Hello, dear readers of the Sprint-Response website. Today on the calendar is Saturday, June 17, 2017, and the TV game “Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?” is on air on Channel One. In this article you can find out all the answers in today's episode of the game show "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?" for June 17, 2017 (06/17/2017).

In the intellectual show "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?" 06/17/2017 visiting the holy of holies of Channel One, the main directorate of information programs, Valeria Korableva and Anton Vernitsky. Also visiting are the valiant representatives of “What? Where? When?”, experts Anastasia Shutova and Mikhail Moon. Let's start the review of the game.

1. What should swords be reforged, according to the popular expression?

• into plowshares
• on the visor
• for patterns
• on the sponge

2. Who was sent in the film "The Elusive Avengers"?

• shepherdess
• Cossack
• old man
• dove

3. What can you eat for lunch?

• consomme
• papier mache
• pince-nez
• fashion show

4. What do you call a copy of an antique object made from modern materials?

• rookie
• new settler
• remake
• chaos

5. What is the name of Euclid’s fundamental work on geometry?

• "Beginnings"
• "Middles"
• "Ends"
• "Infinity"

6. What helped the fairy-tale Niels destroy the gray rats of Glimmingen Castle?

• violin
• pipe
• drum
• Magic wand

7. What animals are on the coat of arms of Novosibirsk?

• wolves
• squirrels
• sable

8.What can be found in each psiche mirror?

• hinges
• carved gilded frame
• lamps
• engraving on glass

9. Who is mentioned in Bulat Okudzhava's song "The Last Trolleybus"?

• pilots
• tank crews
• cavalrymen
• sailors

10. Who introduced the concept of "horsepower"?

• Michael Faraday
• Alessandro Volta
• James Watt
• Benjamin Franklin

11. What battle does the monument of ancient Russian literature "Zadonshchina" tell about?

• Nevskaya
• Kulikovskaya
• on Kalka
• Battle on the Ice

12. What is the girl doing by the open window in the famous painting by Johannes Vermeer?

• waves a handkerchief
• talking to a neighbor
• reads a letter
• puts on a hat

13. In which sea did Neil Armstrong take his first steps on the lunar surface?

• Sea of ​​Plenty
• Sea of ​​Clarity
• Sea of ​​Tranquility
• Sea of ​​Humidity

14. How many black dots are there on the elytra of the most numerous species of ladybugs?

The players answered the fourteenth question incorrectly, so they only won a fireproof amount of 200,000 rubles. Which is a good result. At the table in the studio, the players were replaced by other players who also chose the fireproof amount of 200,000 rubles.

1. What are the names of the lenses that people wear to see better?

• friendly
• contact
• sociable
• sociable

2. What helps children identify the driver in the game?

• reader
• writer
• counting rhyme
• solver

3. What do they say finances do when they don't exist?

• sing romances
• read the stanzas
• fall into trances
• count the chances

4. Which singer wrote and performed the song “Prima Donna”?

• Tamara Gverdtsiteli
• Irina Allegrova
• Alla Pugacheva
• Sofia Rotaru

5. What does not apply to fermented milk products?

• kumiss
• hash
• ayran

6. What item was considered an indispensable attribute of the Scandinavian god Thor?

• hammer
• axe

7. Where did Sharikov prefer to go in the story “Heart of a Dog”?

• to the cinema
• to the theatre
• to the opera
• to the circus

8. Who hasn't participated in expeditions to the Earth's poles?

• Robert Scott
• Roald Amundsen
• David Livingston
• Robert Peary

9. On the territory of which state is the village of Brich-Mulla, about which Tatyana and Sergei Nikitin sang, located?

• Turkmenistan
• Georgia
• Azerbaijan
• Uzbekistan

10. What nickname did physicist Ernest Rutherford receive due to the fact that students from afar recognized him by his steps and voice?

• "elephant"
• "dynamite"
• "crocodile"
• "alarm"

11. Where was Pushkin's name on the list of 29 lyceum students ranked by academic performance?

STEREOTYPICAL VIEW OF FAMILY IN THE RUSSIAN AND ENGLISH PHRASEOLOGICAL SYSTEMS

Introduction

To what extent does the phraseological component of the language affect the perception of such a large-scale and, at the same time, local social phenomenon as the family? Sociologists have noted that this construct, as an association of people based on marriage and/or blood relations, takes place as a universal social phenomenon, or institution, the development features and functions of which are closely related to the history and culture of the ethnic group. Thanks to this idea, the conclusion arises that the stereotype about the semantics of such a linguistic field as the family plays an important role in any linguistic picture of the world, despite a certain national specificity.

RelevanceThis work is determined by the following reasons:

1)the stereotype “family” is one of the most important guidelines for human behavior and constitutes one of the leading concepts in the psychology of interpersonal relationships;

2)discovery of the national-linguistic originality of phraseological units, and comparison of the data of the Russian-language stereotype with similar characteristics of the same stereotype in English ethnoculture provides a clearer formulation of the values ​​of the two language communities based on the semantic field “family”;

3)The semantic field “family” has little research from the point of view of situational semantics, while this method of description reveals the possibilities for further research of this object. ObjectOur research is a stereotype of the semantic field family.

Subject- comparative aspect of stereotypes about family in Russian and English phraseological systems.

TargetThe thesis consists of the representation of the family stereotype in the Russian and English languages. In achieving the goal, the following tasks were identified and undertaken:

1.Consider the concept of stereotype within the framework of linguistics and cognitive linguistics in particular, the place of the stereotype in the system of the scientific paradigm.

2.Analyze the meaning of the word family according to the phraseological dictionary of Russian and English languages.

3.Identify common and different features of words that relate to the linguistic-cultural paradigm family in the Russian and English phraseological systems.

4.Compare the stereotype of the semantic field family in the Russian and English languages.

Theoretical significanceThe research mainly represents a creative approach to describing the term family in the Russian and English languages, finding common and different features of the components of the lexical unit under consideration and words that intersect with the specified word (family), which made a certain contribution to the conceptual theory and to the methodology of comparative research.

Practical value.The provisions and conclusions of the work can be used in the relevant sections of training courses in general and comparative linguistics, literary criticism, lexicology, stylistics of both Russian and English languages, when creating bilingual dictionaries of stereotypes and phraseological bibliography.

Chapter 1. Theoretical aspects of the study of stereotypes in the relationship between language and culture

The term “stereotype” itself is quite ambiguous in its semantic component. In the literature one can sometimes notice how it is noted that it is vague and non-terminological. However, the above characteristics open the boundaries for using such a concept as a designation for a large array of a specific type of phenomenon, because “the concept of stereotyping is a fairly capacious and multidimensional formation.”

A stereotype is initially a metaphor that finds its origin in typography, where a stereotype denotes a monolithic printing form, a relief copy from a typesetting or a cliche (from the Greek - hard imprint). The presence of such printing forms allows for mass printing, avoiding repeated typing. As for the metaphorical meaning, we can deduce that a stereotype is something like an ingrained permanent example of something, in other words, standards. The argument for translating this definition into acceptable representational factors about the world structure, about oneself and others, was “the wide distribution of the components of a stereotypical representation, the limited number of elements combined in a “set,” as well as their stability.”

We can say that the phenomenon of stereotyping is inherent in at least any activity, which allows it to be the object of consideration in disciplines of completely different scientific orientations: cultural studies, sociology, political science, various branches of psychology, ethnography, physiology, cognitive science, linguistics, and so on. . The abundance of angles of study of an object is reflected in the special specificity of its definition and terminological statement, due to which the concept of a stereotype is divided into a sequence of special terms reflected in the following concepts: political stereotype, social, mental, mental, motor, behavioral, ethnic, cultural, racial, ethnocultural, gender, professional, speech, language, communication and so on.

The above list does not contain any ordered classification, because the designations of the terms indicated in it differ genetically (basically) and correspond to different criteria (levels) of scientific analysis. The same stereotype can be characterized as a social, cognitive, linguistic phenomenon, and the like. For example, an ethnic stereotype as a type of social stereotype, being a mental formation, can be realized in the postulates of behavior and communication, speech and language norms.

The first most definite and precise use of the word “stereotype” in the form of a scientific term is associated with the name of the American sociologist (political scientist) and journalist W. Lippmann; he introduced the concept of stereotype into the field of socio-political discourse, outlining his personal concept of public opinion in 1922. Author of the concept called stereotypes schematic, ordered, and culturally determined “pictures of the world” that are in a person’s mind in the form of images that save effort during the process of perceiving complex objects of the world, ensuring the protection of his rights and values. These are patterns accepted in the historical community that allow us to perceive, filter, and interpret information in the process of recognition and recognition of the surrounding reality, based on previous social experience.

The work of W. Lippmann had a strong impact on subsequent research in the field of stereotyping, and therefore, since the beginning of those times, a large number of definitions of stereotype have been proposed. But it is worth noting that, first of all, we were talking about ethnic, ethnocultural stereotypes, which meant stable, generalized (approved by the course of history) ideas about the psychological characteristics of ethnic, national, cultural communities of people. The study of interpretations of a broader concept - a social stereotype - also emphasizes its correlation with a group (category) of people as an object of stereotyping (clash), but it must be said that the group is not only a nation or ethnic group, but also an association of people, according to other social characteristics: age, gender, profession, and so on.

Most definitions of a social stereotype also include other social objects (events, phenomena). For a holistic generalization, social stereotypes should be understood as “standardized, stable, emotionally rich, value-defined images, ideas about a social object.” This interpretation has similar features to the terminology of a stereotype in political psychology, where a socio-political object (process, phenomenon) appears as an object of figurative schematization and standardization.

N. A. Rozhdestvenskaya decides to divide stereotypes according to their content into two categories: those that characterize people as members of certain social, national and political groups, and those that describe (in the form of a generalization) the personal characteristics of people by their behavior, physical qualities, appearance and similar characteristics.

2 Rozhdestvenskaya N.A. The role of stereotypes in human cognition // P. N. Donets proposes a different classification, which is based on a certain number of asymmetric oppositions:

-personal, which relate to personal subjects, as participants in certain social communities, as well as material, event-based oppositions, the objects of which are events, countries, things and similar phenomena;

-intentional (purposeful) and unexpected (spontaneous);

-pragmatic, which secures a connection with the reflection of emotions, assessments, with them cognitive, reflecting exclusively material, rational information;

-heterostereotypes, in other words, ideas about others, images of the “stranger”, and here autostereotypes - self-definition of oneself as a member of a certain ethnic group or a bearer of a certain culture, images of “oneself”;

-positive and negative;

-intense and medial.

The combination of the listed features, according to the author, is necessary to distinguish between the image (positive coloring, constructed intentionally), prejudice (spontaneous, negative charge) and the image of the enemy (intentional strengthening of prejudice). If we follow the opinion of L. I. Grishaeva and L. V. Tsurikova, stereotypes can exist not only in the role of positive and negative, but also often turn out to be neutral. They have quite a lot of similar manipulative motives with rituals, traditions, customs, myths, but nevertheless, stereotypes are formed at the level of hidden mentalities that prevail among “their own”. In studies conducted on the topic of social stereotypes, aspects of the adequacy of the content of certain stereotypes are considered, also with their sources of formation, functionality, factors of stability of stereotypes and their dynamics.

The objects of attention of the sociological approach to the essence of the stereotype differ from the sphere of interests of the psychological approach, but are very similar to the linguistic one, despite the fact that the psychological (cognitive, mental) nature of this formation has a special place in the sociological (political science, cultural science) definitions of the stereotype. According to V.S. Ageev, “undifferentiated ideas about the social and psychological functions of social stereotypes, caused by mixing levels of scientific research analysis, can lead to unambiguously negative assessments of social stereotypes as phenomena not only of a social, but also of a psychological nature.”

According to V.V. Krasnykh, the difference between a concept and a stereotype is greater specificity and “limitedness”. A concept, in the understanding of V.V. Krasnykh, is a unit that belongs to a higher level of abstraction, is a kind of “idea”, “concept”. This phenomenon of language does not have visual prototypical images, although it allows for the presence of visual-figurative associations associated with it. A stereotype is characterized by its figurative nature. The concept reveals itself in the valences that determine the “predictable” blocks of free associations, while the stereotype manifests itself in specific implementations represented by predictable associations. A concept is a paradigmatic phenomenon. The stereotype is functional in nature, and more “broad”, since it manifests itself in communicative behavior as such. Note that concepts are stored in the form of gestalts and propositions, stereotypes - in the form of frame structures.

Defining a stereotype as an image-representation, V.V. Krasnykh identifies in it two fundamental hypostases: a stereotype of behavior - the definition of behavior and actions that should be carried out, and naturally the stereotype-representation itself (carries with it the fulfillment of a predicative function, and precisely determines what is expected in certain situations). Stereotypes-representations, in turn, are divided into stereotypes-images (ideas about objects) and stereotypes-situations (ideas about situations). In the matter of distinguishing the concepts of concept and stereotype in this matter, it turns out to proceed from the understanding of the structure of the concept presented in the works of S. G. Vorkachev, V. I. Karasik, M. V. Nikitin, I. A. Sternin.

Based on the specifics of the structural models of the concept presented by various scientists, a number of researchers identify within the concept “an image that is a certain information-conceptual core, and which has some additional features.” The component of the concept “additional features” is indifferent in dissimilar concepts, but many authors include in it an assessment, as well as knowledge that records the experience of material and/or spiritual interaction with the referent, the results of verbalization of the concept in literature, folklore and the like.

In accordance with the above ideas about the structure of the stereotype and the concept, it can be assumed that the stereotype has its development on the basis of the figurative and evaluative large structural components of the concept. You can also take into account that the figurative component of the structural skeleton of the concept is quite real when represented by perceptual and cognitive (metaphorical) images, and the evaluative component is a general (general axiologist of the human), sensory-sensual (emotional), ethical, aesthetic, intellectual, utilitarian assessment, and also an assessment of possibility, necessity, confidence, availability. In the process of lexical and psychological stereotyping, the dominant images in a particular society (group) are generalized, and those associated with any conceptual postulate are evaluated.

It is possible that a significant role is played by extra-features of a cultural nature (encyclopedic, regulatory, utilitarian, sociocultural, paremiological zones of the concept structure, according to I.A. Sternin), which are in direct contact with the formation of assessments and also images. This gives grounds to define a stereotype as an image-representation, as an emotionally integrated structure, as activity-oriented knowledge and to talk about the high degree of importance of the cultural component in its structure. Stereotyping may be based on perceptual images that provide the process of generalization and standardization of certain characteristics of the referent (objects, phenomena, persons/categories of persons, situations).

In the example of the stereotype-representation “queue” given by V.V. Krasnykh, these are the signs of “screaming”, “anger”, “aggression”, “rudeness”. We can say that the stereotyping of a concept is closely correlated with the “hypertrophy” of specific conceptual features, their generalization and standardization in the minds of people in a certain circle (otherwise the community). A concept that has had the influence of such cognitive operations is transformed into a stereotype, or stereotypical concept (this term is found, in particular, in the works of N. L. Dmitrieva).

1.2 Key characteristics and functions of stereotypes

The creation of stereotypes is a pattern of mental life, which is based on the physiological laws of brain function. The understanding of this nature of the stereotype is laid down in the classical works of the Russian physiological school

I.P. Pavlov (the doctrine of dynamic stereotypy), A.A. Ukhtomsky (the doctrine of the dominant), P.A. Anokhin (theory of functional systems), E.N. Sokolov (in his model of the nerve impulse), as well as in the works of N.P. Bekhtereva and her students.

The common line of all research is the understanding of a stereotype as the ability of the brain to develop a uniform response to similar, similar external stimuli and irritants. The brain is able to recognize repetitive stimuli, as well as combine and integrate information - combining different modalities and intensities into group signals, depending on the overall situation. By filtering out minor differences and identifying the key, dominant factor of perception, under the influence of which a single dominant arises, allowing cyclical and dynamic processing of new stimuli coming from outside, corresponding to the formed “matrix” of memory. This is how a dynamic stereotype arises.

It is important to distinguish between a dynamic stereotype and a reflex (conditioned and unconditioned). A dynamic stereotype, unlike a reflex, becomes relatively independent of an external impulse and can be triggered even in the immediate absence of one. That is, a dynamic stereotype is not a direct physiological reaction to the influence of the environment, it acquires an indirect character - the key link becomes the formed psychological mechanisms (components of the emerging functional system), stimulating the necessary “memory matrix” (according to N.P. Bekhtereva), even in the absence physiological contact with the stimulus. From a physiological point of view, this effect is explained by the presence of traces of the influence of the desired stimulus in the nervous chain, in other words, temporary functional connections are formed in the nervous system and recorded in long-term memory.

The dynamic stereotype is the mechanism that is most expedient from both a biological and psychological point of view, since it allows you to save brain resources and use them more efficiently - not to waste resources on processing insignificant and repetitive environmental influences, but to quickly recognize them and give the fastest possible response, fixed at the level of automatism. This allows, first of all, to quickly respond to danger, to those environmental factors that may pose a threat to the life and health of an individual. A dynamic stereotype allows you not to waste precious time and resources on thinking - but to act automatically and instantly, and “before the launch of conscious thinking” and conscious focusing of attention - launching programs created by the “life” experience of a given individual. The formed dynamic stereotype ensures constant readiness to respond to appropriate changes, and after each reaction to a stimulus, automatic preparation for the subsequent reaction occurs.

Also, thanks to the presence of a dynamic stereotype, the brain’s ability to predict develops. In the works of N.P. Bekhtereva The mechanisms of the emergence of “memory matrices” that provide such automatic and semi-automatic reactions are discussed in detail. The brain solves similar problems according to the principle of “labeled lines,” i.e., “by minimal use of territories, when the rest of the field is intended for thinking.”

Emotions and motivation play an important role in the functioning of “memory matrices”. These are the key psychological factors that mediate the reaction to the stimulus, and which subsequently begin to play the role of a triggering mechanism for the dynamic stereotype, even in the absence of physical contact with the stimulus. Stereotypes are subject to dynamic changes depending on the environment and its conditions, however, due to the non-one-time use of functional features, the stereotype stabilizes, becoming little changeable. A stereotype in dynamics can have its formation at different levels: metabolic, homeostatic, behavioral, mental, social and, which is close to a specific area, speech.

What is the typical association about a language/speech stereotype? Mostly these are expressions that are ready-made and reproducible, whose stable nature is called nothing more than a stamp and a cliche. The tasks of the science of linguistics include the analysis of the structure and semantics of these units, as well as their classification. It should be noted that the main difficulty here is that the cognition of new language units follows outside the context of their functional features. It often happens that in the combinations of the field under study there is a contrasting connotation, which seems to demonstrate the characteristics of free phrases, and at the same time the distinctive form of phraseological units. According to recent research, the category of speech stereotypes is more functional-pragmatic than morphosyntactic . Thanks to the above, the question remains open about the tendency and types of manifestation of stereotypes in speech.

Further, when studying the literature, which includes the study of areas of linguistic/speech stereotyping, the spectrum of the structural units of the categories themselves is revealed, and their designation by terms such as cliches, cliches, speech stereotypes, language stereotypes, speech etiquette, this can also include standard cues, combinations called frequency, syntactic constructions, compositional-genre frames (canons), units that form the style of a text (or speech), this includes business standards with group patterns, aphorisms, quotes and catchphrases, stereotypical judgments, and so on.

It is also worth noting that in addition to any individual verbal unit, a large text can also have the quality of stereotyping, this is especially true in literature. It follows from this that the linguistic scope of the stereotype is quite wide. The scope of influence of the stereotypical component of speech was also influenced by communication theories, cognitive linguistics, pragmatics, psycholinguistics, and linguoculturology has an important influence on increasing the scope of stereotyping. Such an expansion of the content component and volume has given itself the name of a multifaceted phenomenon, which is structured by a number of details under the influence of linguistic, social and psychological moods (factors).

Thus, stereotypes are sensually colored images that accumulate the process of formation of social and psychological experience of communication and interaction of individuals. Having this nature, stereotypes have a number of qualities: they are integral, stable, conservative, emotional, rational, value-laden, etc. These qualities allow stereotypes to perform the following functions:

-convey reliable information;

-navigate in the general flow of information;

-influence the formation of reality.

The first function - the transmission of reliable information - is based on a system of “extensive” synthesis, which is implemented according to the observation of a striking, special way of acting and thinking of participants in other cultural groupings of the cultural sphere. Finding yourself in a foreign culture, it is common for a person to generalize and organize everything that he sees. Starting from the first contacts of a person with a foreign culture, he (the person) builds classifications of new information, thereby forming a relatively clear model of this culture. At the same time, methods of simplification and generalization of reality are used, which make it possible to highlight the most characteristic features of this culture.

Based on the entire variety of impressions, precisely colored boundaries of another cultural sphere are formed, and the members of this culture are also characterized according to certain characteristics. For example, stereotypes of the punctuality and practicality of Germans or the cordiality and penchant for drinking alcohol of Russians are often based on observations of their actual behavior.

The second function - orientation in the general flow of information - implies that stereotyping makes it possible to create a simplified matrix of the surrounding reality, in the cells of which certain social groups are formed. This technique makes it possible to quickly differentiate people into groups based on stereotypical categories, while expecting certain behavior from them (people). For example, if you ask any person about the members of which ethnic groups tend to predict fate along the lines of the hand, then most likely he will answer that they are gypsies. And, conversely, if a person sees a gypsy woman on the street talking to passersby, then most likely he will think that the gypsy woman is offering fortune telling services. If such actions come, for example, from a woman who is no different in appearance from members of the usual environment of cultural significance, it turns out that such thoughts probably do not arise.

Consequently, thanks to stereotypes, a person can distribute the social environment into observable and understandable groups and, thus, simplify the complexity of an unknown cultural environment.

The third function - influence on the formation of reality - suggests that stereotypes make it possible to clearly distinguish between one's own and another's ethnic group. Stereotyping makes it possible to evaluate and compare foreign and own groups and, thus, protect one’s traditions, views, and values ​​of one’s group. In this sense, stereotypes represent certain defense mechanisms that serve to preserve the positive identity of one’s cultural group.

This kind of distinction is associated, first of all, with such a concept as in-group favoritism, which implies the development of a more positive image of one’s culture in comparison with others. Stereotypes, forming a certain reality, consolidate their cultural group and establish its boundaries. For example, stereotypes, sayings or jokes that exist in every culture: “an uninvited guest is worse than a Tatar,” “what is good for a Russian is death for a German.” In these sayings, a specific image of other groups appears quite clearly. As previously noted, the carriers and creators of stereotypes are certain social groups that, interacting with each other, form certain social stereotypes in relation to each other.

The best known of them are ethnic stereotypes, which characterize the ideas of members of some ethnic groups about others. It should be noted that stereotypes are usually projected onto numerous social groups. Personal experience of interaction with representatives of foreign cultures often cannot lead to a change in one or another stereotype, even if the deviation from existing ideas is more than obvious. In this case, personal experience is interpreted as a kind of exception, and the existing stereotype still continues to be the norm.

Since a stereotype is a product of a group, it can only be used in relations between groups for a quick understanding of the situation, as well as to determine the ethnic or cultural affiliation of representatives of different groups. Understanding and definition are carried out instantly, due to the signs of group affiliation, which include the psychological mechanisms of stereotyping, updating the corresponding stereotypes. Moreover, to enable these mechanisms, it is absolutely unimportant what is happening in reality, what the personal experience of the bearer of stereotypes was; The main thing is not to make mistakes in understanding and definition.

In the process of intercultural communication, a person perceives other people along with their actions and through their actions. As a rule, the quality of building relationships with other people depends on the correctness and adequacy of understanding certain actions and their reasons. In this case, stereotypes play an important role, which form certain assumptions about the causes and likely consequences of one’s own and others’ actions. Thanks to the understanding of stereotypes, a person is endowed with certain traits and properties, on the basis of which his behavior is predicted. In other words, not only in communication in general, but also in the circumstances of intercultural relationships, stereotypes play an important role.

Stereotypes are an integral part of the value system; they provide certain protective mechanisms of society. In this regard, the use of stereotypes occurs in almost every intercultural interaction. It is impossible to do without the use of these extremely general, culturally mediated schemes for analyzing not only one’s own group, but also other cultural groups.

The relationship between the cultural affiliation of a particular person and the character traits attributed to him, as a rule, is not adequate. People who belong to different cultures have different understandings of reality, which makes interaction from a single position impossible. Based on the norms and values ​​of their culture, it is common for a person to determine for himself what information and in what way to evaluate it, which, in turn, affects the nature of intercultural interaction. For example, when talking with an Italian who is actively gesturing, a German who is accustomed to a calmer style of communication may form a stereotype that Italians are extremely expressive and disorganized. An Italian, in turn, may have a stereotype that the Germans are a cold and reserved nation.

In addition, stereotypes can be both useful and harmful for communication (depending on the method and form of their use). As previously noted, thanks to effective stereotyping, a person can adequately understand situations and act according to new circumstances. In this regard, stereotypes can not only be obstacles in intercultural communication, but also have certain benefits, for example, in the following cases:

-if the stereotype is consciously used. A person must realize that stereotypes reflect group norms and values, group traits and characteristics, and not specific qualities that are characteristic of a particular person in a given group;

-if the stereotype is descriptive and not evaluative. It is assumed that stereotypes reflect the real and objective qualities and properties of people of a particular group, but not their assessment as good or bad;

-if the stereotype conveys information accurately. Those. the stereotype adequately expresses the characteristics and traits of a particular group;

-if the stereotype is modified. Those. it is based on certain observations, on experience of communicating with real people, or is based on the experience of real situations.

In conditions of intercultural interactions, stereotypes are particularly effective only when they are used as first and positive guesses about a particular person or certain situations, and are not considered as the only true information about them. Stereotypes lose their effectiveness and complicate intercultural interaction if a person mistakenly assigns certain people to the wrong groups, incorrectly describes group norms, confuses stereotypes with a description of a particular person, etc. All this leads to the fact that stereotypes become a serious obstacle in intercultural interaction.

The main reasons hindering effective intercultural communication include:

-Stereotypes do not allow us to identify the individual characteristics of people. The process of stereotyping assumes that all members of a group have the same traits. This approach is used both in relation to the entire group and to each individual person over certain periods of time, despite individual attitudes.

-Stereotypes reproduce and deepen certain erroneous statements and points of view until a person begins to accept them as real.

-Stereotypes are formed from half-truths and distortion of information. While retaining the true characteristics of the stereotyped group, stereotypes distort reality and express inaccurate ideas about the person (people) with whom intercultural interactions take place.

Thus, it is common for a person to maintain his stereotypes, even despite the reality that contradicts them; therefore, in a situation of intercultural interactions, it is very important to be able to correctly deal with stereotypes, i.e. understand them and, if necessary, be able to refuse them (for example, if the stereotype does not correspond to reality).

