Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics

196 Pages·2017·11.17 MB·English

Journal of Foreign
Language Teaching
and Applied
Linguistics

Volume 3 - Number. 3 - 2016
ISSN: 2303-5528
Typeset in Times New Roman by Kongratbayev Kurmangazy

Reproduction of this Publication for Educational or other non-commercial
purposes is authorized without prior permission from the copyright holder.
Reproduction for resale or other commercial purposes prohibited without
prior written permission of the copyright holder.

Disclaimer: While every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of the
information, contained in this publication, International Burch University
will not assume liability for writing and any use made of the proceedings,
and the presentation of the participating organizations concerning the legal
status of any country, territory, or area, or of its authorities, or concerning
the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.

National Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
A catalogue record for this book is available from the National Library of
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Library of International Burch University Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics (J-FLTAL)
/ Editor-in-Chief Azamat Akbarov

Circulation:
200 copies
Nacionalna i univerzitetska biblioteka
Bosne i Hercegovine, Sarajevo
371.3:81’243] (082)

Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics (J-FLTAL)
/ Editor-in-Chief
Azamat Akbarov- Sarajevo :
2016. – 198 str.: ilustr.; 30 cm
First published 2014
Sarajevo 71210
© 2016 Azamat Akbarov for selection and editorial matter; individual contributors their contribution

Editor-in-Chief
Azamat Akbarov

The Editorial Advisory Board
Susan Gass, Michigan State University, USA
Vivian Cook, University of Newcastle, UK
Diane Larsen-Freeman, University of Michigan, USA
Milena Žic-Fuchs, University of Zagreb, Croatia
Larry Selinker, New York University, USA
Mona Baker, University of Manchester, UK
Mirjana Mavrak, University of Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Nebojša Vašić, University of Zenica, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Marijana Sivrić, University of Mostar, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Izabela Dankić, University of Mostar, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Hašim Muminović, University of Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Rebecca Tipton, University of Manchester, UK
Irina Kholina, Moscow State University, Russia
Amir Pušina, University of Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Marie J. Myers, Queen’s University, Canada
Danijela Vasic, University of Belgrade, Serbia
Alyse Schoenfeldt, Palm Beach State College, USA
Neva Cebron, University of Primorska, Slovenia
Snežana Bilbija, University of Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Igor Lakić, University of Montenegro, Montenegro
Amina Hadzibegic Bicciato, University of Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Giovanni Borriello, Roma Tre University, Italy
Željka Babić, University of Banja Luka, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Yevgenij Paščenko, University of Zagreb, Croatia
Işıl Altun, Kocaeli University, Turkey
Merima Osmankadić, University of Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Sanja Radanović, University of Banja Luka, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Nedžad Leko, University of Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Aid Smajic, University of Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Natasa Kostic, University of Montenegro, Montenegro
Petar Penda, University of Banja Luka, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Vesna Bulatovic, University of Montenegro, Montenegro
Roberto Dapit, University of Udine, Italy
Danilo Capasso, University of Banja Luka, Bosnia and Herzrgovina

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Phrase-semantic development of a somatism “eye” reflected in the linguistic worldview. ………………... 7
Aisulu Nurzhanova

Developing Language and Communication Skills in a Medical English Course in Croatia………………. 13
Arijana Krišković & Sandra Tominac Coslovich
dsffsf
Writing the proper story: the importance of personal experience and inadequacy of fiction in Alice
Munro’s story “the Ottawa valley”. ……………………………………………………………………….. 25
Demir Alihodžić
d
s ffsf
Love and hatred in two languages: cross-cultural analysis…………………………………………………. 33
Ivana Grabar & Ekaterina Kostina & Marijana Kolednjak

sffsf
Theory and practice in coursebooks: the intercultural component. ……………………………………...... 43
Edit Rácz

Dsffsf
Pre-service teachers’ cognitions regarding what goes on in the observed. ……………………………...... 51
Elena Ončevska Ager

Dsffsf
Onomasiological, semantic and associative nature of “flower” lexeme in traditional and modern
linguistic concept. ………………………………………………………………………………………..... 59
Hafiza Ordabekova & Kenjetay Kurkebaev & Aisulu Nurzhanova

dsffsf
Foreign language learning anxiety in an EFL context. ……………………………………………………. 71
Izela Habul-Šabanović

dsffsf
Reflection of the nature of the verbal action category in the nursery language. ………………………….. 91
Kuralay Mukhamadi

dsffsf
The substitution of extralinguistic cultural references in subtitles. ……………………………………….. 99
Lidija Mustapić

