2561

Series «Modern Linguistic and Methodical-and-Didactic Researches» Issue № 4 (15), 2016

Therefore, one can conclude that in the English fiction picture of the world, alongside with the ordinary lexical units, the thesaurus of the language person of the beginning of the third millennium includes the professional technical terminology, to a greater extent, of the sublanguage of the information technology. Apparently, this phenomenon is determined by the high level of the development of this field of knowledge about the modern world, its important role in modern people’s life, and first of all, in modern city dwellers’ life.

The great influence exerted by the popularity of the modern society’s computer technologies on this very society, on the nature of the language behavior and the consciousness of the participants of the discourse, as well as on the lexicon used by them, is also analyzed in the other linguistic studies.

Thus, according to Z.Ye. Fomina: "The information society can have an impact on the seemingly stable (that has been forming for ages) national priorities and traditions, the certain ethnic virtues, the specifics of its mentality and the language in general" [10, p. 53].

While researching the issues of politeness in German information society, Z.Ye. Fomina considers the question of "the serious changes in a new type of the global world man" [11, p. 48].

The author presents the facts showing that the popularity of the Internet has led to forming the users’ specific lexicon that involves: the extensive use of abbreviations, acronyms, ideograms, emoticons, Erikativs; the description of the actions in the form of the alphabetic symbols; strikethroughs; the refusal to comply with the rules of spelling; the preference of the dialect forms; and also the use of the concepts from the technical sphere. "Among the Internet users, their own form of writing and communicative culture was established. To some extent, the uses of the computer and the communication in social networks have contributed to a significant expansion of the German language common vocabulary "[11, p. 48, 50].

Thus, the research of the English fiction contexts, correlated with the phenomenon "City", resulted in the conclusion that the means of the computer communication, used by modern city dwellers, are verbalized by the names of the electronic computer devices (computer, terminal), and by the names of their parts, related devices and products. The means of the objectification also include some terminological verbs of the information technology sublanguage. Besides, the means of the nomination comprise, among the others, the proper names (Google Earth) and the abbreviations (PC).

The vocabulary researched meets the basic principles of the organization of the field lexical and semantic model that enables to present it as part of a complex field lexical and semantic model of man’s information and communication environment in a modern city.

The quantitative analysis of the nominations analyzed made it possible to come to the conclusion that the computer, e-mail and computer games are the most popular among the modern city dwellers means of the computer communication.

Thus, the modern metropolis appears as a center of the computer communication in the English fiction picture of the world. Meanwhile, the language personality of the 21st century demonstrates a higher level of technical competence concerning the usage the nominations of the means of the information communication.

Bibliographic list

1.Ter-Minasova S.G. Vojna i mir jazykov i kul'tur: (Ucheb. posobie) – M.: Slovo/Slovo, 2008. – 344 c. – ISBN 978-5-387-00076-8

2.Popova Z.D., Sternin I.A. Leksicheskaja sistema jazyka. – Izd. 2, ispr. i dop. – M.:

URSS, Knizhnyj dom «Librokom», 2009. – 172 s.

3.T1 – Vikipedija. - Jelektronnyj resurs. – Kod dostupa: https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/T1, p.1 (vremja obrashhenija – 20.09.16).

34

Series «Modern Linguistic and Methodical-and-Didactic Researches» Issue № 4 (15), 2016

4.Google Earth – Jelektronnyj resurs. – Kod dostupa: http:chemotkrit.ru/soft/Google_Earth, p.1 (vremja obrashhenija – 18.09.15).

5.inbox – jeto … Chto takoe Inbox? - Jelektronnyj resurs. – Kod dostupa: http://radioelectronics_en_ru.academic.ru/38880/inbox, p.1 (vremja obrashhenija – 19.09.16).

6.Podkasting – Vikipedija – Jelektronnyj resurs. – Kod dostupa: https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki, p.1 (vremja obrashhenija – 14.08.16).

7.Chto takoe vebkast? - Jelektronnyj resurs. – Kod dostupa: https://otvet.mail.ru/question/26222593, p.1 (vremja obrashhenija – 16.08.16).

8.Karaulov Ju.N. Russkij jazyk i jazykovaja lichnost'. Izd.,. 4-e, stereotipnoe.- M.: Editorial URSS, 2004. – 264 s.

