The Use of Connotations with a Specific Subject Meaning on the

Example of the Lexeme «Dog»

Maria V. Suntsova

Kaluga State University Named After K. E. Tsiolkovski, Kaluga, Russia

Keywords: Language, Word, Connotation, Denotative Meaning, Connotative Meaning.

Abstract: The names of animals are associated with history, ethnography and thinking of people, since the outer world

and its internal interpretation are the factors that give rise to the linguistic picture of the world of any national

language, as far as the natural environment is also an important part of the linguistic picture of the outer world.

Consequently, the study of the connotation of the word "dog" is of interest in both nominative and

communicative respects, as it has additional meanings. When determining the meaning of a word, a certain

notion is used. At the same time a word can have a different meaning, which has nothing to do with the

scientific definition. In particular, it can not only denote a phenomenon or thing, but also serves as an

evaluative notion; helps a person express his feelings or his attitude to the surrounding reality. Given all of

this, national features of society and of a particular individual, emotiveness, evaluative component,

expression, social status of a group or individual play an important role.

1 INTRODUCTION

The image of a dog in modern Russian culture is

perceived in two ways. On the one hand, the lexeme

«dog» has a positive connotation: «dog’s loyalty», «a

dog is a friend of man». Moreover, there is a common

Russian phraseological unit « zazhivaet kak na sobake

», meaning that an injury or wound heals very

quickly, without any complications. The derivative

verb « nasobachit'sya » also has a positive

connotation with the meaning «to get the hang of

something, to get used to something». But on the

other hand, the dog personifies meanness, difficulty

and unbearable situation («life of a dog», « holod

sobachij» in the meaning of «freezing cold»).

2 MATERIALS AND METODS

There has been carried out a comparative analysis of

the word "dog" in comparison with the dictionary

meanings of the Big Academic Dictionary, the

Explanatory Dictionary, as well as the data of the

information and reference system - National Corpus

of the Russian Language.

1.1 Problem Statement

Taking into consideration the widespread

phenomenon of connotation in various fields of

scientific knowledge, it is unthinkable to speak about

the lexical meaning of a word without its additional

meanings; therefore it is necessary to study

phraseological units with the meaning «dog» in order

to understand which properties of the lexeme are

relevant for the speaker of a particular language

1.2 Research Questions

To compare the direct meaning of the lexeme «dog»

and to characterize its connotative meaning?

To exemplify by the lexeme «dog» why certain

peoples have formed worldview positions associated

with this lexeme?

1.3 Purpose of the Study

As a rule, when forming the so-called active-type

dictionaries, scientific information is not used,

therefore it is so important to exemplify not only the

direct meaning of the word "dog", but to explain the

connotative one.

Suntsova, M.

The Use of Connotations With a Speciﬁc Subject Meaning on the Example of the Lexeme Â

nDogÂ

DOI: 10.5220/0011609100003577

In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Actual Issues of Linguistics, Linguodidactics and Intercultural Communication (TLLIC 2022), pages 173-175

ISBN: 978-989-758-655-2

 2023 by SCITEPRESS – Science and Technology Publications, Lda. Under CC license (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)

173

3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

In different cultures dog was perceived differently, it

had different functions in the mythological system. In

every culture the image of the dog was not

unambiguous. Our culture has been influenced by

both Eastern and Western cultures. In the East the

mythological role of dog was embodied in both

positive and negative images. In particular, according

to Chinese folk legends, it follows that dog

personifies more than one symbol. First of all, a dog

can symbolize the spirit of an ancestor, a famous folk

hero, as well as a being that connects several

dimensions; very often a dog is a constant companion

of a personage; sometimes a dog can even represent a

negative monster.

Let's turn to European culture. Ancient Greek

culture is considered to be the source and fundament

of Western culture. Homer’s works the «Iliad» and

«Odyssey» are the most recognized monuments of

ancient Greek culture. In his work «The Deciphered

Iliad» Lev Klein claims that dog was one of the

animal species that was assigned a corpse-eating role.

In the «Iliad» there are repeated descriptions of the

death of a person followed by the process of eating

remains by dogs (Klein, 2014)

In those times it did not make dogs a dirty animal,

on the contrary, it put them above the rest, since

people tried to protect themselves from infection and

this way of burial was believed to be normal. The

dead bodies of the poor were eaten by public dogs,

whereas wealthy citizens raised personal dogs for this

occasion. The process of eating remains by dogs was

replaced by burning the bodies but the situation when

the dead bodies were torn apart by dogs was not

believed to be normal anymore and was described as

a disgrace to a man. Consequently, there was a re-

consideration of the significance of dog in the cultural

paradigm in ancient Greece. If we turn to J. Cooper's

«Encyclopedia of Symbols», we will find out that the

significance of this animal in different cultures is very

different (Cooper, 1995)

For a Russian person, the most relevant

associations are those of Christian and ancient Greece

culture - the cradle of European culture. According to

J. Cooper, among Christians dog signifies

«allegiance, devotion, fidelity». In the role of a flock

guardian dog personifies «the Good Shepherd,

bishop, or preacher».

It should be noted that apparently it refers to

Catholics. There was a different attitude towards dogs

in ancient Greece: in the Greek language the word

«dog» was refered to a derogatory term supposing

arrogance and adulation. Thus, the controversial

attitude towards dog finds confirmation in various

sources; this fact is also confirmed by the scientists

who studied them.

Now we will consider the modern times semantic

content of the words denoting dogs. Let's start with

the fact that all the words denoting a given animal,

including the most neutral ones - mutt, dog, puppy, as

well as female dog, male dog - can be used as a

metaphor with a negative connotation in relation to a

person: firstly, dog (figuratively) - with some

disregard for a person who is unduly eager for

protecting the interests of someone, serving someone,

something; secondly, about an evil, cruel, bad person

and so on ( Ozhegov, 1993). Dog – firstly, it is about

a person who provokes indignation, who deserves to

be despised for his behavior, actions; secondly, it is a

swear word; thirdly, a watchdog, a service dog, etc.;

fourthly, it is about a person who zealously serves the

reactionary forces of society, etc. Puppy (colloquial)

- about a young, inexperienced person. Male

(colloquial, abusive) - about a healthy, lascivious

man. Female dog (colloquial) is used as a swear word

(usually in relation to a woman). The word mongrel

has a neutral meaning: a small dog, usually a non-

pedigree dog. (Big encyclopedic dictionary, 1998,

1999, 2002)

Nevertherless, it is the Russian word «shavka»

(mongrel) that serves as a reason why zoorealists use

the Russian slang words «shavlo, shavkal»

(mongrel+jackal) and «shanus» (a combination of the

names of two famous stray dogs Shanya and Bonus)

when naming stray dogs. Really huge sums of money

were raised for their treatment. As a result, the word

«shanus» began to be used to refer to the collective

image of stray non-pedigree dogs, found by

volunteers; the dogs the money is raised for. This

word has negative and disdainful connotative

meaning.

Those who advocate for euthanizing or any other

way of getting rid of these creatures use a big number

of specific lexemes and phrases when speaking about

dogs: «BS» (stray dogs), «blohovoz» (a compound

word formed from the combination carries fleas, the

semantics - dirty and contagious), «mehovoy

chesanism» (a modified sentry mechanism, semantics

- the presence of diseases, parasites, contagiousness),

«blochozavr» (a compound word, a modified

dinosaur and fleas), «sobanya» (sarcastically). The

existing words in the language are not bypassed by

the attention of zoorealists, for a example, the word

«kabyzdoh» for denoting a domestic dog, referring it

to a pitiable, unsightly animal, mainly a dog or a

horse.

TLLIC 2022 - I INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE "ACTUAL ISSUES OF LINGUISTICS, LINGUODIDACTICS AND

INTERCULTURAL COMMUNICATION"

174

On the other hand, radical animal rights activists

have different names for the same animal. There are

not so many of them and they are most likely

connected with the desire to alleviate the negative

effect from the words naming the dogs; we found that

it is clearly present in the semantics of these lexemes

when working with the material from dictionaries.

For example, these are the words «pesel, sobaken»

which refer to aggressive dogs: only yesterday I saw

someone's or nobody's dog running around, an

absolutely calm. «sobaken». Very often the words for

naming people can be used for naming dogs: child

(puppy), boy, girl, baby, guy.

