Psycholinguistic meanings of playfulness

1. Introduction

During the last twenty years, one can observe a radical reorientation from fragmentary mentions of playfulness in psychological texts (Bowman, 1987; Bundy, 1996; Chandler, 1997) to the establishment of the latter as a stable personality trait in theoretical psychological studies (Guitard et al., 2005; Barnett, 2007; Shen, 2010; Yarnal & Qian, 2011; Proyer, 2012; Yue et al., 2016; Gordienko-Mytrofanova & Sauta, 2016; Gordienko-Mytrofanova & Kobzieva, 2017).

In Ukraine, we are the pioneers in the field of study of playfulness as a sustainable personality trait, and we study it in the perspective of the psycholinguists approach, since “the reality of each concept manifests itself in the language” (Kondakov, 1975, p. 457). The essence of playfulness is realized through the psycho-linguistic experiment which is carried out through the reconstruction of its essential characteristics as semantic components, actualized in the consciousness of native speakers. The psycho-linguistic experiment aims to describe the psycho- linguistic meanings of playfulness.

Psycholinguistic meaning is the psychologically real meaning of a word. It bears a tremendous cognitive value in studying of phenomena, expressed by words with unclear semantics. It allows us to establish of the actual definitions and semantic components, which are different from the lexicographic correlate and the communicative meaning of the word in question and are useful for the description of scientific phenomena (Sternin & Rudakova, 2011).

The concept of a psycho-linguistic meaning as the most adequate and reliable model of systemic meaning is being actively developed by I. Sternin and his school (Rudakova, A. V., Maklakova, Ye. A., Friedman, J. I. et al.). The authors of the concept of the psycho-linguistic meaning have developed a template model for the identification and description of the psycholinguistic meaning and the variants for formulating the meaning based on the results of the psycholinguistic experiments with varying degree of detail determined by different goals (Rudakova, 2015).

The experience of specialists in this field has convincingly shown that the free- associative experiment is the most effective tool for describing psycho-linguistic meanings. The results of associative experiments are subjected to the semic interpretation procedure, i.e. associative reactions are interpreted as the verbalization of particular semes of the stimulus-word.

It should be noted that from the point of view of the psycho-linguistic approach, playfulness is the subject of research performed by R. Proyer. In terms of psycho-linguistic tools, the analysis of the linguistic corpus of the German language and the Goldberg hierarchical approach to studying the structure of playfulness was applied. The analysis revealed the following seven factors: 1) cheerful-engaged;

2) whimsical; 3) impulsive; 4) intellectual-charming; 5) imaginative; 6) lighthearted; 7) kind-loving (Proyer, 2012).

In his other research work R. Proyer outlined five factors, such as: cheerful- engaged; whimsical; creative-loving; intellectual; impulsive. He discovered that the sense of humor was most strongly related with the cheerful-engaged factor while some “humor skills” were particularly related to other facto rs; for example, finding humor under stress with the intellectual component (Proyer, 2014).

The purpose of this article is to describe psycholinguistic meanings of playfulness on the basis of the applied psycholinguistic research, which is expected to let us come closer to the description of its systemic meaning.

The primary objectives are the following: to reveal the semantic components of playfulness, actualized in consciousness of native speakers in the unity of all the semantic components that make it up, both core and peripheral; to present the most cost-effective experimental procedures in order to group associates in the process of describing psycholinguistic meanings; to show the psycholinguistic meaning as a type of meaning which bears a great cognitive value in studying phenomena expressed by words of unclear semantics, which are nonetheless relevant lexemes in the linguistic consciousness of native speakers.

2. Methods

The procedure of forming a sample in each association experiment has its own internal logic. Therefore, it is worth saying a couple of words about our sample, or samples to be more precise.

In one of our recent publications it was experimentally proved that the sufficient quantitative composition of the experimental sample ranges between 4 00 and 1500 people and depends on the quantitative and qualitative composition of the general population and the peculiarities of research (Gordienko-Mytrofanova et al., 2018). This means the sample should be large enough to reflect the major tendencies and features of the general population, and also meet the goal of the research.