9.Fomina Z.Ye. Bellaricheskie nominacii kak semioticheskie markery nemeckojazychnoj i russkoj kul'tury /Z.Ye. Fomina // Nauchnyj vestnik Voronezh. gos. arh.-strot. un-ta. Sovremennye lingvisticheskie i metodiko-lingvisticheskie issledovanija. – 2012. – Vyp.1(17). – S. 121-136.

10.Fomina Z.Ye. Jemocional'no-ocenochnaja leksika v russkom i nemeckom jazy-kahV sbornike: Ocherki po russko-nemeckoj kontrastivnoj lingvistike : leksika, sin-taksis Voronezh, 1995. S. 4-28.

11.Fomina Z.Ye. Vezhlivost' v prostranstve nemeckoj digital'noj kommunikacii (na primere jazyka Interneta) /Z.E. Fomina // Nauchnyj vestnik Voronezh. gos. arh.-strot. un-ta. Sovremennye lingvisticheskie i metodiko-lingvisticheskie issledovanija. – 2013. – Vyp.2(20). – S. 43-56.

Analyzed sources

1* Williams W.J. This is not a game. New York, 2009. – 483 p.

2*. Elisabeth Jolley. Cabin Fever. Australia, Penguin Book, 1990. – 237p.

35

Series «Modern Linguistic and Methodical-and-Didactic Researches» Issue № 4 (15), 2016

UDC 802.0:37.013.42

Voronezh State Technical University

PhD of Philology, Associate Professor

of the Chair of Foreign

Languages of VGTU

Irina Yurjevna Lavrinenko

e-mail: [e-mail]

I.Yu. Lavrinenko

CAUSAL, SUBJECT-AND-OBJECT AND QUALITATIVE COMPONENTS OF THE CONCEPT ANGER IN THE PHILOSOPHY OF F. BACON

The article is concerned with analysis of the cognitive structure of the emotional concept “anger” in the philosophical discourse of F. Bacon. The means of verbal representation of the concept “anger” on the basis of semantic-and-cognitive analysis are revealed, the basic parameters of its cognitive structure are determined such as: cause-and-effective environment, subject-and-object paradigm, qualitative characteristics of anger. Cognitive model of the emotional concept “anger” is represented. It was found out that the universal features of the analyzed concept, forming its basic elements, are: instability, latent character, spontaneousness, sociocentricity, ambivalence. Ambivalence and sociocentricity are the most relevant features for the phenomenon anger in the philosophical texts of F. Bacon. The specific character of “anger” in the individual-and-author picture of the world of the English thinker is also characterized by the correlation of anger with both positively and negatively marked essences.

Keywords: philosophical discourse, emotional concept, anger, semantic-and- cognitive analysis, subject, object, causator, cognitive model, F. Bacon.

Spiritual and emotional phenomena represent significant component of man`s nature. According to Ch. Darwin, emotions, as elements of the oldest processes of psychic, appeared in the process of evolutionary development of man and are connected with the circumstances of satisfying men`s needs. Emotions are objective form of reality reflection by means of feelings [1, p.10].

The interest to the emotional world of a person arose as early as in the epoch of Antiquity (the analyses of emotions were carried out by Aristotle, Plato, Geraklit, etc.). The more exact classification of emotions was offered by I.F. Gerbard. Later the classification of emotional states in associations with living beings was represented by Ch. Darwin. Then the classification of emotions was carried out by W. James, G. Lange and Wolter Cannon.

The classification of emotions by V. Wundt concerned comparison of emotional state and subjective background of man. Thus, the states resulting in the positive subjective background were considered to be positive emotional ones and vice versa. It is interesting to note that, as Lewica M. [2], Davidson R.J. and Irwin W. [3] assume, it is difficult to objectively determine the type of emotion because of the complexity of revealing the basis of its character (positive or negative).

Fundamental research of emotional world of a person on the material of the different types of discourse, dedicated, in particular, to the problems of emotive-and-evaluating vocabulary, is represented in the works of Fomina Z. Ye. [4; 5; 6; 7].

V.O. Leontjev assumed that there exist 124 emotional states, classifying according to the source of their origin. B. Dodonov singled out 10 classes of emotions [9]. One of the most

________________________

© Lavrinenko I.Yu., 2016

36

Series «Modern Linguistic and Methodical-and-Didactic Researches» Issue № 4 (15), 2016

famous classifications belongs to K. Izard according to which there exist 10 “fundamental emotions”, such as: interest, joy, surprise, suffering, anger, disguise, contempt, fear, shame, embarrassment [10]. The revealed emotional states are provided by the innate neural programs. According to the classification of K. Izard, the most part of the revealed emotions (70%) have pejorative (negative) meaning.

