What is the internal form of the word. Inner tongue shape

THE CONCEPT OF THE INTERNAL FORM OF THE WORLD IN MODERN LINGUISTICS

Bashkir State Pedagogical University them. M. Akmulla

Russia, Republic of Bashkortostan, 450000 Ufa, st. October revolution, 3 a.

Tel.: +7 (34 7) 272 77 0 7.

The article is devoted to the role of the internal form of the word in the formation of signs of the secondary nomination. The ethno-cultural content of the inner form of the word is a part of the concept that is not objectified in the sign - the cognitive substratum of the meaning. The importance of the internal form of the word lies in the fact that it links the sound complex and the meaning, that is, the word-sound and the word-meaning. With its help, there is a comparison of the known with the previously known, knowledge through naming. The article considers the internal form of a word from the point of view of two interrelated functions - nominative and semasiological, and also provides examples of words with an internal form of derivational and epidigmatic types.

Keywords: internal form of the word, nominative and semasiological function, derivational and epidigmatic types.

inner form words as an element of linguistic semantics is a capacious and broad concept.

According to G. G. Shpet, the internal form of a linguistic sign should be considered from the point of view of its two interrelated functions - nominative and semasiological. Within the framework of the first, the internal form reveals its nominative objectivity, and within the framework of the second, its semantic objectivity.

The nominative objectivity of the internal form of linguistic signs has traditionally aroused particular interest in domestic science about language. F. I. Buslaev was the first to formulate the proposition that the source of a linguistic nomination is, as a rule, the sign that is the first to catch the eye and that excites our “feelings and imaginations” more deeply than others. The essential properties of this feature as an epidigmatic link in the derivational memory of linguistic meanings were summarized in the concept of “internal form” (W. von Humboldt, G. Steinthal, W. Wundt), which received an original, proper linguistic interpretation in the works of A. A. Potebnya.

Although A. A. Potebnya himself considered himself a student and follower of W. von Humboldt, he went much further than his predecessor: he concretized the theory of the “internal form” of the word, developed the concept of the nearest and further value the words.

A. A. Potebnya revealed the mechanism of the appearance of the internal form of the word in his Notes on Russian Grammar. In them, the scientist sets out a view on the role of the internal form of the word in the development of the semantics of the word. “Having called the white glass ball a watermelon, the child did not think to attribute to this ball the green color of the bark, the red middle ... From the meaning of the former word, only one sign entered the new word, namely, sphericity. This sign is the sign of the meaning of this word. ... it (the sign) is common between the two complex mental units being compared, or the basis of comparison, the first element of the comparator in the word.

Two points should be noted in this statement by A. Potebnya.

First, the definition of the meaning sign as a feature, which, however, is represented by a word (watermelon), a word with other features turned off, a word that carries only one feature. This implies the following: the word, the meaning of which represents a certain set of signs, appears fully armed with all these signs, when it denotes a given phenomenon of reality. But the function of the word does not end there. In the case of "secondary" naming (name through name), the word is used as a sign of one feature. And this function is actually similar to another one, which the word performs no longer in the action of nomination, but in the action of communication, when words are combined into a phrase based on a common feature. So, when connecting “water is flowing, the tram is moving, talking about books”, what happens is called semantic agreement and is based on the presence of common features at connecting words. One can obviously say that the word in this case performs two functions as a sign. One is the name this subject, phenomena, process, this is a sign of this phenomenon. The other function is the sign of one element, one sign of the meaning with which the sign-nomination is combined.

In this double function of the word lies both the possibility of considering compatibility as a meaning, and the impossibility of a direct representation of this meaning in the forms of only compatibility.

Taken separately, the word manifests only itself, its meaning. Taken in the text, the word manifests both its meaning through the sum of signs and the meaning of the words with which it is associated in the text, being a representative of one of the signs of the combined word.

It is in this double function of the word in speech that the same mechanism is manifested as in the birth of a new word, more precisely, a new meaning.

A. Potebnya defends the importance of the internal form, because “although the sound is so necessary for the word that without it the meaning of the word would be inaccessible to us, but it indicates the meaning not by itself, but because it had a different meaning before ... Therefore, the sound in a word is not a sign, but only a shell, or a form of a sign, it is, so to speak, a sign of a sign, so that there are not two elements in a word, as can be concluded from the above definition of a word as a unity of sound and meaning, but three.

Thus, this middle element, which connects the sound complex and meaning, that is, the word-sound and the word-meaning, is the step by which the comparison of the known with the previously known takes place, knowledge through naming.

Having accepted the ideas of W. von Humboldt about the essence of articulate sound and its relation to meaning, he repeatedly emphasized that "sound is imbued with thought."

The scientist relies on the concept of apperception - the conditionality of each particular perception by a person's previous experience. Past experience is understood as all knowledge, views, interests, emotional attitude this person. S. D. Katsnelson writes: “By apperceiving the internal, the word apperceives thereby the external object. If perception has found expression in a sound reflex, then both the perception and the image reproduced in memory are apperceived by this reflex, and this reflex represents an image located inside, or an internalized object.

Thus, a new meaning is formed and denoted through the relationship: a) to the previous thought, which serves as its semantic sign, or internal form; b) to its designation, which appears in the new word as a “sign of a sign”, or an external form. For example, memory is “the ability to preserve and reproduce in the mind previous impressions, experience, as well as the very stock of impressions that is stored in the mind”, and a monument is “an architectural or sculptural structure in memory or in honor of someone, something”.

It can be assumed that the trains of thought that connect two meanings, that is, the inner form with the meaning, form a certain network of relations that characterizes the semantics of a given language. This is exactly what A. Potebnya wrote about more than a hundred years ago: “A well-known combination of representations, adopted in the language in the word of one root, is repeated several times in the words of other roots; subsequent formations are subject to analogy with the previous ones.

These thoughts seem to us especially valuable for understanding the semantics of signs of secondary nomination, since their meanings are formed indirectly, by using collective experience people, which is encoded in the corresponding signs of the primary naming.

Such an intermediary between the meaning of the sign of the secondary nomination and the meaning of its producer is the internal form. From this it follows that the content of the internal form is made up of those semantic elements of the lexical and grammatical semantics of the prototype sign, which served as its genetic source.

