A
psychological method of analysis has been developed (Detje, 1996) and will be
presented in order to show which psychological mechanisms the proverbs use to
reach their goal of giving help (or advise) for human action regulation and
human action organization. Some examples will be given to show which psychological
insight there is inside the proverbs. Comer's theory of human action
organization (e.g. Dorner, 1990, 1991) is used in this first analysis and
compared with a lot of proverbs taken from Simrock, 1846. It can be shown that
the proverbs have a much' differentiated "'knowledge" about human
action organization and errors people make while planning and acting; even in
complex and uncertain situations. Proverbs are "Guides to Right
Behavior". This also means that a lot of psychologists' ideas of action
organization are already included in "grandma's wisdom", although the
proverbs use (of course) a quite different language. Since psychologists have used
proverbs mainly for testing and differentiating groups of
persons it
will be very interesting to have an exchange between paremiologists and
psychologists about the psychological significance of the wisdom in the
proverbs.
Many people
have loved proverbs for the wisdom embedded in them. Others have treasured
proverbs for the vividness or earthiness of their imagery. But students of the
subject are impressed by still another characteristic of the proverb: its
verbal economy. Proverbs are rarely wordy. The usual proverb is spare and austere
in expression, and some are marvels of compactness.
"Wisdom"
and "shortness" doubtlessly belong to the popular notion of what
makes up a proverb. Even when a scholar such as Mario Pei wrote a short piece
on "Parallel Proverbs" (1964) for the Saturday
Review, he basically adhered to this general view of the proverb in his
article dealing with national and international proverbs, their cynicism,
philosophy and humor, their obvious misogyny and their contradictor) comments
on life's experiences around the world: Proverbs are among the most ancient of
human institutions. Criticism of life, in brief and pithy form, is
characteristic of proverbs, while their popular philosophy is indeed,
proverbial.
"Proverbs
are the wisdom of peoples" goes an Italian saying. This is perhaps an
exaggeration, but there is no doubt that much of a nation's folk-philosophy
gets into proverbs, along with the spice of national customs and, above all,
the peculiar flavor of the nation's language and phraseology... Proverbs are
generalizations of human experience, condensations of oft-repeated occurrences
of the trial-and-error variety. Above all, they are the fruit of observation
and inductive reasoning, two of the great faculties of the human mind... A
generalization... caught on, became popular, and was passed from mouth to
mouth, from generation to generation.
Ultimately
it became an integral part of the group's folklore, and was repeated whenever the
situation it described recurred. Every proverb tells a story and teaches a
lesson.
This
lengthy discussion of the nature of the proverb by Pei reads almost as an
attempt of summarizing the common understanding of proverbs. Many of the 55
definitions stated above are similar to Pei's points, and it is amazing to
notice how congrous these definitions are to those defining attempts printed in
magazines and newspapers. There certainly is much agreement in the
non-scholarly world of what a proverb is even if scholars seem to be unable to
agree on a reasonable definition at all.
A proverb
is by definition a popular maxim. Proverbs are among the most ancient literary
forms, and among the most universal. Enough if it [the proverb] holds its
measure of truth. Proverbs are anonymous wisdom-literature of the common man in
ages past. Matti Kuusi once defined
proverbs simply as "monumenta humana," and this is exactly what they
are to the general population. Our survey of 55 non-academic definitions has
shown that proverbs are thought to express human wisdom and basic truths in a
short sentence. Popular articles in magazines and newspapers fend to share this
view of the proverb. Altogether proverbs are still seen as useful
generalizations about life, even if at times their value of appropriateness in
certain situations might be questioned. We can poke fun at proverbs, we can
ridicule them or we can parody them, but eventually we are all governed by
their insights to some degree. Proverbs and their wisdom confront us' daily,
and modern people seem to have a clear idea of what proverbs are, what they
express and what they can do for us. Proverb scholars would do well to pay more
attention to the present use of proverbs while obviously also continuing to
tackle the frustrating question of whether a universal proverb definition can
be found. But in their enduring search for such an erudite definition, they can
take solace in the fact that the people using proverbs do know in their minds
what makes a good proverb - an incommunicable quality tells them that a short
and repeated statement of wisdom, truth and experience must be a proverb.
Comparing
the three approaches discussed above (semantic, functional, and contextual) we
have ample ground to conclude that have very much in common as the main
criteria of phraseological units appear to be essentially the same, i.e.
stability and idiomaticity or lack of motivation. It should be noted however
that these criteria as elaborated in the three approaches are sufficient mainly
to single out extreme cases: highly idiomatic non-variable and free (or
variable) word-groups.
The main
features of this new approach which is now more or less universally accepted by
Soviet linguists are as follows:
12.
Phraseology is regarded as a self-contained branch of linguistics and not as a
part of lexicology.
13.
Phraseology deals with a phraseological subsystem of language and not with
isolated phraseological units.
14.
Phraseology is concerned with all types of set expressions.
15. Set
expressions are divided into three classes: phraseological units (e.g. red
tape, mare's nest, etc.), phraseomatic units (e.g. win a victory, launch a
campaign, etc.) and borderline cases belonging to the mixed class. The main
distinction between the first and the second classes is semantic:
phraseological units have fully or partially transferred meanings while
components of phraseomatic units are used in their literal meanings.
16.
Phraseological and phraseomatic units are not regarded as word-equivalents but
some of them are treated as word correlates.
17.
Phraseological and phraseomatic units are set expressions and their
phraseological stability distinguishes them from free phrases and compound
words.
Phraseological
and phraseomatic units are made up of words of different degree of wordness
depending on the type of set expressions they are used in. (cf. e.g. small
hours and red tape). Their structural separateness, an important factor of
their stability, distinguishes them from compound words.
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий