Attributive Constructions with the Adjective ULAKHAN Meaning “Big” the Yakut Language

The linguistic analysis of attributive constructions presented in the article is meant to be a kind of aide for studying human cognitive activity. It demonstrates by what parameters and signs a person perceives and distinguishes oneself from a class of their kind. The purpose of the article is to identify the degree of integration of adjectives with ulakhan ‘big’ seme in Yakut human consciousness. The object of the study is the cognitive features and possibilities of attributive constructions with the adjective ulakhan ‘big ‘. The subject of the study is the attributive constructions with adjectives meaning ulakhan ‘big’ in Yakut. The novelty of the study lies in the fact that in Yakut attributive constructions have not been studied in the structural and semantic perspective yet.

It is pointed out that the nominal attribute ulakhan ‘big ‘ has the most free compatibility, it is a universal word, compared with other parametric adjectives. The adjective ulakhan ‘big’, describing the “world of big things”, is used to characterize the size of an object in relation to its length, width, thickness, depth, etc. 100% semantic similarity with this adjective was shown by the parametric adjectives Diric ‘deep’ and emis ‘thick, plump’, swan ‘thick’, modu ‘thick, strong’. As for the most common adjectives, such as yhyn ‘long’; elongated ‘, urduk ‘ high’, haly’ large in volume, thick ‘, kuuste’ strong ‘ they denote ‘large’ only in some contexts.

The presented adjectival, despite the fact that it has a wide synonymic range, can replace a fairly large number of adjectives, through which the representation of not only visual, but also of internal qualities of the subject is achieved. It has been revealed that an attributive construction is a phrase that expresses an attributive relation, i.e. the relation not only of quality or quantity, but also of possession. For example, the adjectival ulakhan ‘big’ is used instead of possessives with the affix of possession -laah (elbeh nehiliennyeleh ‘multi-populated’, elbeh kihileh ‘multi-loving’, etc.).

1. Apresyan Yu. D. Lexical semantics: Synonymous means of language. Moscow, Nauka publ., 1974, 366 p. (In Russ.).

2. Kibrik A. A. Cognitive research on discourse. Questions of linguistics. 1994, no. 5, pp. 126–139. (In Russ.).

3. Kubryakova E. S. On cognitive linguistics and semantics of the term “cognitive”. Bulletin of Voronezh State University. Series: Linguistics and Intercultural Communication. 2001, vоl. 1, pp. 4–10. (In Russ.).

4. Rakhilina E. V. Cognitive analysis of subject names: semantics and compatibility. Moscow, 2008, 416 p. (In Russ.).

5. Rakhilina E. V. Linguistics of constructions. Moscow, “Publishing center “Azbukovnik”, 2010, 584 p. (In Russ.).

6. Rakhilina E. V., Plungyan V. A. Yu. D. Apresyan as a theorist of Grammar of constructions. In: Word and language: collection of articles for the 80th anniversary of Yu.D. Apresyan. Moscow, YASK, 2011, pp. 548–557. (In Russ.).

7. Explanatory dictionary of the Yakut language. XII t. [In 15 t.]. Novosibirsk, Nauka publ., 2015, 608 р. (In Russ.).

8. Explanatory dictionary of the Yakut language. XIII t. [In 15 t.]. Novosibirsk, Nauka publ., 2016, 648 р. (In Russ.).

9. Croft, W. Some contributions of typology to cognitive linguistics and vice versa. In: Cognitive linguistics: foundations, scope and methodology. Ed. by T. Janssen, G. Redeker. N. Y.: Mouton de Gruyter. 1999, рp. 61–94.

10. Croft, W. Radical construction grammar: syntactic theory from a typological perspective. Oxford, Oxford Uni. Press, 2011.

11. Fillmore, Ch. J., Kay, P., O’Connor, M. C. Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions: The case of “let alone”. Language, 1988, vol. 64, no. 3, pp. 501–538.

12. Goldberg, A. Constructions at Work: The Nature of Generalization in Grammar. Oxford, Oxford Uni. Press, 2006.

13. Tomasello, M. Constructing a language: A Usage-Based theory of language acquisition. Cambridge (MA). Harvard Uni. Press, 2003.