In lexicology, the internal form of a word plays an important role as a sign of a named object, according to which the object gets its name.

Currently, in linguistics, the internal form of the word is considered in two aspects - onomasiological and semasiological.

The onomasiological interpretation of the internal form of a linguistic sign originates in the earliest Potebnian concept, according to which the internal form is considered, as a rule, from psychological point vision. In this case, the mental basis of the internal form is the idea of one or another distinctive feature - the source of the nomination. It is this idea, A. A. Potebnya believes, that “creates an indispensable element of verbal formations” and, consequently, their semantic possibilities when secondary naming units arise: , horror, pain, etc. ”; shorten the tongue to m u “to silence someone, to prevent insolence from speaking, superfluous”. As the analysis shows, the internal form of units with an already formed meaning performs a kind of deciphering function: epistemological, since it serves as a means of cognition of fragments of extralinguistic reality named by idioms, and representative - as a symbol of an onomatopoeic image.

So, the internal form as an epidigmatic component, source and stimulator of the language nomination is an important regulatory factor in the formation of linguistic meaning and its speech implementation.

essential role in understanding the internal form, it belongs to the cultural and historical background of the formation of signs of a secondary nomination: to be afraid like the devil of incense “to experience a strong fear of someone / something”; speak teeth "to confuse someone with extraneous talk, intentionally divert attention from something important, mislead, deceive." In addition, the analysis of the internal form should be organically combined with the study of the semantic transformations taking place in semantic system language, exposed in connection with the development abstract thinking constant updating. In this regard, in our opinion, semasiological concepts of the internal form of linguistic signs are very promising.

Fundamentals of semasiological understanding of the internal form language units were pledged

AA Potebney in the second period of his linguistic activity. The scientist proposed to distinguish between linguistic and extralinguistic knowledge about the corresponding object of the nomination, calling the first "closest" and the second - "further" meanings. A. A. Potebnya’s “immediate meaning” serves as a constructive moment in the development of “further meaning” - a set of encyclopedic (non-linguistic) knowledge about the nominated fragment of reality, fixed by consciousness in the form of concepts and images. “The closest meaning”, being a sign of “further meaning”, facilitates the process of thinking, frees it from unnecessary details, that is, it acts as a form of connection between the old (producing) and the new (derivative) in the meaning of idioms: break your neck - 1) “get injured, perish”, 2) “to fail completely in something”; build a nest "arrange your family life, to create home comfort ".

The element of linguistic semantics discovered by A. A. Potebnya (“the closest meaning”) is called by him formal, since it “is a form of a different content” . In other words, the "proximate meaning" serves as an internal form of representation of the further meaning, a way of linguistic objectification of the intellectual and emotional content.

As observations show, the internal form of signs of secondary nomination, compared with the internal form of verbal signs of direct nomination, is much more informative because, firstly, it projects in the semantics of idioms not only the properties and signs of the elements of the denotative situation, but also the relationship between them, and secondly, refracts and concretizes the subjective meanings focused in it.

In the internal form of signs of secondary nomination, the nominative, predicative and effective aspects of meaning formation turn out to be interconnected. In the embryo, such an internal form contains both connotative and evaluative, semantic components. Therefore, the inner form is not reduced to either a concept, or an emo-seme, or an etymological meaning. This is a kind of "linguistic centaur, focusing in itself one of the signs of the etymological image, the modal-evaluative element of the emo-seme and the individual semantic genes of the concept" .

As a speech-thinking "embryo" and an internal program, an internal form, surfacing linguistic consciousness, becomes a source of typical systemically irrelevant associations, a linguo-creative stimulus to revive the whole chain of social meaningful connections, connotations and representations - the entire semantic range of the figurative palette of a linguistic sign and, above all, signs of a secondary nomination.

The internal form of the word likens the concept to the nearest generic meaning: fighter - "one that destroys." And in this capacity he

represents in the linguistic consciousness of people the essence of the categorization of the corresponding object of knowledge and naming.

Not the last role in the intensification of connotative semes of linguistic meaning is played by the internal form as the center of the etymological image and those extralinguistic meanings of the concept that remained unobjectified in the process of indirectly derivative nomination. Thus, the connotation of a phraseme with a cap is created not so much by its internal form (it is on the periphery of people's linguistic consciousness), but by those meanings of the concept that have remained non-verbalized. V.I. Dal reports about them in his dictionary: “Scan-duck, scandachek - dance, one of the methods of performing a folk male dance: heel to the ground, toe up. Scandalka with a sock. From such an initial introduction one can immediately see a dashing and original youngster in the dance. However, then, according to the internal form, the expression should have meant "cleverly, skillfully." The current meaning of the word is "not serious, frivolous, without understanding the matter." Its origins, apparently, are hidden in the semantic aura of the concept: the “beginning” in such a dance, or skandachok, is usually unpredictable, since it always builds on complete improvisation. All his movements seem to be at random. This is the special significance of the ethno-cultural connotation of the concept for rethinking the internal form of the linguistic sign, in particular the sign of indirect nomination.

In the structure of the internal form of the word, the so-called “objective frame”, introduced into science by G. G. Shpet, stands out.

The subject framework of a linguistic sign is not given, but given. It can be realized in a linguistic sign, in which a certain meaning is communicated to it, including the mode of action. Thus, the intention to threaten someone usually acquires an objective frame-image, within which the amodal content is encoded: "the addressee can be (or will be) punished, taught a lesson." This is a pure amodal program of future objective action. At the same time, the visual image has not yet been formed. It is formed in discursive activity along with the choice of one or another verbal structure. Before verbal attire, the subject frame remains the core element of thought: a person knows with his mind what he wants to do, what effect to produce, but he cannot put together what he knows with his mind into a visual image. Virtual, desired reality becomes relevant only when a visual-sensory image arises, which in turn projects a verbal image. At this stage, the subject framework turns into a “living” internal form of the word, in which the dynamics of the subject action imparts to the word an almost tangible poetic (figurative) energy.

