<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Publishing DTD v1.2 20190208//EN" "http://jats.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/1.2/JATS-journalpublishing1.dtd">
<article article-type="research-article" dtd-version="1.2" xml:lang="ru" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="issn">2313-8912</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>Research Result. Theoretical and Applied Linguistics</journal-title></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">2313-8912</issn></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.18413/2313-8912-2021-7-3-0-1</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">2481</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>THEORY OF LANGUAGE</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>&lt;strong&gt;Semiotics of symbol according to the data of the Russian scientific discourse&lt;/strong&gt;</article-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="en"><trans-title>&lt;strong&gt;Semiotics of symbol according to the data of the Russian scientific discourse&lt;/strong&gt;</trans-title></trans-title-group></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author"><name-alternatives><name xml:lang="ru"><surname>Vorkachev</surname><given-names>Sergey G.</given-names></name><name xml:lang="en"><surname>Vorkachev</surname><given-names>Sergey G.</given-names></name></name-alternatives><email>svork@mail.ru</email><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1" /></contrib></contrib-group><aff id="aff1"><institution>Kuban State Technological University, Russia</institution></aff><pub-date pub-type="epub"><year>2021</year></pub-date><volume>7</volume><issue>3</issue><fpage>0</fpage><lpage>0</lpage><self-uri content-type="pdf" xlink:href="/media/linguistics/2021/3/Лингвистика-4-15.pdf" /><abstract xml:lang="ru"><p>Based on the publications of Russian scientists, the notions of the symbol in the humanities are studied. The problem of the nature, essence and purpose of a symbol, raised back in Antiquity, remains quite relevant at the present time. n Russian linguistics, the &amp;quot;symbolic&amp;quot; theme occupies one of the leading places, but a clear and unambiguous definition of the symbol is still missing. It is established that a symbol is an umbrella semantic formation, covering the subject areas of several scientific disciplines, outside the context of a specific scientific field or theory, it is a pro-term and can act as a generic name for any semiotic unit. The symbolism of the exact sciences and most of the linguistic signs falls into the category of conventional signs, in which the correspondence of the plans of expression and content is arbitrary, the symbolism of the exact sciences and most of the linguistic signs, while the symbolism of all other areas of knowledge falls into the category of motivated semiotic units, in which the plan of expression is one way or another connected with the content plan, and this connection is conditioned by similarity, contiguity, or in some other way. Endowing a motivated sign with a name leads to a &amp;ldquo;doubling&amp;rdquo; of the semantic structure of a new formation, when the signifier of this sign &amp;ndash; an image or a generalized representation &amp;ndash; turns into a signified, sending to another signified, in relation to which it acts as a signifier. A symbol in its most general form is a sign in which the primary content is used as an exponent of another, more abstract and culturally valuable content. The list of specific characteristics of a symbol, both obligatory and optional, compiled according to scientific discourse, includes: &amp;ldquo;vector&amp;rdquo; &amp;ndash; the direction of symbolization from the concrete to the abstract; transcendence &amp;ndash; going beyond the limits of real existence; vagueness and fragility of semantic boundaries, layering and depth; interpretation &amp;ndash; the need for active work of thought and imagination to comprehend the symbolized meaning; coded deep meaning, mystery and mysticism; &amp;ldquo;passwordness&amp;rdquo;, intended for the initiated; intuitiveness; emotiogenicity, mobilizing force; axiology and ideology. The optional properties of a symbol are aesthetic appeal, emphasizing its socio-cultural significance, and, for ancient symbols, &amp;ldquo;archetypeness&amp;rdquo; as belonging to the number of primary ideas and images. The functions of the symbol include: generally semiotic &amp;ndash; informative and communicative; specific &amp;ndash; epistemological, axiological, emotive-affective, social, cultural-unifying, representative, and in some of the symbols &amp;ndash; aesthetic and mobilizing.