2793

Scientific Newsletter of Voronezh State University of Architecture and Civil Engineering

UDC 81:231.74

Osmania University (India)

Centre for Advanced Study in Linguistics Part-Time Teaching Faculty

Doctor of Philology, Professor of the Institute of

the English and Foreign Languages Bhuvaneswar Chilukuri

e-mail: bhuvanesvarc@yahoo.com

Bhuvaneswar Chilukuri3

THE PROVERB AND ITS DEFINITION:

A KA:RMIK LINGUISTIC APPROACH4

In this second part of the paper "The Proverb and Its Definition: A Ka:rmik Linguistic Approach the uncommon characteristic of the proverb is discovered by apava:dam (sublation) and adhya:ro:pam (superimposition). Apava:dam is the isolation and negation of the secondary and essential characteristics to arrive at the asa:dha:raNa ka:raNa (the uncommon characteristic) which is the distinguishing characteristic of the proverbs from other genres. Adhya:ro:pam (Superimposition) is the assertion and mapping (superimposing) of the secondary and essential characteristics on the proverbs to arrive at the uncommon characteristic. Finally, by these two techniques, the proverb is defined as a culturally confirmed, frozen, prototypical illocution (as a text) and is illustrated by an example to prove the definition.

Keywords: proverb, definition, apava:dam (sublation), adhya:ro:pam (superimposition), asa:dha:raNa ka:raNa (the uncommon characteristic), Ka:rmik Linguistic Approach, prototypical illocution, secondary and essential characteristics, cultural confirmation, frozen (textuality).

Let us establish this uncommon characteristic of the proverb in a detailed manner using the above concepts. Such type of a new analysis was not conducted in Mieder [1; 2; 3].

3. 4. The Ka:rmik Uncommon Characteristic of the Proverb: Its Derivation

The uncommon characteristic of the proverb is derived by isolating its primary, and secondary properties as vyavrutta lakshaNa, and also its unchanging property as taTastha lakshaNa and finally identify its svaru:pa lakshaNa empirically. The discovery of the asa:dha:raNa ka:raNa can be made in two ways:

1.Apava:dam (Sublation); and

2.Adhya:ro:pam (Superimposition).

In the former, the secondary and essential characteristics are isolated and negated to arrive at the asa:dha:raNa ka:raNa; in the latter, the essential characteristics are asserted and superimposed to arrive at it.

_________________

© Chilukuri B., 2016

3This article by B. Chilukuri presents the continuation of the article published in the previous issue of the Newsletter.

4This article has earlier been published. But we cite it hereby to demonstrate the original text of the B. Chilukuri article, translated into Russian and published in a Russian version of the Newsletter.

34

3. 4. 1. Apava:dam (Sublation) of the Characteristics of the Proverb

When we observe proverbs, we can identify their primary (essential) and secondary characteristics by an empirical examination of their linguistic properties and their classification. Let us conduct such an examination and find out their properties.

3. 4. 1. 1. Apava:dam of Secondary Properties

According to Ka:rmik Linguistic Theory, secondary characteristics are those that are present in some but not all the members of the species, and which can equally be present in members of other species.

The secondary characteristics in proverbs cut across all the formal, functional, and semantic levels of language in proverbs. Since a particular property is observed at the individual level of the proverbs but not obtained universally across all the proverbs, it cannot be used as a defining characteristic. Therefore, all the definitions that make use of these secondary characteristics turn out to be mere descriptions and not definitions. A brief outline of these properties is made below with examples to provide an empirical proof.

