Cognitive Processing of Marked and Unmarked Members of Grammatical Oppositions in the Russian and Bulgarian Languages | Rusin. 2017. № 2 (48). DOI: 10.17223/18572685/48/9

Cognitive Processing of Marked and Unmarked Members of Grammatical Oppositions in the Russian and Bulgarian Languages

The article presents the results of the experimental analysis of the influence of the grammatical category markedness on their cognitive processing under competitive visual and auditory perception modalities. The cognitive analysis significantly enhances the structural, typological and communicative approaches to the study of markedness of grammatical category members. The research has tested the hypothesis that the auditory or visual perception process interacts with the nature of the formal representation of categorial semantics on the basis of Russian and Bulgarian grammatical systems. The psycho-1inguistic behavioura1 experiments conducted using the E-Prime 2.0 software package (Copyright 1996-2012 Psychology Software Tools) revealed the difference in the cognitive processing of marked and unmarked oppositiona1 members of the grammatical category of the genus and the lexico-grammatical category of animacy/ inanimacy of Russian and Bulgarian nouns. The differences in the speed of cognitive processing (the reaction time of the testees in so1ving cognitive tasks using the stimu1i opposed to this parameter) are manifested in the following: unmarked elements of the opposition are processed much faster than the marked ones. This pattern has manifested with grammatical gender (masculine lexemes are processed faster than feminine) as well as lexico-grammatical category of abstractedness. This pattern has manifested both a grammatical genus and a lexico-grammatical category of abstractness. The lexemes of the masculine gender are processed faster than those of the feminine gender, abstract nouns that are unmarked members of the opposition of the grammatical categories of the number (in Russian and Bulgarian) and definiteness (in Bulgarian) are processed more faster, too. These results are consistent with the conclusions of structural and communicative linguistics on the place and functions of unmarked members in the language system and in the communication system: unmarked meaning is the most natural and expected, therefore it requires less effort for its cognitive processing.

Download file
Counter downloads: 190

Keywords

русский язык, болгарский язык, грамматическая маркированность, маркированный член грамматической оппозиции, психолингвистический эксперимент, поведенческий эксперимент, бимодальное восприятие, Russian language, Bulgarian language, grammatical markedness, marked member of grammatical opposition, psycholinguistic experiment, behavioural experiment, bimodal perception

Authors

NameOrganizationE-mail
Rezanova Zoya I.Tomsk State Universityrezanovazi@mail.ru
Nekrasova Elena D.Tomsk State Universitynekrasovaed@yandex.ru
Всего: 2

References

Ляшевская О.Н., Шаров С.А. Частотный словарь современного русского языка (на материалах Национального корпуса русского языка). М.: Азбуковник, 2009. 1112 с
Маслов Ю.С. Очерк болгарской грамматики. М.: Изд-во лит-ры на иностр. яз., 1956. 292 с
РезановаЗ.И.,НекрасоваЕ.Д. Влияние грамматической категории рода на бимодальное восприятие имен существительных болгарского языка // Русин. 2015. № 3. С. 241-255
Резанова З.И., Некрасова Е.Д. Категория абстрактности имен существительных в русском и болгарском языках: когнитивные рефлексы формализации // Русин. 2016. № 3 (45). DOI: 10.17223/18572685/45/3
Русская грамматика. Т. 16: Фонетика. Фонология. Ударение. Интонация. Введение в морфемику. Словообразование. Морфология. М.: Наука, 1982. 783 с
Философский энциклопедический словарь / Ред.-сост. Е.Ф. Губский и др. М.: ИНФРА-М, 2006. 574 с
Шелякин М.А. О функциональной сущности русского инфинитива // Словарь. Грамматика. Текст. М.: РАН, 1996. С. 288-302
Шелякин М.А. Об инвариантном значении и функциях субстантивного именительного падежа в русском языке // Общее языкознание и теория грамматики. СПб.: Наука, 1998. С. 105-111
Якобсон Р. О структуре русского глагола. М., 1985. С. 210-221
Якобсон Р. К общему учению о падеже. М., 1985. С. 133-175
Croft W. Modern syntactic typology // Approaches to language typology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995. P. 85-144
Greenberg J. Language universals, with special reference to feature hierarchies. The Hague: Mouton, 1966. 89 p
Lyons J. Deixis and substantivity: Loquor, ergo sum? // Speech, place, and action. N.Y., 1982. P. 101-125
Rezanova Z.I, Nekrasova E.D., Temnikova I.G. Gender-Marked Metaphors: Influence of Grammatical Gender and Frequency on Referential Choice of Metaphorical Name of the Person in the Russian Language // The XXVI annual international academic conference, academic conference, language and culture, 27-30 October 2015. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2015. P. 135-141
 Cognitive Processing of Marked and Unmarked Members of Grammatical Oppositions in the Russian and Bulgarian Languages | Rusin. 2017. № 2 (48). DOI: 10.17223/18572685/48/9

Cognitive Processing of Marked and Unmarked Members of Grammatical Oppositions in the Russian and Bulgarian Languages | Rusin. 2017. № 2 (48). DOI: 10.17223/18572685/48/9

Download full-text version
Counter downloads: 1981