1.3 Stereotypes and their phraseological implementation as a linguistic fragment of the picture of the world

For a long period of time, phraseological units themselves were designated as stereotypical phrases. For a better understanding of the issue, I would like to quote N.N. Kirillova: “Such an understanding is facilitated by the basic properties of a phraseological unit, which really bring stereotypical expressions closer to a phraseological unit: stable separateness and reproducibility. What distinguishes them from phraseological units is the absence of a figurative meaning, which is not needed in this case, because they contain the most significant fragments of the real experience of the ethnos.”

According to this property of a stereotype as a characteristic of consciousness, we can conclude that a volume can appear both in the form of various linguistic units and as phraseological units. It is also important that the very concept of a stereotype represents the ideological subtext of the Large Dictionary of Phraseological Dictionaries, where the authors endow phraseological units with the function (or denounce it) of reflecting the stereotyping of the cultural code. However, it is worth noting that the properties of stereotyping units include strict structuredness, which contrasts with the creative side of the issue. There are a couple of structural units here: attitude (sensory-emotive component) and knowledge (information-cognitive part). Still, there are works where the integrity of stereotyping is revealed due to the interconnection of three structural layers: behavioral (characterizes readiness for a specific behavior, in other words, a social attitude), cognitive (constitutes the content of the stereotype) and affective (in other words, emotional).

Functionality, as a property of stereotyping, allows us to consider it more “broad” in the context of use in communication. V.V. Reds distinguishes two states in a stereotype, as an image-representation:

representation (stereotype-representation with the function of a predicate) and behavior (the stereotype of behavior performs a prescription of upcoming actions in language). Stereotypes-representations also have a classification: situations and images (the first is an idea of ​​​​the picture of what is happening, and the second is an object). It follows from this that stereotyping can be a large-scale property of the language system, and the contrast between creativity and stereotyping appears here as a reflection of the relationship between language and speech. The above structural images are important for the functioning of the speech system; they provide it with balance in the language. In the case when stability is lost, basic and long-existing elements disappear, a collapse occurs in misunderstanding of the language system, and when the acquisition of new units is inhibited and linguistic stagnation occurs, a slow extinction occurs. Despite the nature of the phenomenon, the conflict of structural elements serves as an impetus for language and speech development. Components that are stable in their reproducibility can be dubbed “islands of stability,” which create and move speech development forward, enriching it with new units, and at the same time creating references to the past in favor of enrichment. The process of introducing and realizing a stereotype is correlated with the phenomenon of implication. Mostly the feature characterizing implication is subject to textual consideration. Such schemes include stylistics, the author's intention, presupposition together with intention, interpretation and other similar types of textual address. When generalizing the problem, implication includes various approaches and types of its study and analysis. The starting (basic) position is the textual meaning: implication is studied if the semantics of texts is formed due to the circumstances of reproduction, but here excluding its appearance from the totality of the details included in it. For example, the saying “It’s already ten o’clock” appears as an incentive to some action, where the meaning of the phrase itself is pushed to the next position. The starting (basic) position is communicative interaction: the process of implication represents the relationship (contact, dialogue) between the recipient of information and the addressee, polar presuppositions, generalized knowledge, intentions - all this is a picture demonstrating the pragmatism of the approach.

A process under the auspices of semantic perception and interpretation: the subject in such an activity system is most often a textual form, the breadth of perception of which depends on the purpose of the subject of research and the tasks assigned to him. The product of the research is the structural component (development) of any process for deriving textual semantics. A system of text production that may have a sign of specificity during semantic processing. The meaning characteristic of such problems is argued thanks to scientific practicality and the rules of official communication (business communication).

The basic position is the textual component and the cultural background that relates to it. The cultural background is realized in a large number of works on precedent and intertextual topics. Implicitness is expressed here in the compression of semantic loads. Individual names, linguistic units, together with the combinations related to them, carry the possibility of accumulating large amounts of information of a linguistic and cultural nature, which differs from other types of units and combinations. Such a function (property) has an eventual character or works independently of any particular text sample, that is, it has a permanent nature. The subject of implicature has a global characteristic of the process for most research participants, and also appears as going in parallel with the basic postulates of language activity. Stereotypes, metaphors, the origin and implementation of symbolic and mythological units, frame and scenario structures, precedent and intertextual moments, language games and similar active systems and cases of this connective seem to be separate facets of this extensive general activity.

Among such phenomena is the process characteristic of the introduction of phraseological units. They are presented as an intermediate result of a long and endless movement using the implication of information flows. Created on the basis of the scope of possible combinations of single lexical structural objects, the objects of phraseological use are tightly fixed in the linguistic picture as independent signs, to some extent creating a break in the semantic connections of the prototype phrases. The influence of the process of transformation of combinations considered stable in a certain semantic field, units of phraseological structure acquire secondary semantic independence, being realized by potential words or signs-representatives of the phraseological system, and, subsequently, acquire the ability to function in new connections with units of vocabulary, preparing the basis for fresh updates in the phraseological field.

The concept of a stereotype has an unambiguous definition (without taking into account the initial semantic application) and a fairly large distribution, which makes it possible to classify its characteristics, relative to various categories, in a wide spectrum. Due to its cognitive nature, a stereotype in any of its manifestations (in manifestation in any of the previously mentioned spheres: psychology, ethnoculturology, sociology, linguistics, etc.) is a conceptual unit and can take place in any of the possible spheres of human knowledge. It is especially worth noting their difference with the concept concept (presented relatively from the points of view of different linguists) which consists, generally speaking, in the emotive nature of the stereotype, which contrasts with the specificity of the concept and its standardization.

As for the types of stereotypes, dynamic and linguistic stereotypes were subjected to special analysis: the first is actively confused with reflex due to the function of automatism to reduce the cost of brain resources, but the dynamic stereotype is of a psychological nature and depends little on external influences, not being physiology. A linguistic stereotype can also be correlated with the dynamic aspect of stereotyping: it reflects reproducible expressions represented by clichés and cliches. The main functions in the first chapter were identified as the influence of stereotypes, such as the transmission of certain reliable information, which is oriented by functions and influences the formation of ideas about reality. We also examined situations in which stereotypes can have both a negative and a positive impact on the formation of images of linguistic consciousness, from which we can conclude that this phrase should be carefully flaunted when making a clichéd judgment.

It is also important to note the phraseological implementation of the stereotypical component of linguistic consciousness: the phenomenon of information implication reveals the semantic implementation of the stereotype, one of the sides of which is phraseologization. The above is the subject of the study of the first chapter of the work.

Chapter 2. Stereotypical image of the concept of “family” in Russian phraseology

.1 Russian phraseology about the category “family”

Phraseological units in their essence are more “representative” structural components of the science of linguoculturology: the internal structure of phraseological units, represented as a carrier of motivation, often contains components of a cultural and national character, because phraseological units are formed according to the basis on a “figurative representation of reality, reflecting predominantly everyday-empirical, historical and spiritual experience of a linguistic community associated with its cultural traditions.”

Phraseology, according to W. Humboldt, is “one of the ways of linguistic worldview, which gives reason to talk about the existence of a phraseological picture of the world in every language.”

How does culture find its embodiment in language, namely in phraseological units? V.N. Telia 10 put forward a hypothesis, and then followed by a demonstration of the trajectory of its implementation in the field of phraseology. The idea of ​​the assumption is that “if language units have cultural and national specificity, then the latter must have its own ways of displaying it and means of relating to it, i.e. serve as a kind of “link” connecting the “body of the sign” into a single chain (and for signs of secondary nomination, this is the “literal meaning” of the signifier itself) - on the one hand, and on the other - concepts, stereotypes, standards, symbols, mythologems and etc. signs of national and, more broadly, universal human culture, mastered by native speakers.”

In the case when the context of phraseological units is taken, it turns out that their mediator of national-cultural features is a metaphorical basis, the essence of a phraseological expression, and also a metaphorical gestalt structure (often a base that has culturally marked components, denoting “cultural” realities). The method of designating national-cultural specificity is “the interpretation of the figurative basis in the iconic cultural-national “space” of a given linguistic community.” It is worth noting here that there is no direct correlation between culture and language as such: in this case, one only needs to highlight the presuppositional factor as the key to decoding. The interpretation of the content of the cultural structural framework contained in the phraseological system does not have its existence without previously acquired knowledge. It follows from this that the content of the national-cultural interpretation of phraseological components lies in the disclosure of the foundations of the image (the immanent form of phraseological structural units) when placing the research in the national-cultural space of signs of linguistic communities. Here are a couple of methodological conclusions:

1)The cultural code can be “caught” from within the idiomatic form: the content of the cultural imprint that existed before the current state of affairs - traditions and customs, historical events, everyday realities.

2)Understanding cultural processes as a measure necessary for better orientation of a participant in the process in the spiritual, empirical, cultural aspects of life on a basis normalized by stereotypes, standards, symbols, mythogems and similar distinctive features of the cultural side of the people, rooted in a specific linguistic (national) social layer. From the above, we can conclude that a reformulation of the cultural connotation as given to reference values ​​is quite possible.