The subject framework in the structure of the internal form of the word in combination with the semantic perception

The concept of the object of nomination is the cognitive base of any linguistic sign and in this regard is associated with the etymon of the word.

Etimon is the first verbal-thinking step in the process of generating a word and its meaning. This is a kind of mental construct that expresses how the concept is presented to the human mind as a result of comparing all forms of its representation. So, for the word fighter, the etymon is the primary construct of the concept “destroying, destroying”, an image grasped by essential features; it is already understandable and even equivalent to a concept, but it still exists in another, "rudimentary" system of semantic dimensions. Such a semantic and embryonic core of etymon is the internal form of the word.

With this understanding, the inner form of the word fighter is some of its process-invariant meaning, updated in different ways in the figurative space of this conceptual field: a) one who destroys someone or something; b) a fighter plane; c) a fighter pilot.

Thus, in addition to the subject-logical content, the meaning of the sign of the secondary nomination contains information about the subjective understanding of the relationship in which the object of the nomination and the sign of the secondary nomination are located. The meaning of such signs, according to A.F. Losev, “depends on the semantic light that falls on it from the designated object” . "Semantic

light” falling from the subject of the nomination, in relation to the meanings of signs of indirect naming, has a special ethno-cultural content. Such ethno-cultural content represents: a) part of the concept not objectified in the sign - the cognitive substratum of meaning; b) extralinguistic knowledge, expanding and deepening the primary ideas about the object of knowledge; c) ethno-linguistic meanings indirectly coming from the signs of the primary nomination, which served as a derivational basis for the secondary nomination; d) communicative-pragmatic meanings, born in the process of interaction of linguistic meanings in the corresponding speech and situational contexts.

The presence of an internal form for a certain word means the presence of given word certain type paradigmatic semantic relations. There are two main types: derivational (when a relation is established with another word) and epidigmatic (when the second term of the relation is a different meaning of the same word). In addition, mixed cases are possible.

The internal form of the word-formation type is present in words formed from some other word according to some relatively living word-formation model - this means that any word that has a derivational history also has an internal form (compare: dom-ik, re-write,

steam-o-cart, or formed by other means, we compare: move, run, German Gang - but not, for example, feast from drink or fat from live, since these connections are irrelevant for the modern language). So, two homonyms to enter - verb perfect look with the meaning "start walking" (around the room) and the verb imperfect form, constituting species pair with the verb to go (around the corner, into the very thicket), - have a different derivational history and, in this case one and the same, - a different internal form.

Words that have a “direct” and “figurative” meaning have an internal form of the epidigmatic type, provided that the original meaning of this word is also relevant, for example: nose (of a ship), apple (eye), source (“reason”), excitement ( "inner restlessness"), donkey (" stupid man»).

In a significant proportion of cases, the internal form is mixed type. For example, such words as handle (door), leg, back, eye (needle) do not directly correlate with the words handle, leg, but with the word hand (here there is an epidigmatic type of connection: transfer by function); in addition, the word handle has a derivational history (it is formed by adding the suffix -к-, which has a different meaning here than in pen "small hand") - and thus the word handle (door) also has an internal form of derivational type.

Another case of an internal form of a mixed type is represented by words of abstract semantics, the meaning of which arose through a metaphorical rethinking of spatial categories and other parameters of the material world; at the same time, the word of abstract semantics itself does not have a “concrete” meaning - only the morphemes that make up the given word have it. Such, for example, are the words impression, influence, content, representation, assumption, relation. Establishing the nature of the internal form is complicated in such cases by the fact that many of these words are tracing papers (morphemic translations) from foreign (primarily Greek and Latin) samples. So, for example, the word assumption is a tracing paper from the Greek prothesis, which has the original spatial meaning (“exposing”). Another possible path the emergence of such words is the loss of the original “concrete” meaning (for example, the word influence in the 18th century still had the meaning of “infusion”).

The internal form is often a component of the concept contained in the word. According to " Etymological Dictionary Russian language ”M. Fasmer, the word offend came from ob-see, where the preposition ob- means“ around, bypassing, bypassing ”, compare: surround (someone with a treat)“ carry past, not give ”, deprive, weigh. The word offend, therefore, has the internal form "to deprive with a glance, not to look."

And indeed, as semantic analysis shows, it is precisely the lack of attention that constitutes the prototypical situation of the emergence of that feeling, which is denoted by the Russian word insult - in contrast, for example, to the English offence.

Accounting for the internal form sometimes makes it possible to detect a difference between the meanings of quasi-synonymous words and sustainable combinations. Let's compare phraseological units when the cancer whistles on the mountain and after the rain on Thursday. The event "crab on the mountain whistles" is impossible in real world, thus the internal form of the first phraseological unit generates the meaning of "never". On the other hand, "rain on Thursday" is a rare but possible event; accordingly, the internal form of the second phraseological unit generates the meaning “perhaps, someday; no one knows when." This difference is reflected in the use of these phraseological units.

Important property internal form consists in the fact that its presence or absence in a given word is a gradual circumstance: between the “poles”, on which, on the one hand, there are words formed according to a regular pattern and without semantic shifts (compare the words reader or reading, formed from the verb to read), that is, having a “trivial” internal form, and, on the other hand, borrowings such as atom or store, initially devoid of an internal form, there is a rich range of intermediate cases (words having an internal form of varying degrees of completeness and / or transparency). By completeness, we mean cases of partial morphological articulation of a word - like the famous boiled pork or prefixed verbs like switch or kill

(where only the meaning of the service morpheme - suffix, prefix) is clearly distinguished), under transparency - the degree of obviousness, relevance for the linguistic consciousness of the paradigmatic implied by the given word semantic connections.

Thus, the internal form of a word can be interpreted as a technique inherent in the language, “an order of expression and designation with the help of a word of new content, or, otherwise, as a developed model, a language formula, according to which, with the participation of previous words and their meanings, new words and meanings are formed” . This is a linguistic mechanism that sets in motion every time when it is necessary to present, understand and consolidate a new phenomenon in an individual designation, that is, to express a new content in a word.

