The aim of the article is to identify and analyze the semantic components of the verbalized concept “holy fool” in the linguistic world-image of the Russian-speaking population of Ukraine. The main ...method of the conducted research was the psycholinguistic experiment. The sample comprised 204 respondents aged 18-35, males and females being equally represented. The results of the conducted experiment allowed us to make a conclusion that in terms of the everyday linguistic consciousness of the Russian-speaking population of the eastern part of Ukraine the concept “holy fool” is reflected in three core (more than 10%) semantic clusters: 1) “behavior” (46.57%); 2) “appearance, looks” (21.57%); 3) “cognitive disorders” (16.67%).
Therefore, holy fool is mainly represented by lexemes with behavioral semantics, lexemes referring to personal appearance, and lexemes semantically connected with deficient mental abilities of a person. The first cluster is represented by such core semes as “STRANGE” (20.59%) and “BLESSED” (8.82%). The second is represented by “UGLY” (17.64%) and the third cluster is represented by the core seme “FOOLISH” (16.67%). Theological associates are mainly represented by associates that describe a certain type of holiness (“BLESSED”).
The stimulus word “holy fool” is generally evaluated in three different ways: positively, negatively, and neutrally. 41% of respondents display repulsion to this stimulus, which is reflected in the following reactions: ugly 11, foolish, plain 7, insane, sick, ugly creature 4, fool, crazy, crippled 3, mentally challenged, abnormal, wrong, fearful 2 etc.
The comparative analysis of the verbalized concept “holy fool” in the linguistic world-image of the Russian-speaking population of Ukraine and Russia leads to the following conclusions: 1) the semantic charge of the word “holy fool” is bigger in the linguistic consciousness of the Russian-speaking respondents from the eastern part of Ukraine; 2) the core of the verbalized concept “holy fool” have different components (“HUMAN BEING” – “STRANGE”). Most Ukrainian and Russian respondents tend to treat the concept “holy fool” as something negative or neutral, which testifies to the ambivalence of this concept; theological associates are represented in the periphery; emotive associates are only reflected in singular reactions.
The present paper continues a series of articles devoted to ludic competence and the description of its components with the help of psycholinguistic tools and methods. The present article explores ...another component of ludic competence, i.e. impishness, and the corresponding cultural concept “impishness”.
An attempt has been made to single out gender- and role-specific differences in the perception of the verbalized concept “impishness” in the linguistic world-image of the Russian-speaking population of Eastern Ukraine. Psycholinguistic experiment was the main method of research. The sample comprised 400 older adults (aged 30 – 60), male and female respondents being equally represented.
Having analyzed the data from the free association experiment with the stimulus “impishness”, it was revealed that everyday consciousness of common representatives of the Ukrainian linguistic culture reflects all the conceptual meanings that are related to impishness in the intercultural domain.
The core of the verbalized concept impishness is represented by four semantic clusters (more than 10%): “horseplay”, “play”, “children”, “flirting”.
The semantic scope of the concept depends on the gender of the respondents. Thus, for female respondents, the main constituent elements of the concept impishness are children (subject of pranks), as well as foolery and frolicking as manifestations of playful behavior that finds expression in frolic pranks, practical jokes, funny tricks, etc. Male respondents, on the other hand, tend to associate impishness primarily with woman, as well as with immorality, flippant behavior, and various forms of daring, provocative, and imprudent behavior.
Therefore, the ambivalent character of the concept “impishness” reveals itself in certain gender- and role-specific differences in its perception. It reveals itself most vividly in behavioral associates and associates that describe various forms of pranks.
On the whole, the stimulus “impishness” is generally evaluated as something both positive and negative by all the respondents.11.25% of the respondents display negative attitude to the stimulus “impishness”.
The purpose of this study is to define and describe the semantic components of the verbalised concept “lightness” as a component of ludic competence in the linguistic consciousness of the ...Russian-speaking people from Eastern Ukraine. The main method of the research was a psycholinguistic experiment. The sample comprised 426 young people (aged 18-35), males and females being equally represented. Cluster analysis showed that the core of the concept “lightness” is represented by three semantic groups: “the quality being light and insignificant in weight and size …”, “the feeling of happiness and joyful ease”, “the feeling of freedom …, cheerfulness, excitement”. The last two clusters reveal the ambivalent nature of the concept “lightness”. The concept “lightness” is characterized by a large variety of peripheral clusters. The ones that are especially noteworthy are “insight” and “duality”. The former reflects the cognitive component of lightness, which accounts for 3 per cent. The latter reflects the concept’s ambivalent nature. Basically, the semantic content of the core of the word “lightness” does not depend on gender. The comparative analysis of the concept “lightness” in the linguistic consciousness of Ukrainian citizens and people living in Russia reveals its nationally-specific perception in the linguistic consciousness of Ukrainian people, which was reflected in the most frequent reaction “freedom”. Taken together, both samples share a number of common features: wide semantic scope; strong synonymic and weak antonymic connections between stimulus and reactions; positive emotional response to the stimulus. Finally, the results of the free word association test with the stimulus word “lightness” were successfully used to define more precisely and expand our understanding of “lightness” as a component of ludic competence taking into account both core and peripheral clusters.