In phraseology, as a result of the above, it becomes possible to identify some main areas, and which, according to V.N. Telia, are sources of culturally significant interpretation of phraseological units. They are also mentioned in the book by V.A. Maslova: “Against the background of the object of research (linguoculturology - N.P.), several of its subjects can be distinguished, each of which also consists of separate linguoculturological units. Here I indicate 9 such items, but their number can be further increased:

1)the object of linguistic and cultural studies is non-equivalent vocabulary and lacunae;

2)mythologized language units: ritual and ritual forms of culture, legends, customs, beliefs enshrined in the language;

3)paremiological fund of the language;

4)standards, stereotypes, symbols, rituals;

)images;

)stylistic structure of languages;

)speech behavior;

)interaction of religion and language;

)area of ​​speech etiquette".

Further, the review of the phraseological component will be based on the specifically studied component - the family. The family can appear as a variable social universal; it often has pronounced national specificity. “The family, playing the role of a unit of society, is a mirror that reflects the social, legal, demographic, and cultural aspects of the life of peoples. Many families in a large spectrum of social layers and strata represent society as a whole and reflect the complex palette of the system of social relations.”

In other words, the transmission of the generational type of norms of marriage and family behavioral stereotype, against the background of other institutional norms, becomes a certain legacy that directs the lifestyle and thoughts of cultural participants in a specific behavioral direction.

Sociologists have noted that the concept of family is a multifunctional social entity, however, the internal functioning and features characteristic of change have a direct connection with the historical and cultural aspects of the ethnic field.

The stereotype finds a particularly striking manifestation in the context of linguocultural specifics in the idiomatic sphere, which is focused on the reflection of a particularly postulative world picture. This finds its manifestation especially as part of the internal forms of parts of the process of phraseologization of the English and Russian language fields.

The semantic field we are studying, family, is oriented towards actual connections characteristic of the subject of a social institution, and is formed based on the difference in characteristics:

-consanguinity - relationship by marriage / property (cf.: father - husband - father-in-law);

-direct relationship - indirect / indirect relationship (cf.: mother - aunt);

ascending branches and descending branches (first, second, third, etc. degrees) of kinship (cf.: father - son - grandson; grandson - father - grandfather);

horizontal / lateral lines of kinship (cf.: brother - sister); gender characteristics (cf.: son - daughter).

The high degree of productivity of these groups is also manifested in the use of synonyms and diminutives (cf. grandfather, grandfather, daughter, son, granddaughter, brother). But the largest number of such options is recorded when designating the social and emotional core of any family - father and mother (cf.: father, father - mother, mother).

It is significant that direct blood relatives are represented by three main stages (cf.: grandfather - grandson; father - son), while other generations of relatives are recorded sporadically in phraseological units, and in a generalized meaning ancestor (great-grandfather). For example: Mama's boy (son); Climb into hell before daddy; Granddaughter (daughter) of Eva; Grandmother's Tales; Fathers and grandfathers; Daughters and mothers; The truth is the uterus.

The group “Indirect blood relationship” in Russian phraseological units is represented by all nuclear units (cf.: uncle, aunt, nephew, niece), but unlike the nominations of direct relationship here, word-forming synonymous variants (primarily diminutives) are recorded only when naming men by ascending branch (cf.: uncle, uncle). For example: American Uncle; There is an elderberry in the garden, and there is a man in Kyiv; Hunger is not a thing.

Vocabulary characterizing kinship by marriage/property is included much less actively in the process of idiomatization, and certain specific properties are also noted here. Thus, in Russian phraseological units we find mainly the nomination of married persons: the terminological designations husband, wife and metaphorical (jokingly colloquial) half, while among in-laws only mother-in-law is noted wife's mother , daughter-in-law wife of a brother or son, and a married woman in relation to her husband's brothers and sisters and matchmaker the father of one of the spouses in relation to the relatives of the other spouse . For example: Husband and wife are one Satan; Better half; To my mother-in-law for pancakes; The daughter-in-law in revenge.

Within Russian idioms one can find members of another group

“Participants in family rituals” - marriage (cf.: betrothed groom , bride female person entering into marriage , matchmaker the man who makes the match ) or baptism (cf.: godfather godfather to godson's parents ). Finally, the process of idiomatization involves nominations of persons who do not have a family or have lost family members as a result of the death of the latter. It is characteristic that these are only the names of the first younger generation - an orphan, as well as one of the spouses (widower, widower, widower).

For example: Christ's bride; Betrothed-mummer; Straw widow.

The almost absolute number of nominations of blood and non-blood relatives/in-laws in Russian phraseological units is differentiated by gender (cf.: mother, father, son, daughter, uncle, aunt, matchmaker), and the number of units naming male persons is approximately one and a half times more than female. Generalized names are usually fixed in relation to members of the nuclear family, as well as in relation to ancestors in the traditional family. For example: Send to the forefathers; Remember your parents on someone else's eve; Ham's children.

The degree of productivity of using members of the semantic field family as part of idioms is also manifested in how regularly phraseological units with these members are formed. The most active in this regard are the nuclear terminological designations of direct blood relatives - men connecting a parent and his child (cf.: father - 26 phraseological units; son - 18 phraseological units), as well as a child in relation to another child in the same generation (cf.: brother - 29 phraseological units).

The percentage of using the name of a parent, as well as a female child, in relation to another child of the same parents is somewhat lower (cf.: mother - 15 phraseological units; sister - 13 phraseological units).

In general, despite the fact that, according to sociologists and cultural scientists, in modern Russian society, as well as throughout the Western world, the leading family is the nuclear family (husband, wife, children living together) [44.8], the idiomatic system reflects the system family relations, occupying a middle position between nuclear and small patriarchal. This is manifested, for example, in the fact that vertical blood ties turn out to be much more significant (165 phraseological units, or 85.05%) than marital ties of spouses (18 phraseological units, or 9.28%).

The frequency of other members of the field does not exceed four phraseological units, and two-thirds of the lexemes from the semantic field family are recorded in phraseological units no more than one or two times. Thus, an analysis of the internal form of Russian phraseological units indicates that for native speakers the family is a unit of society, the core of which is made up of members of the nuclear family, and parent-child connections are more significant than those of spouses. Significantly less conceptually significant are the connections of blood relatives not in a direct line. This applies even more to various kinds of in-laws. At the same time, the Russian family (according to the idiom) is quite patriarchal. This is manifested not only in the fact that in a nuclear family consanguinity plays a role ó a greater role compared to marriage, but also in the fact that nominations of male relatives are used much more often than female ones (cf.: brother - 29 phraseological units, sister - 13 phraseological units). The reason for this, in our opinion, is that in Russian society to a certain extent the patriarchal structure established since ancient times has been preserved - with the dominance of men in the house. Since ancient times, men were responsible for the well-being of members of their tribe and family: they obtained food, protected from enemies, built settlements, and ruled states. This determined their privileged position in the family hierarchy. In addition, the patriarchal nature of the Russian concept family is also manifested in the fact that it is more focused on the past, since in general there are more nominations of relatives of the older generation, that is, ancestors, than nominations of the younger generation, especially the second generation (cf.: grandfather (grandfather) - 11 phraseological units; grandmother - 4 units; granddaughter - 2 units; grandson - 1 unit). Finally, an analysis of the internal form of Russian phraseological units clearly indicates that Russian speakers prefer to use the basic terminological designations of family members. Synonymous variants (mainly word-formative and/or diminutives) are recorded exclusively as part of the nuclear part of the semantic field family (nuclear type), emphasizing not only that it is the connection between parents and children, as well as children among themselves, that seems most significant, but also that It is these connections that turn out to be the closest in emotional and personal terms.

2.2 Phraseological implementation of the concepts of “spouses” and “parents”

Semantic field family worthy of research in various fields of use, since the distribution of the lexical units that make up the environment goes far beyond everyday vocabulary. For example, proverbs and sayings have gone far from home vocabulary. Proverbs are a storehouse of folk wisdom, which reflects all the phenomena of human life, sometimes represented by proverbs with diametrically opposed points of view. Analysis of lexicographic sources of the Russian language made it possible to identify the following categories, which are updated in the proverb fund related to the thematic group “family”:

category " husband wife"category " parents and children";category " our people";

Before moving on to the category " husband wife",It should be noted that in the stereotypical idea of ​​a family, both husband and wife have a certain status and perform functions corresponding to it:

« A man and a dog are in the yard, and a woman and a cat are in the hut”;

« For the husband - a plow, and for the wife - a cross";

« The husband is to plow in the field, and the wife is to wave her arms”;

« A good wife and fatty cabbage soup - it’s better not to look for it”;

« I’ll fall for my husband - I’m not afraid of anything.”

« It’s a disaster for him who has a wife for a man in the house.”;

Using these proverbs as an example, thematic stereotypical features of the concept family become obvious:

« the husband is the breadwinner, the protector, the wife is the housewife.”

