2

CONTENT

INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………………..3
CHAPTER ONE. LINGUOCULTURAL CONCEPT AS A UNIT OF
ENGLISH LANGUAGE WORLD PICTURE…………………………………6.
1.1 Linguacultural Concept: approaches to its study……………………………6
1.2 Structural organization of the concept and its typology……………………14.
CHAPTER TWO. LINGUOCULTURAL REPRESENTATION OF THE
FRIEND/ENEMY OPPOSITION IN MODERN ENGLISH…………………20
2.1 Peculiarities of representation the "friend/enemy" concept's opposition by
native English speakers…………………………………………………………20
2.2 Formation and functioning of semantic fields devoted to the concept
«friend/enemy» in English………………………………………………………26
CONCLUSION….………………………………………………………………
32REFERENCES
………………………………………………………………….34
 3

INTRODUCTION

The conceptual model "friend/enemy" is one of the main distinctions which

forms a value system and reflects the uniqueness of perception and reality due to
the specific features of a particular culture. The psychological reality conditionally
denoted by this opposition and its representation is an important topic of research.
Reflecting inter- and intra-ethnic relations, the opposition is "friend/enemy"
connected with such psychological phenomena as formation of ethnic (national)
self-consciousness, social behavior. The representations connected with this
opposition, their oppositional character are caused by the process of formation,
development and change of relations of people with the world of real objects,
peculiarities of personality's perception of these relations, their evaluation and
formation of the program of further interactions.
Therefore the theme of "friend/enemy" is revealed differently in linguistics,
psychology, ethnology, sociology, political science, literature studies. Such
scientists have researched this opposition as I. Sternin, Z. Popova, M. Hizova,
Y. Averin, V. Zusman, O. Balyasnikova, O. Kitanina, A. Garmashm, V. Krasnych,
G. Kozyrev, Z. Kychkarev, but this area is still subject to further research. This
research analyzes two important concepts that are related to the participants in
original interpersonal relationships such as friendship and enmity. The interest to
these concepts is determined by the fact that while studying them; it is possible to
reveal the basis on which the norms of relations between "me" and "the other"
emerge. One of the possibilities available to an individual to express his or her
individual will and right to personal choice is the choice of a friend.
“Friend-Enemy" concepts form a binary opposition and are characterized by
multicomponent and cultural conditioning. They differentiate each other, mutually
complement and concretize their meaning, which, in turn, allows to more fully and
adequately define and clarify their semantic fields - the core and periphery - by the
revealed conceptual features. The relevance of the work lies in the fact that on the
 4

basis of the research we'll get a fragment of the language picture of the world,
related to the concepts of "friend/enemy". Also, the relevance of the work is
defined by the need a deeper study of peculiarities of "friend/enemy" opposition by
native English speakers, in view of the linguocultural study of this aspect, with the
general desire of modern science for a detailed study of the logical and
anthropological aspects. The work attempts to systematize and describe the
data/information obtained from various (including non-linguistic) sources and thus
come closer to understanding/disclosure of one of the main cultural constants and
semantic fields devoted to the concept «friend/enemy» in English.
The object of our research is English lexemes that verbalize the concepts of
"enemy-friend".
The subject of the study is the semantic content of the lexico-semantic fields
of such lexemes, for which the key concepts are "friend-enemy", as well as the
basic values in which these concepts are presented.
The research material is lexical and partly syntactical units reflecting the
opposition of "enemy-friend" in English linguistic picture of the world.
The main aim of the work is to model the conceptual opposition "enemy-
friend", by analyzing the linguistic representations of these concepts.
To achieve this aim, the following objectives must be solved:
 to explore the term linguocultural concept and its interpretation in the
research ;
 to reveal cultural and psychological peculiarities of the considered
opposition, its conditions on the basis of the work;
 to establish partial equivalents - representations of "enemy-friend",
opposition at the lexical level of the language system and description of
these relations in the context of their language relations;
 to study the etymological and morphological links of concept "enemy-
friend";
 to examine the context environment of language representations of "enemy-
friend", opposition;
 5

 to analyze formation and functioning the concept “friend/enemy”.

Methods of research include component and contextual analysis based on
the general content of the work, vocabulary definitions analysis, and external
etymological reconstructions method, which allows considering the semantic
motivation of the opposition. The work uses a structural and semiotic approach,
focusing on the semiotic aspects of intercultural communication, as well as
developing modern methods of analysis of figurative structures, critical analysis of
scientific publications on the topic of research, the system-structural method.
The theoretical importance of the study is to further develop the cognitive
direction in linguistics in the description of the oppositional concept model
"enemy-friend".
The practical value of this research is that its results can be used in the
preparation of lecture courses and seminar classes in such disciplines as
lexicology, cognitive semantics, conceptual science, as well as in the creation of
textbooks and manuals. The main points and empirical material of the course work
can also be used in writing thesis and graduation papers of bachelors.
Theoretical basis for this research work was the following definitions of the
notions of " concept and opposition" formulated by Sion L., Shavelson R.,
Langaker R., Rodgers B., Oppenheimer L., Bong M., Clark R.
The structure of the work is determined by the aim and objectives set in the
study. The coursework consists of an introduction, two chapters accompanied by
conclusion and reference. The first chapter is devoted to the consideration of a
number of issues related to the terminological basis of the study, namely concept,
its features. In the second chapter we made analysis of contrastive-conceptual
models of the opposition "enemy-friend", comprehensive linguistic analysis of
linguistic representations of the conceptual opposition. In conclusion, the results of
the study are summarized
 6

CHAPTER ONE.
LINGUOCULTURAL CONCEPT AS A UNIT OF ENGLISH
LANGUAGE WORLD PICTURE

1.1. Linguocultural Concept: approaches to its study

Recently there has been a tendency to study language as a productive way of

interpreting human culture. In modern linguistics, there is a strong tendency to
strengthen the formation of a new direction - culturological linguistics or
linguoculturology. The tasks of linguoculturology include studying and describing
the relations between language and culture, language and ethnicity, language and
national mentality. The basis of the categorical apparatus of linguistics consists of
the concepts of the linguistic personality and the concept, the gnoseological
formation of which is not yet complete.
Today there are dozens of different definitions of the concept, as well as
studies devoted to the analysis of available definitions. So, at the present stage of
development of the problem of interaction of language and culture, linguistic
culturology - a scientific discipline of integrating type, characterized by a holistic
parity and systematic consideration of language and culture as the aggregate units
that form field structures - is important [ 21, p. 42]. The key idea in modern
linguistics is the idea of anthropocentric language. At the center of everything
represented by the word is a person himself and all that is perceived by him as his
environment, the sphere of his being. From the position of anthropocentric
paradigm, the man cognizes the world through the awareness of himself, his
theoretical and subject activity in it, the basis of this paradigm is the switching of
the researcher's interests from the objects of cognition to the subject, i.e. the man in
the language and the language in the man are analyzed.
The dominant problem of linguistics is a holistic theoretical and descriptive
study of objects as a functioning system of cultural values reflected in the
 7