Dsffsf
Structures not enough. …………………………………………………………………………………….. 111
Maria Eugenia Marqués

Dsffsf
Teaching grammatical structures in German as a foreign language (DAF) using multimedia
advertising texts. ………………………………………………………………………………………….. 119
Mariapia D'angelo

Dsffsf
Investigating reported vocabulary learning strategy use in Swedish second language
learning: from interviews to questionnaires …………………………………………………………….... 129
Richard Labontee

Dsffsf
Employment of supernatural elements in william wordsworth’s poetry ………………………………… 139
Sena Önvural Teber

Dsffsf
Translating animal names: the case of the Japanese tanuki …………………………………………….... 151
Simone Dalla Chiesa

dsffsf
Conceptual metahpros in discourse on organ donation. …………………………………………………. 161
Sonja Koren

Dsffsf
Developing an online beginner course with a powerful language learning software. ………………….... 169
Tijana Dabić & Valentina Budinčić

Dsffsf
Efl learners’ perceptions on the use of video-recording for group discussions outside the class. ………. 179
Tuğba Karakurluk

Dsffsf
Id – entity: a man or a monster? ………………………………………………………………………….. 191
Zrinka Frleta
ddssffffssff

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________J_o__u_r_n__a__l_ o__f_ _F_o__r_e__ig__n_ _L__a__n_g__u_a__g_e__ _T_e__a_c__h_i_n__g_ _a__n_d__ _A__p__p_l_i_e_d__ _L__in__g__u_i_s_t_i_c__s

Phrase-semantic development of a somatism “eye” reflected in the
linguistic worldview

Aisulu Nurzhanova
Suleyman Demirel University, Kazakhstan

Abstract: This article tells about phrase-semantic development Keywords:
of the somatism “eye” reflected in the linguistic worldview. somatic lexis, eyes,
Component somatic phraseological units are complexly linguistic worldview,
described and systemized on the basis of Kazakh phraseological unit.
phraseologisms. Research is being done on the basis of semantic
description. Having formed Kazakh language, figurative- Article History:
associative, figurative-aesthetic and figurative-pragmatic
development of phraseological units, which contain the “eye” in Submitted: 25.04.2016
their structure have proved that the lexeme “eye” is significant Accepted: 20.10.2016
lingua-cultural unit with its substantial role in the traditional
worldview of a nation. It has been figured out that the “eye” is
not a merely anatomical organ of a living being, but is a tool
which serves for the identification of visual sensitivity and
gumption happening during human interaction; is a mean which
is able to describe aesthetic features; and; is a symptomatic
symbol that helps to understand psychological condition of a
human being. Moreover, it has been discovered that the eye is a
tool, which helps humans to integrate with external
environment.

7
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
P__h__r_a__s_e_-_s_e__m__a__n_t_i_c_ _d__e_v__e_l_o_p__m___e_n__t_ o__f_ _a_ _s_o__m__a_t__is_m___ _“_e__y_e_”__ _r_e_f_l_e_c__t_e_d__ _in__ _t_h__e_ _li_n__g_u__i_s_t_i_c_ _w__o__r_l_d__v_i_e_w___ ________________________________________________________________________

INTRODUCTION

It is known that all languages of the world have their peculiar somatic lexis. However,
depending on worldview of ethnos, somatic units can be signed differently in a different
language. Ways of analyzing somatic units of Kazakh language makes clear that names of
human body parts are used effectively as metaphoric universalities. Man as a living being
realizes unknown substances by means of comparing things which are already known for him.
It is true to state that human being realizes environment and reality by the eyes, which
performs visual function. In addition to this, the eyes, which are the main organ of the human
body, enable to differentiate and identify various qualities, signs, appearance, size, volume as
well as significance of objects and phenomenon. The eyes function as the anatomical organ
when a person reviews and perceives things which are around. It means that the man realizes,
understands and imagines the whole world by means of the eyes. “Thanks to highly developed
bio-physiological features of the eyes, the man perceives quite perfect picture of the
surrounding reality and is able to find orientation not merely in the macro-world, but is also
able to reproduce images in a relative micro-scale” (Mugu 2003.).