Thematic feature "a happy family is based on mutual understanding"We identified as a result of interpretation the following proverbs and sayings:

« Happiness does not lie in money, but in good agreement”;

« The wife is not a servant to her husband, but a friend”;

« Husband and wife, one of Satan" ;

« Parents protect their daughter until the crown, and the husband protects his wife until the end";

« A good marriage teaches, but a bad marriage separates you from home”;

« And I’m not happy at home when there is discord in the family”;

« Married in a hurry, but in long-term torment"

A prerequisite for family well-being, based on the stereotypical patriarchal idea, is the wife’s hard work and her obedience to her husband. A characteristic feature of Russian society was a disdainful attitude towards a beautiful wife, and there is an explanation for such a phenomenon: the Slavic peoples endured a difficult way of life, which consisted of a constant struggle for existence, people’s dependence on natural phenomena, which is why the wife had to be strong and hardworking. An important role was played by the social and financial status of the family from which the man took his wife, since a woman from a wealthy family was considered spoiled and rebellious:

« A wife is not an icon; don’t put her on a shelf”;

« A beautiful wife is too dry”;

« Choose your wife in the garden, not in a round dance";

« The wife’s wealth will come to nothing”;

« If you take a rich one, you will become a son-in-law; take a poor woman and become a master”;

« If you take a rich person, they will reproach you.”

Analysis of these proverbs gives us the opportunity to highlight another thematic feature of the family: a submissive, hardworking wife, from the side of the stereotypical descriptive factor, is an important criterion of family well-being.

Next, let’s turn to an equally important category - the category “ our people".One's own people are grandfather, grandmother, brother, sister, uncle, aunt, as well as relatives with whom there is no blood relationship: daughter-in-law, son-in-law, mother-in-law, father-in-law, mother-in-law, father-in-law, brother-in-law, sister-in-law. However, it is important to note that relationships between “friends” can be complex, as stated in these proverbs and sayings, having studied which we came to the conclusion that they allow us to draw a postulate judgment that conflicts in relationships between loved ones do not prevent them from being their own people :

« Your own reluctant friend”;

« A brother is not responsible for his brother”;

« If I joined the brotherhood, I forgot the brotherhood too”;

« Now the devil is not even his brother”;

« Mother-in-law in the house - devil in the house";

« Tesha to the house - the house of Sodom";

« Mother-in-law in the house - the house is upside down";

« Father-in-law loves honor, son-in-law loves to take, but brother-in-law rolls his eyes and doesn’t like to give”;

« A tit is not a bird, a son-in-law is not a relative";

« Mother-in-law dries blood" ;

« Daughter-in-law in revenge";

« Four brothers-in-law are better than one sister-in-law";

« The mother-in-law remembers her youth, that’s why she doesn’t believe her daughter-in-law”;

« The mother-in-law is a thunderstorm, the father-in-law will eat his eyes out”;

« Daughter-in-law - to the yard, mother-in-law - to the table";

« The daughter-in-law is having fun - the mother-in-law is angry”;

« One's own is not one's enemy" ;

« Brother-in-law sees brother-in-law from afar”;

« Brotherly love is stronger than a stone wall.";

« What kind of scores are there between our own people?

« Brother is brother, but money is not kin."

Thus, we can come to the conclusion that proverbs and sayings contain some ideas of the Russian people about a happy family. In addition, they convey knowledge about the basic patriarchal and stereotypical foundations and ways of the Russian family.

The analysis showed that in Russian linguistic culture there is both a positive and negative attitude towards marriage:

« People get married for cabbage soup, for meat they get married”, “Married are rich, single are poor”

“The groom is cheerful, but the husband is hanging his nose,” “You get married once, but you cry forever!”language stereotype phraseological dictionary

The importance of this event in a person’s life is clearly noted, the need to treat it with all seriousness and responsibility:

"First make money, then get married"

Having a family in Russian linguistic culture is a good help in solving economic problems, where joint work is seen as a means of survival and well-being of the family: “ The family porridge is boiling thicker”, “The family is at war, but the lonely one is grieving”, “Friendly - not burdensome, but apart - at least leave it.”

As for relationships in the family, the patriarchal model, formed by church traditions both in Russia and in English-speaking countries, and remaining unchanged for centuries, was the following: the husband is the head of the family, the master, demanding unquestioning and absolute submission on the part of his wife and children. Accordingly, the wife and children had to be respectful and express complete submission to him. If we talk about the relatively real picture of the everyday family world of relationships, then there were three models: the dominant position of the husband, wife and parity.

There are a large number of proverbs in the Russian paremiological fund, which reflect the ancient Domostroevsky rules:

“It’s not the outfit that makes a wife look good, it’s housekeeping”, “A woman cares from the stove to the doorstep”, “A wife without a thunderstorm is worse than a goat”, “The husband gave his wife the will not to be kind”, “Don’t beat your wife - and not be nice”, “ A chicken is not a bird, a woman is not a person”, “A wife is an indentured laborer”, “It’s a shame to be a girl, it’s a shame, given in marriage - twice the profit”.

In Russian linguistic culture, there is also a wide prevalence of proverbs that define the true ideal of family life, based on good agreement between family members: “You don’t even need a treasure if a husband and wife get along well”, “Husband and wife are one thing, one body, one spirit”, “They live hand in hand, soul in soul”.

The paremiological fund of the language reflects the difficulties that people face in family life. These include: quarrels between spouses, financial problems, alcohol abuse, adultery. The difficulties of life test the strength of feelings and relationships.

According to the degree of frequency of use, the proverbs are arranged in the following sequence:

1.Proverbs representing the emotional and psychological interaction of spouses with each other and with relatives, character flaws that contribute to the emergence of a conflict situation.

2.Proverbs that present the situation of marital quarrels.

3.Proverbs reflecting the problem of adultery.

4.Proverbs representing the situation of alcohol abuse in the family.

5.Proverbs reflecting the problem of material disadvantage

In Russian linguistic culture, proverbs actualize the importance of harmonious living in the family, and it is agreement in the relationship between spouses that determines the microclimate of the family and is the key to its well-being and well-being, contributing to the successful solution of economic issues and everyday tasks: “ Harmony in the family - prosperity in the home, discord in the family - everything will disappear”, “There is discord in the family, and I’m not happy at home”.

Life together, married life in particular, is unthinkable without a clash of interests, divergences in views, attempts to persistently bring to one’s point of view, and sometimes even re-educate one’s “other half”, which mainly and more often leads to conflicts, which can become a reason for putting forward an idea about how quarrels in the family are natural:

« No matter how much you pound, you can’t live without fighting”, “No matter how much you suffer, you can’t live without a quarrel.”The importance of each spouse in the formation of the psychological microclimate in the family is noted, as well as the responsibility for the occurrence of a quarrel is assigned to both individuals in a small social society: “The neighbor doesn’t want it, so the world won’t”.

Proverbial representation reflects the positive attitude of society towards the presence of a quarrel in the family: “ Darlings scold, only amuse themselves", and negative: “A bad peace is better than a good quarrel.”The paremiological fund also presents behavioral lines in this problem situation:

Firstly, based on patriarchal views on the family, there is no need to talk about troubles in family affairs: “ Cry, young wife, but don’t tell anyone about your grief!” , “Wear a dress, don’t fold it; endure grief, don’t tell!” , “Don’t wash dirty linen in public” , “Sweep dirty linen and bury it in a corner”; secondly, there is no need to interfere in other people’s family affairs: “Don’t judge a husband and wife! God sorts out a wife and her husband,”« Husband and wife quarrel, but the third one doesn’t interfere!”; thirdly, you need to try to prevent and smooth out quarrels: “ A bad peace is better than a good quarrel.",

« A gentle answer - and there is no rage”, “A kind word calms a violent head”; “A kind word is not difficult, but quick”;fourthly, in case of failure in preventing a quarrel, it is necessary to prevent the crime of “point of no return”: “ Be angry, but don’t sin”, “Use your tongue to do whatever you want, but don’t give your hands free rein”, “Swear, but don’t give your hands free rein!” , “Swing, but don’t hit” ,« Scold, but hold on to your dear one,”because a house divided within itself is doomed: “ A house divided within itself cannot stand.”. In Russian paremiological linguoculture, there is a proverb that notes the fragility of the state of a quarrel between loved ones and loving people: “ A quarrel in your family before the first sight."

The state of material lack, need, poverty is one of the cornerstones that tests the strength of feelings and relationships. The paremiological fund notes the negative impact of the state of need on the relationship between spouses, primarily on their feelings: “I’m nice with money, I’m hateful without money”,« Hood Roman, if your pocket is empty"« Hood Roman, when your pocket is empty; Martin is good when there is altyn.”These proverbs reflect the importance of the economic factor in the relationship between men and women and sometimes its priority. In Russian there is also a proverb “ With darling, heaven and in a hut"reflecting the primacy in family happiness not of special domestic comfort and the presence of material goods, but of love, mutual understanding, agreement with a loved one.

The state of need and poverty prevents the satisfaction of basic needs for food, clothing, and household equipment, which causes internal discontent and irritation, which cause quarrels between spouses:

« Not a piece of bread, and there’s sadness in the house,”« Need grieves, need fights" -creates discord between a good citizen and his wife) . The state of need has a brutal effect on the human psyche, makes him self-centered, insensitive to the needs of other people, examples of which exist in the Russian language: “ A hungry belly is deaf to everything.”

A group of proverbs representing the situation of alcohol abuse in the family reflects the condemnation of this phenomenon among the Russian people: “Drunkenness is the drowning of souls, the ruin of families”.