6. AGILITY, PHYSICAL ACTIVITY (OF A HUMAN)

Manifests itself as FRISKINESS 25, ACTIVITY 20, AGILITY 8, BRISKNESS 8, LIVELINESS 2, HASTINESS 2; in SPORT 5 - FOOTBALL 6, BOXING 2, BADMINTON 1, BASKETBALL 1; in games with a BALL 5, TOUCH GAME 1, A GAME OF TAG 1; during WORK OUT 1; when RIDING 1 a BICYCLE1.

CIB - 90 (5.63 %).

7. EASE

EASE 23 is accompanied by the feeling of CHEERFULNESS 6, VIVACITY 5, FREEDOM3, VIGOUR 2, ELATION f; but can also be experienced as the STATE of f CARELESSNESS 10 , BEING RELAXED 3, SAFETY f.

CIB - 55 (3.4 %).

8. CHANGEABILITY

Is characteristic of phenomena of NATURE f that are connected with WATER f, - STREAM2, WATERFALL f, WAVES f, STEAM f; various light phenomena, such as RAINBOW2, SUNBEAMS f, in the effects of ILLUMINATION f - GLITTER f, SPARKLING f, absence of light stream/reflection - BLACK f, nature of light - WAVE-CORPUSCLE DUALISM f; sources of LIGHT f - SUN3, FIRE 2; as well as WIND 3 [wind 2, mild breeze f]; seasons - SPRING 3, SUMMER 2; WEATHER f conditions; BUBBLES OF CHAMPAIGN f;can be perceived in material objects, such as BEADS f, A PLANK OF WOOD f, WIRE f, TABLE f, TRACTOR f, STEEL SHAVINGS f and some processes that are connected with them - WELDING f, SETTING UP A LATHE f, SORTING OUT THE TILES f; also characteristic of PAIN f, SALARY f, HEALTH f, WORK f, EXAM f.

CIB - 45 (2.81 %).

9. BEHAVIOR DURING SEXUAL INTERCOURSE

Assumes FOREPLAY 2 before SEX f6, including elements of ROLE GAMES 2, KISSES f, STRIPTEASE f, TICKLING f; TENDERNESS 4, CARESSING 3 with the aim of getting SATISFACTION 4; can end up in PREGNANCY f.

CIB - 35 (2.19 %).

10. CARELESSNESS

CARELESSNESS, is characteristic in the period of RELAXATION 6, IDLENESS f in front of TV SET f, with FAMILY f, on the EXCURSION f; is experienced as the STATE f BEING RELAXED 3, SAFETY f.

CIB - 25 (1.56 %).

11. MENTAL ACTIVITY

Manifests itself in INTEREST4, IMAGINATION 3, CREATIVITY 2, RESOURCEFULNESS 2, CURIOSITY 2, JOYFUL SOPHISTICATION 2, caused by something EXCITING 4, ABILITY TO ORGANIZE A GAME f; enables the process of DEVELOPMENT 3, SELF-REALIZATION 2 its final manifestation is WISDOM 3.

(Discovery 1);

The authors express deep gratitude and appreciation to Iosif Sternin, professor of Voronezh State University, for valuable advice and recommendations when mastering the method of describing psycho-linguistic meaning. The authors are also profoundly grateful to Heijiro Tsuji, Professor Emeritus of Konan Womens' University, Kobe, Japan, for providing all the necessary materials and genuine interest to our research; also to Rene Proyer, professor of the Martin Luther University, to Willibald Ruch, professor of the University of Zurich, and to Paulette Guitard, associate professor of the University of Ottawa for their valuable support in exploring playfulness.

References

Barnett, L. A. (2007). The nature of playfulness in young adults. Personality and Individual Differences, 43, 949-958.

Bowman, J. R. (1987). Making work play. In: Meaningful play, playful meanings. (pp. 61-71). G.A. Fine (Ed.), Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

Bundy, A. C. (1996). Play and playfulness: what to look for. In: Play in Occupational Therapy for Children, (pp. 52-66). D. L. Parham & L. S. Fazio (Eds.). St. Louis, MO: Mosby.

Chandler, B. E. (1997). The essence of play: a child's occupation. Bethesda, MD: American Occupational Therapy Association, Inc.