language, a contrasting analysis of the personal spheres of different languages

(peoples) based on the theory of linguistic relativity, the concept according to
which the structure of language and the systemic semantics of its units correlate
with the structure of thinking and the way of cognition of the outside world in a
nation. Linguoculturology studies the interrelationships and interactions between
culture and language in its functioning and reflects this process as an integral
structure of units in the unity of their linguistic and extra-linguistic (cultural)
content through systemic methods and orientation to contemporary priorities and
cultural settings (a system of norms and social values) [ 21, p. 51].
Before discussing the peculiarities of the concept's functioning in
linguoculturology, we will give some examples of the representation of this
concept in modern linguistics, emphasizing that we will be interested in the
linguistic-cultural, rather than linguistic-cognitive vector of scientific research
devoted to this problem.
The content of the concept includes information about what an individual
knows, suggests, thinks, imagines about this or that fragment of the world.
Concepts reduce the diversity of observed phenomena to something single, under
certain categories and classes developed by society. Let us consider in detail the
main definitions of this concept. Investigation of the Conceptual Sphere of
Language allows to reveal features of mental world of this or that ethnos, to see,
metaphorically speaking, specific character of the flight trajectory of human
thought, therefore, to learn the culture on different stages of its formation.
Concepts the thought images behind the language signs have recently become the
subject of the lively attention of linguists [14, p. 54].
The notion of the linguocultural concept, which appeared from cognitive
science, proved to be important and necessary for the study of language, and lay in
the basis of cognitive linguistics. The semantic space of a particular language is
made up of concepts, while the semantic space can be used to judge the knowledge
structures in their concrete national of refraction. The concept is a basic notion that
must be disclosed to the researcher. The term "concept" itself did not appear in
 8

scientific literature until the middle of the 20th century. Many linguists, for
example S. Vorkachev, M. Bong, J. J. Hubner, understood the concept as a mental
formation, which replaces us in the process of thinking an undefined set of subjects
of the same kind [41, p. 139].
There are many different interpretations of the term "linguocultural
concept", which caused to disagreements among researchers. Let us review the
most popular definitions of the term " concept". At present, the term "concept" has
established itself as a fundamental notion in cognitive linguistics as the most used.
Concepts are basic units of thinking. The concept acts as a basis for singling out a
certain totality of language means, which are in relations of representation with the
concept [7]. Concept is the process of "capture" of the meanings of things in the
unity of speech" according to definition by Shavelson R., G. Stanton.
Some researches for example B. L. Rodgers, O. Yurchenko interpret the
concept as a kind of cognitive mental structure, its organization peculiarities make
it possible to reflect reality in the unity of different quality aspects [49, p 40].
As human begins to know the world around him, his consciousness begins to
form a whole system of knowledge about the world, which consists of elements
that are concepts. They come in different levels of fidelity and understanding.
G. Sartori singles out the following factors, which help to form and define the
concepts:
1) human subject activity;
2) sensual experience, i.e. perception of the sensory organs;
3) "derivation" of new concepts when addressing vocabulary definitions of
unfamiliar words.
4) intellectual activity that generates new concepts from existing ones;
5) interpretation and explanation of concepts [46, p. 28].
According to researcher concept is, first and foremost, a unit of abstraction
with the help of which a person can control the thought process. These units reflect
the results of knowledge obtained by a person, the experience he or she has
accumulated. A person thinks in terms of concepts. Analyzing, comparing, joining
 9

different concepts in the process of thinking activity, forms new concepts as a

result of thinking [46, p 34].
Many linguists today share the view of V. Starko that the main elements of
the conceptual system are concepts close to semantic parts of speech, the concept
of the object and its parts, movement, action, place or space, time, sign, etc.
[30, p 13].
The notion of concept, by V. Karasik, is multifunctional because it is widely
used in describing the semantics of language, the meaning of language expressions
is equated with the concepts or conceptual structures expressed in them.
A. Ogar defines the concept as a substitute for cognitive means, calling it
mental formation. A. Pryhodko interprets a concept as a dynamic thinking process
of creation of "notions" as creation of thought and suggests to separate it from the
meaning of words.
According to the opinion of Langaker R the concept refers to such a unit of
mental or mental resources of our consciousness and that information a structure
that reflects human knowledge and experience; an operational unit of memory,
mental lexicon, conceptual system and language of the brain, the whole
a picture of the world reflected in the human psyche".
Analyzing these definitions, we conclude that the researchers have not come
to a common understanding of the term "concept". The concept, like the notion, is
a unit of cognitive order. Architectonics of the concept as a structurally sensory
formation is more complex than the notion's architectonics. But a concept, as
opposed to a notion, is thought and feeling. It follows that its volume is wider than
the notion. The concept includes the concept itself, which in turn is its obligatory
nuclear component.
S. Askoldov believes that a concept is one that belongs to practical
philosophy and reflects various factors of reality. That is, a concept is a unit of
thinking that has a separate integral content and does not really decompose into
smaller thoughts, i.e. the elementary side of the inner layer.
 10

This is the structure of the concepts proposed by V. Demjankov. From the

linguocultural side, the researcher distinguishes the following parts of the concept:
 the figurative part, whose function is to fix the cognitive metaphor,
 conceptual, which reflects its defining structure,
 significant, defined by the place that occupies the name of the concept in the
lexical-grammatical system of a particular of the language, which will also
include its etymological and associative characteristics.
According to the next classification by V. Karasik, the concept consists of
three components such as:
 conceptual,
 figurative
 valuable.
V. Maslova offers the following classification, which consists of such basic
parts as:
1.the main feature of relevance is the main component of structure, more
important for speakers of any language and culture, expressed in a verbal way, it is
a means of communication of representatives of a certain ethnic community,
nation;
2. additional historically passive features - reveals its relevance not for the
whole ethnos; it is available for representatives of a certain social group, for a
certain microsociety;
3. the internal form, which is realized through the external form
etymological sign or internal form is the least relevant for linguistic and conceptual
bearers of any culture, since the life story of words is mostly handled by specialists
of specific science [21, p. 48].
P. Matskiv noticed that due to the fact that a concept is a mental reflection of
changing reality, the content of a concept may be subject to changes in the process
of its functioning: on the one hand, some of its features are transformed over time,
and on the other hand, new features may be included in its structure. Consequently,
 11

it is rather difficult to fully imagine the content of a concept with all its
components [ 22, p. 64].
The concept expands the meaning of the word, providing opportunities for
speculation, fantasying, creating an emotional awfulness of the word.
The word and concept materialize in the same sound/letter complex, and this fact
generates an additional scientific interest, causing a number of questions.
Generalization of the viewpoints on the concept and its definitions in
linguistics leads to the following conclusion: the concept is a unit of collective
consciousness that has a linguistic expression and is marked by ethnic and cultural
specificity. The concept includes not only semantic and conceptual, but also
exclusively subjective perception. Due to concepts it is possible to understand
mentality of this or that nation, to understand an individual. Concepts are stored in
consciousness of people and are expressed not only by means of language, but also
non-verbally, by means of gestures and mimics. With all the variability in
determining the structure of the concept, the constancy of a number of components
can be traced: one way or another, representatives of different directions in
linguistics speak about the figurative and conceptual components of the concept
content and the additional associative-evaluation component [ 22, p. 73].
Thus, V. Maslova believes that cultural concepts are the names of abstract
concepts, therefore cultural information here is attached to the signifier, i.e. the
conceptual nucleus [ 21, p. 42]. N. Alefirenko defined a special connection
between the concept and culture. The scientist believes that the concept is a clot of
culture in the human consciousness; the form in which culture enters the human
mental world. Besides, a concept is the means by which a person, an ordinary
person, enters a culture and in some cases influences it [ 40, p. 15]. V. Karasik,
characterizing concepts as cultural primary formations expressing the objective
content of words and having meaning, asserts that they are translated into various
spheres of human existence, in particular, into the spheres of conceptual, figurative
and active development of the world. The key concepts of culture are called
nuclear (basic) units of the word picture that have existential value as a separate
 12

