Event concept of empathy in English juvenile fantasy prose

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

EVENT CONCEPT OF EMPATHY IN ENGLISH JUVENILE FANTASY PROSE

Oksana Doichyk (Vasyl Stefanyk Precarpathian National University, Ivano-Frankivsk, Ukraine)

Nataliia Ivanotchak (Vasyl Stefanyk Precarpathian National University, Ivano-Frankivsk, Ukraine)

Annotation

The article deals with the research of lingual cognitive and pragmatic aspects of empathy in juvenile fantasy prose. It reveals the nature of empathy from the perspective of cognitive linguistics, linguistic emotiology, and pragmalinguistics. The properties of empathy verbalization in juvenile fantasy prose are researched, namely the lexical and grammatical means of verbalization of the corresponding concepts and empathic illocutionary types of psychological support in discursive contexts of the English juvenile fantasy prose. The implementation of both pragmatic and lingual cognitive research findings in the light of cognitive-discursive paradigm revealed the basis of empathy conceptualization and the multifaceted empathic context. The interpretation of EMPATHY meaning is performed by means of schematic cognitive mapping, as well as via establishing the correlation of empathy determinants in discursive contexts which present the communicative strategy of empathy. The componential analysis of definitions of various affective and cognitive states and processes connected with empathy, such as compassion, understanding, sympathy etc., as well as their antonyms, and determination of weight, status and hierarchy of the corresponding semes in vocabulary definitions, showed that generally accepted and empirically proved division of empathy into affective and cognitive is reflected in the language. The analyses revealed affective (feeling, sympathy, sorrow) cognitive (knowledge, ability, understanding) semes in the definitions of empathy types attributing them to either affective or cognitive group. Types of empathy, which belong to the same affective or cognitive group, are not equal in the degree of empathy manifestation. The factor or driving force for upgrading (or downgrading) to a different level is action. While partly addressing social functioning, EMPATHY is turned to cognition and emotion, thus being framed as a social psychological event concept. As an event concept EMPATHY emerges in consciousness and in verbal behavior under the influence of human activity in a certain communicative - pragmatic situation, arising in a variety of constituents of the COGNITIVE and AFFECTIVE parcels of the domain of EMPATHY and unfolding in two scripts which reflect its active and passive manifestations.

Keywords: empathy, event concept, conceptual domain, script, juvenile fantasy prose.

Анотація

empathy children's fantasy linguistics

Подієвий концепт емпатія в англомовній дитячій прозі жанру фентезі. О. Дойчик, Н. Іванотчак.

Статтю присвячено вивченню лінвокогнітивних та прагматичних аспектів вербалізації емпатії в дитячій англомовній прозі фентезі. Розкрито глибинну природу емпатії з позиції когнітивної лінгвістики, лінгвістичної емотіології та прагмалінгвістики. Вивчено особливості вербалізації емпатії в англомовній дитячій прозі фентезі, а саме: лексико -граматичні засоби вербалізації відповідних концептів та емпатійні іллокутивні типи психологічної підтримки в дискурсивних контекстах англомовної дитячої прози фентезі. Залучення результатів як прагматичних, так і лінгвокогнітивних досліджень у ракурсі когнітивно-дискурсивної парадигми дозволило повною мірою описати засади концептуалізації емпатії та багатовимірність контексту емпатійних висловлень. Інтерпретація смислу емпатії здійснюється шляхом застосування інструментарію схемного когнітивного мапування, а також шляхом встановлення кореляції детермінант емпатії в дискурсивних контекстах, що представляють комунікативну стратегію емпатії. Компонентний аналіз значень виявлених у тезаурусах лексем на позначення емоційних та когнітивних станів, що пов'язуються з емпатією (симпатія, розуміння, співчуття та ін.) та їх антонімів, а також визначення ваги та ієрархії сем у словниковому визначенні, показали, що загальноприйнятий та підтверджений емпіричними дослідженнями умовний розподіл емпатії на когнітивну та афективну відображається в мові. Аналіз засвідчує наявність сем, що виражають емоційність (feeling, sympathy, sorrow) та когніцію (knowledge, ability, understanding) у визначеннях станів емпатії, та дозволяє віднести їх до афективного чи когнітивного типу емпатії відповідно. Стани емпатії, що належать до певного когнітивного чи афективного типу, не є рівнозначними за ступенем вираження емпатії. Чинником переходу на вищий чи нижчий рівень є дія. Будучи з одного боку зверненою на соціальне функціонування, а з іншого - на мислення та емоції, емпатія постає суспільно-психологічним подієвим концептом. Як подієвий концепт ЕМПАТІЯ виникає у свідомості та вербальній поведінці під впливом людської діяльності в певній комунікативно -прагматичній ситуації, постаючи в різноманітті конституентів когнітивної та АФЕКТИВНОЇ парцел домену ЕМПАТІЯ та розгортаючись у двох скриптах, які представляють її активні та пасивні прояви.