3. 4. 1. 1. 1. Apava:dam of Formal-Functional-Semantic Secondary Properties

The formal properties of proverbs can be described at the five levels of phonology (phonotactic changes), lexis (word-formation processes such as affixation, conversion, compounding, blending, reduplication, etc.) (see Bhuvaneswar (No Date) [4]), syntax, (simple, compound, and complex sentences), (ibid. 2009) [5], semantics (denotation, semantic changes, semantic relations) (ibid. 2013 a [6], 2010 b [7], 2012 b [8]), and discourse structure (P1, P2, and P3 forms) (ibid. 2012 a [9]) and figures of speech (ibid. 2010a [10]) that cut across all the five levels. At these five formal linguistic levels of proverbs, ALL these major properties are found to be secondary characteristics only as they are present in their variety-range-depth in some proverbs and absent in others while the majority of them are collectively present in the whole corpus of proverbs. In a similar way, their functional properties (the five speech acts: representatives or assertives, directives, commissives, expressives, and declarations) are also found to be secondary characteristics only. These properties are discussed with numerous examples in various articles on lexis, syntax, semantics and discourse analysis in Bhuvaneswar (No Date [4]; 1999-2013 [5; 6; 7; 8; 9; 10; 11]; and also 2013b [12]). Owing to constraints of space, they are not exemplified here.

3. 4. 1. 1. 2. The Textual Characteristic of length is also a secondary property since some proverbs are very short e.g.,

 Time flies – 2 words and some can be very long:

It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God25 words.);

so also is the case of wisdom (e.g., Hit first and talk next contains no wisdom but only expediency).

3. 4. 1. 2. Apava:dam of Essential Properties

When we look at the essential properties of proverbs, we can immediately identify the following four properties:

1. frozen textuality;

35

Scientific Newsletter of Voronezh State University of Architecture and Civil Engineering

2.cultural confirmation;

3.illocutionary (canonical and discoursal speech act) function and

4.prototypical-categorial instantiation.

Any and every proverb in its canonical form is frozen in its standard form and again further frozen in its variation. This freezing is culturally done and confirmed and adhered to in usage. If a proverb is used in a modified form which varies from the standard and variant forms, it does not affect this condition of frozen textuality since the modified forms can be dismissed as idiosyncratic variations. Therefore, we can safely conclude that all proverbs share the characteristic of frozen textuality. This is a formal textual characteristic.

Any and every proverb in its canonical form is culturally confirmed not only in its standard but also in its variant form. If a frozen text is not culturally confirmed as a proverb, it cannot be a proverb; otherwise any frozen text (e.g., Dishonesty is the best/worst policy) can become a proverb which is not the case in reality. It does not mean that frozen texts cannot become proverbs – in fact, they have become when they are culturally confirmed: famous texts from authors such as Alexander Pope :

Fools rush in where angels fear to tread -"An Essay on Criticism".

This is a sociolinguistic or cultural anthropological characteristic which is outside language but ipso facto it implies all the essential and uncommon characteristics since cultural confirmation takes place only if these properties are present. This property makes it literally impossible to define a proverb by formal-functional-semantic-discourse properties alone.

Any and every proverb in its canonical form is a speech act not only in its standard but also in its variant form in its variety-range-depth. In its canonical form, it is a speech act as a formal text and in its application in a context, it is an appropriate speech act in its pragmatic and ka:rmatic context. This is a pragmatic or ka:rmatic (experiential pragmatic) characteristic.

Any and every proverb in its canonical form is a culturally confirmed prototype that can be used to instantiate a categorial social practice not only in its standard but also in its variant form. This prototypical-categorial instantiation (pro-cat instantiation) is a discourse function that has not been discovered and identified as such until Bhuvaneswar (1999 [11], 2003 [13], 2013b [12]) did it with a number of examples (see below for an example of a P1 proverb). This is also a discourse pragmatic (or ka:rmatic) characteristic. This property also makes it literally impossible to define a proverb by formal-functional-semantic-discourse properties alone.

All these four characteristics are essential characteristics since they are universally present in each and every proverb – be it a sentence or a phrase. Nonetheless, they cannot be taken alone to define a proverb. For example, all idioms and famous quotations are frozen texts and culturally confirmed but they are not proverbs – they may become proverbs if they satisfy the other two characteristics of pro-cat instantiation and illocution. In a similar way, pro-cat instantiating paraphrases or idiolectal literary creations cannot be proverbs because they are not culturally confirmed and frozen. Therefore, the uncommon characteristic of a proverb should be a mixed characteristic that incorporates all these four properties and excludes non-proverb texts that contain only any one or more but not all these four characteristics. What is more, such a mixed characteristic should be amenable to be described in a solid linguistic model of language and proverbs. Such an uncommon characteristic is possible only in the ka:rmik linguistic framework which is “a culturally confirmed frozen prototypical illocution (as a text)”. This is its svaru:pa lakshaNam.