entity of the linguistic personality, as well as for the linguocultural community as a

whole [ 15, p. 25].
So, various interpretations of the term "linguocultural concept" reflect its
two-way nature:
 as the meaning of the linguistic sign (linguistic and cultural direction);
 as the content side of the sign, represented in the mentality (cognitive
direction).
So, it should be noted that such a division of interpretations of the term
"concept" is relative; all the above-mentioned points of view are related to each
other, rather than opposed to each other. The main differential feature of the
linguocultural approach is that the concept is recognized as an attribute of culture,
a multidimensional global structure consisting of notions, emo - evaluation block,
concise history and etymology. The concept is objective and is historically
deterministic. It may have the status of a cultural constant if it exists continuously
or for a long time. This means that the concept plays the role of a cultural principle
[ 46, p. 31].
At present, the cognitive status of a concept is reduced to its function of
being a bearer and, at the same time, a way of transmitting meaning, to the
possibility to store knowledge about the world, helping to process subjective
experience by bringing information under certain categories and classes developed
by society. This property brings the concept closer to such forms of reflection of
meaning as a sign, image, archetype, with all the obvious distinctions between
these categories, which the concept can contain and in which it is simultaneously
capable of realizing itself.
The main thing in a concept is a multidimensional and discrete integrity of
meaning that exists, however, in a continuous cultural-historical space and
therefore disposes to cultural transmission from one subject area to another, which
allows to name a concept as the main method of cultural transmission. The concept
is thus a means of overcoming the discrete nature of notions of reality and an
complex of these notions [ 46, p. 42].
 13

Summing up, we can conclude that the concept has the following basic
characteristics. A concept is non-discursive in the sense that it is a non-linear: in
this sense, relations of concepts are not textual (sequential) relations, but
hypertextual relations, based not on temporal deployment, but on principles of
reference.
Concepts are hierarchical, their systemic relations form an "image of the
world", a "picture of the world". Perhaps, the most successful terms expressing the
systemic relations of concepts both as cognitive structures and as linguistic
embodiments are the terms " the linguistic picture of the world" and " a language
world image" because it is claimed that "the system and structure of the linguistic
world view are formed by cultural concepts [ 21, p. 34].
The occurrence of the concept is determined by its function in human
consciousness and its participation in the thought process.
In order for the concept to take root as a heuristic category, it is necessary to
separate the systemic, linguistic concept and its speech, contextual incarnations.
The concept and its speech, contextual incarnations are in a relationship
similar to that of phoneme and sound, morpheme and morph. The language
concept is abstract, immaterial, while the speech, contextual incarnations are
material and concrete. Through the verbal, contextual incarnations, the existence of
the concept is realized [ 21, p. 13].
The concept can be considered as a set of its 'external', categorical attribution
and internal, semantic structure with a strict logical organization. The concept is
based on the initial, prototypical model of the basic meaning of the word (i.e. the
invariant of all meanings of the word). In this connection it is possible to speak
about central and peripheral zones of the concept. And the last one is capable of
divergence, i.e. causes the removal of new derivatives of values from the central
one.
 14

1.2.Structural organization of the concept and its typology

The study of the concept represents a modern trend in linguistic science,

generated by advances in cognitive science. In view of the rapid technological
development of mankind, the concept represents a fundamental notion of such
modern sciences as linguoculturology and intercultural communication, as well as
related disciplines.
In modern linguoculturology there are several semantic classifications of
concepts, the author of one of the most complete is V. Maslova. The scientist
believes that all concepts can be divided into
1) concepts about the world (“time”, “homeland”),
2) elements and nature (“water”, “fire”),
3) concepts about human (“genius”, “wanderer”),
4) moral concepts (“truth”, “sin”),
5) social concepts and relations (“friendship”,” war”),
6) emotional concepts (“happiness”,” joy”),
7) the world of artifacts (“house”, “candle”),
8) the conceptual sphere of scientific knowledge (“philosophy”,
“mathematics)”,
9) the conceptual sphere of art (music, dance) classifications [21, p. 63].
In the context of our work, it is important to note that today there are several
typologies of concepts in linguoculturology:
- on the basis of their standardization:
 individual,
 group,
 national [ 21, p. 73].
 in terms of content:
 representations,
 diagrams,
 15

 frames [ 17, p. 15].

 by linguistic expression:
 phrases,
 free combinations,
 syntactic constructions,
 texts [ 17, p. 17].
The concept is presented as a nationally labeled image of culture, which has
a language expression in the form of a word, phrase, sentence and conveys some
linguistic and cultural content that is essential for understanding the national
peculiarities of native speakers. The concept forms a linguistic picture of the world
of this nation [10]. However, each ethnos has special, inherent ratios between
concepts that create the basis of national worldview and world assessment [4, p.
83]. It is also necessary to understand that the conceptual sphere of each individual
person is individual and depends on many reasons: his or her level of education,
politeness, intelligence.
The study of the concept structure shows that the initial empirical image first
acts as a concrete sensual content of the concept, and then becomes a means of
codification, a sign of the multidimensional concept that becomes increasingly
complex as it is understood [11, p. 36]. Consequently, the structure allows
transforming information about the concept and then actualizing this or that word.
The concept has a complex structure. On the one hand, everything that belongs to
the structure of the concept belongs to it and, on the other hand, the structure of the
concept includes "everything that makes it a fact of culture" namely etymology,
history, modern associations, assessments etc [15, p. 25].
The concept can be distinguished by the number of objects included in the
given concept, and by the content which is the set of general and essential features
of the concept. The semantic composition of the concept includes all pragmatic
information of the language sign related to its expressive function. Another
component of the linguistic concept semantics is the "cognitive memory of a
 16

word": semantic characteristics of the linguistic sign associated with its original
purpose and the system of spiritual values of the native speakers of the language
[11, p. 38].
As mentioned earlier, the structure of the concept includes a value
component, conceptual and figurative elements. In the conceptual element of the
concept A. Zalevska singles out the following layers or components that each
concept has:
 the first layer includes the actual main feature;
 the second layer includes one additional or several additional features,
"passive" features;
 the third layer of the concept is its inner form [13, p. 38-39].
In the first layer, i.e. in the actual feature, the concept really exists for all
those who use this language as a means of mutual understanding and
communication. Since a concept is a means of communication, then in this "layer"
a concept is included both in the structures of communication and in thought
processes.
In the second layer, or in additional, "passive" attributes, the concept really
exists only for some social groups.
The third layer, or inner shape, is only revealed by researchers. But that
doesn't mean that the concept doesn't exist in this layer [ 13, p. 39].
In the works of modern linguoconcepts the emphasis is made on the
justification of certain types of concepts that are distinguished on different bases.
Thus, for example, teleonomical concepts S. Vorkachev defines to the highest
values ("happiness", "Motherland", "love", etc.), regulatory concepts, the main
content of which is the norm of behavior, receiving a conceptual, figurative and
value dimension ("freedom", "law", "modesty", etc.), emotional concepts,
characterizing the emotional sphere of a person ("joy", "longing", "anger", etc.).
The description of ethnic-specific concepts expressing special world
understanding of this or that ethnos ("privacy", "punctuality", "art (ability) to live")
is offered. Conceptual groups or fields are analyzed from other positions
 17

