Abstract
The article deals with language reflection, verbalization through metatexts, and interpretation. The expression of language reflection is defined in the works of writers and poets. The research is directed at investigating the text, realizing the process of interpreting the works of great poet A. Kunanbayev from the point of linguistic consciousness, and determining the results. The poet conveys information by utilizing various language tools and constructs that prompt self-questioning. The definitions of concepts, classifications, and characteristics related to language reflection are given. The authors aimed to identify language reflection in A. Kunanbayev’s works, classify reflexives marking the language reflection of the author, modeling them using the G. Gibbs’ model, and comparing them with the psycholinguistic survey materials within the framework of reflexive linguistics. The authors agree that there are two classifications of reflexives, such as metatextual commentary and metalanguage interpretation. As a result of the study, the poet’s self-reflection consisted of 6 elements (Gibbs’ cycle), through the lexico-semantic analysis of the reflexives the poet’s language units were classified as metatextual commentary and the respondents' answers as metalanguage interpretation. The syntactic structures of the language reflexives were determined, and it was found that they are often in interrogative and negative forms. According to the purpose of the article, the reflexives in the poet's poem were identified and classified into four groups (Describing the poet or providing additional information; Working on yourself; Working with character; Positive assessment) by the semantic nature of the respondents' interpretation of the work as a result of the psycholinguistic experiment.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data Availability
The authors confirm that all data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this submitted article.
References
Abilkasymov, B., Bizakov, S., Zhunisbekov, A., et al. (2011). Kazak adebi tilinin sozdigi [Dictionary of the Kazakh literary language]. Fifteen volumes, Almaty, 2011 (Vol. 5, p. 752).
Agha, A. (2006). Language and social relations. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511618284
Alejandro, A. (2021). Reflexive discourse analysis: A methodology for the practice of reflexivity. European Journal of International Relations, 27(1), 150–174. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354066120969789
Alejandro, A., & Knott, E. (2022). How to pay attention to the words we use: The reflexive review as a method for linguistic reflexivity. International Studies Review, 24(3), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1093/isr/viac025
Arutyunyan, S. M. (1966). Nacija i ee psihicheskij sklad [The nation and its psychical mentality]. Krasnodar, 1966, 23.
Ashimbaeva, N., Rysbergenova, K., Mankeeva, Zh., et al. (2011). Kazak adebi tilinin sozdigi [Dictionary of the Kazakh literary language]. Fifteen volumes, Almaty, 2011 (Vol. 4, p. 752).
Bizakov, S. (2007). Sinonimder sozdigi [Dictionary of synonyms]. Almaty, Arys Publishing House, 2007, 640.
Boud, D., Keogh, R., & Walker, D. (1985). Reflection, turning experience into learning. Routledge.
Brushlinsky, A. V. (1997). Psihologicheskaja nauka v Rossii XX stoletija [Psychological science in Russia of the XX century: Ishodnye osnovanija psihologii sub’ekta i ego dejatel’nosti [The initial foundations of the psychology of the subject and his activity]. Institute of Psychology of the Russian Academy of Sciences.
Bublitz, W., & Hübler, A. (2007). Metapragmatics in Use. John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.165
Bulygina, T., & Shmelev, A. (2000). Stihijnaja lingvistika [Folk linguistics]. Russian language today. No. 1. Moscow, 2000, 9–18.
Chardin, P. T. (2008). The phenomenon of man. Harper Perennial Modern Thought.
Chernyavskaya, V. (2020). Metapragmatika kommunikacii: kogda avtor prinosit svoe znachenie, a adresat svoĭ kontekst [Metapragmatics of communication: when the author brings his own meaning, and the addressee brings his own context]. Bulletin of St. Petersburg State University. Language and literature. 2020. No. 1. 135–147. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu09.2020.109.
Chigovskaya, Ya. (2001). Kategorii retrospekcii i prospekcii v russkih nauchnyh tekstah [Categories of retrospection and prospection in Russian scientific texts]. dis. for cand. Philol. Sci. Perm, 2001. https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu09.2021.207
Crismore, A. (1989). Talking with readers: Metadiscourse as rhetorical act. Peter Lang.
Descartes, R., & Clarke, M. D. (1998). Meditations and other metaphysical writings. Penguin Classics.
Duncker, D. (2017). Reflexivity, repetition, and language-making online. Language Sciences, 61, 28–42.
Duskaeva, L. (2004). Dialogicheskaja priroda gazetnyh rechevyh zhanrov [Dialogical nature of newspaper speech genres]. Perm, Perm Publishing House. University, 2004.