Hence, objectivity of estimation of the reality given by truth is identified by means of seeing
the things through one’s own eyes. In Kazakh language we use several expressions to prove
that a certain phenomenon happened in reality. For example: “to see something with one’s
own eyes”, “what was seen is authentic, what was heard is vague”, “to come into one’s eyes”,
“in one’s eyes”, “to swim before one’s eyes” and “stand right in front of the eyes” are used
to convey such a meaning as “recollections and flashbacks” which often come into one’s
mind; “to pass out of sight” is used to refer to rapid disappearance; “in the back of beyond”
is used to refer to far location, distant suburb; “familiar faces” (literally from Kazakh – one’s
eyes saw one’s face) is used to refer to people who had a chance to meet before.
Phraseologisms which were made up by presence of the somatism “eye” in the internal
structures of it prove that the “eyes” exist in the human body, and we assemble information
about reality by means of seeing what happen around.

In the linguistic worldview, the eyes functioning as visual organ of the material real, which
consists of tears, blood, flesh and wall-eye are described by direct meanings of
phraseologisms as “blood shot the eyes” referring to physical tiredness; “out a wide swath”
(literally – to cover the eyes with wall-eye) referring to state of being arrogant; “to offend
one’s eyes” which is used to express state of getting annoyed and being at odds.
Phraseologisms with figurative meanings are used to describe external symptomology of
internal feelings – anger, furiosity, sadness, grief, depression, sorrow – which are realized
through observing. For instance, phraseologisms as “to cry one’s eyes out”, “to cry buckets”,
“to shed tears”, “to squeeze out a tear”, “to be close to tears”, which express physical features
of the eyes “cry”, do not merely reflect internal power of feelings leading to cry, but discover
entire crying process. Further, phraseologisms as “the scales fell from one’s eyes” – to tell
directly of misconduct, “pass away” (literally from Kazakh – to strew sand over one’s eyes)
8
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________J__o_u__r_n__a__l _o__f_ F__o__r_e_i_g_n__ _L__a_n__g__u_a__g_e__ T__e__a_c_h__i_n__g_ _a_n__d__ _A__p_p__l_i_e_d__ L__i_n__g_u__i_s_t_i_c_s_
– death or burial, “to trample on somebody’s feeling” (literally “a black eye”) – torture, “to
throw ground to one’s eyes” (literal translation) – doing evil, “to sight for sore eyes” – to meet
very close person to you, “(көзге түрткі етті) pushed the eye ” – mocking that is used to
show possibilities of external factors to have physical affect on the eyes.

PHRASEOLOGISMS AND ITS APPLICATION

A role of the white layer known as “sclera” and black of the eyes known as “pupil” are quite
significant for understanding and perception by means of seeing. If this is based on such
phraseologisms as “one has a trained eye”, “apple of one’s eyes” (literally “white and black
of the eyes”), “to guard somebody like the apple of one’s eyes”, “to have shiny eyes”, then
“black-eyed”, “brown-eyed”, “saiga calf eyes”, “slant-eyed” and “gray-eyed” are culturally
colored models which differentiate size and color of the eyes like black-brown, black, gray,
gray-red and blue. This type of aesthetic evaluation as well as comparison of the eyes with
household items is realized by zoomorphic, fitomorphic and metamorphic use of the
somatism “eyes”. Images based on the metaphors including names of cattle and plants have
been formed upon living style of a nation. This sheds light on the original culture of that
nation. For example: “big black beautiful eyes similar to camel’s eyes”, “brown-eyed”
(literally – eyes of a sheep), “black – eyed” and etc. (Sagidolda 2003).

Having devoted attention to phraseologisms based on movement of one’s eyes such as “to
have beady eye on something” – to observe carefully, “to cut eyes at” – to look at, “to cast
one’s eyes down” – to hesitate, “to keep one’s eyes fixed on something/somebody” – to watch
steadily, “to remove one’s gaze” – to look away, “to have half eye on” – to take care of, “to
fix eyes” – to state at somebody piercingly, “evil eye, overlook” – to jinx, we can prove that
the eyes function not merely as a visible part of the body, but can refer to a manner of looking.
This means that linguistics pays attention to the eyes as the part of the body, which is able to
affect external environment. We can refer eyelid, eyelashes, tear nodule and eyebrow to the
additional and reactions of eyelid and eyelashes manipulate closing and opening process of
the eyes. Hence, eyelid and eyelashes can be considered as closing and opening mechanisms
of the eyes having impact on external environment. Linguistics supports the picture by
bringing vivid conceptions and understandings as “at one’s own risk” – regardless of anything
or literally: “to close one’s eyes abruptly”, “to be constantly exposed to bad things” – literally:
“to have no chance to open eyes”, “to risk” – to take a chance, “from the birth” – since
becoming conscious or literally: “since first opening the eyes”.