Ключові слова: емпатія, подієвий концепт, концептуальний домен, скрипт, дитяча проза фентезі.

Аннотация

Событийный концепт эмпатия в англоязычной детской прозе жанра фэнтези. О. Дойчик, Н. Иванотчак.

Статья посвящена изучению лингво-когнитивних и прагматических аспектов вербализации эмпатии в детской англоязычной прозе фэнтези. Раскрыто глубинную природу эмпатии с позиций когнитивной лингвистики, лингвистической эмотиологии и прагмалингвистики. Изучены особенности вербализации эмпатии в англоязычной детской прозе фэнтези, а именно лексико - грамматические средства вербализации соответствующих концептов и эмпатийных иллокутивных типов психологической поддержки в дискурсивных контекстах англоязычной детской прозы фэнтези. Привлечение результатов прагматических и лингво-когнитивных исследований в ракурсе когнитивно-дискурсивной парадигмы позволило в полной мере описать принципы концептуализации эмпатии и многомерность контекста эмпатийных высказываний. Интерпретация смысла эмпатии осуществляется путем применения инструментария схемного когнитивного картирования, а также путем установления корреляции детерминант эмпатии в дискурсивных контекстах, представляющих коммуникативную стратегию эмпатии. Компонентный анализ значений выявленных в тезаурусах лексем для обозначения эмоциональных и когнитивных состояний, связываются с эмпатией (симпатия, понимание, сочувствие и др.) и их антонимов, а также определения веса и иерархии сем в словарном определении, показали, что общепринятое и подтвержденное эмпирическими исследованиями условное деление эмпатии на когнитивную и аффективную отображается в языке. Анализ показывает наличие сем, выражающих эмоциональность (feeling, sympathy, sorrow) и когницию (knowledge, ability, understanding) в определениях состояний эмпатии, и позволяет отнести их к аффективному или когнитивному типу эмпатии соответственно. Состояния эмпатии, принадлежащие к определенному когнитивному или аффективному типу, не являются равнозначными по степени выражения эмпатии. Фактором перехода на более высокий или низкий уровень есть действие. Будучи с одной стороны обращенной на социальное функционирование, а с другой - на мышление и эмоции, эмпатия предстает социально -психологическим событийным концептом. Как событийный концепт, ЭМПАТИЯ возникает в сознании и вербальном поведении под влиянием человеческой деятельности в определенной коммуникативно -прагматической ситуации, являясь в многообразии конституентов КОГНИТИВНЫХ и АФФЕКТИВНЫХ парцелл домена ЭМПАТИЯ и разворачиваясь в двух скриптах, представляющие ее активные и пассивные проявления.

Ключевые слова: эмпатия, событийный концепт, концептуальный домен, скрипт, детская проза фэнтези.

Introduction

In the context of the anthropocentric paradigm, the interest in studying various means by which language represents different traits and states of personality has markedly increased. Empathy is a universal preverbal cognitive-affective form of psychic reflection determining the agent's behaviour in social interaction, and is verbalized by symbols. The skills of understanding other people's intentions and emotions through their language, observing their movements, postures, inherent in the system of mirror neurons of the human brain, are necessary for a successful social interaction (Schwartz, 2013). As a special form of psychic reflection based on mirror neurons and covering a wide range of emotional and cognitive states, empathy is a complex phenomenon. The implementation of both pragmatic and lingual cognitive research findings (Kravchenko, 2012; Martyniuk, 2016; Morozova, 2005; Shevchenko, 2014) in the light of cognitive-discursive paradigm revealed the basis of empathy conceptualization and the multifaceted empathic context.

