oppositions ‘truth’ and ‘lie’ play a key role in
the organization of linguocognitive processes. The differences between the concepts of ‘truth’ and
‘lie’ in English demonstrate how binary oppositions are used to express cultural and social
distinctions. The practical value of the research lies in the possibility of applying its results in
cognitive linguistics and linguocultural studies.
References
1. Аристотель. Метафизика. – М.: БОМБОРА, 2024. – 416 с.
2. Бахтин М.М. К философии поступления // Философия и социология науки и техники. – 1985. – С. 82–138.
3. Бердяев Н.А. Философская истина и интеллигентская правда // Вехи: сборник статей о русской интеллигенции. – 1991. – С. 6–25.
4. Серов В. Энциклопедический словарь крылатых фраз и словосочетаний. – М.: Локид-Пресс, 2004. – 879 с.
5. Даль В.И. Толковый словарь живого великорусского языка. – Санкт-Петербург; Москва, 1881. – 807 с.
6. Заботкина В.И. Репрезентация событий в когнитивных моделях и дискурсе: Аксиосфера культуры // In: Репрезентация событий: интегрированный подход с позиции когнитивных наук. – Москва: Издат. Дом ЯСК, 2017 – С. 28-45.
7. Aimukhambet Z.A., Abdilmanatkyzy A., Baitanasova K., Seiputanova A., Kurmambayeva K. The poetic interpretation of binary opposition in the structure of myth // Rupkatha Journal on Interdisciplinary Studies in Humanities. – 2017. – №9(1). – P. 11-20. https://doi.org/10.21659/ rupkatha.v 9n1.03
8. Знаков В.В. Категории правды и лжи в русской духовной традиции и современной психологии понимания // Вопросы психологии. – 1994. – №2. С. 55– 64.
9. Черников М.В., Перевозчикова Л.С. Категории «правда» и «истина» в русской культуре // Историческая психология и социология истории. – 2015. – Т. 8, №2. – С. 143 –156.
10. Европейский словарь философий: Лексикон непереводимостей. Том первый. – К.: Дух i лiтера, 2015. – 576 с.
11. Серикбаева Г. Бинарные оппозиции как метод концептуализации: пример Codex Cumanicus // Международный журнал общества, культуры и языка. – 2023. – №11(3). – С. 159-170.
12. Гланцберг М. Истина // Стэнфордская энциклопедия философии / под ред. автор: Э.Н. Залта. [Электронный ресурс]. URL: https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2021/entries/truth/ (дата обращения: 01.09.2025)
13. Амирбекова А. Тіл және ойлау: ұғым мен ұғым мәселелері // Абай атындағы Қазақ ұлттық педагогикалық университетінің хабаршысы, «Филологиялық ғылымдар» сериясы. – 2019. – №3(61). – Б. 14-19.
14. Isenberg A. Deontology and the Ethics of Lying // Aesthetics and Theory of Criticism: Selected Essays of Arnold Isenberg. –1973. – Р. 245–264.
15. Апресян Ю.Д. Избранные труды. Том 2: Интегральное описание языка и системная лексикография. – М.: Языки славянской культуры, 1995. – 767 с.
16. Belousova A.I. Binary opposition as an object of linguistic research // Eurasian Humanitarian Journal. – 2024. – №2. – P. 6-11.
17. Lakoff J., Johnson М. Metaphors We Live By. – Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1980. – 300 p.
18. Sinclair D. Trust the Text: Language, Corpus and Discourse. – London: Routledge, 2004. – 287 p.
19. Сергиенко Н.А., Царская Т.С. Концепты ПРАВДА и ЛОЖЬ в русском и украинском языках: лингвокогнитивный сопоставительный анализ // Филологические науки. Вопросы теории и практики. Филология. Теория и практика. – 2021. – Том 14. Выпуск 5. – С. 1671-1677.
