Phraseological units with the semantics of "human character" in Russian and Chinese

Van Tszin ORCID: 0009-0009-8848-0400 Senior Lecturer, Department of the Russian Language, School of Foreign Languages, Hulunbuir University (China); Postgraduate Student, Department of the Russian Language and Methods of its Teaching, Faculty of Philology, Peoples' Friendship University of Russia 117198, Russia, Moscow, Miklukho-Maklaya str., 10, 2, office. Department of the Russian Academy of Sciences jing-wang@mail.ru Other publications by this author

Introduction.

In recent years, the number of comparative interlanguage studies of stable expressions has increased significantly. This is due to the fact that their analysis and comparison allows us to discover unique cultural features, which are not always possible to identify in monolingual studies.

Phraseological units with the meaning of "human character" occupy a special place in every language, which is due to their universality. They reflect cultural peculiarities of perception, assessment of people's character, as well as understanding of their behavior and qualities. Due to the increased mutual interest in the study of the cultures of Russia and China, the analysis of phraseological units with the semantics of "human character" in these languages will reveal common and specific features peculiar to the two linguistic cultures, which is definitely important for a better understanding of intercultural differences and similarities.

The purpose of the article is to identify similarities and differences in phraseological units with the meaning of "human character" in Russian and Chinese. Russian Russian and Chinese languages require the fulfillment of tasks, including the definition of the composition of phraseological units with the semantics of "human character", the comparison of phraseological and semantic groups, the search for common and specific features reflecting the peculiarities of Russian and Chinese mentality.

Phraseological units in Russian and Chinese.

By phraseology, following N.F. Alefirenko, we understand an expression that has signs of reproducibility, stability, separateness of component composition, expressiveness and integrity of meaning ^{[1, p. 23]}. Phraseologism has a stable structure and semantic integrity and in the Russian language may have a different quantitative composition ^{[2, p. 127]}. Phraseological units reflect a complex of historical and cultural knowledge, which makes them valuable material from the point of view of studying the national and cultural specifics of language systems ^[3]. In Russian linguistics, phraseological units include phraseological units, combinations, coalitions and expressions (stable phrases) ^[4].

In Chinese linguistics, there are two understandings of phraseology (here it is necessary to note the presence of the Chinese term chengyu, corresponding to an idiomatic expression), including a narrow one, which refers only four-syllable stable expressions to chengyu, as well as a wide one, including all kinds of idiomatic expressions ^[5]. Chinese chengyu usually consist of four elements, they are almost never borrowed, the motivation of their meaning is based on etymology and the history of their origin ^[6-8]. Their structure is fixed and cannot be divided into separate components ^[9]. Based on the fact that the research material is phraseological units, and not paroemias in general, we will adhere to a narrow understanding of chengyu in the Chinese language, believing that it corresponds to the Russian term phraseology in this sense.

Research methodology.

Phraseological units with the semantics of "human character" are stable expressions with signs of reproducibility, stability, separateness, expressiveness and integrity of meaning, united by the common meaning of "human character". In turn, the character of a person in the Explanatory Dictionary of the Russian language is understood as "a set of mental characteristics that make up a person's personality and which manifest themselves in his actions and behavior" ^[10]. In the Dictionary of Modern Chinese under character (kit. ) the external manifestation of a person's inner qualities is understood, including personal thinking, expression of emotions, and behavioral habits ^[11]. Consequently, the studied phraseological units combine stable units, the semantics of which is associated with the designation of the characteristics of the human psyche that influence his character and behavior.

The study was carried out using the methods of lexico-semantic and linguistic-cultural analysis. The use of the first method is justified by the need to classify expressions as phraseological, as well as the relationship between their semantics and lexical composition. The second method allows for a deeper understanding of the cultural characteristics of the perception of a person's character, expressed in stable statements. It is based on the principle of the presence of unique cultural patterns in each nation, which in turn are cognitive structures and are reflected in stable units of language, thereby finding their material embodiment in idiomatic expressions ^[12]. It also seems necessary to study the symbolic component of phraseological units, which is conditioned by historical, mythological and literary precedents, and is often directly related to national and cultural specifics ^[13]. Further, a comparison is made, which is necessary for a better understanding of the cultural connotation of phraseological units ^{[14, p. 35]}.

To classify phraseological units, an approach is used with their division into three main groups – with a positive, negative and neutral evaluative component ^[15]. Both quantitative and qualitative methods of studying the research material were used. In particular, the first ones allow us to compare the quantitative ratio of phraseological and semantic groups in the phraseological field with the semantics of "human character" in Russian and Chinese. Qualitative methods were used to analyze the semantics of phraseological units and its motivation by national and cultural specifics.

The research material is represented by phraseological units with the meaning "human character". A random sample of the study was used and 200 phraseological units of the studied semantics in each language were selected. Russian Russian Phraseological Dictionary (edited by V.N. Telia) ^[16], Lexical and Phraseological Dictionary of the Russian language (A.V. Zhukov) ^[17], Dictionary of Chinese chengyu (Liu Songjun) ^[18], Dictionary of Chinese chengyu (Wang Xinggo) ^[19]. As a result, a sample of 400 phraseological units was obtained, which were later classified and labeled in accordance with their semantics of specific qualities of a person's character (for example, "kind", "evil", and so on), which subsequently allowed using a filter and MS Excel visualization tools to visually present the results of quantitative analysis.

The results of the study.

Phraseological units with the meaning of "human character" are widely represented in Russian and Chinese. As a result of the classification into three groups, it was found that in both languages units with the meaning of negative character traits prevail (in Russian – 52.0%, 104 units; in Chinese – 37.5%, 75 units), such as short temper, arrogance, greed, cruelty, anger, hypocrisy, cowardice and others. Phraseological units denoting positive traits of a person's character are more common in the Chinese language. Their share among the Chinese phraseological units of the sample was 37.5% (75 units), while Russian phraseological units of this group made up 25.5% of the sample (51 units). The sample also included 22.5% of Russian and 17.5% of Chinese neutral phraseological units about a person's character. Let's take a closer look at the composition of these groups.

Among the Russian phraseological units denoting negative character traits, the most common expressions turned out to be: about laziness (10.0%), for example, Valyak's cat, laziness was born ahead of him, the laziness of the heavenly king, lazy as a hog, not to move a finger, etc. They are characterized by synonymy ^[20]. Less often (4.5%) there are phraseological units about greed (e.g. raking hands, insatiable throat, toad strangles, strangle yourself for a penny, give a finger - bite off the whole hand, etc.), arrogance (4.0%) – important as a peacock, spread your tail, proud as a rooster, hold your head high, turn up your nose, walk Gogol, walk like a turkey, look down from above. In Chinese, the most common phraseological units about greed (7.0%), for example, kit. d?c?n j?n ch? (letters. having received the tsun, get close to chi, meaning insatiable, greedy), l?ng t?n sh? qi? (letters. greedy and ruthless, like a wolf, like a thief, like a rat, it means. to be greedy), aic?ir?m?ng (letters. love money more than life, it means. greedy, greedy), etc. Phraseological units about anger are also common (5.0%), for example, kit. ? q q?ng mi?n li?o y? (letters. blue muzzle, protruding fangs, sign. spiteful, ferocious), ( ( (letters. to have nothing human in oneself; meaning. cruel, inhuman), and about wastefulness (4.0%), for example, kit. hu? j?n r? t? (lit. to scatter money like the earth, meaning. overspending money), d? sh?u d? ji?o (letters. big hands, big feet, meaning to squander, throw money), etc.

The most significant positive character traits in terms of prevalence in Russian phraseological units are kindness (4.0%) and honesty (4.0%). This is reflected in the stable expressions of Russian. a kind soul (meaning kind), a warm heart (meaning kind), will not hurt a fly (meaning kind), with a clear conscience (meaning honest), without a double bottom (meaning. honest), honest as a Komsomol member (meaning. honest) and others. Despite the importance of these features for Chinese culture, those that denote hardness (6.5%) prevail quantitatively among this group of phraseological units, for example, Chinese ji?nr?nb?b? (meaning. stand firm; firm), ? zh zh?ngli?-d?zh? (letters. Dizhu (a stone rock protruding in the middle of the Yellow River; sign.. standing like a rock against the current), as well as hard work (6.0%), e.g. whale. z? z? b? ju?n (lit. try your best, meaning hardworking), etc.

Phraseological units about neutral character traits are less common, which is primarily due to the limitations of these traits. Among them, expressions about modesty are common in both languages, for example, Russian. quieter than water below the grass, water will not stir up, the red maiden, kit. k?ng r?ng r?ng l? (letters. Kung Rong concedes the pear, meaning. be humble), etc.

Having carried out a lexical and semantic analysis of phraseological units about the character of a person, we will proceed to the study of their linguistic and cultural features.

Of interest is the general pattern of the predominance of phraseological units about human character, in which the main component is somatism (body part) or zoologism (animal).

Phraseological units of Rus were found with the somatism component. without a king in my head (meaning stupid), a long tongue (meaning talkative), big heart (meaning kind), thin gut (meaning weak-willed), tirelessly (meaning hardworking) and kit. ji?n qi?n y?n k?i (letters. at the sight of money, even a blind man's eyes open, it means. to be greedy, greedy for money), ji?nzu?b?osh? (letters. sharp on the tongue; sharp; snide, meaning. sarcastic), b?xu? d?nx?n (letters. a flaming heart and blood turned into jasper, meaning. honest) and others.

In Chinese phraseological units, symbols of a blood-sucking fly are used to denote greed ( c?gggy ji ji ji ji, letters. as soon as the flies see the blood, they suck it hard, meaning. be very greedy), goose ( y?ngu?b?m?o, letters. to snatch a feather from a flying goose, it means. he will not miss his chance, he will not miss the opportunity to profit). It is worth noting that in Russian linguoculture, the goose is associated with a cunning character, for example, the laptooth goose, a sign. tricky. At the same time, cunning in Russian is expressed using the image of a fox, for example, cunning as a fox. In Chinese, the image of a fox is used to express a cruel character, for example, the whale. h? ji? h? w?i (lit. The fox uses the power of the tiger, meaning. to use someone else's authority by offending other people).

It was also found that there are common symbols in the perception of character traits. For example, anger in Chinese culture is associated with a wolf, which is confirmed by several phraseological units, for example, kit. ch?il?ngch?ngx?ng (lit. have wolfish habits (predatory character), meaning. evil), l?ngz? y?x?n (letters. the cub has a wolf's heart (meaning. evil, indomitable), l?ngx?n g?uf?i (lit. a wolf's heart and a dog's lungs, meaning. cruel, ferocious), r?l?ngs?h? (like a wolf and a tiger). This perception of anger is also typical for the Russian language, where the wolf's heart describes an evil character. The perception of the snake as a symbol of a hypocritical nature is also similar: the Russian serpent is a tempter (meaning hypocritical), kit. one snake has two heads, meaning. to hide insidious intentions, to harbor evil intentions).

In both languages, there are phraseological units with precedent names-anthroponyms. For example, the Russian Baron Munchausen (sign. tricky). Due to the considerable length of history, in Chinese culture, many precedent stories have reached the modern world in the form of legends, and their heroes have become household names for human character traits. This is reflected in the phraseological units k?ng r?ng r?ng l? (letters. Kung Rong concedes the pear, meaning. modest) – according to the parable of Kung Rong, who, as a child, always took the smallest pear for himself, giving way to the big ones; or y yu?n l?ng h?oq? (lit. Yuanlong is a brave spirit, meaning. bold) – during the Three Kingdoms period, Chen Deng, referred to as Yuanlong, showed special courage in dealing with the enemy Xu Fan, which became the reason for the emergence of phraseology. Chinese phraseological units with toponyms denoting character traits were also found: kit. d? l?ng w?ng sh? (letters. Having mastered the Long (Gansu) region, it is important to get to Shu (Sichuan). to be insatiable, greedy),