The research of empathy conducted by neurologists (Schwartz, 2013 etc.), social psychologists (Nickerson, 2009; Stanger, 2012 etc.), and linguists (Aznabayeva, 2015; Anishchenko, 2015; Tatsenko, 2017, etc.) has been aimed at grasping the nature of human-world interaction. The phenomenon of empathy has come into the focus of cognitive research of literary texts (Vorobyova, 2006), cognitive metaphor (Lakoff, 2001) and pragmatics of dialogue discourse (Koziarevych, 2006). The spheres of verbal empathy and empathic speech acts in French have been analysed (Kuznetsova, 2010), illocutionary empathic acts in French dialogue discourse such as understanding, compassion, sympathy have been researched (Anishchenko, 2015; Haziziov, 2015). However, the structure of empathy conceptual domain and its substantiation as the event concept in juvenile fantasy prose is yet to be discussed.

The study of empathy verbalization in juvenile fantasy prose is crucial given the didactic nature of this type of discourse and the prospective influence of empathic expressions on social consciousness. In juvenile fantasy discourse empathy is compared to magic: it is the force that can be used both for evil (for manipulation and control) and for good (for understanding and compassion). Empathy can be metaphorically described as the invisible background which ontologically defines the rerum natura: the verbalization of empathic and non-emphatic concepts of compassion, pity, misunderstanding, bullying in juvenile fantasy prose performs the didactic function of discourse and shapes the principles of socialization and emotional intelligence of juvenile readers.

Methodology and methods

The structure of the social psychological event concept of empathy is determined by means of M.V. Nikitin's modus model, presenting empathy as a gestalt formation: the meaningful, conscious mental structure existing as a complex of interconnected operational modi, which perform functions of systematization and categorization (Nikitin, 2004). The modus structure is based on the dichotomy “general vs. singular”, embodied in the logical notion (i.e. knowledge without assessment), concept (containing assessment and attitude) and image, which is an intermediary link between the two and can be manifested at the level of a single entity or at the level of the whole class of entities (Nikitin, 2004, p. 59). The tools for modelling empathy as a holistic conceptual structure are graduality and image schemas.

According to M.V. Nikitin, the structure and features of the concept are determined by the type of entity it presents (Nikitin, 2004, p. 60). Systematization of constitutive features of the entity is carried out by identifying its logical notion, which is established at the linguistic level by means of cognitive-semasiological interpretation of the semantic properties of the concept name in typical contexts recorded in dictionaries, that is, by means of componential analysis. empathy includes cognitive (understanding other people's mental states) and affective components (emotional reaction to the experience of others). componential and definition analyses of the concept name (lexeme empathy), its synonyms and antonyms forming the lexical-semantic group of empathy, revealed cognitive features of the social psychological event concept of empathy, and contributed to its research in discourse.

Concepts and Cognitive Domains

The concept is not an isolated unit of human experience. It exists as part of the background knowledge structures--domains (Clausner & Croft, 1999; Prykhodko, 2008; Zhabotynska, 2013). A domain is defined as “any coherent area of conceptualization... context for the characterization of a semantic unit” (Langacker, 2008, p. 47), i.e. system of concepts correlated in such a way that to understand one of them it is necessary to understand the whole structure in which they belong. This structure is described within a certain conceptual hierarchy of the domain (Zhabotynskaya, 2009, p. 5) or conceptual field (Prykhodko, 2008, p. 174). A domain is a structured area of background knowledge. However, a domain in the broadest sense of the term can be any concept or field of experience: it can be applied to a broad associative field and to a conceptual category united by hypero-hyponymic connections (Zhabotynskaya, 2009, p. 64). Thus, the conceptual sphere is a network of domains, each of the domains is a network of parcels, each of the parcels is a network of concepts, each concept is a network of features which characterize it (Zhabotynskaya, 2009, p. 64).

