Authors
- Suvorova Elena V. PhD (Pedagogy)
Annotation
The article presents a systematic analysis of the concept alienness within the frameworks of various social and humanitarian theories, belonging to the following spheres: cultural linguistics and anthropology, philosophy and cultural studies, linguistics and ethnolinguistics. The analysis relies on the basis of 65 scientific and research works
in the mentioned above areas of knowledge and aims at revealing the conceptual content of alienness through the prism of interdisciplinary approaches. It concludes that the gradual opposition other – different – foreign – alien can be built with various components, such as: I – Another one (Others), I – NOT-ME, own – alien, close – different. The idea of alien is intertwined with affective-perceptual-cognitive cultural attitudes, which are internalized in the process of growing up and afterwards evolve into the category of the unconscious. The binary opposition own – alien (other, different) can be global, i. e. include other oppositions such as good – bad, righteous – sinful, pure – wicked, etc. The opposition self – alien (other, alien) can also be represented as a three-level system: close (secular, understandable) – distant (alien, sacral, mystical); close to my social circle – far from my social circle; individual (accepted by me personally at the level of values and beliefs) – social (i. e. values and beliefs that I may or may not accept). It is the language that becomes a trigger launching the identification system «friend – foe», as it keeps the individual and cultural experience, which allows an individual to differentiate the surrounding world at the level of the secular – sacral; close – distant (in terms of belonging to a certain social or ethnic group) acceptable – unacceptable.
How to link insert
Suvorova, E. V. (2024). THE EVOLUTION OF CONCEPTUAL VIEWS ON ALIENNESS IN THE HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES Bulletin of the Moscow City Pedagogical University. Series "Pedagogy and Psychology", 3 (55),
References
1.
1. Averintsev, S. S. (1981). Religion and literature. Collection of articles. Heritage publishing. (In Russ.).
2.
2. Merton, R., Mead, J., Parsons, T., & Schutz, A. (1994). American sociological thought: Texts. Izdatel’stvo MGU. (In Russ.).
3.
3. Bakhtin, M. M. (2000). Author and hero. Towards the philosophical foundations of the humanities. Azbuka. (In Russ.).
4.
4. Belykh, E. S. (2022). Generalized Other J. G. Mead: Internalization of group att tudes and abstract thinking. Proceedings of Voronezh State University. Series: Philosophy, 3, 71–78. (In Russ.).
5.
5. Boas, F. (1997). Some problems of the methodology of social sciences. Anthology of cultural studies. Universitetskaya kniga, 1, 499–508. (In Russ.).
6.
6. Boas, F. (1926). The mind of primitive man. Gosudarstvennoe izdatel’stvo. (In Russ.).
7.
7. Boas, F. (2008). Evolution or diffusion? Anthology of cultural studies. Cultural interpretations (pp. 343–347). Centr gumanitarnyh iniciativ. (In Russ.).
8.
8. The Big Russian Encyclopedia. (2016). (2024, July 13). https://bigenc.ru (In Russ.).
9.
9. Great ethics. (1212). (2024, July 13). https://iknigi.net/avtor-konstantin-dushenko/100660-luchshie-mysli-iizrecheniya-drevnih-vodnom-tome-konstantin-dushenko/read/page-2.html (In Russ.).
10.
10. Ivanov, Vyach. Vs., & Toporov, V. N. (1965). Slavic language modeling semiotic systems (Ancient period). Nauka. (In Russ.).
11.
11. Levy-Bruhl, L. (2022). Primitive thinking. Akademicheskij Proekt. (In Russ.).
12.
12. Levy-Bruhl, L. (2024). The supernatural in primitive thinking. Akademicheskij Proekt. (In Russ.).
13.
13. Levi-Strauss, K. (1994). Primitive thinking. Respublika. (In Russ.).
14.
14. Losev, A. F. (2023). Philosophy of name, thing and name. AST. (In Russ.).
15.
15. Losev, A. F. (1995). Form – Style – Expression. Mysl’. (In Russ.).
16.
16. Lossky, N. O. (1914). Perception of someone else’s mental life. Logos, T. 1–2, 189–200. (In Russ.).
17.
17. Lotman, Yu. M. (2020). Inside thinking worlds. Azbuka. (In Russ.).
18.
18. Lotman, Yu. M., & Uspensky, B. A. (1977). The role of dual models in the dynamics of the Russian culture (until the end of the 18th century). Transactions on Russian and Slavic philology, XXVIII, 3–36. (In Russ.).
19.
19. Mead J. G. (1994). American sociological thought. Izdatel’stvo MGU. (In Russ.).
20.
20. Mead, J. G. (2009). Favorites. Collection of translations. (2024, July 13). https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/dzhordzh-gerbert-mid-izbrannoe-sbornik-perevodov (In Russ.).
21.
21. Mead, J. G. (2013). Social consciousness and consciousness of meaning. Epistemology and philosophy of science, T. 35, 1, 219–227. (In Russ.).
22.
22. Mead, J. G. (2014). Philosophy of the present. Izdatal’skij dom NIU VShE. (In Russ.).
23.
23. Ortega y Gasset, X. (2000). Selected works. Ves’ mir. (In Russ.).
24.
24. Sapir, E. (1993). Selected works on linguistics and cultural studies. Progress, Univers. (In Russ.).
25.
25. Slavic antiquities. (1995–2014). Ethnolinguistic dictionary: in 5 vols. The Russian Academy of Sciences. Institute of Slavic Studies and Balkanistics (under the general editorship of N. I. Tolstoy). Mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya. (In Russ.).
26.
26. Steblin-Kamensky, M. I. (1976). Myth. Nauka. (In Russ.).
27.
27. Telia, V. N. (1988). Metaphorization and its role in creating a linguistic picture of the world. The role of the human factor in language: Language and the picture of the world (pр. 173–203). Nauka. (In Russ.).
28.
28. Tolstaya, S. M. (2010). Semantic categories of cultural language. Essays on Slavic ethnolinguistics. Librokom. (In Russ.).
29.
29. Tolstoy, N. I. (2003). Essays on Slavic paganism. Indrik. (In Russ.).
30.
30. Tsivyan, T. V. (2006). Model of the world and its linguistic foundations. KomKniga. (In Russ.).
31.
31. Eliade, M. (1994). Sacred and profane. Izdatel’stvo MGU. (In Russ.).
32.
32. Eliade, M. (1995). Aspects of myth. Invest-PPP. (In Russ.).