Among the specific properties, it should be noted the prevalence in the Russian language of phraseological units about the character of a person with a religious component of biblical origin. For example, the Russian devil in the flesh (meaning. evil), Herod's soul (meaning. evil), God's dandelion (meaning. calm), angelic patience (meaning. patient), neither a candle to God nor a poker to hell (sign. mediocre), an angel in the flesh (meaning. modest) and others. In the Chinese language, phraseological units about the character of a person with religious and philosophical sources of origin (from Confucianism and Buddhism) were found in the sample. For example, kit. m? w? xi? ch?n (lit. the eye does not fall on the dust, it means. arrogance) is of Buddhist origin. In Buddhism, the mundane world refers to people with low status (who are like dust). The phraseological unit kit. r?nzh?y?j?n (letters. to fulfill to the end the duty of humanity (humanity) and justice, meaning good), comes from the teachings of Confucius about the highest humanity, to be faithful to ideals and fair to the end.

Discussion of the results of the study.

Despite the fact that phraseological units expressing negative human character traits prevail in both languages, the difference lies in the fact that these traits do not coincide. This is due to the fact that in Russian and Chinese cultures, people, in connection with their social values and the peculiarities of historical development, highlight among the most negative aspects of human character, which demonstrates the difference in social requirements for such an "ideal" character. For example, in Russian culture, from this point of view, such traits as laziness, greed and arrogance turn out to be extremely negative, while in Chinese culture – greed, anger and wastefulness. Among the positive traits, besides kindness and honesty in both cultures, firmness and hard work are also appreciated in China.

The analysis of phraseological units with the semantics of "human character" in the Russian and Chinese languages allowed us to discover the universal and specific of their cultures. The universal thing is that in both linguistic cultures somatisms are used as symbols to express character traits, which is primarily due to their close connection with a person. The prevalence of phraseological units about nature with a component of zoologism confirms the importance of nature for humans, which is common to Russian and Chinese cultures. However, differences in the perception of animals, as well as the peculiarities of the flora and fauna of the two countries determine the specifics, which is expressed in the transmission of human character traits through these images.

The peculiarities of cultural development are reflected in precedent names that have national and cultural specifics. In Chinese, we note the wider prevalence of these phraseological units, which is associated with the long history of civilization. In this case, as a rule, the names of the heroes of historical events or legends are used, especially the era of the Three Kingdoms. In Russian, phraseological units with precedent names borrow them from biblical tales, epics and folklore.

Both cultures are characterized by the influence of religious and philosophical teachings on the perception of human character. However, the specificity lies in the fact that Russian phraseological units reflect the predominant influence of Christianity, while Chinese ones reflect Buddhism and Confucianism.

Conclusions.

Thus, in Russian and Chinese, phraseological units with the semantics of "human character" are quite common, which allowed us to collect quite complete material and identify completely different character traits described in idiomatic expressions. As a result of the classification, three groups of phraseological units were found, including those denoting positive, negative and neutral character traits, while the second group turned out to be the largest in each of the languages.

Lexical and semantic analysis revealed that despite the similarities in some features, the quantitative predominance of phraseological units with different character traits is found in Russian and Chinese. This allows us to prove that stable expressions reflect the peculiarities of perception of the "ideal" character of a person, which are directly related to the differences in the social values of China and Russia.

The conducted linguistic and cultural analysis allowed us to find that the universal use of somaticisms, zoologisms, and precedent names as images for conveying the characteristics of human character is universal for Chinese and Russian languages. However, in many ways these images do not coincide, except for a few examples, for example, when expressing such a character trait as anger in the image of a wolf. In other cases, a rich national and cultural specificity of human perception of character is revealed at the linguistic level.

In conclusion, we note that further research can be aimed at studying the structural and grammatical organization of phraseological units with the semantics of "human character" in Russian and Chinese, as well as a deep linguistic and cultural study of individual components (somatisms, zoologisms, precedent names and others) as part of these phraseological units.