The article considers the emotion anger. Being one of the basic emotional states of man anger is described by many foreign and native scientists (Izard K., Lizaridi M.I., Ekman K. Plutchik K., Ortony A., Collins A., etc.). In the research under consideration the analysis of anger as mental construct is carried out by studying linguistic means of its verbalization.

The aim of the research is to reveal the means of verbalization of the concept “anger”, the features of its semantic-and-cognitive structure, the principle of its structuring, determine its cognitive content as well as to build the cognitive model of the concept “anger” in the philosophical discourse of F. Bacon taking into consideration the determined principles.

The specifics of the research is that it is carried out within philosophical discourse, that is determined as philosophical text, containing the author`s description of nature and content of such philosophical phenomena as life, truth, kindness, happiness, etc.. Philosophical text obligatory reveals the philosopher`s (author`s) spiritual personality and helps to get an idea of his values, intentions, views by the analysis of the used linguistic means [11, p. 128].

The research was carried out on the material of the philosophical treaty of F. Bacon “The Essays or Counsels Civil and Moral” (1597-1612) - a collection of essays containing the author`s speculations about the key aspects of social, spiritual, cultural political and other spheres of life.

The most part of the treaty is dedicated to the description of the moral-and-ethical issues (friendship, truth, religion, studies, humour, etc., comprising 44 % of all the topics) and social ones (children, parents, marriage, usury, travelling, power, etc., comprising 14 % of all the topics) phenomena. The emotional states, described in the treaty are: love, envy and anger, that may reveal the fact that anger is one of the basic dominants of the emotional paradigm in the world picture of F. Bacon, that is of strong scientific interest. The analysis of F. Bacon`s conceptual speculations about anger is widely represented in philosophical critical articles and reviews [12; 13; 14; 15 and others], but the analysis of his speculations about anger from the point of linguistics hasn`t been conducted before, that determined the topic of this article.

It is of interest to note that of all negatively marked emotional concepts revealed in the philosophical discourse of F. Bacon (despise, fear, contempt, hate, etc.), the concept “anger” is verbalized in 18% of all the analyzed examples, objectifying negatively marked emotional states. Thus, for F. Bacon anger as philosophical category is of substantial scientific interest.

To achieve the aim of the research lexical-and-semantic analysis of the works of F. Bacon was carried out, that consisted in revealing the means of verbal representation of the concept “anger” in the analyzed texts and the analysis of the semantic features of the lexemes, representing this concept.

As semantic-and-cognitive analysis revealed the concept “anger” in the philosophical discourse of F. Bacon is verbalized by the lexemes anger and angry. According to the lexicographical data [1**], semantic meaning of the lexeme «anger» is characterized by the medium degree of expressiveness: it represents the average emotional experience, the feeling of anger represented by the lexeme is highly unspecific, naming both sudden and permanent phenomenon, reasonable anger and the anger arising with no reason [1**, p. 38].

The lexeme angry also has generalized, unspecified semantic meaning; it may be used to characterize actions, facial expressions, voice, mimics, words, [1**, p. 38] etc. It is interesting to note that “universality” of the semantic structure of the lexeme angry is also revealed in the analysis of its syntagmatic relations: the lexeme is used both attributively and predicatively, as well as with prepositional object, determining the reason of anger.

37

Series «Modern Linguistic and Methodical-and-Didactic Researches» Issue № 4 (15), 2016

To reveal the model of the cognitive structure of the concept “anger” semantic-and- cognitive analysis of the contexts, containing the lexemes angry and anger, was conducted. Basically 24 examples were analyzed.

As the results of contextual and semantic-and-cognitive analysis show, cognitive structure of the concept “anger” is determined by the following parameters:

1.qualitative characteristics of anger;

2.cause-and-effect environment of anger;

3.subject and object environment of anger.

Cause-and-effect environment of anger reveals the context and features, connected with anger, in terms of its causes and effects. Subject and object paradigm characterizes the quality of anger in terms of its source (subject) and aim (object). Qualitative characteristics reveal the contents of anger in terms of its qualities, properties and ontological features. Below the features of the concept “anger” revealed in consideration with above mentioned parameters are represented.

Each of the revealed parameters represents the definite area of the cognitive structure of the concept “anger” and contains the definite number of features. The most representative area of the concept`s cognitive structure is the one, representing its quantitative characteristics, that is specific for the philosophical discourse of F. Bacon.

