Analysis reveals national-specific and universal characteristics of laziness concepts in Russian and Chinese cultures, indicating cultural attitudes.
The purpose of the work is to reveal the universal and nationally specific content of Russian and Chinese concepts. The object of research is the Laziness concept as a mental and linguistic and cultural phenomenon. The subject of this study is the identification of the national-cultural specificity of the Russian and Chinese concepts of Len’ and 懒 [lǎn]. The result of the research is the revealed national and cultural specificity of the mentioned Russian and Chinese corresponding concepts. The complex semantic structure of the concepts Лень and 懒 (Laziness) has been clarified: the etymology of the representative words and the historical context of the concepts have been studied; changes in the semantics of Russian and Chinese representatives have been traced. By applying methods of semantic and word formation analysis of representative words, cognitive features that form the core of conceptual meanings have been revealed: conceptual and evaluative components of the content of the concept. A linguacognitive analysis of the polysemy of the adjective ленивый (lazy) has been performed, and the stereotypical image of a lazy person has been reconstructed; stereotypical views about a lazy person, conceptualized in Russian and Chinese phraseology, have been identified, and a linguacognitive analysis of cultural models of the Russian and Chinese languages has been carried out. It has been concluded that the two opposing ways of conceptualizing the notion of Len’ (laziness) in Russian linguoculture reflect the paradoxical nature of attitudes, in contrast to the unambiguously directed axiological nature of the concept of laziness (懒) in Chinese linguoculture. The practical application of the research results lies in the possibility of their use in translations of Russian literary, philosophical, and religious literature into the Chinese language, as well as for teachers of the Russian language in the Chinese audience.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Чернцова et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: