Verbal Inchoative Meaning in Linguistic Categories (Based on the English and Kyrgyz Languages)

2025

Полный текст Открытый доступ: Gold Метаданные (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.30564/fls.v7i12.12072
Достоверность данных 70 средняя
Как считается эта оценка

Складывается из проверяемых признаков самой записи: есть ли у статьи DOI, сколько независимых источников подтвердили её данные, заполнены ли обязательные поля и насколько свежо последнее подтверждение. Снижают оценку расхождения между источниками и отсутствие идентификатора. Значение от 80 означает, что запись опубликована без дополнительной проверки; от 60 до 79 — что она опубликована с пониженной достоверностью и ручная проверка желательна. Запись, выверенную редактором вручную, пересчёт не опускает ниже 90. Это оценка наших данных о статье, а не оценка самой статьи.

Аннотация

The contribution deals with studying the functional and cognitive aspects gaps connected with the content and formal constituent parts of the verbal semantic aspectual category, phasal meanings, and means that form inchoative semantics in English and Kyrgyz languages. The aspectual space in language, represented by a universal conceptual aspectual category and corresponding semantic categories in certain languages, is a controversial and little-studied concern in linguistics today. The purpose of this study is to analyze verbal inchoative meaning in correlation with conceptual and linguistic semantic categories and means of its expression in different-systemic languages — English and Kyrgyz. The research involves the linguistic method with the interpretive approach to the study of aspectual phenomena, distributive method, the method of quantitative analysis, the empiric method, the comparative analyses method, and the functional-semantic method. The scientific novelty of research consists in recognizing that the aspectual space of English and Kyrgyz languages is built on the relations of non-oppositional difference. The core zone structures of the functional-semantic fields (FSFs) of the inchoative meaning in the two languages differ: in English, this field is monocentric, whereas in Kyrgyz, it is polycentric. The findings expand further understanding language functioning as the main tool of human psychological activity and communication, and contribute to modern typological and cognitive investigations in cross-linguistic aspectual studies. The results can be applied in teaching English and Kyrgyz languages, as well as in developing innovative methodology with mental maps application containing possible content and means of expressing verbal inchoative semantics.