Qualitative characteristics are one of the parameters determining the structure of the concept “anger” in the philosophical discourse. Anger is represented as a mental construct, having the features of materialized phenomenon. On the contextual analysis of the texts, verbalizing this type of anger, attention is focused on the features and characteristics of anger as an emotional state of man independently of the qualities of object, subject or causator of anger. F. Bacon describes anger as an object of action and manipulation of man that is subjected to the following activity:

m a n i p u l a t i o n o f t h e d e g r e e o f i n t e n s i t y o f a n g e r : a ) actions to intensify anger:

multiply and sharpen anger;

raise … anger;

putteth an edge upon anger;

kindle anger,

b) actions to decrease anger:

appeas anger;

extinguish anger;

in all refrainings of anger; inclination and habit to be a n g r y may be attempted and calmed; a n g e r may be repressed

аnger must be limited and confined.

c o o r d i n a t i o n o f t h e a r e a o f a n g e r ` s a c t i o n :

to contain anger from mischief;

r e t r o s p e c t i o n o f a n g e r :

to look back upon anger.

In the example below anger is represented as phenomenon which intensive character can be controlled, i.e. attempted, calmed, repressed, raised:

We will first speak how the natural inclination and habit to be a n g r y may be attempted and calmed. Secondly, how the particular motions of a n g e r may be repressed, or at least refrained from doing mischief. Thirdly, how to raise a n g e r , or appease a n g e r in another. [1*, Of Anger].

38

Series «Modern Linguistic and Methodical-and-Didactic Researches» Issue № 4 (15), 2016

The conceptual range below demonstrates the features of this type of anger:

1)irritability – inbred sense - possible to be attempted;

2)fit of anger – possible to be calmed or to prevent its negative effects;

3)anger – can be repressed or raised in other person.

Anger (irritability) demonstrated by this example is represented as innate, i.e., natural sense for man. Man is speculating on the possibility to control anger, though: to attempt it, that is to decrease its influence on man`s spiritual state, to learn how to repress it, so that totally get free of its influence. It is also of interest to note that anger isn` t demonstrated as a permanent sense, but as the sense that arises periodically, and is characterized by instability of intensity (it arises in fits). The high intensity of anger must be calmed down, that is also connected with man`s affords, with the control of man`s own emotional state, id est strong sense of anger is difficult to repress. Prevention of negative effects of anger is less difficult task for a man, compared to its repression. Moreover, anger, demonstrated by the above example, is a sense that is easily liable to man`s influence. Man can easily generate this sense in other man, as well as to calm it down, that is to control anger in other person. Thus, anger is represented as a feeling liable to man`s influence.

As it is known, emotional states don`t arise autonomously, but together with other emotions. Like many other emotions, anger in the philosophical picture of the world of F. Bacon is also represented as a part of the emotional system of man and is determined by cause-and- effect relations. Thus, anger arises by some reasons (motives) (for example: the causes and motives of anger), as well as results of anger (the effects of anger).

In general the following caustors (causes) of anger were revealed in the analyzed material: hurt, a man's reputation, angry business, to be too sensible of hurt, frowardest and worst disposed [The Essays, Of Anger, p.166-167]. Thus, anger in the philosophical discourse of F. Bacon is mostly caused by negative emotional states, unfair situation or attitude, the negative image of a person in society, negative information, as well as in the result of negative state of mind and mood of man in general.

It is necessary to point out that in the process of semantic-and-cognitive analysis the results of anger are not represented as a separate phenomenon; the given above reasons differentiate degree of intensity or manifestation of anger.

It is of interest to note that the reasons of anger can be treated as object of anger, and in this way causator and object of anger coincide. Thus, the objects of anger can be represented by the following: man whose personality serves as causators of anger (angry with man), certain circumstances (angry business).

Below is an example, demonstrating anger from the point of t h e r e a s o n s o f i t s o r i g i n :

… the causes and motives of a n g e r , are chiefly three. First, to be too sensible of hurt; for no man is a n g r y , that feels not himself hurt; and therefore tender and delicate persons must needs be oft a n g r y … The next is, the apprehension and construction of the injury offered, to be, in the circumstances thereof, full of contempt: for contempt is that, which putteth an edge upon a n g e r , as much or more than the hurt itself. And therefore, when men are ingenious in picking out circumstances of contempt, they do kindle their anger much. Lastly, opinion of the touch of a man's reputation, doth multiply and sharpen a n g e r [1*; p. 166-167].