Gabdullin, B. (1986). Abai tagylymy [Abai lessons], Almaty: Zhazushi, p. 75.
Gibbs, G. (1988). Learning by doing: A guide to teaching and learning methods. Further Education Unit Oxford Polytechnic.
Goroshko, E. I. (2001). Jazykovoe soznanie: Associativnaja paradigma [Linguistic consciousness Associative paradigm], Dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philology (pp. 283–287). Moscow.
Isakhan, M., Muslimov, M., Kokenai, S., & Syddykov, B. (2015). Islamdyk terminder sozdigi [Dictionary of Islamic terms]. Astana, Research and Analysis Center for Religious Issues, 2015, 60.
Johns, C. (2009). Becoming a reflective practitioner. Wiley.
Kalashnikova, N. A. (2006). Refleksija kak princip filosofskogo myshlenija [Reflection as a principle of philosophical thinking], Dissertation for the Candidate of Philosophical sciences, Volgograd (p. 8).
Kaliyev, B., Tuymebaev, Zh., Kurmanbayuly, Sh., & Isakova, S. (2017). Mukagali tili sozdigi [Mukaghali language dictionary]. Almaty, 2017.
Kaliyev, G., Bizakov, S., Nakysbekov, O., et al. (2011). Kazak adebi tilinin sozdigi [Dictionary of the Kazakh literary language]. Fifteen volumes, Almaty, 2011 (Vol. 2, p. 744).
Kazak dasturli madenietinin entsiklopediyalyk sozdigi [Encyclopedic dictionary of Kazakh traditional culture]. (1997). Almaty, Sozdik-Slovar (p. 368).
Khlebda, V. (1998). Shest' soobrazhenij po voprosu o jazykovom samosoznanii [Six considerations on the issue of linguistic self-awareness]. Russian Studies: Linguistic. paradigm of the late twentieth century. St. Petersburg, 1998 (pp. 62–67).
Kim, L. (2008). Uchastie obydennogo metajazykovogo soznanija v interpritacii rechevogo proizvedenija [Participation of ordinary metalinguistic consciousness in the interpretation of a speech work]. Ordinary metalinguistic consciousness and ordinary linguistics, interuniversity collection of scientific articles (pp. 369–373). Kemerovo, Barnaul, Publishing house of Altai University, 2008.
Kolyaseva, A. (2014). Terminologiya v zerkale obydennogo I professianalnogo soznaniya [Terminology in the mirror of ordinary and professional linguistic consciousness]. Dissertation for Candidate of philol. Sciences. Moscow, 2014, p. 327.
Konyratbaeva, Zh., Kaliyev, G., Yesenova, K., et al. (2011). Kazak adebi tilinin sozdigi [Dictionary of the Kazakh literary language]. Fifteen volumes, Almaty, 2011 (Vol 6, p. 752).
Kunanbayev, A. (2010). Abai Kara Sozderi [Meaningful Words of Abai]: Otyz segizinshi kara soz [Word thirty-eight], Almaty: Oner.
Kuznetsova, T. (2012). Strategii semantizacii slov nositeljami russkogo jazyka (jeksperimental'noe issledovanie variativnosti tolkovanij [Strategies for the semantization of words by Russian speakers (an experimental study of the variability of interpretations)]. Diss. for Cand. of Phil. sciences. Kemerovo, 2012 (p. 173).
Locke, J. (1847). An essay concerning human understanding. New York: Kay & Troutman.
Liu, Y. (2019). Reflective thinking scale for healthcare students and providers Chinese version. Social Behavior and Personality, 47(2), e7671. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.7671
Malbakov, M., Ongarbaeva, N., Uderbaev, A., et al. (2011). Kazak adebi tilinin sozdigi [Dictionary of the Kazakh literary language].Fifteen volumes Almaty, 2011 (Vol. 10, p. 752).
Mankeeva, Zh., Bizakov, S., Zhunisbek, A., et al. (2011). Kazak adebi tilinin sozdigi [Dictionary of the Kazakh literary language].Fifteen volumes Almaty, 2011 (Vol. 11, p. 752).
Merriam-Webster website https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/introspection
Mechkovskaya, N. B. (2000). Social’naja lingvistika [Social Linguistics] (p. 21). Aspect Press.
Molodychenko, E. (2021). Metapragmaticheskie diskursy i zhanrovaja differenciacija v internet-media [Metapragmatic discourses and genre differentiation in Internet media]. Bulletin of St. Petersburg State University. Language and literature 18(2), 363–382.
Nicol, J., & Dosser, I. (2016). Understanding reflective practice. Nursing Standard, 30(36), 34–42. https://doi.org/10.7748/ns.30.36.34.s44
Nikitina, S. E. (1993). Ustnaja narodnaja kul’tura i jazykovoe soznanie [Oral folk culture and linguistic identity] (p. 187). Nauka.
Petrovskiy, V.A. (1997). Problemy sub'ektov v postneklassicheskoj nauke [Problems of subjects in post-non-classical science], edited by V.I. Arshinov and V.E. Lepsky, Moscow: Cogito Center, (p. 176).
Philosophical Terms Dictionary https://gufo.me/dict/philosophy
Reid, B. (2000). Reflective practice: The role of the mentor to aid reflective practice.
Reilly, J. M., & Silk, H. (2020). The power of humanities for reflection and healing during challenging times. Families, Systems and Health, 38, 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1037/fsh0000576
Rostova, A. (2008). Obydennoe metajazykovoe soznanie: status i aspekty izuchenija [Everyday metalinguistic consciousness: status and aspects of study]. In Kemerovo, B. (Ed.), Everyday metalinguistic consciousness and ordinary linguistics: interuniversity collection of scientific articles. Altai University (pp. 49–58).
Ryabtseva, N. (1994). Kommunikativnyj modus i metarech' [Communicative mode and metaspeech]. Logical analysis of language: Language of speech actions. Moscow, Nauka, (pp. 90–111).
Ryabtseva, N. (2005). Yazyk I estestvenniy intellect [Language and natural intelligence]. Moscow, RAS, Institute of Linguistics (p. 640). Academia.
Shaumyan, S. (2006). Signs, mind, and reality: A theory of language as the folk model of the world// advances in consciousness research. John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Shumarina, M. R. (2011). Jazyk v zerkale hudozhestvennogo teksta. Metajazykovaja refleksija v proizvedenijah russkoj prozy [Language in the mirror of a literary text. Meta-linguistic reflection in works of Russian prose] (p. 328). Monograph, Moscow: Flinta.
Silverstein, M. (1993). Metapragmatic discourse and metapragmatic function. In J. A. Lucy (Ed.), Reflexive language: Reported speech and metapragmatics (pp. 33–58). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511621031.004
Spitzmüller, J. (2015). Graphic variation and graphic ideologies: A metapragmatic approach. Social Semiotics, 25(2), 126–141. https://doi.org/10.1080/10350330.2015.1010323
Ter-Minasova, S. G. (2018). Language and intercultural communication (p. 175). Astana: National Translation Bureau.
Tussupbekova, M., Idrissova, M., & Smagulova, B. (2016). Benefits and importance of using the Book of Words by Abai Kunanbayev to English teaching in Kazakhstani Universities. Indian Journal of Applied Business and Economic Research (IJABER), 14(15), 10687.
Vepreva, I. T. (2002). Jazykovaja refleksija v postsovetskuju jepohu [Language reflection in the post-Soviet era]: Monograph, Yekaterinburg.
Verschueren, J. (2000). Notes on the role of metapragmatic awareness in language use. Pragmatics, 10(4), 439–456. https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.10.4.02ver
Vezhbickaya, A. (1978). Metatekst v tekste [Metatext in text]. New in foreign linguistics. Ed. 8. Linguistics of the text (pp. 402–421).
Website Sozdikqor https://sozdikqor.kz/sozdik/?id=209
Zhakypov, S. M. (2012). Zhalpy psihologiya negizderi [The basis of psychology] (p. 203). Publishing House Alla Prima.
Zhanuzak, T., Omarbekov, S., Zhunisbek, A., et al. (2011). Kazak adebi tilinin sozdigi [Dictionary of the Kazakh literary language].Fifteen volumes (p. 752). Almaty, 2011.
Funding
The authors did not receive support from any organization for the submitted work.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Sadirova conceived the presented idea. Sydyk carried out the experiments. Both authors contributed to the design of the experiment, the analysis/interpretation of the data results, and the writing of the manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
All authors certify that they have no affiliations with or involvement in any organization or entity with any financial interest or non-financial interest in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript.
Research Involving Human Participants
All procedures performed in the present study were approved by the K. Zhubanov University Ethics Committee, Kazakhstan (No. 0010/ 21.02.2023).
Informed Consent
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Sadirova, K., Sydyk, P. Language Reflection: Metatextual Analysis. J Psycholinguist Res 53, 31 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-024-10069-6
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-024-10069-6