("patience", "war", "expression of will", etc.), individual-authors' concepts are

considered in the minds of philosophers and writers. The study of institutional
concepts manifesting themselves in the sphere of certain social institutions
("censure", "service", "guarantee"), ideological concepts, in the content of which
the positions of certain social classes and groups are established ("democracy"),
archetypical concepts ascending to subconscious attitudes in behavior ("betrayal"),
symbolic concepts allowing multiple figurative and value comprehension ("gift")
[ 6, p. 5-7].
From the point of view of theme, the concepts form, for example, emotional,
educational, textual and other conceptual spheres.
From the pragmatic point of view, O. Efimenko divides linguistic-cultural
concepts into:
 philosophical categories, which he calls universal categories of culture
(time, space, reason, change, movement),
 social categories, so-called cultural categories (freedom, right, justice, work,
wealth, property) [ 12, p. 12].
The concepts classified by their sources form individual, microgroup,
macrogroup, national, civilizational, universal conceptual spheres. Concepts
functioning in this or that kind of discourse can be distinguished for example, on
pedagogical, religious, political, medical and other [ 12, p. 13].
Besides, the structure of the notion depends on the type of the analyzed
concept. The analysis of the results of cognitive research shows how diverse the
principles of defining types of concepts are:
1. By the degree of specificity - abstractness of content:
 Concrete;
 abstract [ 24, p. 132].
2. In terms of language nomination:
 nominated ;
 non-nominated [24, p. 141].
 18

3. In terms of sustainability:
 stable;
 unstable [ 25, p. 72].
4. In terms of frequency and regularity of updates:
 current;
 irrelevant [25, p. 81].
5. In terms of structure:
 simple (one-level);
 complex (multilevel);
 segmental;
 composite [25, p. 84].
6. By the method of language expression of the units verbalizing them:,
 text (verbalized by the whole text),
 grammatical,
 syntactic;
7. By nominal density:
 single or individual,
 dual ("semantic doublets", antonymous),
 group (synonymous) [25, p. 91].
8. By standardization:
 universal (invariant);
 national (ethnic), group (belonging to social, age, sexual, and other groups),
 personal (the concept as an individual's property) [ 13, p. 39].
9. In terms of content and degree of abstraction: a concretely sensory image,
representation (a thought picture), scheme, concept, prototype, proposition, frame,
script, hyponymy, insight, and gestalt [25, p. 96].
We can conclude that the complex structure of the concept, including the
following components:
1) international, representing universal human values and beliefs;
 19

2) ethnic;
3) social, representative of social status of the communicators;
4) group - gender, age, professional;
5) individual-personal, reflecting an individual's educational value, his or her
religious views, personal experience, speech style, etc.
Also summing up, we should note that the concept is a basic concept of
linguoculturology, a kind of mental unit with the help of which cultural heritage is
studied in the minds of people. The study of the concepts of a certain ethnic group
makes it possible to understand and realize the peculiarities of its culture and
mentality.
The main features of the concept as a linguative-cultural category can be
summarized as follows:
 universality, generality, abstractness of the idea of something;
 the identity of understanding by recipients with a common mentality;
 cultural-ethical, historical-cultural significance for native speakers;
 the ability to influence the formation of the conceptual sphere within
the collective consciousness;
The totality of concepts specific to a particular nation constitutes a national
conceptual sphere, different from that of other nationalities.
 20

CHAPTER TWO.
LINGUOCULTURAL REPRESENTATION OF THE FRIEND/ENEMY
OPPOSITION IN MODERN ENGLISH

2.1 Peculiarities of representation the "friend/enemy" concept's opposition by

native English speakers

The image of a human being is reconstructed in a multifaceted,

multidimensional and multifunctional way in sociology, physiology, psychology
and linguistics. Often it is a question of perceptual, mental, emotional and willful
"moduses", their varieties and interpenetration. The most extensive and interesting
is the human inner world, the sensual side of his being. The analysis of emotional
manifestations reflected and fixed in a language sign is the most important and
almost the only source of culturological information about "ordinary
consciousness" of the native speakers of any language.
Recently, a lot of attention is drawn to the problem of determining the
opposition of the friend/enemy in English, which by the end of XX century has
caused increased interest among linguists, philosophers, linguoculturalists,
psychologists. As observations show, this concept in linguoculturology is one of
the least studied and clearly defined, while its significance and value is quite high.
This opposition reflects a complex system of spiritual and moral and ethical
dimensions of the world picture and the inner, spiritual life of a person.
This study is conducted in accordance with linguistic-cultural conceptology,
which is characterized by anthropocentrism as an attitude to the comprehensive
coverage of the human factor in language and expansionism as an interdisciplinary
approach to the objects of linguistic research. The friend/enemy's opposition
appears to be a complex emotional and ethical mental formation with a
biopsychosocial origin and a complex gradial structure - a gradial opposition, as
well as its national and cultural specificity in the studied English lingvoculture.
 21

The material of the research of this opposition was lexical units and phraseological
units of the English language. The phraseological material includes phraseological
units, paremias (proverbs ) and stable verbal complexes. The source of the research
material were explanatory, synonymic, antonymic, ideographic, phraseological,
combinatorial dictionaries.
Language, culture and consciousness are inextricably linked; the meanings
of language units reflect the specificity of the national picture of the world. The
unit of linguistic culture is a concept; concepts, being in a systemic relationship
with each other, support the continuity and integrity of culture. Opposition of the
enemy/friend is part of the common cognitive base of mankind and is important in
forming the evaluation attitude of a person to the representatives of friends and
enemies.
In English linguoculture, a conceptual complex reflecting the emotional tone
of social relations is represented by a gradient-concept with radical enemy/friend
opposition. As the central component of the name of this opposition we will
consider a few words -peace, neighborliness, tolerance. The starting point of our
study of the core of the opposition will be its negative pole - enmity/hostility
concept, because, firstly, the determining factor in our study is the biological
determinant of human behavior (aggression and hostility towards other members of
society), and secondly, the negative component, being semantically more complex,
reveals additional antonymous relations.
For British modern society, the problem of forming an enemy image remains
relevant. The interdisciplinary status of this problem is emphasized in
culturological, political, sociological, ethno psychological of work. The study of
the image of the enemy in the British linguoculture is associated with its study as a
problem of social and "mental" history, as a problem of perception of the
"stranger" in extreme situations. In the mass consciousness, the "enemy" is a
collective image [3], which can be personalized and relate to a specific person, and
can also be associated with an ethnic group, state, and society.
 22

The formation of the enemy image in the British linguoculture takes place in
the context of real or symbolic interactions distinguished by the combination of
certain types of relations. For example, there is a mutual hyperbole of "malicious
intentions", there is a "enchanted circle of hostility"[55], and mutual escalation of
enmification increases [55]. The enemy from the point of view of both sides is
always strong, numerous, cruel and insidious, often stupid and necessarily ugly".
He is a stranger, an aggressor, causes physical and mental pain, ruthless and
criminal. The social and psychological nature of the image of the enemy also lies
in the fact that this image is formed at the intersection of different types of
experience of interaction, is based on stereotypes, prejudices, and negative
identification, and is subject to the strongest influence of the mass media, using the
mechanism of cognitive dissonance.
In English, there is a very large list of words expressing an enemy
relationship. The choice of a certain name of a concept must first of all be
conditioned by its ability to enter into antonymous relations with the word
enemy/friends. According to this concept, two words-synonyms - enmity and
hostility - claim to be the origin of an enemy name. Let us consider and compare
dictionary definitions of the words enmity and hostility, as well as such word-
fields (according to the English explanatory dictionaries).
Enmity - 1. hostility; 2. enmity; dislike, anger; malevolence[52].
1) the condition of being a foe [54] ;
2. the perception that enemies have for each other[55];
3) the sense or condition of hostility[52] ;
4) good, active, and typically mutual hatred - the traditional problem of enmity
between Protestants and Catholics , personal enmities and political conflicts;
animosity, antagonism[51].
Based on the vocabulary quoted, the main semantic features of the word
enmity are: -enemy-a feeling or condition of positive, active, and mutual a) hatred,
b) hostility, c) ill will, d) animosity, e) antagonism[54].
 23