In the given above example three causators of anger are clearly represented and determined:

1) extreme sensitivity to hurt (to be too sensible of hurt); 39

Series «Modern Linguistic and Methodical-and-Didactic Researches» Issue № 4 (15), 2016

2)the circumstances of hurt, i.e. accompanying hurt with contempt (the apprehension and construction of the injury offered, the circumstances thereof, full of contempt);

3)risk to man`s reputation (opinion of the touch of a man's reputation).

On the one hand, this range of reasons of anger, represented by F. Bacon, simplifies the nature of anger, making this emotion more understandable and predictable, and gives the opportunity to analyze anger from the position of scientific approach. On the other hand, it makes the description of anger more academic, representing anger not only as everyday phenomenon, but as object of scientific experiment, subjected to empirical analysis. This type of anger contains the cognitive feature of “conditionality” that is verbalized by the phrase: the causes and motives of anger.

When analyzing the first causator of anger (to be too sensible of hurt) it is necessary to pay attention to the correlation of anger with other senses of man of spiritual-and-ethic range, i.e.: sensitivity, scrupulousness, spiritual weakness. The correlation of anger with man`s weakness is of special interest, as it describes anger in the philosophical discourse of F. Bacon as the demonstration of man`s vulnerability, faint-heartedness. Thus, anger for F. Bacon is prerogative of the weak.

The feeling of hurt, as a causator of anger, is connected with unfair attitude to man, insult, that demonstrates anger as a tool of protection, an attempt to obtain justice that makes anger in the philosophical discourse of F. Bacon close to the phenomenon of moral-and-legal range.

This type of anger can be represented by means of the following conceptological range:

Conceptological range of the concept “anger”, caused by the feeling of hurt

scrupulous people,
		anger (arises often)
weak natures

the feeling
of hurt		stronger natures
				anger (arises less often)

As the conceptological range demonstrates, the causator of anger – the feeling of hurt – influences the frequency of anger. The weakness of man and the frequency of anger are in reverse progression: weak natures feel anger more often, than the stronger natures.

It is necessary to point out that analyzing the second cause of anger – the accompanying hurt with contempt – contempt is not only a favourable condition of anger, but also an emotion, the intensity of which is directly proportional to anger. Compare:

…for contempt is that, which putteth an edge upon anger, as much or more than the hurt itself[1*; p. 166-167].

Thus, anger is emotion, relational to contempt, and is also a result of contempt, that can be demonstrated by means of the following conceptological range: hurt contempt anger.

The third reason of anger is a risk to man`s reputation (opinion of the touch of a man's reputation), that also leads to the anger`s escalation (doth multiply and sharpen anger). This

40

Series «Modern Linguistic and Methodical-and-Didactic Researches» Issue № 4 (15), 2016

causator of anger is the phenomenon of moral-and-ethical range, as reputation (from the lat. reputatio – reflection, reasoning) is connected with opinion of man in society. Changing this opinion for the worse causes discomfort and aggression, that leads to anger.

Besides revealing the reasons of anger, this feeling in the philosophical discourse of F.

Bacon can be determined within the paradigm “subject-object”. The appearance of anger is also reasoned by definite causes, but the qualitative characteristics of subject or object of anger, rather than its causator, are specified.

Let`s consider the types of anger, revealed by the correlation of subject and object.

As the result of the research showed, the subjects of anger in the philosophical discourse of F. Bacon are represented by general, unspecified images of people from different social classes and gender groups, for example:

people in general (men, persons);

children; women;

sick folks.

Man (people), as subjects of anger, can plunge in anger:

(be) in anger;

feel the burden of anger: carry anger; feel anger: man is angry.

The objects of anger are more generalized and abstract phenomena: man (abstract image): a man, another.

Below there is an example, where the subject of anger are people, possessing definite qualities: too sensitive to hurt (arisen in the result of contempt):

And therefore, when men are ingenious in picking out circumstances of contempt, they do kindle their a n g e r much [1*, Of Anger].

The subject of anger in the given above example is man, obtaining such perceptive qualities as: too sensitive to contempt, receptive, liable to feel negative attitude of the people around. Thus, this type of anger depends on psychological features of person, i.e. on man`s degree of sensitivity and acts as a protective reaction of man on contempt. Causator of this type of anger can be determined as contemptuous, critical attitude to man.