Alcohol addiction often becomes a problem within the family microsociety: “ The husband drinks, and the wife beats pots”, “The husband - for a glass, and the wife - for a stick.”It also entails other negative actions such as: passion for gambling, adultery (both of the drinkers themselves and their “halves”): “ Drinking and walking - no good in sight."« The wife is with the cook (at home), and the husband is with the cook (in the tavern)”, “The husband is a drunkard, and the wife is beautiful - everything is fine”.

The negative impact of alcohol on the human psyche and intellect is generally recognized, which is also confirmed in folk wisdom: “ Don’t ask if he’s drinking, ask how he’s hopped.”« How drunk - you're your own master"« There was Ivan, but he became a fool, and it’s all his fault.”« The woman is drunk - she’s all a stranger.”This state of one of the spouses destructively covers the present and future of the couple. A man's drunkenness is a great challenge for a couple and a disaster for the whole family. Alcohol abuse by a woman in a patriarchal society places even greater blame on her and the consequences of this addiction are more detrimental to the family: “ The husband drinks and drinks half the house; the wife drinks and drinks the whole house.”In the linguistic culture of the Russian language there is a proverb representing family alcohol abuse: “ The husband - for a glass, and the wife - for a glass."This is perhaps the only case when the unity of spouses is not welcomed.

The biggest sin and the biggest crime in the patriarchal stereotypical view in the family is considered to be a violation of marital fidelity, which can result from a loss of trust, and subsequently the disintegration of the marital union of two people. The husband, as the traditional head of the family, is responsible for ensuring that his wife follows the rules of being a pious homemaker. : “Let your wife go, so look for her in other people’s houses.”In Russian linguistic culture there is also a proverb that regulates the moral behavior of a husband, representing the moral and ethical requirement for him as a family man, and at the same time reflecting the situation of distrust of his wife, the superiority of a man over a woman: “ Don’t look at other people’s wives, but look after your own.”And also in this environment, as a reason for violation of marital fidelity by both spouses, according to the paremiological fund, one can single out such a reason as misalliance: “ An old husband’s young wife is someone else’s self-interest”, “An old husband’s wife is young - the trouble is not small”, “The wife loves the old husband, if she is not jealous”, “The husband is young, the wife is old - the trouble is no small.”Despite the not very approving attitude towards misalliance in the Russian-speaking proverbial culture and a more tolerant attitude towards marriage, where the husband is much older than the wife (“The husband is old and the wife is young - wait for the children, the husband is young and the wife is old - wait for the lashes”),the situation of a significant age difference is considered as the root cause of adultery . Another reason for a wife’s infidelity is considered to be her husband’s addiction to alcohol: “ The husband is a drunkard, and the wife is beautiful - everything is fine”, “The wife is at the cooker’s (at home), and the husband is at the cooker’s (in the tavern)”- although in this proverb, alcohol abuse may be a consequence, not a cause.

In Russian linguistic culture, the wife’s unreliability (treachery) is noted:

« I saw my husband behind the barn - and goodbye, Jew”, “The husband is behind the wolves, and the wife is behind the fellows.”Proverbs of the Russian language reflect the situation of “holy ignorance” of the husband in the event of his wife’s infidelity: “ Besides the husband, everyone knows that his wife is walking,” “The husband doesn’t know that his wife is walking.”

In Russian linguistic culture there is a restrained negative attitude towards a man’s adultery: “ An honest husband only deceives his wife,” “It’s free to fool around, love other people’s wives,” “Don’t look at someone else’s wife.”Russian linguistic culture regards a wife’s infidelity as a greater sin compared to that of a man: “ The husband sinned, so there is sin in people; but the wife sinned and brought it home”, “The husband’s sin remains behind the threshold, but the wife carries everything home.”

In Russian linguistic culture there are also proverbs that reflect the attitude of a married man or a married woman towards other spouses, when compared with which their own spouses clearly lose: “ Someone else’s wife is a swan, and her own is wormwood.”« The devil puts honey in someone else’s wife, and pours vinegar in his own,” “Look, other people’s wives have husbands like that: but with us, everything is like that.”The man’s attitude is represented by the following proverbs: “The devil puts a spoonful of honey into someone else’s wife”, “Someone else’s wife seems like a girl to everyone”, “Children are better than their own, but someone else’s wife”,in which there is a clear lack of love and respect for one’s own wife . A woman’s attitude in this contextual issue differs from a similar man’s and is characterized by adherence to Christian morality and the canons of marriage and family, expressed in fear of God, awareness of the sinfulness of feelings not for one’s own husband and readiness for self-sacrifice, on the one hand: “To love someone else’s husband is to destroy yourself,” “It’s not sweet to kiss a married man,”and a state of dependence and lack of rights, on the other: “ Someone else’s husband would be nice, but I wouldn’t live with him; and your hate is to drag around with him.”

Analysis of the paremiological fund of the Russian and English languages ​​allows us to draw a conclusion about the closeness of peoples in the value perception of reality, reflecting the importance of the family in a person’s life, and, based on this paragraph, the marital component of the microsociety. Next we will talk about such a component of the family as children, which also occupies a worthy niche in the phraseological field.

2.3 Phraseological implementation of the concept “children”

In the previous paragraph, we considered the linguistic component of the concept of family well-being and vice versa, and children in this case play an important role in the formation happiness in the family . At the same time, there is an opposite opinion: children are a burden and unnecessary troubles. At all times, the relationship between parents and children was complex, but close:

“A family without children is like a lantern without a candle”;

“A family without children is like a watch without a weight”;

“A woman without children is an empty barrel of rags”;

“A house with children is a bazaar, a house without children is a grave”;

“Grief with children, but grief without them”;

"The son is the father's helper";

“A daughter is a mother’s helper”;

“You don’t need a treasure if the children get along”;

“Rely on your strength - better than your own son”;

“Children are the flowers of life”;

“Children are the flowers of life, but they love care”;

“Small children - small troubles, big children - big troubles”;

“Small children - small worries, big children - big worries”;

“A mother’s heart warms better than the sun”;

“My own mother swings high, but doesn’t hurt”;

“A wife cries with dew for her husband, and with a river for her son”;

“A mother’s beatings don’t hurt for a long time”;

“Your child is cute”;

“You didn’t wash your child”;

“The child may be crooked, but it’s nice to his father and mother.”

Interpretation of these proverbs allows us to determine the thematic features inherent in the concept of family:

A childless family is an unhappy family ( “A woman without children is an empty barrel of rags”; “A family without children is like a lantern without a candle”; “A family without children is like a watch without a weight”; “A house with children is a bazaar, a house without children is a grave”).

For any mother, her child is the best ( “Your child is cute”; “Your unwashed child is cute”; “The child may be crooked, but it’s nice to his father and mother.”) Mother is the most precious person for a child ( “A mother’s heart warms better than the sun”; “My own mother swings high, but doesn’t hurt”;

“A wife cries with dew for her husband, and with a river for her son”; “A mother’s beatings don’t hurt for a long time”; “It’s warm in the sun, good in mother’s presence”; “Children without a mother are orphans”; “Without a father - half an orphan, without a mother - a complete orphan”).

There is also a family paradigm where the relationships of parents and children with each other do not have mutual returns; moreover, there are often cases when a parent, realizing himself in the role of a caring mentor and trying to establish a trusting relationship with a child, encounters an undesirable situation of non-acceptance of the approach. In such cases they say:

“They pay with black ingratitude”;

“Dear parents, will you give me some money? »

“Put him (the parasite’s son) on your neck, and he’ll climb onto your head himself”;

“While the son is little, the mother cries: “Oh, he’s going to die!”; He became big, his mother also cried: “Oh, he’ll kill!” ;

“The son is crying for his father, who died and left little money”

“Our father died and left nothing…”

“Don’t rely on your son: take care of your strength”

“Feeding your parents is like paying off old debts”

“A parent’s heart is in children, and a child’s is in stone”

A certain lack of desired respect between children and parents is one of the signs of a stereotypical idea of ​​the family as a patriarchal component of social relations between people. In the dialogue " parents - children"An important factor is occupied by such a factor as education, which is reflected in these proverbs and sayings:

“Managed to give birth, manage to raise”;

“If you sow a habit, your character will grow”;

“Rotten the tree while it bends, teach the child while it obeys”;

“When there are many nannies, a lame child”;

“Whatever a child enjoys, as long as it doesn’t cry”;

“A father will not treat his son with an indulgence”;

“The unloved son with a vine, the beloved with a rod”;

"Too many cooks spoil the broth"

The above examples imply a conclusion about literacy in the matter of education and participation. Component children in the linguocultural environment here it acquires a descriptive structure devoid of a personal factor. The emphasis in the above proverbs and sayings is precisely on assessing the actions of children as participants in the family social cycle, which became the area of ​​study in this paragraph.

In the second chapter, our study of stereotyping in the phraseological system is the implementation of the semantic field family in the Russian language picture of the world. One of the main features of the study is national specificity: all lexical units of the field family have a rather bright shade of the patriarchal structure of Russian life. Here the degree of productivity of using members of the semantic field family as part of idioms is played out, where the most active in this regard are descriptive moments regarding blood relatives.