There are really hot discussions on the Internet

about who is right in their attitude to stray (and

domestic) dogs; the language of the opinions is quite

expressive. It is not difficult to determine the position

of this or that author. For example, this

Timokha is looking for the parents. The puppy is

6 months old. Very affectionate and obedient baby.

Doesn't damage anything at home. It will be a real

beauty when it is grown up. Treated against

parasites. Learning to walk ouside. Even now

displays protective qualities. Would suit a flat or a

private house (not on a chain). The baby is waiting

for his mum and dad. Get yourself a plush friend and

you won't regret it! (National corpus of the Russian

language, 2021).

As can be seen in the above example of the

advertisement, the dog is named by the lexeme

peculiar for naming a person (baby). The prospective

owners are expected to become the parents (looking

for the parents). Special attention is given to the

beauty of the animal (it will be a real beauty when it

is grown up, to its cleanliness and safety and even

usefulness (doesn't damage, treated against parasites,

protective qualities). The dog is given a human name

Timokha; it is attributed some human qualities

(affectionate and obedient). Finally, it turns to be a

lovely toy (plush friend).

In contrast to this position, the author of the

following example draws our attention to the other

side of these creatures and their supporters; thereby,

he uses different vocabulary:

It will be a good idea for «zoobaby» (animal

rights activists) to take all the «shavki» (mongrels)

home and not to shift the responsibility for «shavlo»

(mongrel+jackal) to the people around. Why do they

demand to build shelters AT OUR EXPENSE for

keeping the dogs for life, whereas there are people

who are in need of this money more than dogs? Or

probably there are no problems in medicine, the level

of life, pensions? иях? It is a kind of cancer. It is a

pity that this cancer is not «sterilized» in order to

prevent further reproduction.

P.S. If a dog is outside not wearing a muzzle,

without a leash or an owner – you have the right to

kill it for self-defense, because it is an wild animal

that tried to attack you, am I right? (National corpus

of the Russian language, 2021.)

Here the dogs are named by the words with

negative connotation (shavki, shavlo). The radical

animal rights activists are also judged negatively

(zoobaby). The given position can be explained by the

fact that ideological enemies equate man with animal.

The author notes the tendency of the opponents to

anthropomorphise animals. Special attention is given

to the danger to others; the author emphasizes that an

animal is not a part of the society (wild) and it is

dangerous for people (tried to attack you). Here we

can speak about a tactic to humiliate, diminish the

status of the opponent. The author also uses a tactic

«friend-foe», when he is together with the readers (at

our expense).

4 CONCLUSIONS

Thus, the value worldview in the language is

reconstructed in the form of interrelated value

judgments, correlated with legal, religious, moral

codes, commonly approved judgments of common

sense, typical folklore and famous literary plots. The

system of moral values and ethical norms of the

conflicting parties differ radically, in the linguistic

expression it is focused on the meaning of the lexeme

«dog» (Tripolskaya, 1999).

REFERENCES

Big encyclopedic dictionary, 1999. Great Russian

Encyclopedia. 2nd ed. p. 617.

Big encyclopedic dictionary, 1998. Linguistics. p. 1117.

Big encyclopedic dictionary: philosophy, sociology,

religion, esotericism, political economy, 2002. p. 911.

Klein, L., 2014. Deciphered "Iliad". p. 574.

National corpus of the Russian language, 2021.

http://www.ruscorpora.ru/new/index.html

Cooper, J., 1995. Encyclopedia of symbols. Series

"Symbols". Book IV. Association for Spiritual Unity

"Golden Age". p. 401.

Ozhegov, S. I., Shvedova, N. Yu., 1993. Explanatory

dictionary of the Russian language: 80,000 words and

phraseological expressions. 4nd ed. Higher school.

Tripolskaya, T. A., 1999. Emotive-evaluative discourse:

cognitive and pragmatic aspects / T. A. Tripolskaya. -

Novosibirsk: Publishing house of NGPU. р. 166.

The Use of Connotations With a Speciﬁc Subject Meaning on the Example of the Lexeme Â

nDogÂ

175