The noun enemy expresses the subject of a situation of enmity - foe,

unfriend, rival, military, opponent:
1) a person who feels hate for, supporters harmful thoughts against, or
engages in antagonistic activity against each other; an opponent or foe; one of two
or more people who hate and oppose each other: He is a ruthless businessman and
he s made a lot of enemies (a lot of people hate him), They are enemies (of each
other);
2) a hostile country or state ; a citizen of such a state;
3) an armed foe; an opposing military force (in time of war) - The army
attacked the enemy at dawn, The enemy had advanced and was/were threatening
our communications, enemy forces/missiles, behind enemy lines[54].
4) enemies, persons, nations, etc. that are hostile to one another - Let s make
up and stop being enemies[49] ;
5) something harmful or prejudicial - His unbridled ambition is his worst
enemy, Alcohol was his greatest enemy, Poverty and ignorance are the enemies of
progress [50]
The adjective enemy (derived from a conversion from a noun enemy) is an
enmity attribute - enemy, hostile, belonging to the enemy, unfriendly:
1) hostile power or to any of its nationals - enemy property;
2) obsolete - inimical, ill-disposed.
The word hostility is means: 1. hostility; hostile relations; enmity;
antagonism[54]; 2. hostile act[52]; 3. multitude of hostilities; state of war[53].
The semantic features of the word hostility are presented in the explanatory
dictionaries as follows: 1. deep-seated usually mutual ill will; a hostile state,
condition, or attitude; enmity; antagonism; unfriendliness - feelings of hostility
towards people from other backgrounds[55]
In the "English Dictionary" the word "enemy" has the following meaning:
"relations and actions imbued with hostility, hatred (irreconcilable enmity, to
nourish enmity towards someone)" [34]. By "enemy" we mean a person who has
hostile, evil relations with or between certain groups, sometimes countries, and
 24

even inanimate objects and abstract concepts (My tongue is my worst enemy; The
best is the enemy of the good.). The English Etymological Dictionary provides the
following explanation: "The enemy is the opponent, the foe(If you want to make an
enemy, lend money). Enemy with someone - to be someone's enemy, to do evil, to
recite hostility, to enmity against each other mutually. Enemy, hostility - a state of
warring; dislike, disagreement, malevolence. Enemy, hostility. Enemy (essence) -
grave illness, individual with temporary insanity; falling, shouting, secularism,
eccentricity [36]
The analysis of the element of the analyzed friend/enemy opposition "friend"
in the English language culture is implemented within the framework of the
linguistic-cultural direction, in which we highlight the main, actual feature;
additional, or several additional, "passive" features, which are outdated,
"historical"; internal form, usually unconscious, imprinted in external, verbal form.
In the main feature, in the actual, "active" layer, the concept exists for all people
who use this language as a means of their mutual understanding and
communication.
In additional, "passive" signs of its content, the concept is actual only for
some social groups, while in all cases "historical", "passive" signs of the concept
are actualized mainly when people communicate within a given social group, when
they communicate with each other, not externally, with other groups.
The inner form, or etymological feature, or etymology, is only revealed to
researchers and researchers. For those who use this language, this layer of content
of the concept exists indirectly, as the basis on which the other layers of meaning
have emerged and are held.
To reveal the inner form of a concept, let us turn to its etymology In Middle
English, frend, freond. Originates from the present participle of the verb freon,
freogan, so the meaning of the participle is "loving". In Icelandic froendi, a
kinsman (close relative), is derived from the verb frja - to love. In Swedish,
froinde (a kinsman). In Gothic frijonds, a friend, the present participle of the verb
frijon is to love. In Old Hungarian friunt - to love. In Scottish pri - to love[36].
 25

Consequently, the inner form of a "friend", embedded in his etymology,

contains the component "friend" - a close loved one, a relative[54].
The analysis of the research results of the most actively used lexemes
obtained with the help of Roger Thesaurus allows us to interpret the concept of
friend/enemy in opposition by considering the following elements:
Friend-peace:
Friends allow us not to feel alone, bringing warmth, tranquility and
cordiality to our lives. Since ancient times, it has been observed that a good friend
is like a cure, able to calm and comfort (Bible).
Enemy – war:
The enemy - the hostile relations, enemies make us feel hatred, loneliness,
give a sense of bitterness and resentment.
Friend-Likeness.
Similarity between people is a fundamental requirement when choosing
friends. Most people tend to choose people of their education, age, gender and
social status as friends. In close communication, friends may even adopt each
other's lifestyle or begin to adopt a similar style in their clothing, for example, from
the literature: "Carrie and her friends, who turned out to be unattractive guys in
their twenties, were sitting on a banquette" [Ibidem, p. 169].
The enemy is the difference.
Often people become enemies because of different views of the same thing
or idea, often the basis for hostility is different social status, material expenses,
professional ranks, political and religious views.
Love - Friend
Most often, friendship means not only mutual assistance, but also trust, frankness,
inner intimacy and love. In addition, the concepts of "friendship" and "love" are
often inseparable in human consciousness and are of equal importance. Friendship
can evolve into love over time, and failed lovers can become friends: "The falling
out of friends is the renewal of love. The falling out of lovers is the renewal of
 26

friendship" (proverb) All this allows us to come to the conclusion that love and
friendship are inseparable for man.
Enemy - Hate
The concept of the enemy is connected with another feeling, unlike
friendship and love, enemies most often cause a feeling of hatred, and they are
interconnected. Very often, a simple dislike of someone can turn into a stronger
feeling, first quiet disloyalty, then open hostility, later enmity.

2.2 Formation and functioning of semantic fields devoted to the concept

«friend/enemy» in English

In English culture – we can clearly see a certain coolness, distancing the

English linguistic personality. The semantic field of this concept of friend has no
special distinguishing features, although it is undoubtedly a valuable thing of man-
made origin (value, cherish, afraid to lose it, to set a value on friendship; to
make/form/knit/cement/ strike up/cultivate friendship). It also behaves like a human
being; English friendship, however, does not have any part of the human body, but
it can hurt: "The most fatal disease of friendship is gradual decay" (Johnson).
"There's the silence of a great hatred ... / And the silence of an embittered
friendship" (Masters).
. The main generic feature of the English lexicography of the part of the
"friend" position is the lexeme of a relationship or acquaintance, which is further
revealed through semantic multipliers: affection, trust, mutual understanding,
closeness, connection, community, frankness, mutual help, mutual help, sympathy,
acceptance, love, respect, mutual benefit in dictionaries and the state of, condition
of being friends, feeling, behaviour, attachment, instance, period of the feeling - in
the English dictionaries.
With the concept of friend there was a semantic shift towards "friend",
where you can have many such friends. In old use, this concept meant that friends
 27