36

Before writing was developed, proverbs were stored in cultural memory and recalled by individuals for their use in a context. After writing was developed, they are stored by recording them in books, etc. for reference and used. Whatever be the case, the test for their veracity is in their use since books reflect what was in use at the time of writing the books. Therefore, real life discourse should be the basis for all proverbiology and it should be complemented by recorded proverbs and their usage. Consequently, real life conversations should be taken into consideration and the unconsciously evolved essential properties have to be negatively discovered and identified by apava:dam in a scientific method; in addition, they have to be positively recognized by statistical methods and superimposed on the concerned text in use to discover the uncommon characteristic. This is the reverse process of apava:dam: in apava:dam, the secondary and essential properties are identified and negated to find out the uncommon characteristic; in adhya:ro:pam, the essential properties are positively discovered and identified by rigorous comparative statistical analysis. Then they are superimposed to find out the uncommon characteristic by integration; finally, it is also confirmed by apava:dam.

By an examination of all the proverbs in use, we find that there is:

1.a common frozen content of the proverb in use as recorded in books as its citation form. This form excludes the proverb initiators and linkers as well as idiosyncratic modifications/memory errors of the citation form in use. Hence, proverbs are frozen texts. In a similar way, all these frozen texts are:

2.culturally confirmed to be so by the speech community that uses these proverbs, be it the standard ones or their regional or dialectal variations – this is done by oral interviews and written evidence. Unfortunately, even though some work is done on speech functions (illocutionary function) of proverbs from the speech act theory, it and the pro-cat instantiation function have escaped the attention of proverbiologists, until Bhuvaneswar (1999 [11], 2003 [13]) discovered them as essential characteristics. This discovery has paved the way for a foolproof definition of the proverb. These characteristics are not the sole prerogative of proverbs alone. Hence, each property by itself cannot define the proverb. As a result, a mixed characteristic has to be worked out that excludes all other genres and distinguishes the proverb from others. This is obtained by combining all these properties into a single characteristic that gives us its uncommon characteristic which is used to define the proverb as “a culturally confirmed frozen prototypical illocution”.

Only one example is taken from real life conversations owing to constraints of space and the use of the proverb is analyzed to illustrate the definition [see “The Uncommon Characteristic of a Proverb” in Bhuvaneswar (No Date) [4] for more examples]. Here, the proverb occurs in P1 (proverb alone) form - but it can also occur in P2 (proverb embedded in an utterance), and P3 (proverb preceding or following an utterance in a turn) forms in its basic varieties of discourse structure - and functions as an illocution performing pro-cat instantiation. In addition, we discover it as a culturally confirmed (and) frozen text from folk wisdom and printed books. Therefore, these four properties are superimposed on a text in question and the uncommon characteristic is discovered by Proverb Identification Test (PIT).

3. 4. 1. 2. 1. Illustration of the KLT Definition by the Use of a P1 Proverb:

[A (Me) and B (Robin Fawcett) were going on a sightseeing trip in Hyderabad in 1999. B, a famous linguist, knows that I am doing research on proverbs. We hired an auto to the famous Golconda Fort but missed the way and passed through Kutub Shahi Tombs, another historical sight. When we reached the Tombs, the following conversation occurred.]

37

Scientific Newsletter of Voronezh State University of Architecture and Civil Engineering

In the above real life conversation, the text in question occurs in the second turn of the exchange: it is the sentence Every cloud has a silver lining. A culturally informed speaker immediately recollects and recognizes the proverb in its fixed form, and in his doing so, we find that it is a frozen text since it is fixed and recalled in the cultural memory as such. That it is a culturally confirmed frozen text is also confirmed by the empirical evidence of the folk knowledge of its usage in the daily life of the English speaking people and its occurrence as a recorded proverb (text) in books of proverbs. In this real exchange, it is further proved to be so. Again, when we observe its usage, we find that it is an assertive speech act (illocution) used as a follow up move to support the assertion made by A. The statement made by A expresses a natural event cognized as an unhappy social practice which turns out to have an advantage: going to Kutub Shahi Tombs is not in the plan which is a waste of time and money and so an embarrassing mistake. Therefore, it is one categorial instance of such a mistake. However, since B is on a sightseeing trip and Kutub Shahi Tombs are an important tourist attraction, going that way brought an advantage. By the use of the proverb, it is confirmed that there is an advantage in such mistakes by virtue of its cultural authorization. In other words, the proverb serves as a prototype to instantiate a category of such practice: procat instantiation. Furthermore, as A makes an attempt to save his face, B indirectly saves