20. Aitkulova G.A., Islam D.А., Kazhiakbarova R.B Linguocultural Features of the Concept “DiligenceLaziness” in the Kazakh Language // Ясауи университетінің хабаршысы. – 2025. – №3(137). – P. 66–77. https://doi.org/10.47526/2025-3/2664-0686.234
21. Jingjing Wu, Le Cheng Beyond binary opposition: philosophical reflections on a multi-level Language cognitive model from an embodied constructional perspective // Humanities and Social Sciences Communications. – 2025. – Vol. 12. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-025-05690-2
22. Konyratbayeva Zh.M., Konyratbayev O.B., Doszhan R.A., Mahmut G. Ethnosemantic analysis of binary oppositions in toposystems // De Gruyrter Mouton. – 2023. – №258. – P. 93–114. https://doi.org/10.1515/sem-2023-0054
REFERENCES
1. Aristotel. Metafizika [Aristotle. Metaphysics]. – M.: BOMBORA, 2024. – 416 s. [in Russian]
2. Bahtin M.M. K filosofii postuplenia [Towards the philosophy of admission] // Filosofija i sociologija nauki i tehniki. – 1985. – S. 82–138. [in Russian]
3. Berdiaev N.A. Filosofskaia istina i intelligentskaia pravda [Philosophical truth and intellectual truth] // Vehi: sbornik statei o russkoi intelligencii. – 1991. – S. 6–25. [in Russian]
4. Serov V. Enciklopedicheski slovar krylatyh fraz i slovosochetani [An encyclopedic dictionary of catch phrases and phrases]. – M.: Lokid-Press, 2004. – 879 s. [in Russian]
5. Dal V.I. Tolkovyi slovar zhivogo velikorusskogo iazyka [Explanatory dictionary of the living Great Russian language]. – Sankt-Peterburg; Moskva, 1881. – 807 s. [in Russian]
6. Zabotkina V.I. Reprezentacia sobyti v kognitivnyh modeliah i diskurse: Aksiosfera kultury // In: Reprezentacia sobyti: integrirovannyi podhod s pozicii kognitivnyh nauk [Representation of events in cognitive models and Discourse: The Axiosphere of Culture // In: Representation of events: an integrated approach from the perspective of cognitive sciences]. – Moskva: Izdat. Dom IaSK, 2017 – S. 28-45. [in Russian]
7. Aimukhambet Z.A., Abdilmanatkyzy A., Baitanasova K., Seiputanova, A., Kurmambayeva K. The poetic interpretation of binary opposition in the structure of myth // Rupkatha Journal on Interdisciplinary Studies in Humanities. – 2017. – №9(1). – P. 11-20. https://doi.org/10.21659/ rupkatha.v 9n1.03
8. Znakov V.V. Kategorii pravdy i lzhi v russkoi duhovnoi tradicii i sovremennoi psihologii ponimania [Categories of Truth and Falsehood in the Russian Spiritual Tradition and Modern Psychology of Understanding] // Voprosy psihologii. – 1994. – №2. S. 55– 64. [in Russian]
9. Chernikov M.V., Perevozchikova L.S. Kategorii «pravda» i «istina» v russkoi kulture [Categories of “truth” and “truth” in Russian culture] // Istoricheskaia psihologia i sociologia istorii. – 2015. – T. 8, №2. – S. 143 –156. [in Russian]
10. Evropeiski slovar filosofii: Leksikon neperevodimostei. Tom pervyi [The European Dictionary of Philosophies: A Lexicon of Untranslatables. Volume One]. – K.: Duh i litera, 2015. – 576 s. [in Russian]
11. Serikbaeva G. Binarnye oppozicii kak metod konceptualizacii: primer Codex Cumanicus [Binary oppositions as a method of conceptualization: an example of Codex Cumanicus] // Mezhdunarodnyi zhurnal obshestva, kultury i iazyka. – 2023. – №11(3). – S. 159-170. [in Russian]
12. Glancberg M. Istina // Stenfordskaia enciklopedia filosofii / pod red. avtor: E.N. Zalta. [Electronic resource]. URL: https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2021/entries/truth/ (date of access 01.09.2025) [in Russian]
13. Amirbekova A. Tіl zhane oilau: ugym men ugym maselelerі [Language and thinking: problems of the concept and concept] // Abai atyndagy Qazaq ulttyq pedagogikalyq universitetіnіn habarshysy, «Filologialyq gylymdar» seriasy. – 2019. – №3(61). – B. 14-19. [in Kazakh]
14. Isenberg A. Deontology and the Ethics of Lying // Aesthetics and Theory of Criticism: Selected Essays of Arnold Isenberg. –1973. – R. 245–264.
15. Apresian Iu.D. Izbrannye trudy. Tom 2: Integralnoe opisanie iazyka i sistemnaia leksikografia [Selected works. Volume 2: Integral Language Description and System Lexicography]. – M.: Iazyki slavianskoi kultury, 1995. – 767 s. [in Russian]
16. Belousova A.I. Binary opposition as an object of linguistic research // Eurasian Humanitarian Journal. – 2024. – №2. – P. 6-11.
17. Lakoff J., Johnson M. Metaphors We Live By. – Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1980. – 300 p.
18. Sinclair D. Trust the Text: Language, Corpus and Discourse. – London: Routledge, 2004. – 287 p.
19. Sergienko N.A., Carskaia T.S. Koncepty PRAVDA i LOZh v russkom i ukrainskom iazykah: lingvokognitivnyi sopostavitelnyi analiz [The concepts of TRUTH and LIE in Russian and Ukrainian: linguistic and cognitive comparative analysis] // Filologicheskie nauki. Voprosy teorii i praktiki. Filologia. Teoria i praktika. – 2021. – Tom 14. Vypusk 5. – S. 1671-1677. [in Russian]
20. Aitkulova G.A., Islam D.A., Kazhiakbarova R.B Linguocultural Features of the Concept “DiligenceLaziness” in the Kazakh Language // Iasaui universitetіnіn habarshysy. – 2025. – №3(137). – P. 66–77. https://doi.org/10.47526/2025-3/2664-0686.234
21. Jingjing Wu, Le Cheng Beyond binary opposition: philosophical reflections on a multi-level Language cognitive model from an embodied constructional perspective // Humanities and Social Sciences Communications. – 2025. – Vol. 12. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-025-05690-2
22. Konyratbayeva Zh.M., Konyratbayev O.B., Doszhan R.A., Mahmut G. Ethnosemantic analysis of binary oppositions in toposystems // De Gruyrter Mouton. – 2023. – №258. – P. 93–114. https://doi.org/10.1515/sem-2023-0054
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Yassawi Journal of Philology
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