will be loved, and in new - that friends will bring pleasure, joy. A lexicographical
study of the synonymous range of the concept is being conducted: associate,
companion, comrade, crony, conversational pal, americ of conversations, buddy,
companion usually refers to a person associated with someone primarily by the
circumstances of personal life, sometimes only at the moment - a companion in the
game, a companion on the way, (random) interlocutor, etc., in contrast, companion
does not refer to a business or official relationship, but rather to a friendship that
manifests itself in a shared leisure experience. companion refers to a person who is
associated with someone with a common outlook or cause, and often also to a
friendship based on complete equality: comrades-in-arms[55].
Comrade comes close to companion when it comes to children's friendship.
Comrade most often describes situations of an old friendship, i.e. a friendship that
began in childhood or adolescence, regardless of whether friends have been
separated since then or have been in constant contact until adulthood [54].
Pal and buddy refers to people with whom a person spends their leisure time
or does some work together and with whom they are or may be connected in a
family friendly relationship. In contrast to buddy, pal more often implies a closer,
personal, almost friendly relationship of mutual trust, willingness to support, etc.,
and in this respect comes close to the word comrade.
While the most frequent syntagmatic characteristics of the lexeme "friend”
as an English-speaking audience are sincere, close, deep warm (heart), lifelong,
which also reflects in sufficient The description of the paradigmatic series of word
reactions made it possible to define the deep semantic structure of this lexeme.
Dominants in the search for synonyms of English The lexemes of "friend" were:
happiness, fun, confidence. trust, love, help.
In English, associations company, help, together, fun, socializing constitute
the positive zone of the concept of "friend".
So, In the center of semantic field of the “friend” there will be words
“companion”, “comrade”, “Partner” , “intimate” , “supporter”, “ally”. The
 28

word “companion” is borrowed from the Latin language and literally means “he
who eats bread together” (lat. Com - with, pan - bread) [34].
The word "comrade" came into English in the 16th century from Spanish,
"camarada" - soldiers who shared one room for standing, in Latin the word
"camara" meant "room"[34].
“Partner” comes from the word “parcener” (co-successor), which, in turn,
was borrowed from Latin (Latin partire - to share). “Intimate” also came from the
Latin language in the 16th century, and had the same meaning “closest friend”
[36].
Further, in the second peripheral zone will include words belonging to
ordinary vocabulary, that is, colloquial speech: “old man”,, “buddy”, “brother”,
“bro”, “crony”, “pal”, “old boy”, “old chap”, “chuck”, “cobber”, “fellow”,
"Old guy", "old bean", "spud".
The word "crony" in the 17th century was invented by students of
Cambridge University and students took the Greek word “khronios” as the basis,
which means “long-term”[34].
"Pal" was borrowed in the 17th century from the language of gypsies living
in England, pal - brother[34].
“Bro” is an abbreviation of the word “brother”, “cobber” comes from the
Australian version of English, cob [34].
The word “fellow” means as “man, boyfriend, partner, friend, comrade” and
has rather interesting etymological roots[34].
Guy is supposedly borrowed from French, where guie is a guide, adviser,
consultant [34].
It should be noted that in this case the word “old” is often used, which, as it
were, indicates a long friendship (an old friend, an old, time friend)[55].
In English, there are a huge number of phraseological units and stable
expressions related to the concept of "friend." Let's list some of them: “be on a
friendly footing with”, “make an alliance”, “have belief in”, “give one`s
confidence to somebody”, “Place dependence in somebody”, “place reliance in
 29

somebody”, “have trust in somebody” , “row in the same boat with somebody”,
“Wear somebody`s colors” , “give countenance to somebody”, “hunt in couples” ,
“Be cap and can”, “hold in esteem”, “look with favorite on”, “make friends
(with)” , “Strike up a friendship” , “be on the same side of the fence”, “mend
one`s fences” “Be finger and thumb” [54].
A friend is the antonym of the enemy, if enmity is a relationship and action
imbued with hostility, mutual hatred, then friendship is a relationship and action
imbued with sympathy, mutual love.
The semantic field of the word "enemy" can create words such as "dislike",
"discord", "hatred", "rivalry", "strife", "struggle", " division", i.e. words with
negative emotional coloring, expressed to a certain extent.
According to the Dictionary of English, hatred is a feeling of disgust,
aversion, desire for evil; hate is a feeling of enmity, malice, the strongest dislike
(Good in the hatred of evil); strife is a dispute, singing, rivalry, disagreement,
quarrels, unrest[54].
In English linguoculture, "enemy" is associated with the words "enmity"
hostility, animosity, malice, antagonism" ,evil will , malicious intent[55].
The word "enmity" is borrowed in the 13th century A.D. from Old French,
formed from the word enemistie - "adversary, foe" [34].
The concept of "enemy" in English, is perceived first of all “as a person
opposed to any political beliefs, hostile to the state power, opponent" [53] and then
as "enemy of a certain person, a person trying to intentionally harm someone"[55].
If the concept of "enmity" is conditionally represented as a functional-
semantic field, then in the nuclear zone, i.e. in the center, the "enemy" mentioned
above will be located. Further in the first peripheral zone should be placed
synonyms of this word: "enemy", "opponent", "foe", "hater".
According to Dictionary, the enemy is an for, hostile, disliked person; the
enemy is
1) enemy troops;
2) a person who is hostile to someone;
 30

enemy
1) a person who opposes someone or something, is hostile;
2) enemy, rival;
3) rival - a person who rivals, i.e. fights, competes with someone in
something [55].
In the next, second peripheral zone, we place the words found in everyday,
spoken speech, i.e. those words which native English speakers in everyday life in
relation to the enemies. This will include cursing vocabulary. For example:
"bastard", "snake" ("to warm the snake on the chest" - quite common phraseology,
which means "to trust, treat well a person who does not deserve friendship and
respect"), "beast ""and so on.
It is necessary to pay attention to the fact that the names of animals are
mainly used, as if creatures that are on a lower level than man. "Snake" refer to
some cunning and insidious creature (snake-temptation in the Bible). The words
"bastard" and "creature" are essentially insults, also have a pronounced negative
connotation and mean "some creature causing dislike and disgust". In relation to
their enemies, people are often not shy in terms of expressions.
“Opponent” is usually used to mean “an adversary, a rival in a political
struggle, a person opposing the interests of a party, or a rival in sports”[55].
“Adversary” can also be perceived as “a competitor in the struggle, in
competitions, a personal enemy and an opponent of something”[55].
“Antagonist” - “an opponent in disputes, debates, discussions, competitions,
as well as some substance that neutralizes the action of another” [54].
"Foe" is used in the meaning of "military adversary, enemy, ill-wisher."
[54].
“Rival” has the following semantic meaning: “competitor, competing
organization, team, rival in any field”[54].
The word "adversary" in the 14th century CE was borrowed from Latin,
adversus - “against”. In Old English, the word “fah” meant “hostile,” in Old
 31