In the process of acquiring mental experience, conceptual hierarchies are formed, which include domains of different levels. To distinguish these levels, we use the terms suggested by S.A. Zhabotynskaya: a `conceptual sphere' stands for the analysed conceptual space, a `domain' stands for information unit within the concept sphere, a `parcel' stands for the information unit within the domain, while the concept is the constituent of the parcel signified by a word or another language unit (Zhabotynskaya, 2009, p. 5).

As empathy encompasses a wide range of emotional-cognitive states and processes, including cognitive (understanding other people's mental states) and affective components (emotional response to the experience of others), the structuring of the event concept of EMPATHY requires the usage of categorization models.

Categorization Models

Categorization is the structuring of information about the world that forms certain categories. The formation of a category is closely connected with the formation of a concept or group of concepts around which it is built, i.e. with the process of conceptualization. Central to the processes of categorization and conceptualization are the concepts of prototype and basic level. The basic level of categorization is the level of associations where the traits most relevant to consciousness are concentrated. Units of this level are the most frequent, structurally simple and informative, including maximum features of an entity as a prototype in its category, and are the first to be learned in ontogenesis (Lakoff, 2003, p. 30).

The primacy and centrality of the concepts of the basic level can be traced in the categories of emotions: universal basic emotions must be correlated in the autonomic nervous system, correlated with facial expressions and based on embodied cognition (Lakoff, 2003, p. 30).

Summarizing the study of basic levels, J. Lakoff identifies models of categorization (cognitive models) (Lakoff, 2003, p. 31). Distinguishing the terms of a conceptual and a cognitive model, which are often used synonymously, S. A. Zhabotynskaya characterizes the conceptual model as a database, an ordered structure of knowledge representation formed without the use of cognitive operations (focusing, schematization, profiling, etc.). The cognitive model is defined as the structure of the database, modified by cognitive operations (Zhabotynskaya, 2009, p. 61). These models describe the mechanisms of conceptual system formation as a basis for thought processes and ways of conceptualizing reality:

• propositional models that characterize entities and indicate the relationships between them;

• image schemas that structure more complex cognitive structures by means of basic units representing sensor and motor experience;

• metaphorical models, which are the transition from propositional or schematic models of one sphere to the corresponding models of another sphere. Such a metaphorical transition is possible due to the structuring of both spheres as matrices of domains containing compatible image schemas;

• metonymic models that conceptualize reality on the basis of substitution of entities within the common sphere of human experience (Lakoff, 2003, p. 32).

These structures of knowledge are the background for cognitive processing and meaning reconstruction, where the main means of the conceptual sphere representation are propositional models and image schemas which contribute to the metaphorical transfer.

Image-schematic approach represents complex conceptual structures in terms of simpler conceptual components (Lakoff, 2003, p. 33). Within the cognitive-discursive approach, schematic images allow to establish patterns in the process of meaning formation and categorize the event concept of EMPATHY.

Categorization of empathy

Empathy is a universal preverbal cognitive-affective form of psychic reflection determining the agent's behaviour in social interaction, and is verbalized by symbols adopting axiological meaning. While partly addressing social functioning, empathy is turned to cognition and emotion, thus being framed as a social psychological event concept (Chesnokov, 2009; Shevchenko, 2015). As an event concept EMPATHY emerges in consciousness and in verbal behaviour under the influence of human activity in a certain communicative-pragmatic situation, arising in a variety of constituents of the cognitive and affective parcels of the domain of empathy and unfolding in two scripts which reflect its active and passive manifestations. The event concept of empathy is a structured unity of meanings, including `ability', `understanding', `feeling', `tact', `sympathy', `pity', `compassion'. Under the influence of human activity in a certain communicative-pragmatic situation of empathy arises in consciousness and verbal behaviour, unfolding as a behavioural reaction in two scripts (action frames), reflecting the passive and active manifestations of empathy.