B’s face by supporting his view. On the same text, all these four characteristics are superimposed as a mixed characteristic. In other words, that text on which this mixed characteristic is superimposed becomes a proverb.

The entire process of the formation, application and transmission can be captured by the following graphic networks to empirically support the ka:rmik linguistic definition of the proverb as a ‘culturally confirmed frozen prototypical illocution (as a text)’.

3. 5. Evidence for the Ka:rmik Linguistic Definition of the Proverb Stage 1: Formation of the Proverb

The following KLT Graph 1 can be used to motivate not only the formation of the proverb Every cloud has a silver lining (and in fact any other proverb) but also its application in a ka:rmik (dispositional, sociocognitive, experiential) linguistic framework to support the KLT definition of the proverb.

38

KLT Graph 1: Combined Triaxial Quadrants of Cognitive Actionality;

KLT Network 1. Tricircled D-Q-C Creating Action

In the formative stages of the proverb first, dispositional functional pressure (D.F.P.) builds up in one speaker’s Consciousness-qualified-Disposition (C-q-D) to express an unknown/unfamiliar/abstract social contextual practice in terms of a known/familiar/concrete salient practice – it is the desire. Second, his will stirs his guNa:s (traits) in his C-q-D in the Disposition Quadrant I to impact (shown by an arrow) on his phenomenal knowledge impinging on the C-q-D from the World View Quadrant II (shown by an arrow) and third, by a flash of dispositional creativity born from his va:sana:s, he conceptualizes the salient practice in his C-q-D as a cogneme in the Concept Quadrant III to categorize the contextual action (practice). Finally, he materializes the cogneme as an utterance in the context as contextual lingual action in the Context Quadrant IV to fulfill his desire and experiences the results of his action. The cogneme gradually evolves from pasyanti (the un-manifest state of cognition as a concept) - to - madhyama (semi-manifest cognition of its pattern and structure of an utterance) - to - vaikhari (its material form of sound).

Stage 2: Individual-Collective-Contextual Conjunction and Standardization (ICCCS)

In the Network 2 given below, how this utterance becomes a proverb is shown. The individual (I) uses this utterance to categorize the social contextual practice with another individual through individual interpersonal communication (I IPC) in the first instance. If the second individual accepts it in toto (cultural confirmation by a single individual) and likes it, he further uses it as a prototype with another individual to categorize the same or a similar practice. Here, the utterance becomes a proverb in principle but not popular. If he does not accept it in toto, he modifies it and standardizes it and uses it with another individual in a similar way. As the usage gains currency by its cyclic use, it is finally polished and standardized at the collective (C) level by collective cultural confirmation (by many indi-

39

Scientific Newsletter of Voronezh State University of Architecture and Civil Engineering

viduals – ‘many’ is fuzzy and cannot be a mathematically fixed number; it means ‘generally known’) in a frozen form. Thus, it becomes an accepted prototype to instantiate different categorial social practices. At this instance, a proverb in principle becomes a popular proverb. This exact instance is unnoticed like water under a mat but becomes felt as its cultural confirmation is progressively established by popular usage through time.

KLT Network 2: a. Creation and Transmission of Proverbs by ICCCS I/I IPC I-to-C IPC

●

C/I IPT

b. I-I-I (Interconnected-Interrelated-Interdependent) Network of ICCCS

Stage 3. Transmission, Retention and Perpetuation of Proverbs

When a proverb is popularized, it gets entrenched in the I/C memory of the C-q-D of the speech community in the society. In other words, its frozen form as it is culturally established gets fixed in the memory of the individuals. At this stage, the knowledge of the language and its proverbs along with their form-function-meaning-style (L) and the rules of making moves, speech acts (representatives, directives, commissives, expressives, and declarations as illocutions), exchanges, and transactions in contextual discourse (C) for pro-cat instantiation are also unconsciously stored in the knowledge component of disposition (D) as Dispositional Knowledge (DK) in the mind as shown in the Star Network Ib.