LITERATURE

1. Alefirenko N. F. Controversial problems of semantics. M., 2005. S. 128-137.

2. V. P. Zhukov, Semantics phraseological units. M.: Enlightenment, 1978. -159 p.

3. Ilyukhina N. A. Image as an object and model of semiological analysis: author. diss. ... Dr. Philol. Sciences. Ufa, 1999. S. 15-19.

5. Losev A. F. Philosophy of the name. M., 1990. S. 75.

6. Potebnya A. A. From notes on Russian grammar. M.,

1981. Vol. 1-2. pp. 17-19.

7. Fasmer M. Etymological dictionary of the Russian language. M.,

8. Potebnya A. A. On the connection of some representations in the language. Philological Notes. Voronezh, 1864. S. 127.

INTERNAL FORM OF THE WORD, the motivation of the meaning of a word (or phrase) of a given language by the meaning of its constituent morphemes or the original meaning of the same word, perceived by speakers of a certain language, i.e. the image or idea underlying the nomination and defining a certain way of constructing the concept contained in the given word; sometimes the term is used in the same sense motivation. Term internal word form in this sense was introduced into linguistic use in the middle of the 19th century by A.A. Potebney. phrase internal form goes back to the Russian translation of W. von Humboldt's term innere Sprachform ( internal form of the tongue), but meaningfully here we are talking about different things: under internal form of the tongue Humboldt had in mind a kind of evidence of the "spirit of the people" contained in the structure of his language. The concept of internal form was on the periphery of the interests of structural linguistics, but in last years in connection with the appeal of linguistics to explanatory models, the recognition of the need to take into account the facts of diachrony in a synchronous description and the need for such a semantic representation of the word that would be oriented to taking into account all its relevant paradigmatic connections, there is a renewed interest in the problem of the internal form of the word.

In his work 1862 Thought and language Potebnya wrote: “In the word we distinguish: outer shape, i.e. articulate sound, content objectified by sound, and inner shape, or the closest etymological meaning of the word, the way in which the content is expressed. With some attention, there is no way to confuse the content with the inner form. For example, the different content conceivable with the words salary, lat. annuum, pension, French age, can be brought under general concept fees; but there is no similarity in how this content is depicted in the words mentioned: annuum - what is released for a year, pensio - what is weighed, gage originally - a pledge, guarantee, reward, etc., in general, the result of mutual obligations, while salary- an act of love, a gift, but not a legitimate reward, not a consequence of an agreement between two persons.

Thus, the internal form is a trace of the process by which the given word was created by the language, according to Yu.S. So, for example, a bird cuckoo so named because she yells "coo-coo!", the word window associated with the word eye; Here, the nomination is based on the idea of the “eye”, which participates in the construction of the concept of a window as a source of metaphorical transfer (“windows near a house are like the eyes of a person”) or metonymic (a window is, as it were, an extension of our eye, cf. peephole "small window"). Word blueberry refers to the color of the designated berry, and the word upbringing- to the idea nutrition; here, in the formation of the concept, the mechanism of metonymy or synecdoche was used: child nutrition is, obviously, component his upbringing. This "trace of the movement of thought" may be more or less noticeable, or may be completely lost in the mists of time; in the latter case, one speaks of the loss or absence of an internal form in the given word. So, for example, the words dungeon and room have an internal shape, and prison and room- No.

Loss of internal form can occur due to different reasons. It happens that the word that served as the basis for the nomination goes out of use. Such is the situation, for example, with the word ring: word colo, from which ring formed with a suffix, was replaced by the word wheel (formed from the base indirect cases the words colo). In other cases, the connection between the generating and the derived word is simply lost. So, city in modern Russian is no longer associated with the verb fence, window with eye, word bear not understood as "eating honey"; combinations red ink, pink lingerie or White dove do not contain an oxymoron. All these connections, however, are present in the language in a latent form and can "come to life" in poetry or in a language game.

The internal form is completely absent from borrowed words (which is natural, since even if a borrowed word consists of significant parts, they are significant only in the language in which it was created - with the exception of those cases when it includes morphemes that have become "international ”, type anti-fascist or reorganization). Therefore, the presence of an internal form can serve as an indication of the direction of borrowing; so, for example, it is safe to say that the Russian word bishop is a borrowing from Greek episkopos, and not vice versa, only because the Greek word has an internal form (“looking around”), while the Russian one does not.

So, the presence of an internal form in a certain word means that this word has a certain type of paradigmatic semantic relations. Depending on which entity is the second term of this relation, different types of internal form are distinguished. There are two main types, which can be called, respectively, derivational (when a relation is established with another word) and epidigmatic (when the second term of the relation is a different meaning of the same word). In addition, mixed cases are possible.

The internal form of a derivational type is present in words formed from some other word according to some relatively living word-formation model - this means that, generally speaking, any word that has a derivational history also has an internal form (cf. house-ik, re-write, steam-o-cart, or formed by other means, cf. move, run, German gang- but not, for example, feast from drink or fat from live, since these connections are not relevant for the modern language). Yes, two homonyms come in- verb owl. species with the meaning "start walking"<по комнате>and the verb nes. species, constituting an aspect pair with a verb come in <за угол, в самую чащу>, – have a different derivational history and, which is the same thing in this case, have a different internal form.

Words that have a “direct” and “figurative” meaning have an internal form of the epidigmatic type, provided that the original meaning of the given word is also relevant, for example: nose(ship), Apple(eye), etc., source("cause"), excitement("inner restlessness"), conclusion(logical operation), donkey("stupid man"), bucket, cup, bag in the meaning of a measure of volume, etc.

In a significant part of the cases, the internal form is of a mixed type. For example, words like pen(door), leg, back, ear(needle), etc. not directly related to words pen, leg etc. but with the word hand(here there is an epidigmatic type of connection: transfer by function); besides, the word pen has a derivational history (it is formed by adding the suffix -to-, which has a different meaning here than in pen"little hand") - and thus the word pen(door) also has an internal form of a derivational type.