References
Barnett, L. (2007). The nature of playfulness in young adults. Personality and Individual Differences, 43, 949-958. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2007.02.018
Bowman, J. (1987). Making Work Play. In G. A. Fine (Ed.), Meaningful Play, Playful Meanings (pp. 61-71). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Bundy, A. (1996). Play and Playfulness: What to Look for. In D.L. Parham & L. S. Fazio (Eds.), Play in Occupational Therapy for Children (pp. 52−66). St. Louis, MO: Mosby.
Chapman, J. (1978). Playfulness and the development of divergent thinking abilities. Child: Care, Health and Development, 4, 371-383. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2214.1978.tb00096.x
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1975). Play and intrinsic rewards. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 15, 41-63. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2214.1978.tb00096.x
Dal, V. I. (2011). Tolkovyi Slovar Zhivogo Velikorusskogo Yazyka Explanatory Dictionary of the Living Great Russian Language: in four volumes. Moscow: Publishing house: Drofa.
Glynn, M., & Webster, J. (1992). The adult playfulness scale: an initial assessment. Psychological Reports, 71(1), 83-103. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1992.71.1.83
Gordienko-Mytrofanova, I., & Kobzieva, Iu. (2017). Playful competence: the access code to the inner resources. Proceedings of the 15th European Congress of Psychology Amsterdam, 11-14 July (19).
Gordienko-Mytrofanova, I., Pidchasov, Ye., Sauta, S., & Kobzieva, Iu. (2018). The problem of sample representativeness for conducting experimental and broad psychological research. Psycholinguistics, 23(1), 11-46. doi: 10.5281/zenodo.1212360.
Groos, K. (1976). The Play of Man: Teasing and Love-Play. In J. Brunner, A. Jolly, & K. Sylva (Eds.), Play, Development and Evolution (pp. 62–83). Middlesex, United Kingdom: Penguin Books.
Guitard, P., Ferland, F. & Dutil, É. (2005). Toward a better understanding of playfulness in adults. OTJR: Occupation, Participation and Health, 25(1), 9-22. https://doi.org/10.1177/153944920502500103.
Кобзева, Ю., Гордиенко-Митрофанова, И., Гончаренко-Кулиш, А. (2020a). Определение шаловливости как компонента игровой компетентности через реконструкцию семантических элементов концепта «шаловливость». Проблеми сучасної психології, 47, 118-140.
Kobzieva Iu., Gordienko-Mytrofanova I., Sauta S. (2020b). Psycholinguistic Features of Imagination as a Component of Ludic Competence. EUREKA: Social and Humanities. Psychology, 2, 15-23. http://dx.doi.org/10.21303/2504-5571.2020.001128
Kobzieva Iu., Gordienko-Mytrofanova I., Udovenko M., Sauta S. (2020c). Concept “humour” in the linguistic consciousness of the Russian-speaking population of Ukraine. European Journal of Humour Research, 8(1), 29-44. http://dx.doi.org/10.7592/EJHR2020.8.1.kobzieva
Караулов Ю. Н., Черкасова Г. А., Уфимцева Н. В., Сорокин Ю. А., Тарасов Е. Ф. Русский ассоциативный словарь. В 2-х т. Т. I. От стимула к реакции: ок.7000 стимулов. М.: ООО «Издательство Астрель»: ООО Издательство АСТ».
Караулов Ю. Н., Черкасова Г. А., Уфимцева Н. В., Сорокин Ю. А., Тарасов Е. Ф. Русский ассоциативный словарь. В 2-х т. Т. II. От реакции к стимулу: более 100 000 реакций. М.: ООО «Издательство Астрель»: ООО Издательство АСТ».
Ожегов, С. И., Шведова, Н. Ю. (2011). Толковый словарь русского языка. Москва: Мир и образование, Оникс.