The use of synonyms and diminitives are one of the main word-formation tools of derived units of the semantic field.

Consideration from the components side parents/spouses And children goes through their expression through such phraseologically formalized structures as proverbs and sayings. From the analysis performed, he will draw a conclusion about a clear patriarchal stereotypical basic tendency in the role hierarchy in the Russian family: a woman is the keeper of the hearth, with whom the social demand for piety is greater than with a husband, and a man is a breadwinner who can realize himself outside the family coordinate system, in whose image morality is often presented not in favor of the wife. Regarding the component children the conclusions are aspects of the parent’s upbringing and participation in their life, as well as the infantile nature of such a participant in the family semantic field.

Chapter 3. Stereotypical image of the concept “family” in English phraseology

3.1 English phraseology about the category “family”

In the previous chapter we looked at the phraseological side of the family component

After bad weather there will be a bucket.

The sun will rise before our gates.

Everyone is the smith of his own happiness.

In Sagittarius, the bet is good, but the exhibition is dashing.

A soldier's head is like grass in the rain.

When you go to school, your suspenders tighten; I came home - wait for the stretch.

The soldier is a wretched man, worse than a bastard.

He loves courage and fight.

Not every bullet hits a bone, some also hits a bush.

Get lost yourself, and help your comrade.

The city takes courage.

The warrior fights, and the wife grieves.

Twenty-five years is a soldier's century.

Need gallops, need dances, need sings songs.

Nakedness, barefoot poles are hung: the barns are full of cold and hunger.

Ermoshka is rich: he has a dog and a cat.

No stake, no yard.

Need is a misgir, and the borrower is like a fly.

The lender is a loser.

You take the strap and give me the strap.

He took the matting from the devil, and will give him the skin as well.

Debt is at your doorstep.

Debts are like stoves: no matter how much wood you put in, it’s not enough.

Hunger torments, and debt destroys.

To go for hire is to accept bondage.

Hired - sold.

There is nothing to pay the debt - go to the Volga.

Water carries you down, and bondage carries you up.

The mare is in a collar, and the barge hauler is in a strap.

You can't even hear a groan in the hoot.

They walked along the towline, but there was no bread.

You can’t heat the sea with an awl, and you can’t get rich from barge hauling.

A barge hauler saves money in an hour.

I pull the strap until they dig a hole.

The market will tell you the price.

Little in delivery - much in request.

He doesn’t always feed the convoy, but sometimes the cart also feeds.

Kalachis live cheaply if money is dear.

The rich man with the money rides on the same sleigh.

Lying goods do not feed.

Living goods increase the overhead.

There is a lot of money to be traded.

Money is tricky when it comes to trading.

A silver hammer will break through an iron ceiling.

They fight with Altyn, trade with Altyn, and grieve without Altyn.

Altyn himself opens the gate and clears the way.

Zlato doesn’t talk, but he does a lot.

Without money, everyone is skinny.

A thief worth $100 is hanged, but a thief worth $500 is honored.

The rich create as he wants, but the poor do as he can.

And the master of money - sir.

The mansions are crooked, the sleighs are made of bast, the servants are barefoot, the greyhound dog is a noble house.

Our heads disappeared behind the naked boyars.

The camisoles are green, and the cabbage soup is not salty.

There is silk on the belly, and crack in the belly.

Some lordship is worse than sextonism.

You don't get promoted to cutters for cutting hair.

I am not trained, and you are not a cutter.

Altyn for the worker, and half a ruble for the contractor.

For the Swiss it’s a hryvnia, and for the cutter it’s a ruble.

The businessman gets half a ruble, and the contractor a ruble.

You won't get rich with an axe, but you will get sad.

Whoever stands at the paper spinning mill burns like a candle.

The miner descends into the ground and says goodbye to the white light.

If you go to the slaughter, you will end up in battle.

There is also a plowshare, but there is nothing to shout about.

Our affairs began to improve: there was no more land left from the seeds.

Hunger is driving the world.

Work for a century, you will barely earn enough to buy bread.

The rich man is in debt for everything.

I will be rich and I will have horns; I will kill whomever I want.

Every mother loves her child.

The child does not cry, the mother does not understand.

Little children are like little stars: they shine and bring joy on a dark night.

Children are joy, children are sorrow.

Like the womb, so are the babies.

Punish children with shame, not with thunder and scourge.

The young man was withered by someone else's girlish beauty.

I can’t sleep, I can’t lie down, I’m still sad about my dear one.

Don't be strong by force.

Even to live in a forest hut, but to be with your loved one.

Don't take a dowry, take a sweet girl.

You can't outrun a betrothed woman with a horse.

At least sit down and ride away from Svashenka’s speeches.

The crafty matchmaker is a seven-headed snake.

The near one is a crow, and the far one is a falcon.

Don’t marry your son to your mother-in-law, don’t give your daughter to your father-in-law.

Giving away my daughter means no sleep for the night.

They cover the head and apply care.

The end of the whole thing is complete.

Baba - krosna, husband - plow.

The family pot is always boiling.

The owner of the house is the owner.

What's the treasure when a husband and wife get along well?

I’ll dress myself with a spindle and cover myself with a plow.

When she gets married, she sings songs, but when she gets married, she sheds tears.

The father-in-law is a thunderstorm, and the mother-in-law will eat her eyes out.

The dashing mother-in-law has eyes in the back too.

Living in orphanhood means shedding tears.

There is no worse life in the world for a hare and a sparrow, and a third stepchild.

The mother swings high, but doesn’t hit hard; The stepmother swings low and hits him painfully.

Life for orphans is like peas on the road: whoever walks by will snatch it.

To be a widow means to endure troubles.

The widow's canopy is not worth it.

Tenth water on jelly.

The seventh kvass is on the grounds.

Our locksmith is a cousin of a blacksmith.

Your Katerina and our Orina are Praskovya’s cousin.

The only relatives are bast shoes.

The week is strong, but life is half.

In troubles a person manages.

Just as fire is not visible in flint, so in a person there is a soul.

What is brewing in the heart cannot be hidden on the face.

You can see sadness in the clear eyes, and sadness in the white face.

Rust eats iron, and sadness eats the heart.

The day fades into night, and man fades into sadness.

He who overcomes his anger becomes strong.

Anger dries a person's bones and breaks his heart.

A hot temper is never evil.

To create good things is to amuse yourself.

An angry person is like coal: if it doesn’t burn, it blackens.

Conscience with a hammer: it taps and listens.

When trouble comes, food will not come to mind.

They told Afanasy that the weather was bad: you know, he galloped and lost his wheels.

It’s not our business to sculpt pots, but our business is to smash pots.

The oatmeal boasted that it was born with cow's butter.

The jug got into the habit of walking on water, and there he broke his head.

What you don’t like in someone else, don’t do it yourself.

Take care of your clothes again, and your health and honor from a young age.

You made the porridge yourself, so you can sort it out yourself.

Zaretsky dogs are dashing, and ours alone has eaten enough of seven.

In a willing herd, the wolf is not scary.

Sidor has a custom, Karp has his own.

Gingerbread is dear to a child, and peace to an old man.

A cradle is for a baby, and a crutch is for an old man.

The young one - toys, and the old one - pillows.

As goes to the cradle, so goes to the grave.

In a good life the curls themselves curl, in a bad life they split.

It is not time that whitens the hair, but sadness.

There is nothing to blame for the mirror if the face is crooked.

See trees in their fruits, and see people in their deeds.

Patience and work will grind everything down.

To cut down the forest - do not spare your shoulders.

No water flows under a lying stone.

A small deed is better than a big idleness.

You can't cut down a tree in one go.

Conspiracies of the Siberian healer. Issue 37 Stepanova Natalya Ivanovna

So that the husband pines for his wife

So that the husband pines for his wife

From the letter:

“I have three children, twin girls and a boy. My husband met a girl on the Internet, at first he corresponded with her, and then, apparently, he met her. I found out all about this later, when he told me that he had lost interest in me and he liked someone else.

Dear Natalya Ivanovna, I can understand everything and am ready to forgive him, because we have three children, who needs them if not us? Is there really no way to bring back his passion? I don't want to live because of my worries. How can this be, it’s unfair! Is his new affection dearer to him than I, who bore him children, and dearer than our innocent children? I beg you, tell me how I can revive his passion?”

To do this, you will need to go to a village, a village or a place where there is a well. You need to approach the well from the right side of the sun and, leaning over it, looking into the water, say:

Like the water in a well is icy, cold,

How impossible it is to drink,

So let the heart of a slave (such and such)

Will stop loving (so-and-so).

Like water in a well

It's never hot

So (so-and-so) let (so-and-so) forget,

Forgets her words, forgets her eyes.

So that he doesn’t call her and doesn’t know,

Like water in a well, it was getting cold.

Didn't hold her hand

I didn’t press it to my heart,

I didn’t worry about her, I didn’t suffer,

From hour to hour I forgot about her.

Be the key to my words in the water,

Castle, stay safe in the ground.

From now on, forever, for all time.

In the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit.

Amen.