The eyes are used not merely to have impact on external environment, but is a tool of
assessing various qualities, size, location of phenomenon (visible space, distance, which can
be captured by one’s eyes, to look somebody up and down, in the blink of an eye, to run an
eye over, to be a thorn in one’s side, to be a feast for the eyes and etc.). Thus, Kazakh language
clearly points that function of the eyes is not merely to see, but it is also a tool which functions
as a measure. Linguistic worldview reflects interpretation of emotion “anatomy” – quasi
organ which forms the tenderest feelings of a human – based on visual function of the eyes.
9
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_P_h__r_a__s_e_-_s__e_m__a__n_t__ic__ d__e_v__e_l_o__p_m___e_n__t_ _o_f_ _a_ _s_o__m__a__t_i_s_m__ _“_e__y_e__”_ _r_e__f_le__c_t_e_d__ _i_n_ _t_h__e_ _l_i_n_g__u_i_s_t_i_c__ w__o__r_l_d__v_i_e_w___ ________________________________________________________________________
For example, pharaseologisms as “to come into one’s eyes” – to touch feelings, “do not pay
attention to” – to ignore, to consider as insignificant, “not to pay much attention” – to neglect,
“not to offend” – to avoid offending, “to regain one’s spirit” – to cheer up, “to draw one’s
attention” – to pay one’s attention are models which are used to show organs not as a tool for
perceiving life and understanding invisible real of environment, but as body parts featured to
feel abstract things. This invisible organ is able to move. Hence, it can see, interpret, pain and
grow. It doesn’t have any color like black, blue, gray as well as shape. However, it can turn
black and white like the eyes. For instance: the eyes got darkened – “to take the bit between
one’s teeth”, to lose heart – “to have one’s soul darkened”, to frustrate, to collapse, to cry
one’s eyes out “literally: to have one’s eyes whitened” – “to cry bitter tears”, to have one’s
soul whitened – “to regain one’s composure”. The eyes as real organ can be opened, closed
and the can sleep, whereas as unreal organ, they are always open, awake and fresh. There is
one saying: “eyes are open, soul is awake” which can be referred to a person, who is
intellectual, and status seeking. It is true to state that blind and wretched people can feel and
perceive surrounding reality by highly developed nonmaterial sense organs as mood and soul.

If the eyes as real organ of the body gives description to a certain moment of man’s
psychological condition (the eyes got flashed, the eyes got soared, to offend one’s eyes), then
mood as unreal organ of feeling has ability to focus and combine moments of a man’s
expressing feelings. For instance, if we do not receive any news from a person who is close
to us or in cases when we wait for a result of a certain event, stirring feelings like fear, little
threat, impatience and streaking hopes might be expressed by mood, while relaxation of one’s
mood describes convergence of feelings like worry, anxiety and unrest. Condition of one’s
mood is cause by instant cry, that is external symptomatology of “mood relaxation”. Thereby
the eyes which are real material organ of the body discover unreal quasi organ like man’s joy,
happiness, gladness, hurt, grief, delight, mercy, acknowledgement, imagination, wish, good
intention and etc.

Mood as unreal organ of the body and abstract of the linguistic worldview is followed by the
ability of the man’s real sense organ to catch the space which is over of human’s sight. For
example: heart feeling can be spread to everyone, mood can peer look into the depths of one’s
soul, dear friends, what is quicker: mood or three years old blue stallion?” and etc. This means
that mood is one type of channel, which can penetrate deep into the systems of visual organs.

LINGUISTIC MODEL OF KAZAKH LANGUAGE

If linguistics can convey quantity of existing eyes through linguistic models as “to lose one’s
sight, “tears which come out of both eyes”, mood as unreal organ of vision cannot clearly
express quantity and location of it. We guess possible location of sense organs as to be laid
in depths of mystery, sense organs which caused by man’s perception of the world through
seeing. This is realized by linguistic models, which show external affection of the world
wholly with their entire penetration (to get festive mood, to peer look into the depths of one’s
soul); which become reversed by themselves, not by using instant feelings as tool to have
10