German “fehan” - “to hate,” in Old Norse “feikn” - “terrible, scary, nasty,” thus
the word “foe” [34].
“Opponent” is formed from the verb “oppose”, which is borrowed from the
Latin “opponere”, “ob” - “against”, “ponere” - “to put”[54].
In the second peripheral zone will be placed words related to abusive
vocabulary and vulgarisms, such as: “dirty dog” (trashy, vile person, scum,
scoundrel), “snake”, “viper” (scoundrel, reptile, snake), “Swine” (cattle, scum,
pig), “tripe”, “bag of tripe” (trash, scum), “beast” (monster, creature), “crud”.
As can be seen from the above examples, the names of animals are also used here
(“dog”, “snake”, “viper”, “swine”)[54].
In the third, most extensive zone, there will be stable phrases and
phraseological turns of various types characterizing hostile relations. Here we
include verbal phraseological units: “agree like cats and dogs”[34], “agree like
harp and harrow”[34],“mask one`s batteries”[34] , “bear somebody malice”[34],
"bear hard"[34], "be in somebody`s beard"[34], "breed bad blood" [34], “cast a
bone between”[34], “cross somebody`s path”[34], “get in the way”[34], “have a
crow to pluck with somebody "[34]," have a down on some body "[34]," entertain
a feeling against[34], “hate like poison[34].
. In the same zone we will place the most frequently used expressions and
combinations with the word “enemy”. For example: “sworn enemy; archenemy;
avowed enemy; deadly enemy, mortal enemy, fast foe dire foe; nemesis ”. Of
particular interest are phraseological phrases such as “how goes the enemy?”, “to
kill the enemy”. In these cases, time, although in an ironic form, is associated with
the enemy.
Thus, having analyzed the concepts of “friend” and “enemy”, we can
conclude that these concepts have both universal features and national-cultural
specificity in the English language and this specificity is embodied in English
phraseology.
 32

CONCLUSIONS

In the course of our research we came to the conclusion that the opposition
of the enemy friend can be thought of not only as dual, but also as a graded
friendship-world enmity, friendship-peace/tolerance, and neighbors-
enmity/hostility.
This opposition together represents a special case of a gradient-concept, a
conceptual complex whose components are in a gradient opposition relationship.
The enemy/friend opposition can be represented by a multitude of multi-member
gradient oppositions, each of which has its own semantic trait. The semantic
connections of the English opposition are based not only on conceptual, but also on
value intersections. In the formation of the concept the enemy/friends of British
cultures play a major role not only social, but also biological factor associated with
the congenital aggression of man as a biological being, and therefore the enmity
gets a wider objective and ambivalent assessment in the English language pictures
of the world.
"Enemy" in the understanding of English linguistic culture is a relationship
and action based on mutual hatred and hostility. In English, the "enemy" is
considered, first of all, as a political opponent, and only then, as a personal enemy,
competitor, rival. Also, in English, “enemies” are seen as “military opponents;
countries hostile to each other, at war”.
In the English language, phraseological verb phrases prevail, the main
emphasis is on the actions of the warring parties. “Agree like cats and dogs”, “a
snake in the grass”, “to nourish a viper in one`s bosom”. Many phraseological
units mean various obstacles and obstacles caused by enemies ("put a spoke in
someone`s wheel", "throw sand in the wheels", "put grit in the machine"). In
English phraseological turns, “enemy” is inextricably linked with such concepts as
a feeling of hatred, hostility, disgust, contempt, meanness, betrayal; "Enemy" is
 33

seen as some kind of evil. From the foregoing, it can be concluded that native
English speakers associate the image of the “enemy” with feelings that have a
pronounced negative connotation.
The perception of this concept in English-speaking society is almost
identical. But it should also be noted that in English, "enmity" as "competition,
rivalry, clash of beliefs" is of great importance.
Let us pass to the conclusions concluded on the basis of the consideration of
the concept of "friendship." And in the English language picture of the world,
"friendship" is associated with the provision of support, assistance, with warm,
gentle feelings, trust. Basically, all phraseological units associated with this
concept carry a positive emotional characteristic. In English, “friendship” is seen
as a mutual affection of people, a close relationship based on mutual respect for
mutual understanding. Friends are understood as close people whose relationships
are imbued with respect, affection, love and understanding. In English, the word
"friend" also refers to military allies, members of one party, society, as well as a
patron, supporter, adherent. " There are many English and Russian proverbs about
friendship. Some of them warn against the betrayal of friends, some talk about the
need for reciprocity in a relationship.
In English phraseological phrases related to the concept of “friendship”, the
words “belief, reliance, favor, support, liking” are used, i.e. "Feelings on which
friendship is built." In English, phraseology, expressions are used that emphasize
the closeness and inseparability of friends, for example: “shoulder to shoulder”,
“be finger and thumb”, “hand and glove”, characterizing the close relationship
between friends. The names of literary heroes associated with friendships,
borrowed from myths and biblical tales and become common nouns (Orestes and
Pilad, Castor and Pollux, Damon and Pythias, David and Jonathan), are also very
often used.
The study of relations on the scale of emotion with the poles "friend" and
"enemy" seems to make an invaluable contribution to the study of human nature
and its ethical standards, with the identification of ethno specific.
 34

REFERENCES

1. Балашова Л. В. Реализация концептов «свой – чужой» в политическом

дискурсе начала ХХІ в. Политическая лингвистика. Екатеринбург,
2015. № 1 (47). С. 40–50.
2. Вільчинська Т. Основні підходи до визначення концепту в
лінгвістичній парадигмі. Наукові записки Тернопільського
національного педагогічного університету. Серія: Cуперечливі
аспекти. 251 Мовознавство. Тернопіль : Підручники і посібники, 2009.
Вип. 2 (18) 2008. С. 26 -33.
3. Воркачев С. Г. Концепт как зонтиковый термин. Язык, сознание,
коммуникация. М., 2003. Вып. 24. С. 5 – 12.
4. Дацишин Х. Концепт «чужий» у політичному дискурсі. Вісник
Львівського ун-ту. Серія Журналістика. 2015. Вип. 39. С. 296–302.
5. Григорьев В. П. Грамматика идиостиля. М., 2003. 168 c.
6. Голобородько К.Ю. Лінгвістичний статус концепту. URL:
http://dspace.nbuv.gov.ua/bitstream/handle/123456789/75094/09Goloborod
ko.pdf?sequence=1
7. Демьянков В.З. Понятие и концепт в художественной литературе и
научном языке. Вопр. филологии. 2001. № 1. С. 35 – 47.
8. Єфименко 2005: Єфименко, О. Є. Концепт СТЕП в українській мові:
словникова, текстова і психолінгвістична парадигма: автореф. дис…
канд. філол. наук: 10.02.01. Харк. нац. пед. ун-т ім. Г. С. Сковороди. Х.,
2005. 19 с.
9. Залевская А. А. Психолингвистический подход к проблеме концепта.
Методологические проблемы когнитивной лингвистики. Воронеж:
Воронежский государственный университет. 2001. С. 36-44.
10.Іващенко В.Л. Типологічна диференціація концептуальних структур як
одиниць ментального простору. Мовознавство. 2004. № 1. С. 54 – 61.
 35