40

Legend: D Disposition; C Context; L Lingual Action; R Representative; E Expressive; Dec Declaration; apparently transforms into; Consciousness / Knowledge/Awareness

KLT Star Network 1. Retention of Proverbial Knowledge (PK) as DK

That it is so can be inferred when it is used in a context by recall: when an individual gets a dispositional impulsion from his D.F.P. to use a proverb to construct pro-cat actional reality according to his dispositional reality, he conceptualizes a proverbial utterance as a cogneme by recall in a similar way as shown in KLT Graph 1 and Network 1 and uses it in a context in C/I IPT. As it is used, it is heard, learnt and retained and perpetuated by its further use in a cyclic, I-I-I network of IPC and IPT as shown in Network 2b: individuals communicating with individuals I-I-I together to form the collective by IPC; the collective communicating with the individual is also I-I-I; In addition, it is also taught by its recollection. Hence, it is proved that it is confirmed and retained in the cultural memory in a frozen form as an illocution.

As it is continuously used or recalled, it is propagated and its life is perpetuated. The deviations in its use are caused by lack of alertness, focus, attention, and loss of memory. If the proverb is modified in any way – be it dialectal or simply formal, a bifurcation point starts and as it spreads, one to more than one variant is produced. They may or may not coexist with the original standard depending on their popularity. A rupture in the cycle brings the death of the proverb.

From the ka:rmik linguistic analysis (KLA) conducted above, we conclude that formal, functional, semantic, cognitive and mixed definitions cannot provide a conclusive definition of the proverb. They cannot withstand scientific analysis. Only KLA can withstand such scrutiny. Hence, it is humbly submitted to the learned reader to test this definition of the proverb as “a culturally confirmed frozen text of a prototypical practice used as an illocution over a categorial action in a setting for a projected view of life” or “a culturally confirmed frozen prototypical illocution (as a text)”and censure it if it is faulty or else ratify it.

41

Scientific Newsletter of Voronezh State University of Architecture and Civil Engineering

Bibliographic list

1.Mieder, Wolfgang. 1993. “Popular views of the Proverb”. In Proverbs are Never out of Season. (Ed.) Wolfgang Mieder. New York: Oxford University Press.

2.Mieder, Wolfgang. 2004. Proverbs A Handbook. London: Greenwood Press.

3.Fomina Z.E. Meteorologicheskie poslovichnye primety s imenem svjatogo v ne-meckom lingvokul'turnom soobshhestve / Z.E.Fomina // Nauchnyj vestnik Voronezh. gos. arh.-stroit. un-ta. Sovremennye lingvisticheskie i metodiko-didakticheskie issledova-nija. – 2015. – Vyp. 2 (26). – S. 129146.

4.Bhuvaneswar, Chilukuri (No date). “Bhuvaneswar Chilukuri on Scribd”. www.Scribd.com/bhuvanesvar.

5.Bhuvaneswar, Chilukuri, 2009. The Syntax of Proverbs I: The Sentence In American English Proverbs:A Case Study in Quirk’s Model”. Al Mergib Journal of English Studies, Vol.1. Ghasar Khiar, Al Mergib University.

6.Bhuvaneswar, Chilukuri, 2013a. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Proverbiallinguists/files/Semantics of Proverbs.

7.Bhuvaneswar, Chilukuri, 2010b. “Derivation of Referential Meaning in Proverbs I - Propositional Meaning: A Ka:rmik Linguistic Approach”. Misurata Univeristy Journal of

English Studies, Vol.1. Ghasar Khiar, Misurata University, June, 2010.

8.Bhuvaneswar, Chilukuri, 2012b. “Derivation of Referential Meaning in Proverbs 2

-Syntactic Meaning of Complex Speech Acts: A Ka:rmik Linguistic Analysis”, In: Scientific Newsletter, 2 (20), Voronezh State University of Architecture and Civil Engineering, Voronezh, Russia.