</p></abstract><trans-abstract xml:lang="en"><p>Based on the publications of Russian scientists, the notions of the symbol in the humanities are studied. The problem of the nature, essence and purpose of a symbol, raised back in Antiquity, remains quite relevant at the present time. n Russian linguistics, the &amp;quot;symbolic&amp;quot; theme occupies one of the leading places, but a clear and unambiguous definition of the symbol is still missing. It is established that a symbol is an umbrella semantic formation, covering the subject areas of several scientific disciplines, outside the context of a specific scientific field or theory, it is a pro-term and can act as a generic name for any semiotic unit. The symbolism of the exact sciences and most of the linguistic signs falls into the category of conventional signs, in which the correspondence of the plans of expression and content is arbitrary, the symbolism of the exact sciences and most of the linguistic signs, while the symbolism of all other areas of knowledge falls into the category of motivated semiotic units, in which the plan of expression is one way or another connected with the content plan, and this connection is conditioned by similarity, contiguity, or in some other way. Endowing a motivated sign with a name leads to a &amp;ldquo;doubling&amp;rdquo; of the semantic structure of a new formation, when the signifier of this sign &amp;ndash; an image or a generalized representation &amp;ndash; turns into a signified, sending to another signified, in relation to which it acts as a signifier. A symbol in its most general form is a sign in which the primary content is used as an exponent of another, more abstract and culturally valuable content. The list of specific characteristics of a symbol, both obligatory and optional, compiled according to scientific discourse, includes: &amp;ldquo;vector&amp;rdquo; &amp;ndash; the direction of symbolization from the concrete to the abstract; transcendence &amp;ndash; going beyond the limits of real existence; vagueness and fragility of semantic boundaries, layering and depth; interpretation &amp;ndash; the need for active work of thought and imagination to comprehend the symbolized meaning; coded deep meaning, mystery and mysticism; &amp;ldquo;passwordness&amp;rdquo;, intended for the initiated; intuitiveness; emotiogenicity, mobilizing force; axiology and ideology. The optional properties of a symbol are aesthetic appeal, emphasizing its socio-cultural significance, and, for ancient symbols, &amp;ldquo;archetypeness&amp;rdquo; as belonging to the number of primary ideas and images. The functions of the symbol include: generally semiotic &amp;ndash; informative and communicative; specific &amp;ndash; epistemological, axiological, emotive-affective, social, cultural-unifying, representative, and in some of the symbols &amp;ndash; aesthetic and mobilizing.</p></trans-abstract><kwd-group xml:lang="ru"><kwd>Symbol</kwd><kwd>Sign</kwd><kwd>Semiotics</kwd><kwd>Function</kwd><kwd>Semantic feature</kwd><kwd>Motivation</kwd><kwd>Conventionality</kwd></kwd-group><kwd-group xml:lang="en"><kwd>Symbol</kwd><kwd>Sign</kwd><kwd>Semiotics</kwd><kwd>Function</kwd><kwd>Semantic feature</kwd><kwd>Motivation</kwd><kwd>Conventionality</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><back><ref-list><title>Список литературы</title><ref id="B1"><mixed-citation>Averintsev, S. S. (1983). Symbol, in Il&amp;#39;ichev, L. F. (ed.), Filosofskij entsiklopedicheskij slovar&amp;#39; [Philosophical Encyclopedic Dictionary], Sovetskaja entsiklopedia, Moscow, Russia, 607&amp;ndash;608. (In Russian)</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B2"><mixed-citation>Alefirenko, N. F. (2000). Simvolizatsija kul&amp;#39;turnogo prostranstva [Symbolization of cultural space], Lingvokul&amp;#39;turologija. Tsennostno-smyslovoe prostranstvo yazyka [Linguoculturology. Value-semantic space of language], Flinta-Nauka, Moscow, Russia. (In Russian)</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B3"><mixed-citation>Arutyunova, N. D. (1999). Yazyk i mir cheloveka [Language and the world of man], Yazyki russkoj kul&amp;#39;tury, Moscow, Russia. (In Russian)</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B4"><mixed-citation>Bezrukova, V. S. (2000). Osnovy dukhovnoj kul&amp;#39;tury. Entsiklopedicheskij &amp;nbsp;slovar&amp;#39; pedagoga [Foundations of spiritual culture. Encyclopedic Dictionary of the Teacher], USTU-UPI, Ekaterinburg, Russia. (In Russian)</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B5"><mixed-citation>Benveniste, E. (1974). Obshhaja lingvistika [General linguistics], Progress, Moscow, Russia (in Russian). (In Russian)</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B6"><mixed-citation>Brockhaus F., Efron I. (2007). Illjustrirovannyj Entsiklopedicheskij &amp;nbsp;slovar&amp;#39; [Illustrated encyclopedic dictionary], Eksmo, Moscow, Russia. (In Russian)</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B7"><mixed-citation>Vorkachev, S. G. (2003). Concept as an &amp;rdquo;umbrella term&amp;rdquo;. Jazyk, soznanie, kommunikacija, Iss. 24, 5&amp;ndash;12. (In Russian)</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B8"><mixed-citation>Vorkachev, S. G. (2011). Russian linguocultural conceptology: current state, problems, vector of development, Izvestija RAN. Serija literatury i jazyka, 70 (5), 64&amp;ndash;74. (In Russian)</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B9"><mixed-citation>Vorkachev, S. G. (2016). Ex pluribus unum: linguocultural concept as a synthesis education. Vestnik RUDN. Serija lingvistika, 20, 17&amp;ndash;30. (In Russian)</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B10"><mixed-citation>Vorkachev, S. G., Vorkacheva, E. A. (2019). Discourse and its typology in Russian linguistics, Aktual&amp;#39;nye problemy filologii i pedagogicheskoj lingvistiki, 3, 14&amp;ndash;21. DOI: 10.29025/2079&amp;ndash;6021-2019-3-14-21 (In Russian)</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B11"><mixed-citation>Dobrokhotov, A. L. (2001). Symbol, in Stepin V. S. (ed.), Novaja filosofskaja entsiklopedija: v 4 t. T. 3 [New philosophical encyclopedia: in 4 vol. Vol. 3], Mysl&amp;#39;, Moscow, Russia, 532&amp;ndash;534. (In Russian)</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B12"><mixed-citation>Yegazarov, A. (2003). Illjustrirovannaja entsiklopedija simvolov [Illustrated Encyclopedia of Symbols], Astrel-AST, Moscow, Russia. (In Russian)</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B13"><mixed-citation>Ivin, A. A. (2004). Filosofija: Entsiklopedicheskij &amp;nbsp;slovar&amp;#39; [Philosophy: an encyclopedic dictionary], Gardariki, Moscow, Russia. (In Russian)</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B14"><mixed-citation>Ivin, A. A., Nikiforov A. L. (1997). Slovar&amp;#39; po logike [Dictionary of Logic], Vlados, Moscow, Russia. (In Russian)</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B15"><mixed-citation>Karasik, V. I. (2010). Yazykovaja kristallizatsija smysla [Linguistic crystallization of meaning], Gnosis, Moscow, Russia. (In Russian)</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B16"><mixed-citation>Karasik, V. I. (2017). Yazykovaja plastika obshhenija [Linguistic plasticity of communication], Paradigma, Volgograd, Russia. (In Russian)</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B17"><mixed-citation>Kondakov, N. I. (1975). Logicheskij slovar&amp;#39;-spravochnik [Logical dictionary-reference book], Nauka, Moscow, Russia. (In Russian)</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B18"><mixed-citation>Krasnykh, V. V. (2003). &amp;ldquo;Svoj&amp;rdquo; sredi &amp;ldquo;chuzhih&amp;rdquo;: mif ili real&amp;#39;nost&amp;#39;? [&amp;ldquo;A Friend&amp;rdquo; among &amp;ldquo;strangers&amp;rdquo;: myth or reality?], Gnosis, Moscow, Russia. (In Russian)</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B19"><mixed-citation>Losev, A. F. (1970). Symbol, in Konstantinov F. V. (ed.), Filosofskaja entsiklopedija: v 5 t. T. 5 [Philosophical encyclopedia: in 5 vol. Vol. 5], Soviet encyclopedia, Moscow, Russia, 10&amp;ndash;11. (In Russian)</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B20"><mixed-citation>Lotman, Yu. M. (2000). Semiosfera [Semiosphere], Art&amp;ndash;SPb, St. Petersburg, Russia. (In Russian)</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B21"><mixed-citation>Maslova, V. A. (2001). Lingvokul&amp;#39;turologija [Linguoculturology], Akademija, Moscow, Russia. (In Russian)</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B22"><mixed-citation>Pervushina, N. A. (2011). The phenomenon of a symbol: conceptual problems of research, Vestnik TGPU, 11, 187&amp;ndash;191. (In Russian)</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B23"><mixed-citation>Pokhlebkin, V. V. (2001). Slovar&amp;#39; mezhdunarodnoj simvoliki i emblematiki [Dictionary of international symbols and emblems], International relations, Moscow, Russia. (In Russian)</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B24"><mixed-citation>Radionova, S. A. (1998). Symbol, in Gricanov A. A. (ed.), Novejshij filosofskij slovar&amp;#39; [The latest philosophical dictionary], V.&amp;nbsp;M.&amp;nbsp;Skakun ed., Minsk, Belorussia, 614&amp;ndash;615. (In Russian)</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B25"><mixed-citation>Svasyan, K. A. (1980). Problema simvola v sovremennoj filosofii: (Kritika i analiz) [The problem of the symbol in modern philosophy: (Criticism and analysis)], AN ArmSSR, Yerevan, USSR. (In Russian)</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B26"><mixed-citation>Spirova, E. M. (2009). Symbol functions, Znanie. Ponimanie. Umenie, 2, 205&amp;ndash;211. (In Russian)</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B27"><mixed-citation>Sycheva, S. G. (2000). Problema simvola v filosofii [The problem of the symbol in philosophy], Tomsk UP, Tomsk, Russia. (In Russian)</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B28"><mixed-citation>Philosophical Encyclopedic Dictionary (2003), in Gubsky, E. F., Korableva, G.&amp;nbsp;V., Lutchenko, V. A. (eds.), Infra-M, Moscow, Russia. (In Russian)</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B29"><mixed-citation>Sheikin, A. G. (1998). Simvol, in Levit, S. Ja (ed.), Kul&amp;#39;turologija. XX vek. Entsiklopedija: v 2 t. Т. 2 [Culturology. XX century. Encyclopedia: in 2 vol. Vol. 2], Universitetskaya kniga-Aletheya, St. Petersburg, Russia, 199&amp;ndash;200. (In Russian)</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B30"><mixed-citation>Shelestyuk E. V. (1997). On the linguistic study of the symbol, Voprosy jazykoznanija, 4, 125&amp;ndash;141. (In Russian)</mixed-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article>