This monograph observes the intercultural and interlingual equivalence relations between Slovene and German phrasemes and proverbs from a cultural-semantic and pragmatic perspective. Phraseological studies, above all, reveal the idiosyncrasies of particular languages and cultures compared between each other and significantly contribute to realisations related to phraseological theory. The comparative research results (Földes 1991, Dobrovol’skij 2002, Bernjak 2004, Jesenšek 2004, Fabčič 2012) indicate that the phraseological repositories of the observed languages express similarities between processes related to phraseologisation. Hence, it is possible to speak about language universals in this regard. Nevertheless, all interlinguistic phraseological relations cannot be considered as universal, since instances of divergence can be observed as well. Such instances are regarded as proof of specific, idioethnic features contained by both individual phrasemes and proverbs. The phenomenon of language universals has influenced considerations regarding phraseology, particularly steering the realisation that the lexical level of natural languages is dominated by conceptual metaphors. Conceptual metaphors consist of two conceptual domains – the source (concrete) domain and the target (abstract) domain – and are determined by specific sets of mappings that apply to given pairings of the conceptual domains (cf. Lakoff/Johnson 1980) In the linguistic realisation, thus in the metaphoric linguistic image of the world as well, which is created and developed in concrete historical circumstances, phenomena of universality appear on which all denotations – including phraseological linguistic denotations and the kinds and manners of their interpretation – are based (cf. Jesenšek 2004: 404). The language-specific perception of the world is most clearly evident from the interlinguistic non-equivalence between phraseological units, which contain cultural and historical features exclusive to respective speech communities (e. g. Den letzten beißen die Hunde; auf dem Holzweg sein; eine Meise haben – biti čez les; zbit kot turška fana; prosto po Prešernu). Specific national or cultural features of linguistic symbols respectively represent different phenomena. “An idiom with established semantics or, in other words, an idiom enabling referential use determines a denotation that evokes an entire complex of cultural and historical associations. Such denotations are considered as unique and culturally marked” (Dobrovol’skij 1997: 48). According to Dobrovol’skij, differences between phrasemes between languages compared can be explained based on the semantics of the observed phrasemes. However, their respective culture-specific features do not play a crucial role. “Very few idioms have absolute equivalents between different languages. The reason for this stems from different verbalisations of particular entities by means of secondary nomination and has less to do with culture-specific features” (Dobrovol’skij 1999: 42). Even though this statement may be agreed with to a certain degree, the question as to why two languages verbalise the same segment of reality differently, remains unanswered. Based on the relatively high degree of difference between the Slovene and German phrasemes and proverbs observed, the question arises as to where do the specific features of either language become clearly evident? The most obvious examples of zero-equivalent phrasemes are phrasemes that are respectively determined by factors specific to Slovene or German history, nature, material culture or folklore. Differences can often be explained by considering the fact that the phrasemes formed in order to mark human actions or characteristics expressively originate from extra-linguistic experiences, which are basically accessible to and acquired in a similar manner by members of any culture, regardless if they are native speakers of Slovene or German. However, the choice of proto
COBISS.SI-ID: 77606401
The monograph highlights the findings of an empirical study on the knowledge and use of German and Slovene proverbs. The study was conducted between groups of Austrian and Slovenian informants (Austrian youths and adults, and informants representing three Slovenian dialect groups). The informants were surveyed on their knowledge of proverbs and the frequency of verbal use as well the frequency of proverb use in writing in their respective native languages (German or Slovene respectively – L1). The choice of proverbs included in the respective questionnaires was mostly identical (with individual exceptions). Extra-linguistic factors were also considered during the analysis of the answers. The data obtained from the empirical study between both speech communities are compatible for the following parameters: the level of knowledge and use of proverbs between informants from respective speech communities, the level of knowledge and use of proverbs based on gender, the level of knowledge and use of proverbs based on location (informants living either in a metropolitan or rural area), the level of knowledge and use of proverbs based on age, and the level of knowledge and use of proverbs based on the respective levels of education. The analysis has shown that proverbs represent a significant part of the passive lexicon of the informants included in the study. The informants expressed a relatively high level of proverb knowledge and a significantly lower level of proverb use. The average shares of proverb knowledge between individual groups (70 % between Austrian youths, 97.2 % between Austrian adults and an average share of 83 % between Slovene informants) show that the group of Austrian adults expressed the highest level of proverb knowledge, followed by Slovenian adults and Austrian youths respectively. Proverb knowledge is often related to the age of the speakers of a particular language. The relatively low level of proverb knowledge among the group of Austrian adults was expected, while the relatively low share of proverb knowledge among the group of Slovene informants aged between 26 and 50 compared to the group of Slovene informants aged 26 or less was not expected at all. The group of Austrian adults is particularly interesting due to its vocational structure (specialist subject teachers and teacher trainees), which is why the significantly high level of proverb knowledge among the members of this group has been expected. No statistically significant overlapping was observed between answers pertaining to the knowledge and use of specific proverbs between informants from both speech communities. Due to a lack of statistically significantly overlapping answers – no overlapping at all in the case of youth and adult Austrian informants and only one specific proverb overlapping between the answers provided by Slovenian informants – the situation regarding proverbs known best and used most frequently by the informants remains unclear. It can be assumed that the informants from both speech communities have access to vast arrays of well-known and frequently used proverbs. Therefore, the fact that no statistically significant overlapping was observed between the results obtained from informants from both speech communities, is not surprising. Regarding the least known and least used proverbs, no cases of overlapping could be documented between the informants of both speech communities. However, two significant cases of overlapping where observed within each speech community. The respective cases feature the following proverbs: Steter Tropfen höhlt den Stein, Eine Schwalbe macht noch keinen Sommer (German) and Pokopani živijo dlje as well as Uspeh ima veliko očetov (Slovene). In addition to providing various possibilities for comparison, the results of the empirical study also hint at additional options for further research.