Попова, З. Д., Стернин, И. А. (2007). Семантико-когнитивный анализ языка. Воронеж: Истоки.
Proyer, R. (2012). Development and initial assessment of a short measure for adult playfulness: The SMAP. Personality and Individual Differences, 53(8), 989-994. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2012.07.018
Proyer, R. (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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.12.011
Raven, J. (2001). The Conceptualisation of Competence. New York: Peter Lang Publishing,Inc.
Schaefer, C. & Greenberg, R. (1997). Measurement of playfulness: a neglected therapist variable. International Journal of Play Therapy, 6(2), 21-31. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0089406
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).
Shen, X., Chick, G. & Zinn, H. (2014). Playfulness in adulthood as a personality trait: a reconceptualization and a new measurement. Journal of Leisure Research, 46(1), 58-83. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222216.2014.11950313
Стернин, И. А., Рудакова, А. В. (2011). Психолингвистическое значение слова и его описание. Воронеж: Ламберт.
Tsuji, Hit., Tsuji, Hei., Yamada, S., Natsuno, Y., Morita, Y., Mukoyama, Y., Hata, K. & Fujishima, Y. (1996). Standardization of the Five Factor Personality Questionnaire: Factor structure. International Journal of Psychology, 31. Proceedings from the XXVI International Congress of Psychology. Montreal, 16-21August. (103-217).
Уфимцева, Н. (2009). Образ мира русских: системность и содержание. Язык и культура, 98-111.
Ушаков, Д. Н. (1935-1940). Толковый словарь русского языка: в четырех томах. Москва: Сов.энциклопедия: ОГИЗ.
Yarnal, C. & Qian, X. (2011). Older-adult playfulness: an innovative construct and measurement for healthy aging research. American Journal of Play, 4(1), 52-79. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ985548.pdf
Ефремова, Т. Ф. (2000). Новый словарь русского языка. Толково-словообразовательный. Москва: Русский язык.
Епишкин, Н. И. (2010). Историчесикй словарь галлицизмов русского языка. Москва: Словарное издательство ЭТС.
Yue, X., Leung, C. & Hiranandani, N. (2016). Adult playfulness, humor styles, and subjective happiness. Psychological Reports, 119(3), 630-640. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033294116662842.
Засекина, Л. В. (2008). Тенденції розвитку вітчизняної психолінгвістики: методологічний огляд проблем та окреслення шляхів їх вирішення. Психолінгвістика, 1. С. 9-20. Retrieved from: http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/psling_2008_1_2.
References (translated and transliterated)
Barnett, L. (2007). The nature of playfulness in young adults. Personality and Individual Differences, 43, 949-958. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2007.02.018
Bowman, J. (1987). Making Work Play. In G. A. Fine (Ed.), Meaningful Play, Playful Meanings (pp. 61-71). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Bundy, A. (1996). Play and Playfulness: What to Look for. In D.L. Parham & L. S. Fazio (Eds.), Play in Occupational Therapy for Children (pp. 52−66). St. Louis, MO: Mosby.
Chapman, J. (1978). Playfulness and the development of divergent thinking abilities. Child: Care, Health and Development, 4, 371-383. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2214.1978.tb00096.x
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1975). Play and intrinsic rewards. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 15, 41-63. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2214.1978.tb00096.x
Dal, V. I. (2011). Tolkovyi Slovar Zhivogo Velikorusskogo Yazyka Explanatory Dictionary of the Living Great Russian Language: in four volumes. Moscow: Publishing house: Drofa.
Glynn, M., & Webster, J. (1992). The adult playfulness scale: an initial assessment. Psychological Reports, 71(1), 83-103. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1992.71.1.83
Gordienko-Mytrofanova, I., & Kobzieva, Iu. (2017). Playful competence: the access code to the inner resources. Proceedings of the 15th European Congress of Psychology Amsterdam, 11-14 July (19).
Gordienko-Mytrofanova, I., Pidchasov, Ye., Sauta, S., & Kobzieva, Iu. (2018). The problem of sample representativeness for conducting experimental and broad psychological research. Psycholinguistics, 23(1), 11-46. doi: 10.5281/zenodo.1212360.
Groos, K. (1976). The Play of Man: Teasing and Love-Play. In J. Brunner, A. Jolly, & K. Sylva (Eds.), Play, Development and Evolution (pp. 62–83). Middlesex, United Kingdom: Penguin Books.
