The Lexico-Semantic Representation of the Binary Oppositions ‘Truth’ and ‘Lie’
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.47526/3107-3085.423Anahtar Kelimeler:
ikili karşıtlık “doğru - yalan”, anlamsal karşıtlıklar, sözcüksel karşıtlıklar, edebi dil, sosyo-kültürel normlar, dilbilimsel analizÖzet
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 thinking. Three main groups of linguistic binary oppositions are analyzed: semantic, lexical and syntactic. The main attention is paid to semantic binary oppositions and their manifestations in the 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 the literary language. The purpose of the study is to determine the the lexico-semantic features of binary oppositions ‘truth’ and ‘lie’ in the English literary language, to identify their linguo-cultural functions in structuring the language system and socio-cultural norms.
The methods of literary analysis and modeling were used to classify binary oppositions and determine their meaning in the language. The study analyzed the manifestations of lexical-semantic binary oppositions ‘truth’ and ‘lie’ in the English literary language. To identify the differences in the functioning of binary oppositions in English literature, the influence of binary oppositions was determined based on the linguo-cognitive analysis of socio-cultural 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 linguo-cognitive processes. The differences between the concepts of ‘truth’ and ‘lie’ in English demonstrate how binary oppositions are used to express cultural and social differences. The practical value of the research lies in the possibility of using its results in cognitive linguistics and linguocultural studies.
Referanslar
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
İndir
Yayınlanmış
Nasıl Atıf Yapılır
Sayı
Bölüm
Lisans
Telif Hakkı (c) 2026 Yassawi Journal of Philology
Bu çalışma Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ile lisanslanmıştır.