Another case of an internal form of a mixed type is represented by words of abstract semantics, the meaning of which arose through a metaphorical rethinking of spatial categories and other parameters of the material world; at the same time, the word of abstract semantics itself does not have a “concrete” meaning - only the morphemes that make up the given word have it. These are, for example, the words impression, influence, content,performance, guess, attitude etc. Establishing the nature of the internal form is complicated in such cases by the fact that many such words are calques (pomorphemic translations) from foreign (primarily Greek and Latin) samples. So, for example, the word assumption is tracing paper from Greek prothesis, which has the original spatial value ("exposure"). Another possible way for the emergence of such words is the loss of the original “concrete” meaning (for example, the word influence in the 18th century still had the meaning of "infusion").

Let's illustrate different types of internal form on the example of Russian names of the days of the week. The words Tuesday, Thursday, Friday and Wednesday have a transparent internal form of the word-formation type: the first three are formed from the corresponding ordinal numbers - respectively, second, fourth and fifth days of the week; Wednesday (or in the original Russian form, preserved in dialects, Wednesday) is "the middle (of the week)". Note that the name of this day of the week in German (Mittwoch) has a similar internal form - and this is not a coincidence: Russian Wednesday in the meaning of "middle day of the week" is an ancient semantic calque (i.e. the result of borrowing a figurative meaning) from the corresponding German word. Word Sunday has an internal form of the epidigmatic type - it refers to the name of one of the Christian holidays - the Resurrection of Christ. Originally a word Sunday denoted this only day of the year - the first day of Easter, but from about the 13th century. it came to be used for every seventh, non-working day weeks, displacing in this sense the word a week (having a transparent internal form of the derivational type "non-working day"). Word a week preserved in its original meaning, for example, in the Ukrainian language, and in Russian it left its mark on the word Monday- the day following ( on) Sunday (weeks)". Word Saturday does not have an internal form at all - this word is borrowed from Hebrew. The internal form is often a component of the concept contained in the word. According to M. Fasmer's Etymological Dictionary of the Russian Language, the word offend came from ob-see where is the preposition about- has the meaning "around, around, bypassing", cf. enclose <кого-то угощением>"carry past, do not give", deprive, give short weight. Word offend, thus, has the internal form "to deprive with a look, not to look". Indeed, as semantic analysis shows, it is precisely the lack of attention that constitutes the prototypical situation of the emergence of that feeling, which is denoted by the Russian word resentment - unlike, for example, English offence.

Accounting for the internal form sometimes reveals the difference between the meanings of quasi-synonymous words and stable combinations. Compare, following A.N. Baranov, phraseological units when cancer on the mountain whistles and after the rain on Thursday. The event "crab on the mountain whistles" is impossible in the real world, thus the internal form of the first phraseological unit generates the meaning "never". On the other hand, “rain on Thursday” is a rare but possible event; accordingly, the internal form of the second phraseological unit generates the meaning "perhaps, someday; it is not known when." This difference is reflected in the use of these phraseological units. So, in the following phrase, the use of the idiom when cancer on the mountain whistles would be inappropriate: Come, he will come. Maybe tomorrow, maybe next month. In a word - after the rain on Thursday. Similarly, the quasi-synonymous idioms around every corner and every step differ in that the former cannot be applied when referring to non-residential space: one cannot say * In the forest on every corner came across mushrooms.

An important property of the internal form is that its presence or absence in a given word is a gradual circumstance: between the “poles”, on which, on the one hand, there are words formed according to a regular pattern and without semantic shifts (cf. words reader or reading formed from the verb read), i.e. having a "trivial" internal form, and, on the other hand, borrowings like atom or score, initially devoid of internal form, there is a rich spectrum of intermediate cases, i.e. words that have an internal form of varying degrees of completeness and / or transparency. By completeness, we mean cases of partial morphological articulation of a word - like the famous baked ham or prefixed verbs like switch or kill (where only the meaning of the service morpheme - suffix, prefix) is clearly distinguished), under transparency - the degree of obviousness, relevance for the linguistic consciousness of the paradigmatic semantic connections implied by the given word.

The internal form is also characterized by extraordinary variability relative to native speakers. For native speakers who are inexperienced and not inclined to linguistic reflection, the internal form exists only in its trivial version - to the extent that it is found in living and regular word-formation processes ( house – house, glass – wine glass). Two categories of people - linguists and poets - have the richest ideas about the internal form, although they are significantly different.

It would be wrong to think that the inner form is a concept that only linguists need: just linguists could do without it, since the relevant facts can be easily interpreted in other terms - etymology, derivational semantics and lexicology. The unification of rather heterogeneous phenomena within the framework of a single concept of "internal form" is necessary only because it has a well-defined psycholinguistic reality under it. The fact is that the idea that the "true" meaning of a word is its "original" meaning is unusually deeply rooted in the minds of speakers. Suffice it to recall that the science of language began with etymology, and back in the 19th century. word etymology used in the meaning of "grammar"; while the word itself etymology, now denoting the science of the origin of words, is formed from Greek word etymon, which means "truth".

The search for this original (and thus "true") meaning - naive etymologization - is an integral part of linguistic behavior and has been characteristic of man since time immemorial. It is enough to recall the inexhaustible ideas about the origin of words Moscow, Russian; Etruscans(= these are Russians), Asia(= Az and I), etc. In the era immediately preceding the emergence of comparative historical linguistics, the theorist of the Russian and Church Slavonic languages, the leader of the Slavophile movement A.S. language as “I (am) language, i.e. sound, ringing, voice, rumble. Wed See also examples given by S.E. Nikitina from the modern language practice of the Old Believers: “ way there is teaching»; « rite- this is acquired from the ancestors, what is from them found". The same train of thought, but containing irony, is reflected in expressions like artist from the word « badly". The desire for transparency of the internal form of a word, which makes it possible to understand its meaning, often (especially in the speech of children and poorly educated people) leads to a distortion of the word in accordance with its supposed internal form, cf. words like spinzhak(instead of blazer) from back, vonitaz(instead of toilet bowl) from stink etc. This mechanism is used when creating words like privatization(instead of privatization).