11.Карасик В. Языковой круг: личность, концепты, дискурс. М., 2004. 214

с.
12.Кристалл Д., Дейви Д. Лингвокультурный анализ концепта. Новое в
зарубежной лингвистике. Вып.9. М.,2000. 13-19 с.
13.Кузнєцова Т. В. «Свій» / «чужий» у текстовому просторі ЗМІ. Стиль і
текст. 2017. Вип. 8. С. 59–65.
14.Кубрякова Е.С. Об установках лингвокультурной науки и актуальных
проблемах лингвистики. Вопросы когнитивной лингвистики. 2004,
№1. С. 6-17.
15.Левенкова Е.Р. Репрезентация концепта enemy в политическом
дискурсе США. М., 2018. 13 с.
16.Літяга В. Поняття "концепт" у парадигмі сучасних лінгвістичних
досліджень. Вісник Київського національного університету імені
Тараса Шевченка.№2. 2017.с.23-28.
17.Маслова В. А. Лингвокультурология: Учебное пособие.Мн.:
ТетраСистемс, 2004. 256 с.
18.Мацьків П. Концептосфера БОГ в українському мовному просторі.
Дрогобич: Коло, 2007. 332 с.
19.Михайлова Е.В. Conceptual aspects of the notion of “a model of the world”
in cultural studies. K., 2015. 124 p.
20.Мозиков М.Б., Макарова Н.В. Концепт «enemy» в англо-американском
языковом сознании. Материалы IX Международной студенческой
научной конференции «Студенческий научный форум» 2017. URL: <a
href="http://scienceforum.ru/2017/article/2017031920">http://scienceforum.
ru/2017/article/2017031920</a>
21.ПальчевськаО. С. Концепт ШЛЯХ в англійській, французькій та
українській мовах: лінгвокогнітивний та етнолінгвістичний ракурси:
автореф. дис… канд. філол. наук: 10.02.15. Донецьк. нац. ун-т.
Донецьк, 2006. 20 с.
 36

22.Приходько А. Н. Концепти і концептосистеми в когнітивно-

дискурсивній парадигмі лінгвістики. Дніпро: Прем‘єр, 2015. 308 с.
23.Полюжин М., Остапчук А. Типология и основные функции концептов.
Науковий вісник Східноєвропейського національного університету
імені Лесі Українки. Розділ І. Когнітивна лінгвістика. 4, 2015. c. 81-91.
24.Огар А. Суперечливі аспекти поняття “концепт”. Проблеми
гуманітарних наук. випуск 32. Філологія. 2010. 18 c.
25.Онипенко Н. К. Грамматические категории в тексте.Лингвистика на
рубеже эпох. М., 2001. 146 с.
26.Орлов В.Ю. Понятие «враг/enemy» в русском и английскомязыковом
пространстве. Научное сообщество студентов XXI столетия.
ГУМАНИТАРНЫЕ НАУКИ: сб. ст. по мат. VII междунар. студ. науч.-
практ. конф. № 7. 2018. 15 с.
27.Селіванова, О. О. Сучасна лінгвокультурологія: термінологічна
енциклопедія. Полтава: Довкілля.2006. 716 с.
28.Словарь литературоведческих терминов под ред. Белокуровой
С. П. М.,2005.342 c.
29.Старко В. Ф. Концепт ГРА в контексті слов‘янських і германських
культур (на матеріалі української, російської, англійської та німецької
мов): автореф. дис… канд. філол. наук: 10.02.15. НАН України Ін-т
мовознавства ім. О. О. Потебні. К., 2004. 17 с.
30.Старкова Е. В. Проблемы понимания феномена концепта в
лингвистических исследованиях. Киров, 2015.146 с.
31.Орлов В.Ю. Языковая реализация концепта «враг/enemy». Успехи
современного естествознания. 2015. № 8. 35 c.
32.Фильде В. Г. Оппозиция «свой» – «чужой» в культуре : дисс. …к.
филос. Наук. Омск, 2015. 152 с.
33.Фісак І. Категорія концепт. Філологічні науки. 2015. № 17. c. 60-75.
 37

34.Фоменко Е.Г. Лингвотипологическое в идиостиле. URL:

http://www.james-joyce.ru/articles/lingvotipologicheskoe-v-idiosile-
joysa3.htm
35.Фоминых Н.В. Концепт, концептор и художественний текст.
Методологические проблемы когнитивной лингвистики: научное
издание. Воронеж : Воронежский государственной університет, 2001.
С. 176 – 179.
36.Цьмух О. Поняття «концепт» у сучасному лінгвістичному дискурсі.
Лінгвістичні студії: Збірник наукових праць.2017. 13-21 с.
37.Юрченко О.В. Definition of concept in modern linguistic researches.
Запорізький національний університет, 2016. 346 c.
38.Aryeh Botwinick. Same/Other versus Friend/Enemy. The Oxford Handbook.
2017. 116 p.
39.Austin, John Langshaw How to Do Things With Words. Harvard University
Press, 2nd edition, 2005. 168 p.
40.Bong, M., & Clark, R.E.Comparison between concept in academic
motivation research. Educational Psychologist, 34(3), 139-153 р.
41.Bong, M., & Clark, R.E.Comparison between concept in academic
motivation research. Educational Psychologist, 34(3), 139-153 р.
42.Dyke T.A. Van Cognitive Processing of Literature Discourse. Poetics
Today. 1999. № 1. p. 143-160.
43.Dyke T.A. van. Studies in The Pragmatics of Discourse. Series Major;
101The Hague, Paris, 1991. 331 p.
44.Eco U. The role of the reader: Explorations in the semiotics of texts.
Bloomington, 2004. 273 p.
45.English expressions: textbook.Oxford: AST, 2017. 231 p.
46.Foley Angela S. A Guide to Concept Analysis. 2017. 73 р.
47.Klein E.A. A Comprehensive Etymological Dictionary of the English
Language. New York, 2016.
 38

48.Kumankov A. Concept of Enemy New opportunities and impasses:

theorizing and experiencing politics. Istanbul: DAKAM Publishing, 2015.
43p.
49.Langacker R. Concept, Image and Symbol. The Cognitive Basis of
Grammar. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 2001. 321 p.
50.Langaker R.W. The conceptual basis of cognitive semantics. Language and
conceptualization. Eds. J. Nuyts, E. Pederson. Cambridge, 1999. 435 p.
51.Nuopponen A. Methods of concept analysis: a comparative study. LSP.
2010. 121 р.
52.Pieter Nicolas. Enemy Character Сoncept. 2015. 341 p.
53.Reinhard Mehring. Carl Schmitt’s Friend-Enemy Distinction Today. 2017
URL:http://www.doiserbia.nb.rs/img/doi/0353-5738/2017/0353
57381702304M.pdf
54.Rodgers B.L. Concepts, analysis and the development. The evolutionary
cycle. 2008. 335р.
55.Oppenheimer L. The Development of Enemy concept . NY, 2016. 144 p.
56.Oxford Guide to British and American Culture Текст. ed. J. Crowther. Fifth
impression. 2nd ed Oxford University Press. Oxford, New York, 2016.606 p.
57.Policarpo V. An Exploratory Typology of the Meanings of Friendship
cobcept social sciences. 2015. 21 p.
58.Samarskaya T. Artistic discourse: specificity of components and
peculiarities of artistic text organization. M., 2018. 152 p.
59.Sartori G. Concepts: A Systematic Analysis. New York, NY: Sage; 2004.
153р.
60.Shavelson, R. J., & Bolus, R. Сoncept: The interplay of theory and methods.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 74(1), 2018. 56 p.
61.Shavelson, R. J., Hubner, J. J. Сoncept: Validation of construct
interpretations. Review of Educational Research, 46 (3), 2013. p. 407–441.
62.Sion L. Enemy Making The SAGE Encyclopedia of War: Social Science
Perspectives. 2018. 15 p.
 39

63. Skeat W. Concise Etymological Dictionary of English Language. Oxford:

Clarendon Press, 2001. 563 p.
64.Vilho H. On the concepts of the “other” and the “enemy”. 2017. 21 p.
65. Webster`s New Century Dictionary. New York, 2016.
66.Wouter G. Werner the Concept of the Enemy in International Legal
Thinking. 2017. 170 p.