CONCEPTUAL DICHOTOMY “WORD OF GOD – HUMAN WORD” IN THE BIBLICAL DISCOURSE

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.17721/2520-6397.2024.1.05

Keywords:

Bible, word, logos, concept, binary opposition, nuclear and periphery zone

Abstract

The article deals with the study of the concept “word” as a basic one in the Holy Scripture. The Bible as a precedent text has always attracted researchers’ attention and still remains topical. It provokes interest as it renders sacral conceptual paradigm to the fullest. The article deals with cognitive linguistic modeling of the mentioned concept in the Biblical discourse, considering binary opposition “word of God – human word”.

Cognitive meanings of the nuclear and peripheral concept zones, which are represented in the forms of notional, figurative and evaluative information, have been revealed in the course of study. Its nucleus contains factual and conceptual information, within which two components are characterized: linguistic and theological. The nomens “group of sounds”, “a language unit”, “speech”, “language”,” talk” and “conversation” represent the linguistic nature of a word. The lexemes “Logos”, “Gospel”, “the expressed or manifested mind and will of God”, “Jesus Christ” and “Holy Scripture” verbalize the theological component.

A range of senses of the concept “word” has been singled out and analyzed, which often constitute whole microcontexts in the Biblical discourse. The peripheral zone of the concept “word” has been analyzed, that is represented as imagery and value information. The value information has been constructed on the opposition of the positive and negative connotations of the concept “word”. The imagery information naturally complements the notional one mostly by using the conceptual metaphor.

The concept “word” in the Biblical discourse has been interpreted through comparison of dichotomies “sacral – profane”, “eternal – temporary”, “ideal – real”, “transcendental – immanent”, which manifest the extreme opposition “Word of God – human word”.

References

Bally, C. (1961). Frantsuzskaya stylystyka [French stylistics]. Nauka [in Russian]. [Балли, Ш. (1961). Французская стилистика. Наука].

Cambridge International Dictionary of English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Retrieved from: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/ [in English].

Filosofsʹkyі entsyklopedychnyі slovnyk [Philosophical encyclopedic dictionary] (2002) / Zа rеd. V. І. Shynkaruka. Kyiv: Abrys. [in Ukrainian]. [Філософський енциклопедичний словник (2002) / За ред. В. І. Шинкарука. Київ : Абрис].

Holy Bible: King James Version. Retrieved from: https://bibleonline.ru/bible/kjv-dc/ [in English].

Horkusha, O.V. (2004). Rolʹ kontseptu Lohos v zahalʹnokhrystyyansʹkiy paradyhmi [Role of the concept logos in general Christian paradigm]. Ukrainian religious studies, 29, 39–47 [in Ukrainian]. [Горкуша, О. (2004). Роль концепта Логос в загальнохристиянській парадигмі. Українське релігієзнавство, 29, 39– 47].

Ivasyshyna, T. A., & Rudenko, I.V. (2019). Pryroda slova v konteksti bibliynoho dyskursu: psykholinhvistychnyy analiz [Nature of word in the context of Biblical discourse: psycholinguistic analysis]. Psycholonguistics : scientific theoretical bulletin, 26 (2), 157–174 [in Ukrainian]. [Івасишина, Т. & Руденко, І. (2019). Природа слова в контексті біблійного дискурсу: психолінгвістичний аналіз. Психолінгвістика: зб. наук. праць, 26(2), 157–174].

Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we Live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. [in English].

Lakoff G.P. (1987). Women, Fire and Dangerous Things. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press [in English].

Langacker, R. W. (1987). Foundations of Cognitive Grammar: Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford University Press [in English].

Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English. Retrieved from: https://www.ldoceonline.com/ [in English].

Martyniuk, A.P. (2011). Slovnyk osnovnykh terminiv kohnityvno-dyskursyvnoyi linhvistyky [Dictionary of main terms of cognitive discourse linguistics]. Kharkiv: Kharkiv Y. Karazin National Univerity, Kharkiv [in Ukrainian]. [Мартинюк, А. П. (2011). Словник основних термінів когнітивно-дискурсивної лінгвістики. Харків: Харківський національний університет імені В. Н. Каразіна].

Mekh, N. O. (2011). Linhvokulʹturema LOHOS u naukovykh, relihiynykh ta khudozhnikh kartynakh svitu [Linguocultureme LOGOS in scientific, religious and fictional world picture]. Kyiv: Yug [in Ukrainian]. [Мех, Н. О. (2011). Лінгвокультурема ЛОГОС у науковій, релігійній та художній картинах світу. Київ: Юг].

Poliuzhyn, М. M. (2015). Ponyattya, kontsept ta yoho struktura [Notion of concept and its structure]. Bulletin of East European Lesia Ukrainka National University. Philological Sciences. Linguistics, 4, 212–222 [in Ukrainian]. [Полюжин, М. (2015). Поняття, концепт та його структура. Науковий вісник Східноєвропейського національного університету імені Лесі Українки. Філологічні науки. Мовознавство, 4, 212–222].

Ryken, L., Willhoit, J., & Longman, T. Dictionary of biblical imagery. Retrieved from: https://azbyka.ru/otechnik/Spravochniki/slovar-biblejskih-obrazov/[in English].

Selivanova, O. O. (2006). Suchasna linhvistyka: terminolohichna entsyklopediya [Modern linguistics: terminological encyclopedia]. Poltava : Dovkillia-K. [in Ukrainian]. [Селіванова О. О. (2006). Сучасна лінгвістика: термінологічна енциклопедія. Полтава : Довкілля-К.,].

Selivanova, O. O. (2008). Suchasna linhvistyka: napryamy ta problemy [Modern linguistics: trends and problems]. Poltava : Dovkillia-K. [in Ukrainian]. [Селіванова, О. О. (2008). Сучасна лінгвістика: напрями та проблеми . Полтава : Довкілля-К].

Downloads

Published

2024-04-04

How to Cite

ODYNTSOVA, H., & KONDRATIEVA, T. (2024). CONCEPTUAL DICHOTOMY “WORD OF GOD – HUMAN WORD” IN THE BIBLICAL DISCOURSE. Linguistic and Conceptual Worldviews, 1(75), 74-88. https://doi.org/10.17721/2520-6397.2024.1.05