The internal form found as a result of this kind of naive etymologization (what is called "folk etymology") can, however, influence the actual functioning of the language. An example similar phenomenon can serve as a verb dominate, which, under the influence of folk etymology, connected it with the word pressure(by analogy with tolerate –patience, grow old – aging), in modern language practically lost its original meaning "to be sufficient" and management<чему>: in colloquial language, this verb is used only in the meaning of "press, suppress, gravitate" and has control<над кем/чем> (The past dominated his life). Another example (given by D.N. Shmelev): the word instigation, etymologically derived from the word mouth, in the modern language is perceived as a stylistically colored (“Church Slavonic”) version of the word, which in a stylistically neutral (“Russian”) version would look like learning, cf. variability night - night, power - can. In some cases, the coincidence of the phonetic appearance and at the same time the meaning of two etymologically different (i.e. homonymous) words is so striking and system communications between such words are so strong that the absence between them genetic connection surprises even linguists. Yes, the word hell, related to Latin pixels, "resin" (and perhaps even simply borrowed from the diminutive form of the form picula), in the modern language is rightfully included in the derivational nest of the verb bake. Another example is the word passion, hiding in itself two homonyms: "strong feeling, suffering" ( Passion of the Lord) and "fear" (cf. What passions!, hence the verb frighten). These and other examples of word reinterpretation in the language system under the influence of folk etymology are considered in the article by T.V. Bulygina and A.D. Shmelev Folk etymology: morphonology and picture of the world.

would define inner form words as a semantic or structural correlation of a lexical or grammatical morpheme of a word with other morphemes of a given language, which may arise in the minds of speakers when analyzing the structure of this word. This correlation can be objectively due to the preservation of the original etymon in the structure of the word (“bullfinch” and “snow”), but it can also be the result of the so-called “folk”, or “false”, etymology (“myopic” from “myopic”). Otherwise understood inner form words in semasiology and stylistics, where this term is associated with the idea of the internal figurativeness of a word (phrase), i.e., about the meanings that arise when it is used in a context due to the different subject and system relatedness of the word (phrase) as a whole and its individual parts. School of Russian and Ukrainian scientist A.A. Potebni understood inner form broadly not only in single word, but also in work of art generally.

2) inner form language. The German scientist W. Humboldt distinguishes in the language outer shape(“the expression that language creates for thinking”) and inner form, i.e., a system of concepts that reflects the peculiarities of the worldview of the speakers of a given language and is fixed by the external form of the language. Together, external and inner form form a form of language that Humboldt opposes to content. In the understanding of the German scientist H. Steinthal inner form there is a way of expressing mental content in language; it is opposed to sound material (“external sound form”) and mental content. Thus, inner form in Steinthal corresponds rather to the Humboldt form, and not inner form German scientist W. Wundt , on the contrary, returns to Humboldt's understanding, distinguishing the "external linguistic form" as the structure of the language and inner form as a complex of hidden mental processes, manifested with the help of an external language form.

AT modern science problem inner form is considered mainly in various branches of neo-Humboldtianism (see L. Weisgerber , E. Sapir , B. whorf ). Marxist scholars, revealing the concept inner form, attract linguistic sociology and linguistic psychology.

Lit.: Humboldt W., On the difference between organisms human language..., per. P. Bilyarsky, St. Petersburg, 1859; Shpet G. G., Internal form, M., 1927; Potebnya A. A., Thought and language, 5th ed., Har., 1926; Zvegintsev V. A., Semasiology, M., 1957, ch. 7; Budagov R. A., Introduction to the science of language, M., 1958.

A. A. Leontiev.

Article about the word inner form" in big Soviet Encyclopedia has been read 9063 times

INTERNAL FORM OF THE WORD, the motivation of the meaning of a word (or phrase) of a given language by the meaning of its constituent morphemes or the original meaning of the same word, perceived by speakers of a certain language, i.e. the image or idea underlying the nomination and defining a certain way of constructing the concept contained in the given word; sometimes the term is used in the same sense motivation. Term internal word form in this sense was introduced into linguistic use in the middle of the 19th century. A.A. Potebney. phrase internal form goes back to the Russian translation of W. von Humboldt's term innere Sprachform ( internal form of the tongue), but the content here is about different things: under internal form of the tongue Humboldt had in mind a kind of evidence of the "spirit of the people" contained in the structure of his language. The concept of internal form was on the periphery of the interests of structural linguistics, but in recent years in connection with the appeal of linguistics to explanatory models, the realization of the need to take into account the facts of diachrony in a synchronous description and the need for such a semantic representation of a word that would be focused on taking into account all its relevant paradigmatic connections , there is a renewed interest also in the problem of the internal form of the word.

In his work 1862 Thought and language Potebnya wrote: “In the word we distinguish: outer shape, i.e. articulate sound, content objectified by sound, and inner shape, or the closest etymological meaning of the word, the way in which the content is expressed. With some attention, there is no way to confuse the content with the inner form. For example, the different content conceivable with the words salary, lat. annuum, pension, French age, can be subsumed under the general concept of payment; but there is no similarity in how this content is depicted in the words mentioned: annuum - what is released for a year, pensio - what is weighed, gage originally - a pledge, guarantee, reward, etc., in general, the result of mutual obligations, while salary- an act of love, a gift, but not a legitimate reward, not a consequence of an agreement between two persons.

Thus, the internal form is a trace of the process by which the given word was created by the language, according to Yu.S. So, for example, a bird cuckoo so named because she yells "coo-coo!", the word window associated with the word eye; Here, the nomination is based on the idea of the “eye”, which participates in the construction of the concept of a window as a source of metaphorical transfer (“windows near a house are like the eyes of a person”) or metonymic (a window is, as it were, an extension of our eye, cf. peephole"small window"). Word blueberry refers to the color of the designated berry, and the word upbringing- to the idea nutrition; here, when forming the concept, the mechanism of metonymy or synecdoche was used: the child's nutrition is, obviously, an integral part of his upbringing. This "trace of the movement of thought" may be more or less noticeable, or may be completely lost in the mists of time; in last case they talk about the loss or absence of an internal form in a given word. So, for example, the words dungeon and room have an internal shape, and prison and room- No.