9.Bhuvaneswar, Chilukuri, 2012a. “Speech Act Theory and Proverbial Discourse: A Ka:rmik Linguistic Analysis”, in: Scientific Newsletter, 2 (18), Voronezh State University of Ar-chitecture and Civil Engineering, Voronezh, Russia.

10.Bhuvaneswar, Chilukuri, 2010a. “Figures of Speech in Proverbs I (Phonology): Evi-dence for Ka:rmik Linguistic Theory”. Misurata Univeristy Journal of English Studies, Vol.1. Ghasar Khiar, Misurata University, June, 2010.

11.Bhuvaneswar, Chilukuri, 1999. “The Structure of the English Proverb in I/E Exchange: A Multilayered Systemic Analysis”. First ICEG Conference. Hyderabad: CIEFL

12.Bhuvaneswar, Chilukuri, 2013b. “Proverbial Linguistics: Theory and Practice in the Ka:rmik Linguistic Paradigm - Creation and Development of Proverbs (Fourth Part of the Plena-ry Speech). (Eds.) BENAYOUN, Jean-Michel/KÜBLER, Natalie/ZOUOGBO,

Jean-Philippe (2013). «Parémiologie. Une identité affirmée». Actes du Colloque International de Parémiologie «Tous les chemins mènent à Paris Diderot» 29 juin au 2 juillet 2011,

Volume I et II. Schneider Verlag Hohengehren. Baltmannsweiler.

13.Bhuvaneswar, Chilukuri, 2003. “The Proverb and Its Definition: A Karmik Linguistic Approach”. 30th International Systemic Functional Linguistics Congress. Lucknow: CIEFL.

42

UDC 801.73

Doctor of Philology, Associate Professor Marina Valentinovna Subbotina, Yakovlev Chuvash State Pedagogical Uni-

versity, Chebocsary e-mail: ocean7@yandex.ru

M.V. Subbotina

DISTRIBUTIVE METAPHOR AS RESEARCH METHOD

FOR WORKS OF PHILOLOGY

The article considers the method of revealing distributive transfers of elements of semantic meanings of keywords that make up the semantic composition of a work of philology. The rationale of the discussed method of research of semantic structures is determined by the method focus at the explication of author’s intention, the process of author’s writing. The article provides the historical and philological substantiation of the method by means of the works by Plato, A.F. Losev, V.V. Vinogradov, Yu.V. Rozhdestvensky; describes the formal representation of the semantic structure of a work of philology and shows applied significance; gives the approximate analysis of revealing a distributive metaphor as exemplified in A.A. Blok poem «On Kulikovo Field» (1) and A.S. Pushkin poem «Recollection». The article concludes that the formation of a metaphor being the result of author’s stylistic efforts conforms with a specific algorithm which implies the following stages: prosaic prototype/ philosophical notion → author’s interpretation → semantic invariant/ noem → delimitation of an invariant by denoting a variant → metaphorical comparison → reality.

Keywords: metaphor, keyword, synonymization, noem, semantic composition, dialogue, semantics, linguistic means, facture of speech, prosaic prototype.

The system of distributive transfers of the elements of the semantic meanings of the keywords in the work of philology was for the first time described by the author of this article as applied to a publicistic text. Later the author continued this experiment by examining all other kinds of philology and used it when describing the phenomenon of an intercultural metaphor [1]. At present the versatility of this method in determining a general semantic tendency of people’s behavior and their characteristic stylistic efforts is being proved by the author’s many disciples in the current professional activity in the most various fields of philology.

The method of the distributive metaphor is based on the consideration of metaphor as a fact of the cohesion of images making up the semantic composition of the work of philology. For this purpose, such concepts of modern text theory as keywords and metaphorization are used. Keywords are building words of the work which determine the core of the image in every extract of a text being a relatively separate image structure. Metaphorization is understood as occasional (in text) synonymization of words in the sequence of parts of the work of philology.

A work of philology is every completed utterance which can be a proverb, a poem, an official document, a monograph, an advertisement, etc. [2, p. 20-21]. Every completed utterance has a semantic composition.

____________________

© Subbotina M.V., 2016

43