Glynn, M. A., Webster, J. (1992). The adult playfulness scale: An initial assessment. Psychological Reports, 71(1), 83-103.

Gordiienko-Mytrofanova, I. V. (2014a). Leksikograficheskoie znacheniie slova “igrivost” (podgo- tovitelnyi etap psikholingvisticheskogo eksperimenta) [The lexicographic meaning of the word “playfulness” (the preparatory stage of the psycholinguistic experiment)]. Psychological Prospects Journal, 24, 65-77.

Gordiienko-Mytrofanova, I. V. (2014b). Psikhologicheskoie soderzhaniie leksikograficheskikh znachenii slova “igrivyi” (podgotovitelnyi etap psikholingvisticheskogo eksperimenta) [The psychological content of the lexicographic meanings of the word “playful” (the preparatory stage of the psycholinguistic experiment)]. Problemy suchasnoi pedahohichnoi osvity - Problems of Modern Pedagogical Education, 45(2), 419-430.

Gordiienko-Mytrofanova, I. V. (2014c). Psikhologicheskaia interpretatsiia leksikograficheskogo opisaniia slova “igrivyi” [Psychological interpretation of the lexicographic description of the word “playful”]. Problemy Suchasnoi Psykholohii - Problems of Modern Psychology, 25, 8398.

Gordienko-Mytrofanova, I., Sypko, A. (2015). Playfulness as a relevant lexeme in the bilingual linguistic consciousness of Ukrainian people. East European Journal of Psycholinguistics, 2(1), 43-51.

Gordienko-Mytrofanova, I., Sauta, S. (2016). Playfulness as a peculiar expression of sexual relationships (semantic interpretation of the results of the psycholinguistic experiment). European Humanities Studies: State and Society, 1, 46-62.

Gordienko-Mytrofanova, I., Kobzieva, I. (2017). Humor as a component of ludic competence. Visnyk [Journal] of the Hryhorii Skovoroda Kharkiv National Pedagogical University, 57, 4056.

Gordienko-Mytrofanova, I., Kobzieva, I. (2018). Concept «Holy Fool» in the Linguistic World- Image of the Russian-Speaking Population of Ukraine. Psycholinguistics, 24(1), 118-133.

Gordiienko-Mytrofanova, I., Pidchasov, Y., Sauta, S. Kobzieva, I. (2018). The problem of sample representativeness for conducting experimental and broad psychological research. Psycholinguistics, 23(1), 11-46.

Guitard, P., Ferland, F., & Dutil, E. (2005). Toward a better understanding of playfulness in adults. OTJR: Occupation, Participation and Health, 25(1), 9-22.

Kondakov, N. I. (1975). The Logical Dictionary-Reference. Moscow: Nauka.

Proyer, R. T. (2012). A Psycho-linguistic Study on Adult Playfulness: Its Hierarchical Structure and Theoretical Considerations. Journal of Adult Development, 19(3), 141-149.

Proyer, R.T. (2014). A Psycho-Linguistic Approach For Studying Adult Playfulness: A Replication and Extension Toward Relations With Humor, The Journal of Psychology, 148(6), 717-735.

Proyer, R.T. (2017). A new structural model for the study of adult playfulness: Assessment and exploration of an understudied individual differences variable. Personality and Individual Differences, 108, 113-122.

Rudakova, A. V. (2015). On the concept of an integrated lexicographic meaning of a word and the methodology of its description. Culture of Communication and Its Formation: Interuniversity Collection of Scientific Works, 31, 109-115.

Schaefer, C. & Greenberg, R. (1997). Measurement of Playfulness: A Neglected Therapist Variable. International Journal of Play Therapy, 6(2), 21-31.

Shen, X. (2010). Adult playfulness as a personality trait: Its conceptualization, measurement, and relationship to psychological well-being. Doctoral dissertation. Retrieved from Pennsylvania State University Library Catalog (OCLC No. 859524715).

Sternin, I.A., & Rudakova, A.V. (2011). Psikholingvisticheskoie znacheniie slova i yego opisaniie [Psycholinguistic meaning of the word and its description]. Voronezh: Lambert.