Loss of internal form can occur for various reasons. It happens that the word that served as the basis for the nomination goes out of use. Such is the situation, for example, with the word ring: word colo, from which ring formed with a suffix, was replaced by the word wheel(formed from the stem of the oblique cases of the word colo). In other cases, the connection between the generating and the derived word is simply lost. So, city in modern Russian is no longer associated with the verb fence, window with eye, word bear not understood as "eating honey"; combinations red ink, pink lingerie or White dove do not contain an oxymoron. All these connections, however, are present in the language in a latent form and can "come to life" in poetry or in a language game.

The internal form is completely absent from borrowed words (which is natural, since even if a borrowed word consists of significant parts, they are significant only in the language in which it was created - with the exception of those cases when it includes morphemes that have become "international ”, type anti-fascist or reorganization). Therefore, the presence of an internal form can serve as an indication of the direction of borrowing; Thus, for example, it is safe to say that Russian word bishop is a borrowing from Greek episkopos, and not vice versa, only because the Greek word has an internal form (“looking around”), while the Russian one does not.

Words that have a “direct” and “figurative” meaning have an internal form of the epidigmatic type, provided that the original meaning of the given word is also relevant, for example: nose(ship), Apple(eye), etc., source("cause"), excitement("inner restlessness"), conclusion (logical operation), donkey("stupid man"), bucket, cup, bag in the meaning of a measure of volume, etc.

Another case of an internal form of a mixed type is represented by words of abstract semantics, the meaning of which arose through a metaphorical rethinking of spatial categories and other parameters of the material world; at the same time, the word of abstract semantics itself does not have a “concrete” meaning - only the morphemes that make up the given word have it. These are, for example, the words impression, influence, content, performance, guess, attitude etc. Establishing the nature of the internal form is complicated in such cases by the fact that many such words are calques (pomorphemic translations) from foreign (primarily Greek and Latin) samples. So, for example, the word assumption is tracing paper from Greek prothesis, which has the original spatial value ("exposure"). Another possible way for the emergence of such words is the loss of the original “concrete” meaning (for example, the word influence in the 18th century still had the meaning of "infusion").

The internal form is often a component of the concept contained in the word. According to M. Fasmer's Etymological Dictionary of the Russian Language, the word offend came from ob-see where is the preposition about- has the meaning "around, around, bypassing", cf. enclose <кого-то угощением>"carry past, do not give", deprive, give short weight. Word offend, thus, has the internal form "to deprive with a look, not to look". Indeed, as semantic analysis shows, it is precisely the lack of attention that constitutes the prototypical situation of the emergence of that feeling, which is denoted by the Russian word resentment- unlike, for example, English offence.

An important property of the internal form is that its presence or absence in a given word is a gradual circumstance: between the “poles”, on which, on the one hand, there are words formed according to a regular pattern and without semantic shifts (cf. words reader or reading formed from the verb read), i.e. having a "trivial" internal form, and, on the other hand, borrowings like atom or score, initially devoid of internal form, there is a rich spectrum of intermediate cases, i.e. words that have an internal form of varying degrees of completeness and / or transparency. By completeness, we mean cases of partial morphological articulation of a word - like the famous baked ham or prefixed verbs like switch or kill(where only the meaning of the service morpheme - suffix, prefix) is clearly distinguished), under transparency - the degree of obviousness, relevance for the linguistic consciousness of the paradigmatic semantic connections implied by the given word.

It would be wrong to think that the inner form is a concept that only linguists need: just linguists could do without it, since the relevant facts can be easily interpreted in other terms - etymology, derivational semantics and lexicology. The unification of rather heterogeneous phenomena within the framework of a single concept of "internal form" is necessary only because it has a well-defined psycholinguistic reality under it. The fact is that the idea that the "true" meaning of a word is its "original" meaning is unusually deeply rooted in the minds of speakers. Suffice it to recall that the science of language began with etymology, and back in the 19th century. word etymology used in the meaning of "grammar"; while the word itself etymology, now denoting the science of the origin of words, is derived from the Greek word etymon, which means "truth."

The search for this original (and thus "true") meaning - naive etymologization - is an integral part of linguistic behavior and has been characteristic of man since time immemorial. It is enough to recall the inexhaustible ideas about the origin of words Moscow, Russian; Etruscans(= these are Russians), Asia(= Az and I), etc. In the era immediately preceding the emergence of comparative historical linguistics, the theorist of Russian and Church Slavonic, the leader of the Slavophile movement A.S. Shishkov, in his work “The experience of reasoning about the initial unity and difference of languages”, decomposed the word language as “I (am) language, i.e. sound, ringing, voice, rumble. Wed See also examples given by S.E. Nikitina from the modern language practice of the Old Believers: “ way there is teaching»; « rite- this is acquired from the ancestors, what is from them found". The same train of thought, but containing irony, is reflected in expressions like artist from the word« badly". The desire for transparency of the internal form of a word, which makes it possible to understand its meaning, often (especially in the speech of children and poorly educated people) leads to a distortion of the word in accordance with its supposed internal form, cf. words like spinzhak(instead of blazer) from back, vonitaz(instead of toilet bowl) from stink etc. This mechanism is used when creating words like privatization(instead of privatization).

The internal form found as a result of this kind of naive etymologization (what is called "folk etymology") can, however, influence the actual functioning of the language. An example of such a phenomenon is the verb dominate, which, under the influence of folk etymology, connected it with the word pressure(by analogy with tolerate – patience, grow old – aging), in modern language has practically lost its original meaning "to be sufficient" and management<чему>: in spoken language this verb is used only in the meaning of "pressure, suppress, gravitate" and has control<над кем/чем> (The past dominated his life). Another example (given by D.N. Shmelev): the word instigation, etymologically derived from the word mouth, in the modern language is perceived as a stylistically colored (“Church Slavonic”) version of the word, which in a stylistically neutral (“Russian”) version would look like learning, cf. variability night - night, power - can. In some cases, the coincidence of the phonetic appearance and at the same time the meaning of two etymologically different (i.e., homonymous) words is so striking and the systemic connections between such words are so strong that the absence of a genetic connection between them surprises even linguists. Yes, the word hell, related to Latin pixels, "resin" (and perhaps even simply borrowed from the diminutive form of the form picula), in the modern language is rightfully included in the derivational nest of the verb bake. Another example is the word passion, which hides two homonyms: " strong feeling, suffering" ( Passion of the Lord) and "fear" (cf. What passions!, hence the verb frighten). These and other examples of word reinterpretation in the language system under the influence of folk etymology are considered in the article by T.V. Bulygina and A.D. Shmelev .