An event concept consists of categorical, logically interconnected semantic unities that reflect a person's awareness of the course of events in reality (Shniakina, 2015). It is defined as a model of activity reflected in an individual's mind, which is described in terms of social interaction, i.e. from the standpoint of its motive, purpose, as well as its strategies and tactics (Chesnokov, 2009, p. 6). One of the ways to research the event concept is to build a model that allows to outline its qualities and predict its unfolding, reflecting the structured knowledge in the form of a frame, script, etc. (Shevchenko, 2015; Shniakina, 2015).

The frame is a unified structure of knowledge, schematization of experience (Fillmore, 1982, p. 111); data structure, which reflects the knowledge about a stereotypical situation, obtained from previous experience, and the text describing this situation (Minsky, 1975). According to the conceptual content, frames are classified as static, containing knowledge about a certain state of affairs, and dynamic (scenarios, scripts), representing knowledge about the course of events. Concepts of the dynamic type correspond to the frame scenario--a sequence of episodes unfolding in time and space (Shevchenko, 2015).

M. Minsky defines a frame scenario as a typical structure for a certain action, event, concept (Minsky, 1975). The frame scenario differs from the static frame by the presence of the basic elements, i.e. action and temporal and causal connections. Figure 1 depicts the first phase of the event concept EMPATHY, hierarchically organized in the action frame, which reflects the passive manifestations of empathy (understanding, pity, sympathy).

Empathy Phase 1. Phase 1 consists in transforming the recipient's state into one's own (experiencing the corresponding emotional states, awareness of motives, intentions of the recipient of empathy, etc.) and the nomination of this state by lexical and grammatical means of verbalization of the corresponding units of the event concept of empathy: someone agent (subject of empathy) acts towards someone experiencer (subject of empathy / 3d person / reader); acts there (consciousness); acts how (method) transforming the recipient's state into one's own; acts for the purpose / result of expressing one's own emotional state; acts how (manner) sincerely. The concept of empathy is characterized by another ontological feature--capacity. Therefore, the action frame is complemented by a subject frame, which characterizes the agent (subject of empathy) as ONE that has the capacity to be empathic.

Fig.1. Empathy Phase 1 (Passive manifestations)

Empathy consists of understanding another person's emotional state and tolerant communication of the understanding:

1) Harry couldn't imagine when that would be. Dumbledore looked as though he knew what Harry was thinking. “I knew your father very well, both at Hogwarts and later, Harry,” he said gently. “He would have saved Pettigrew too, I am sure of it.” Harry looked up at him. Dumbledore wouldn't laugh--he could tell Dumbledore... (Rowling, 1999, p. 427).

The abovementioned example illustrates the empathic understanding of Harry's emotional state (who blamed himself for rescuing the man who had betrayed his parents and caused their death) and a tolerant communication of this understanding (said gently) in an attempt to comfort Harry by expressing confidence that his father would do the same. The expression I am sure is often used in discursive contexts of empathy to nominate understanding, with approval expressed by nonverbal means (e.g. smiling, with a smile, say gently (tone)):

2) “Harry, Cedric, I suggest you go up to bed,” said Dumbledore, smiling at both of them. “I am sure Gryffindor and Hufflepuff are waiting to celebrate with you, and it would be a shame to deprive them of this excellent excuse to make a great deal of mess and noise.”(Rowling, 2000, p. 282)

3) This example expresses the understanding and approval of the students' desire to celebrate the selection of Cedric and Harry as champions of the Triwizard Tournament.

4) “This? It is called a Pensieve,” said Dumbledore. “I sometimes find, and I am sure you know the feeling, that I simply have too many thoughts and memories crammed into my mind.” (Rowling, 2000, p. 597)

5) Harry knew what it must have cost him to try and find them in the dark, to warn them. (Rowling, 1998, p. 243)

The unfolding of the initial phase of the event concept of empathy is observed in all types of discursive contexts of empathy (empathy manifestations in the characters' lines, the author's narratives, as well as the descriptions of empathy, expressing the author's assessment of characters addressed to the reader):

6) ... poor Mr. Baggins said he was sorry so many times, that at last he grunted “pray don't mention it ”, and stopped frowning (Tolkien, n.d.).

