Baglan Bazylova¹, Gulzhan Kazhigalieva¹, Gulmira Kazhigaliyeva², Shynar Tazhibayeva¹, Zhanna Zhussupova³, Zhamal Ergalieva¹

Show more
¹ Kazakh State Women’s Teacher Training University, Almaty, Kazakhstan.
² Kazakh National Teacher Training University Named Abay, Almaty, Kazakhstan.
³ K. Zhubanov Aktobe Regional State University, Aktobe, Kazakhstan.
Show less

Abstract: Language, as an instrument of socialization, reveals the most important aspects of the relationship between individuals and society, while national linguistic personality reflects the characteristics of national culture and attitude. To understand a certain national personality, one must express its cultural values and specific attributes on the basis of these aforementioned aspects. In this regard, this paper examines the ideological and cultural core of the Russian and Kazakh people by focusing on certain cultural, symbolic, and stereotypical features. Comparative analysis of the Kazakh and Russian linguistic personalities shows that fundamental reforms in ideological, political, and social spheres have transformed the national linguistic personalities of both these regions.

Keywords: Socialization, National Linguistic Personality, Cultural Concepts, Lingua-Cultural Description, National Character

Cite this paper: Bazylova, B. , Kazhigalieva, G. , Kazhigaliyeva, G. , Tazhibayeva, S. , Zhussupova, Z. and Ergalieva, Z. (2015) Language as an Instrument of Socialization and a Representation of National Linguistic Personality. Creative Education, 6, 71-78. doi: 10.4236/ce.2015.61006.

References

[1]   Ananina, T. V. (2006). Emotions and Language Picture of the World. Messenger of KASU, 2, 92-99.

[2]   Chafe, W. (1994). Discourse, Consciousness and Time. The Flow and Displacement of Conscious Experience in Speaking and Writing. Chicago: Univ. Chicago of Press.

[3]   Chasanov, B. (1990). Kazakh-Russian Literary Bilingualism. Almaty: Rauan.

[4]   Chenki, A. (1996). Modern Cognitive Approaches to Semantics of Similarities and Differeces in Theories and Goals. Problems of Linguistics, 2, 68-78.

[5]   Dosimova, M. S. (2008). National Specifics of Language Objectivization of a Concept “Woman”: On the Material of the Russian and Kazakh Languages. Candidate of Philological Sciences, Thesis, Astrakhan: Astrakhan University.

[6]   Girutsky, A. A. (2007). Beloruss-Russian Art Bilingualism: Typology and History, Language Processes. Minsk: High School.

[7]   Hachmafova, Z. R., & Makerova, S. R. (2010). Cognitive Systems of Linguistic Identity in the Process of Interpretation of a Literary Text. Herald MGOU, 1, 51-56.

[8]   Humboldt , V. (1984). Selected Works on Linguistics. Translation from German, Moscow: Progress.

[9]   Karasik, V. I. (2004). Language Circle: Person, Concepts, Discourse. Moscow: Gnozis.

[10]   Karaulov, Yu. N. (1987). Russian Language and Linguistic Personality. Moscow: Science.

[11]   Karaulov, Yu. N. (1989). Russian Linguistic Personality and Problems of Its Studying. Moscow: Nauka Publ.

[12]   Kazhigaliyeva, G. A. (2001). Linguacultural Aspect in Work on the Art Text. Almaty: Codex.

[13]   Krasnykh, V. V. (2000). Language, Consciousness, Communication. In V. V. Krasnykh, & A. I. Izotov (Eds.), Collection of Articles (pp. 41-51). Moscow: Dialogue Moscow State University.

[14]   Shakhmatov, A. A. (1936). Sketch of Modern Russian Literary Language (12th ed.). Moscow: Learning and Teaching Publishing.

[15]   Vinogradov, V. V. (1930). About Art Prose. Moscow: Science, 24-33.

[16]   Vorobev, V. V. (2008). Linguaculturology. Moscow: Publisher of the Russian Peoples’ Friendship University.

[17]   Zamilova, A. V. (2013). Lingvosocionic Modeling of Russian Language Personality (Based on Online Blog). Thesis, Kemerovo: Kemerovo University.