ANALYSIS OF DEEP SEMANTIC STRUCTURES AS A METHOD OF OPERATIONALIZATION OF THE PROCESSUAL MODEL OF THE STRUCTURE OF AN IMAGE OF THE WORLD
Abstract
Purpose. The article is devoted to the problem of operationalization of the processual model of the structure of an image of the world. The subject of the analysis is models of the meaning systems. The author aims to compare the process model of the structure of an image of the world with the models of the systems of meanings like the life script or archetypal structures.
Methodology. As a research method, we used a comparative analysis of the components of the processual model of the structure of an image of the world on the one hand and multi-level semantic structures on the other.
Results. The results of the study are that the author considers the processes of deployment of the life script and archetypal structures as a special case of the dynamics of the processual model. From the point of view of the level of functioning, the process of their unfolding can be considered as the influence of the motivational subsystem on the target and functional, while from the point of view of the level of generalization – as the process of meaning formation, characterized by the transition from syncretic and complex subsystems to the conceptual one. This process can be carried out in several directions of functioning: the level of internal activity corresponds to the processes of intrapersonal dynamics of semantic structures; the level of communicative activity-the processes of interpersonal interaction, as well as the interaction of the subject with culture as a field of collective meanings. The level of practical activity can be correlated with behavioral acts caused by the influence of archetypal models and scenario patterns.
Practical implications. Solving the problem of comparing models of the systems of meanings allows us to achieve a synergy effect, on the one hand, allowing us to supplement the ideas about the deep structures of an image of the world, and on the other - to use the tools of the psychology of subjective semantics and psychosemantics to analyze the processes of implementing the life script and the archetype. The obtained data can be used to model the processes of implementing deep structures by means of the psychology of subjective semantics in the construction of a message.
Downloads
References
Agavelyan O.K., Agavelyan R.O., Perevozkina Yu.M., Perevozkin S.B., Ryumina T.V. Mir nauki, kul’tury, obrazovaniya, 2012, no. 5 (36), pp. 39-42.
Bogdanova I.A., Zvezdakova I.V. Filologicheskie nauki. Voprosy teorii i praktiki, 2015, no. 3-3 (45), pp. 33-35. https://www.gramota.net/materials/2/2015/3-3/8.html
Bondarchuk N.V. Organizatsionnaya psikhologiya, 2013, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 78-94. https://orgpsyjournal.hse.ru/2013-3-1/102764525.html
Bronnik L.V. Kognitivno-sinergeticheskiy podkhod k yazyku: filosofsko-metodologicheskiy analiz [Cognitive-synergetic approach to language: philosophical and methodological analysis]. Rostov-na-Donu, 2013, 348 p.
Vygotskiy L.S. Myshlenie i rech [Thinking and speaking]. M.: AST: Khranitel’, 2008, 668 p.
Zarubko E.Yu. Psikhosemantika obobshchennykh kategoriy v mezhsub”ektnom vzaimodeystvii [Psychosemantics of generalized categories in intersubjective interaction]. Tyumen, 2010, 26 p.
Kapustina T.V. Psikhologiya. Istoriko-kriticheskie obzory i sovremennye issledovaniya, 2018, vol. 7, no. 1A, pp. 64-75. http://publishing-vak.ru/file/archive-psycology-2018-1/7-kapustina.pdf
Korshunova S.A. Nauchnyy Vestnik Voronezhskogo gosudarstvennogo arkhitekturno-stroitel’nogo universiteta, 2015, no. 1 (5), pp. 61-65.
Kotelnikova Yu.A. Vestnik SPbGU. Sotsiologiya, 2014, no. 4, pp. 16-30.
Leontev D.A. Psikhologiya smysla: priroda, stroenie i dinamika smyslovoy real’nosti [Psychology of meaning: nature, structure and dynamics of meaningful reality]. M.: Smysl, 2007, 511 p.
Luk’yanova S.P. Teoreticheskaya i eksperimental’naya psikhologiya, 2011, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 55-61. http://www.tepjournal.ru/images/pdf/2011/3/07.pdf
Parshikova G.V. Kognitivno-sinergeticheskiy podkhod k osmysleniyu prirody soznaniya [Cognitive-synergetic approach to understanding the nature of consciousness]. Bryansk, BGTU, 2015, 147 p.
Perevozkina Yu.M., Dmitrieva N.V., Perevozkin S.B., Ryumina T.V., Ganpantsurova O.B. Sibirskiy pedagogicheskiy zhurnal, 2013, no. 3, pp. 213-217. https://repo.nspu.ru/bitstream/nspu/1220/1/postroenie-konstrukta-dlya-izuch.pdf
Perevozkina Yu.M. Strukturnye transformatsii psikhosemanticheskikh mifologicheskikh prostranstv lichnosti : na primere slavyanskoy kul’tury [Structural transformations of psychosemantic mythological spaces of personality: on the example of Slavic culture]. Novosibirsk, 2009, 222 p.
Serkin V. P. Struktura i funktsii obraza mira v prakticheskoy deyatel’nosti [Structure and functions of the image of the world in practice]. M.: MGU, 2005, 356 p.
Serkin V.P. Vestnik MGU. Seriya 14. Psikhologiya, 2006, no. 1, pp. 11-19.
Serkin V.P. Psikhosemantika: uchebnik i praktikum dlya bakalavriata i magistratury [Psychosemantics: textbook and workshop for undergraduate and graduate programs]. M.: Yurayt, 2016. 318 p.
Sidorov, K.R., Vasilev I.A. Vestnik Moskovskogo Gosudarstvennogo Universiteta. Seriya 14. Psikhologiya, 2018, no. 3, pp. 90-106. https://doi.org/10.11621/vsp.2018.03.90
Skleynis V.A. Mir nauki, 2016, vol. 4, no. 6. http://mir-nauki.com/PDF/72PSMN616.pdf
Skleynis V.A. Psikholog, 2018, no. 2, pp. 30-37. https://doi.org/10.25136/2409-8701.2018.2.24839
Skleynis V.A. Psikholog, 2019, no. 2, pp. 1-8. https://doi.org/10.25136/2409-8701.2019.2.28386
Shadrikov V.D. Psikhologiya deyatel’nosti cheloveka [Psychology of human activity]. M.: IPRAN, 2013, 464 p.
Benson J. E., Elder G. H. Jr. Young Adult Identities and Their Pathways: a Developmental and Life Course Model. Developmental Psychology, 2011, vol. 47, no. 6, pp. 1646–1657. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023833
Chang, H. M., Ivonin, L., Díaz, M., Català, A., Chen, W., & Rauterberg, M. From mythology to psychology: Identifying archetypal symbols in movies. Technoetic Arts, 2013, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 99-113. https://doi.org/10.1386/tear.11.2.99_1
Du Toit, D. Archetypal values, career orientations, perceived career success and meaningfulness, University of South Africa. Pretoria, 2010. 214 p. http://uir.unisa.ac.za/handle/10500/4856
McPeek, R.W. The Pearson-Marr Archetype Indicator and Psychological Type. Journal of Psychological Type, 2008, vol. 68, no. 7, pp. 53-67. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/216101940
Plakhtiy T. Archetypal model of emergence, escalation and resolution of social conflicts. Public management: collection, 2017, no. 3 (8), pp. 235-248. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3007128
Stewart, I., Joines, S. TA Tomorrow. Transactional Analysis Journal. 2011, vol. 41, no. 3, pp. 221-229. https://doi.org/10.1177/036215371104100304
Abstract views: 255 PDF Downloads: 245
Copyright (c) 2021 Viktor A. Skleynis
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