Poor Bilbo couldn't bear it any longer. At may never return he began to feel a shriek coming up inside, and very soon it burst out like the whistle of an engine coming out of a tunnel (Tolkien, n.d.).

Empathy Phase 2 represents the development of active manifestations of empathy, aimed at improving the emotional state of the recipient (Fig. 2.):

Fig. 2. Empathy Phase 2 (Active Manifestations)

Someone agent (subject of empathy) acts towards someone recipient (object of empathy); operates there (social sphere); acts how (method) expressing one's own emotional state; acts for the purpose / result of improving the recipient's emotional state; acts with the help of such tools (expressives of psychological support: consolation, compassion, understanding, encouragement); acts how (manner) tolerantly: “Possibly no one's warned you, Lupin, but this class contains Neville Longbottom. I would advise you not to entrust him with anything difficult. Not unless Miss Granger is hissing instructions in his ear.” Neville went scarlet. Harry glared at Snape; it was bad enough that he bullied Neville in his own classes, let alone doing it in front of other teachers. Professor Lupin had raised his eyebrows. “I was hoping that Neville would assist me with the first stage of the operation, ” he said, “and I am sure he will perform it admirably. ” Neville's face went, if possible, even redder (Rowling, 1999, p. 132).

This example demonstrates tolerant communication of understanding Neville's condition in the form of an expressive of consolation (I am sure he will perform it admirably), and is aimed at refuting the critical reprimands and praising, allowing the recipient to save face and avoid the humiliation intended by Snape.

The cognitive strategy of empathy unfolds according to the following scenario: “A, knowing what B feels [assessment of the situation], expresses their feelings [choice of verbal / nonverbal means and implementation of the appropriate communicative act] to share the experience of B [motive] (expressive component), A wants to express their feeling trying to improve B's emotional state [intention]” (Tatsenko, 2015).

Thus, EMPATHY is an event concept that unfolds in time, is dynamic, can be conceptualized in the form of two (consecutive) scripts and is presented by empathy nomination with lexical and grammatical means of verbalization of the corresponding concepts and / or speech acts of psychological support:

Fig. 3. Frame-scenario of the event concept of empathy

As a form of mental reflection based on mirror neurons, the concept of EMPATHY is the background for the profiling of empathetically marked and non-marked concepts. For example, PITY is profiled against the background of the domain human being, subdomain empathy (i.e. a person is able to understand pity, compassion, understanding only if they are familiar with the psyche and able to feel the cognitive and affective resonance).

The conceptual subdomain empathy is structured into two parcels: cognitive, which includes the concepts of UNDERSTANDING, TACT, MISUNDERSTANDING, TACTLESSNESS, BULLYING and affective, including the concepts of COMPASSION, pity, sympathy, mercilessness, cruelty, antipathy (Ivanotchak, 2017).

Concepts do not exist in isolation from each other. Inter-conceptual connections are conditioned by universal principles of thinking related to the categorization of the world in terms of logic such as hierarchy-linearity, general-individual, multiple-singular, as well as inclusion and implication. When concepts are in a relationship of inclusion or implication, the actualization of one always causes the actualization of the other, which leads to the confluence of concepts within the discursive formation, when each of them retains its own features and properties (Pryhodko, 2008, p. 207). Most concepts of the domain of empathy have common defining cognitive features e.g. `sympathy', `compassion', `tolerant attitude'. For instance, `sympathy' (weight 0.64) is one of the most significant semantic components in the lexeme-name of the concept pity (Table 1):

Table 1 - Semantic components of lexeme ``pity'

Thus, the concepts of empathy conceptual domain confluence both with each other and with the parcels of related conceptual domains. Within the conceptual space, the concepts can be distinguished and separated from each other only against the background of the domain of empathy, to which they belong (Fig. 4).

Fig 4. The conceptual domain of empathy

Conclusion

The event concept of empathy is a structured unity of meanings, which includes `ability', `understanding', `feeling', etc. Under the influence of human activity in a certain communicative - pragmatic situation, empathy arises in consciousness and verbal behaviour, unfolding as a behavioural reaction in two scripts reflecting the passive and active manifestations of empathy. The event concept of empathy exists within its static (systematization, categorization, figurative) and dynamic (identification) modi. In the systematization modus, the constitutive features of the conceptual component of the concept of empathy are feelings and cognitive ability, communication, activity, according to which the categorization of empathy is carried out and members of conceptual binary oppositions are distinguished. In the categorization modus, the concept of empathy motivates the categories of the subordinate level, which are structured on the basis of image images scale and path.

References

1. Aznabayeva, L. A. (2015). Mezhdometiya kak sredstvo vyrazheniya empatiyi [Exclamations as the means of empathy expression]. Vestnik Volhohradskoho hosudarstvennoho unyversyteta. Seriya 2: Yazykoznaniye, 2, 63-68.

2. Anishchenko, A. A. (2015). Sposoby funktsyonirovaniya katehoriyi vezhlivosti v empatiinom rechevom akte ponimaniya [Means of functioning of politeness category in the empathic speech act of understanding]. VestnikBashkirskoho universiteta, 2(4), 1348-1351.

3. Chesnokov, I. I. (2009). Mest' kak emotsional'nyy povedencheskiy kontsept (opyt kognitivno- kommunikativnogo opisaniya v kontekste russkoy lingvokul'tury) [Revenge as emotional behavioral concept]: avtoref. diss ...dokt. filol. nauk. Volgograd.

4. Clausner, T., & Croft, W. (1999). Domains and image schemas. Cognitive Linguistics, 10(1), 1-31. Fillmore, Ch. (1982). Frame semantics. In Linguistics in the morning calm (pp. 111-137). Seoul: Hanshin publishing Company.

5. Ivanotchak, N. I. (2017). Linhvokohnityvni i prahmatychni parametry empatii v anhlomovnii dytyachii prozi zhanru fentezi [Linguocognitive and pragmatic aspects of empathy in juvenile fantasy prose]. (Unpublished candidate dissertation). V.N. Karazin Kharkiv National University, Kharkiv, Ukraine. (in Ukrainian)

6. Lakoff, G. (2003). Metaphors we live by. London: The University of Chicago Press.

7. Lakoff, G. (2001). Metaphors of terror. Retrieved from http://www.cse.buffalo.edu/~rapaport/575/F01/lakoff.on.terrorism.html

8. Langacker, R. (2008). Cognitive grammar: a basic introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

9. Kravchenko, A. V. (2012). “Reprezentatsiya myslitelnykh struktur v yazyke” kak tema nauchnoho diskursa [“Thought structures representation in language” as the topic for scientific discourse]. Kohnitivnye issledovaniyayazyka, 12. Retrieved from http://www.univie.ac.at/constructivism/archive/fulltexts/828.pdf

10. Kuznetsova, A. A. (2010). Illokutivnuye tipy verbalnoho proyavleniya empatiyi [Illocutional types of empathy explication] In Vestnik Bashkirskoho universiteta, 15, 2, 360-363.

11. Martynyuk, A. P. (2016). Konitivno-komunikativnaya lingvistika: v poiskakh bazovykh printsipov i metodik analiza [Cognitive-communicative linguistics: in search of basic principles and methods of analysis] In Cognition, Communication, Discourse, 12, 17-35. https://doi.org/10.26565/2218-2926-2016-12-02

12. Minsky, M. (1975). A framework for representing knowledge (pp. 211-277). In P. H. Winston (Ed.), The psychology of computer vision. New York: McGraw-Hill.

13. Morozova, E. I. (2005). Lozh kak diskursivnoye obrazovaniye: linhvokohnitivnyi aspekt [Lying as a discourse formation: linguocognitive aspect]. Kharkov: Ekograf.

14. Nickerson, R. S., Butler, S. F., & Carlin, M. (2009). Empathy and knowledge Projection. In J. Decety, & W. Ickes (Eds.), The social neuroscience of empathy (pp. 43-56). Cambridge: MIT Press.

15. Nikitin, M. V. (2004). Razvernutye tezisy o kontseptakh [Extended issues on concepts]. Voprosy kohnitivnoi linhvistiki, 1(001), 53-64.

16. Prykhodko, A. M. (2008). Kontsepty i kontseptosystemy v kohnityvno-dyskursyvnii paradyhmi linhvistyky [Concepts and conceptual systems in cognitive-discursive linguistic paradigm]. Zaporizhzhya: Premyer.

17. Schwartz, W. (2013). The parameters of empathy: core considerations for psychotherapy and supervision. Advances in descriptive psychology, 10, 203-218.

18. Shevchenko, I. (2015). Kontsept kommunikativnogo povedenia i zhanr [The concept of communicative behaviour and genre] Zhanry rechi, 1, 24-30.

19. Shevchenko, I. S. (2014). Kontsepty kommunikativnoho povedeniya v kohnitivno-diskursivnoi paradihme [Communicative behavior concepts in cognitive-discursive paradigm]. Vestnik MHPU. Seriya “Filologiya. Teoriya yazyka. Yazykovoye obrazovaniye”, 1(13), 110-120.

20. Shnyakina, N. Yu. (2015). Arkhitektura cobytiinoho kontsepta (na primere verbalizirovannoi situatsii poznaniya zapakha). [Event concept architecture (on the example of verbalized situation of smelling comprehention]. Filolohicheskiye nauki. Voprosy teorii i praktiki, 10 (52), 201-204.

21. Stanger, N., Kavussanu, M., & Ring, Ch. (2012). Put yourself in their boots: effects of empathy on emotion and aggression. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 34, 208-222.

22. Tatsenko, N. V. (2015). Katehoriya empatii kriz' pryzmu linhvistychnoyi emotiolohiyi [The category of empathy from the perspective of linguistic emotiology]. Filolohichni traktaty, 7, 1, 50-60.

23. Tatsenko, N. V. (2017). Realizatsiya empatii v suchasnomy anhlomovnomu dyskursi: kohnityvno- synerhetychyi aspect [Empathy realization in contemporary English discourse: cognitive- synergetic aspect]. Sumy: Sumskyi derzhavnyi universytet.

24. Zhabotinskaya, S. A. (2009). Onomasiologicheskiye modeli i cobytiinyie skhemy [Onomasiological models and event schemes]. Visnyk Kharkivskoho natsionalnoho universytetu imeni V.N. Karazina, 837, 3-14.

25. Zhabotynska, S. A. (2013). Im'a kak tekst: konczeptual'naya set' leksicheskogo znacheniya (analiz imeni emoczii) [The name as a text: conceptual network of lexical meaning (analysis of the name of emotion)]. Cognition, communication, discourse, 6, 47-76. https://doi.org/10.26565/2218-2926-2013-06-04

Sources for illustrations

26. CALDT--Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary and Thesaurus. Retrieved from http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/ state 1? q=state

27. CED--Collins English Dictionary. Retrieved from http://www.collinsdictionarv.com/dictionary/english/state?showCookiePolicv=true

28. LDCE--Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English. Retrieved from http://www.ldoceonline.com/dictionary/state 1

29. MEDAL--Macmillan English Dictionary for Advanced Learners (Intenational Student Edition). (2006). Oxford: Macmillan Education.

30. MWCD--Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary (2003). (11^th Ed.). Springfield, MA: Merriam Webster Inc.

31. OED--Online Etymology Dictionary. Retrieved from http://etymonline.com/

32. ODBWE--Oxford Dictionary of British and World English. Retrieved from http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/state?q=state Rowling, J. K. (2000). Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire. New York, NY: Arthur A. Levine/Scholastic Books.

33. Rowling, J. K. (1999). Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban. New York, NY: Arthur A. Levine/Scholastic Books.

34. Rowling, J. K. (1998). Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone. New York, NY: Arthur A. Levine/Scholastic Books.

35. Tolkien, J. R. R. (n.d.). The Hobbit. Retrieved from https://ia801907.us.archive.org/0/items/TheHobbitByJ.R.RTolkien/The⁰/o20Hobbit⁰/o20by⁰/o20 J.R.R%20Tolkien.pdf

Размещено на Allbest.ru