Guitard, P., Ferland, F. & Dutil, É. (2005). Toward a better understanding of playfulness in adults. OTJR: Occupation, Participation and Health, 25(1), 9-22. https://doi.org/10.1177/153944920502500103.
Кобзева, Ю.,
The purpose of this study was to define and to describe the semantic components of the stimulus word humour in the linguistic consciousness of young Russian-speaking people from Eastern Ukraine. The ...main method of the research was a psycholinguistic experiment. The sample comprised 400 young people (aged 20-31), males and females being equally represented. The experiment proved that the concept humour in the linguistic consciousness of the Russian-speaking population of Ukraine is represented by four core semantic clusters: “laughter,” “joke,” “merry-making/joy” and “show.” Analysis of female and male associative fields shows that the semantic core of the word humour does not depend on the respondents’ gender identification. The results of frequency and cluster analysis have implied a number of the following conclusions. Firstly, humour and laughter form an inseparable unity of stimulus and reaction in the linguistic consciousness of respondents, although the psychological paradigm considers humour and laughter as two independent phenomena. Secondly, the cognitive component of humour was only reflected in the peripheral cluster “mind” of respondents’ associations. Thirdly, young Russian-speaking people from Ukraine do not have an ideal image of humour represented by a certain comedy show or relevant to any specific comedians. The generalised visualisation of humour is represented by reactions of the extreme periphery. Finally, comparative analysis of the verbalised concept humour in the linguistic consciousness of Russian-speaking population of Ukraine and people who live in Russia did not reveal any national-specific features in the perception of stimulus humour.
The article is devoted to the problem of creating a representative sample of respondents in the course of experimental and broad psycholinguistic research, first of all, its quantitative composition ...and structure. The primary method of research was the psycholinguistic experiment, the main stage of which is a free association experiment with "playfulness" as a stimulus word. The use of mathematical and statistical procedures confirmed the hypothesis and helped to achieve the goal. The hypothesis of the experimental psycholinguistic research into "playfulness" stimulus as a stable personality trait was to prove the effectiveness of applying specific strategies to determine the representative quantitative composition of samples by means of comparing the frequency of the studied characteristics. In terms of theoretical substantiation, the approaches to the determination of the quantitative composition of the experimental sample and the statistical calculations based on the results of the practical research into associative reactions to the stimulus "playfulness", it is proved that as the size of the sample decreases, the distinction grows, meaning that groups with fewer respondents do not reflect all the characteristics of the general population. The assumption was proved that the number of 100 people or close to that could not meet this requirement in the case of extensive research, the minimum size of the sample should be about 400-500 people, though this number is not always sufficient either. The sufficient quantitative composition of the experimental sample, in large general populations, varies from 400 to 1500 persons and depends on the quantitative and qualitative structure of the general population and the organizational peculiarities of the research. So, the sample should be enough to meet the requirement, which is to reflect the main tendencies and characteristics of both the general population and the purpose of the study.
Статья посвящена теоретическому обоснованию концепции создания техники терапевтического юмора, направленной на гармонизацию детско-родительских отношений с детьми старшего дошкольного возраста с ...негативными психическими состояниями и их родителями. Основу концепции рассматриваемой техники составляют: 1) метод «позитивной реинтерпретации», в фокусе внимания которого находятся, во-первых, осознание родителями «позитивных» аспектов нарушений, а именно, способностей ребенка реагировать на определенные ситуации и конфликты симптоматическим поведением; во-вторых, прямое вовлечение родителей в процесс изменения поведения ребенка – помощь ребенку в переходе от болезненных форм общения с самим собой и с миром к адаптивным; 2) игра Поллианны «Просто радуйся!», цель которой – понизить уровень эмоциональных страданий ребенка и усилить ощущение благополучия, через воспитание позитивного отношения к жизни; 3) прием «профилактики юмористических недоразумений», направленный на формирование у родителей умения чувствовать ребенка на основе воспроизведения собственных детских воспоминаний, связанных с травмирующими юмористическими недоразумениями; 4) совместная читательская деятельность детей и родителей: семейное чтение и обсуждение детской юмористической литературы; 5) положение о том, что психотерапия ребенка осуществляется через психотерапию родителей. ... воспитать в ребенке юмор — драгоценное качество, которое, когда ребенок подрастет, увеличит его сопротивление всякой неблагоприятной среде и поставит его высоко над мелочами и дрязгами. У ребенка вообще есть великая потребность смеяться. Дать ему добротный материал для удовлетворения этой потребности — одна из не последних задач воспитания. Корней Чуковский
PDF