COBISS.SI-ID: 77706497
The article focuses on phraseology, an interesting and frequently treated topic in scientific linguistic literature. The authors begin their observations by proceeding from a contradictory question – Am I a phraseophile or am I a phraseophobe? – which they discuss in the theoretical part in the context of linguistics and phraseodidactics respectively. From the perspective of linguistics, the authors define phrasemes as relatively stable multi-word lexical units with a higher or lower level of figurativity of the meaning of the whole unit or of individual parts of the unit respectively. Two distinct trends are highlighted from the perspective of phraseodidactics – the awareness about the inevitability and necessity of phraseology to be "naturally" included on all levels of language teaching and learning on one hand, and the problem of including phraseology into language teaching due to the complexity of phraseological lexical units, the meaning and the use of which are often subject to different limitations that are difficult to be determined and omitted, on the other. The empirical part features a quantitative analysis and interpretation of answers provided by teachers of German as a foreign language to the question stated above. The common denominators found in the answers, which at first glance appear to be vastly different, are particularly interesting. The surveyed teachers provided their answers as either (foreign of native) language experts, as (foreign or native) language speakers, or as (foreign or native) language teachers respectively. Although the answers cannot be representative, they still reveal clear trends among teachers of German as a foreign language with regard to foreign-language phraseology and foreign-language-oriented phraseodidactics. The viewpoints of the teachers namely significantly affect the decision about what areas and contents are to be emphasised in foreign language teaching in the long run. The collected empirical data hints at positive shifts in phraseology-specific competences of foreign language teachers and, consequently, students as well. The intensity and the range of phraseodidactic research, the development of advanced didactic models (Kühn's three-step model on phraseology in foreign language teaching as well as the four-step model by Laskowsky and Bergerová) and the development of modern interactive phraseme-oriented multimedia materials and tools (such as Ephras or SpirchWort) additionally influence and support the teaching, learning and the use of phrasemes in both a broad and narrow sense.
COBISS.SI-ID: 19888136
This paper discusses the lexicographic example within the scope of paremiography (proverb lexicography).The focus is on criteria for the identification, determination and selection of those contextual language data that can, in the functioning of the lexicographic example, systematically and appropriately support the lexicographic process in modern paremiography. The idea is pursued that during the time of corpus empirical lexicography, which mostly also yielded electronic products, its status and thus its functionality has been altered. From the traditional primarily documentary illustrative function and support of the individual competence of the lexicographer, it became the starting- and central point of the lexicographic working process. It became the empiric base for the description of linguistic phenomena and can only then be microstructurally integrated into its traditional illustrative documentary function. Interdisciplinarily and through inclusion of the phraseological and paremiographical theoretical knowledge of semantics, pragmatics and grammar of the proverbs, assertions are then developed on the quality characteristics of text passages with the help of which potential lexicographic examples within the scope of paremiography can be identified, systematically evaluated and selected. Finally the acceptability and operationability of the determined quality characteristics are discussed as well as some further research questions addressed. The considerations are based on the experiences from the development of a multilinguistic peromiographical product, that was conceptualized and developed as documentation of the actual proverbial use and also as learning and teaching material in foreign language learning contexts (SprichWort 2010). The article will therefore contribute to the development of a theory of the lexicographic example, since 1977 called for (cf. Wiegand 1977) and until now not yet realized within the scope of paremiography.
COBISS.SI-ID: 20256008
Proverbs (paremias) are undoubtedly well established in the contemporary language use. Empirical corpus-linguistic data attest a significantly high incidence of proverbs in many communicative domains. Were they once considered primarily a stylistic, rhetorical and didactic device, the present use of proverbs shows a clear formally-structural as well as functional change. This change is evident in a frequent innovative and creative as well as playful textual insertion that is largely established by their diverse variational and transformational potential, and has usually deliberate stylistic, pragmatic and functional influences as a consequence. From the perspective of (foreign) language didactics, the phenomenon should be of particular interest and integrated into language learning. However, this is largely not yet the case. It is perhaps that old traditionalistic attitudes towards proverbs and presumptive lack of knowledge about the formally-structural as well as semantically-pragmatic features of proverbs play a role. The main objective of this paper is to point to those features of proverbs that are of relevance for the (foreign) language didactics and should have consequences for language learning.
COBISS.SI-ID: 19964424