"Revitalization" of the inner form, discovery hidden meanings is one of the most characteristic poetic speech- along with the establishment of new associative-derivative links. At the same time, when using language in a poetic (according to R. Jacobson) function, there is no rigid boundary between these two classes of phenomena. As rightly noted by T.V. Bulygin and A.D. Shmelev, when Tsvetaeva writes Minute: past: pass! - then this can be interpreted simply as a sound convergence of words minute and minute, and as a pseudo-etymologization of the word minute. Therefore, one word can have several different paradigmatic semantic connections that are relevant to the linguistic consciousness and coexist without conflicting. Yes, the word grief associated with the word hot and bitter, cf. bitter grief; bitter tears and burning tears (hot and combustible historically formed from the verb burn, with which the word grief is connected etymologically). Word yearning in Russian is etymologically connected with the words in vain and sickening, and also, in a secondary way, i.e. due to the presence of both phonetic and semantic similarities, with the word closely. Moreover, all three variants of the internal form of the word yearning reflected in its current meaning.

Consider now the combination Railway: in the "ordinary" use of language (i.e., in its communicative function), the idea of "iron" is not here at all, in the sense that it is not in the interpretation: the fact that the rails on which the train travels are made of iron does not is irrelevant for the correct use of the data linguistic sign. However, at the slightest departure from the use of the language for its “direct purpose” (i.e., when a poetic function arises), this meaning is activated, comes to life, comes out. This happens, for example, in block lines Longing for the road, iron // Whistle, tearing the heart. Arutyunova N.D. About shame and cold. - Questions of linguistics, 1997, No. 2
Baranov A.N. Internal form as a factor in organizing the meaning of discursive words
Baranov A.N., Dobrovolsky D.O. The internal form of idioms and the problem of interpretation. – Izvestiya RAS. Ser. lit. i yaz., 1998, No. 1
Gak V.G. Typology of linguistic nominations. - In the book: Gak V.G. Language transformations. M., 1998
Zaliznyak Anna A. On the place of the internal form of the word in semantic modeling. – Proceedings international seminar Dialogue "98 on computational linguistics and its applications, v. 1. Kazan, 1998
Maslov Yu.S. Introduction to linguistics, ed. 3rd. M., 1998
Bulygina T.V., Shmelev A.D. Folk etymology: morphonology and picture of the world. - In the book: Slavic studies. Collection for the anniversary of S. M. Tolstoy. M., 1999

inner form words are a sign that forms the basis of the name. The basis of the name of the word cuckoo a sign of a characteristic cry is laid, although the cuckoo can be characterized from different sides - size, color, shape. A different internal form can be found in words that name the same object. Yes, in Russian literary language and in dialects there are words for dandelion dandelion, puffball, fly, milk jug. All four words have the same conceptual basis, but the inner form that motivates each name is not the same. In the first case, the motivating attribute is the action "to blow", in the second, it is a form attribute, in the third word the name is based on the motivating attribute "that which can fly", and in the fourth word, the internal form indicates the similarity of the juice of this plant with milk.

The motivating feature underlying the name can be different type. It can be based on onomatopoeia: to giggle, to bark, to growl, to croak. Other types of internal form are observed in derivative words and words with a figurative meaning. In derivative words, the internal form appears in comparison with single-root words: pilot- the man, who flies". The figurative meaning is motivated by other meanings of the same polysemantic word: He is a fish, not a man. In this example, the meaning of the word fish- "cold, unemotional, indifferent" is motivated by the direct meaning of the word.

These types of motivation are called, respectively, phonetic, derivational and semantic motivation.

The internal form of a word disappears over time and, on the contrary, appears in words that did not have it. The loss of the inner form is associated with many reasons: phonetic changes, the disappearance of the word that served as the basis of motivation, semantic changes. Yes, the word pole historically associated with words fence, city, however, the changes that have led to phonetic differences in the roots of these words interfere with the awareness of this connection.

The loss of the motivating word leads to the loss of the inner form. The words ring, about in modern Russian do not have an internal form, although in the past they had one. The old motivation relied on the word colo- “circle, wheel”. With the disuse of the word colo the motivating sign based on this word disappears.

Semantic changes occurring in the lexical meaning are also reflected in the internal form. Yes, the word city once associated with the word fence, because in ancient times the cities were fenced with a palisade or a fortress wall. Gradually, with the change in realities, the lexical meaning lost the attribute “having a fence”, and semantic links between these words were broken.

§ 32. Etymology, folk etymology

Words not only lose, but also acquire an inner form. Most often this happens in the process of folk etymology. Folk etymology is the imagining of motivation in those words where it was not. Thinking is based on sound and semantic associations. For example, blazer- this is “clothes worn from the back”, therefore the word jacket, when a motivating sign is established, changes its appearance, turning into jacket. Other examples: boulevard- “a place where they walk”, therefore boulevard becomes gulbar. As you can see, folk etymology is accompanied by phonetic changes in incomprehensible borrowed words. This is what makes it possible to semantically correlate the etymologized word with understandable words.

Many words that do not currently have an internal form had one in the past. Etymology is engaged in revealing the lost inner form. Etymology examines the origin of words, using data from dialects and related languages. For example, the word joint etymologically related to the verb put. The proof of this connection is the dialectal use of the verb put out hand, finger in the meaning of "dislocate".

The etymological analysis of words received a scientific basis when the methods of comparative historical study of languages were developed, when phonetic patterns in their development were discovered. For example, knowledge of patterns in changing the sound shell of words the end and Start made it possible to restore the old root and talk about the common semantics of these roots in the past.

However, the study of the development of the meanings of words, the restoration of primary semantics has its own difficulties. The difficulties of etymological analysis are determined by the fact that semantic changes are due to various factors - the natural and social environment, the material and spiritual culture of native speakers, and when studying the content side of a word, it is necessary to take into account, if possible, all factors of both linguistic and extralinguistic order.