It is of interest to note that the contemptuous attitude can really exist and be determined, but it can also be unnoticed. Besides, the feeling of contempt can be felt because of man`s suspiciousness, his tendency to see negative sides of phenomena, that serve as the basis to assume that anger arises not because of the negative attitude to man, but the understanding of this negative attitude from the people around, connected with the awareness of his own imperfection before the others. It is also worth mentioning that anger is revealed as emotion varying on the degree of intensity and frequency. It is possible to assume the existence both higher and lower degrees of anger, the existence of which depends on people`s perception of contempt. The power and frequency of anger depends on the fact how often man feels (realizes) contemp. Depending on three variants of perception of anger one may determine its variations in intensity and frequency (they do kindle their anger much). The conditions influencing the degree of anger can be represented by means of the following conceptological range:

people, who don`t perceive contempt the less manifestation of anger;

people, who perceive contempt the more intensive manifestation of anger.

41

Series «Modern Linguistic and Methodical-and-Didactic Researches» Issue № 4 (15), 2016

As the above patterns demonstrate, anger is in one conceptological range with contempt, that not only demonstrates correlation of these negatively marked emotional states, but also determines their direct dependence: the higher degree of awareness of contempt, the more intensive the anger.

The given above example reveals such features of anger as “correlation with spiritual weakness”, “variation of the degree of intensity”.

It is necessary to note that in this example anger is determined as an emotion of man irrelatively to any object, because the object of anger is people in general. The lack of concretization, appeal to generalized objects and aim of emotional states are characteristic features of the philosophical discourse of F. Bacon [16; 17]. The next example demonstrates the specific features of anger by characteristics of its object - the generalized image of man:

There is no man doth a wrong, for the wrong's sake; but thereby to purchase himself profit, or pleasure, or honor, or the like. Therefore why should I be a n g r y with a man, for loving himself better than me? [1*, Of Revenge].

Anger in the above example is addressed to man (the object of anger) because of his egoistic feelings, that is the loving himself more, than the subject of anger. The basic feature of anger, verbalized by the example, is “the presence of the object of anger” (abstract image of man), that is objectified by the phrase: be angry with a man. The lexeme angry, as verbal explicator of the concept “anger” is used in interrogative sentence, that is rhetorical question, being addressed, more likely, to the supposed subject of anger. It is necessary to note that the question contains the information that anger is the feeling the existence of which is disputable, as its cause (causator) is not influential enough for the subject, that represents the idea that man`s love of himself is a natural feeling, that is a priori a part of man`s being that doesn`t suppose to cause discontent. Anger in this example exists only in subject`s speculations about appropriateness of its existence, that is a demonstration of “the implicit character” of this kind of anger. It is verbalized by the rhetorical phrase: why should I be angry…. The implicit character is a key feature of anger, represented by this example.

It is also necessary to emphasize that this type of “presupposed”, hypothetical anger points out the natural character and propriety of egocentric love. Anger, represented by this example, is less intensive feeling compared to egocentric love, that in its turn reduces the feeling of anger, prevents its rising. This fact reveals inversely proportional character of correlation of anger and love in the philosophical discourse of F. Bacon, their incompatible nature: love presupposes the absence of anger and vice versa.

The special feature of anger in the philosophical discourse of F. Bacon is its ability to correlate not only with negative but also with positive phenomena. Thus, anger for F. Bacon is a part of associative row with such negatively marked moral-and-ethical categories as baseness (аnger is a baseness), contempt, passions, envy, fear as well as with positively marked category love. This fact demonstrates the ambivalent character of anger as object of philosophical discourse.

It is of interest to point out the associative parallels of anger in the philosophical picture of the world of F. Bacon: it is metaphorically compared to destructive realia – the ruined house: anger is like ruin. This comparison is exemplified below:

Seneca saith well, that a n g e r is like ruin, which breaks itself upon that it falls [1*, Of Anger].

Anger in the given above example is metaphorically compared with ruined house, that reveals its ability to self-destruction: anger is liable to disappear when it is directed to someone

42

Series «Modern Linguistic and Methodical-and-Didactic Researches» Issue № 4 (15), 2016

or something. This feature of anger reveals the finiteness of its nature. Anger also acts as subject, able to be ruined and to destroy itself.

Independently on the features of causators, subjects and objects of anger as well as on the character of manipulations on it anger in the philosophical discourse of F. Bacon is also characterized as emotion with the definite features:

1)instability of appearance, extreme ways of demonstrations that represents latent character of anger (anger fretting inwards) , spontaneity of anger (a fit of anger).

2)periodic character of appearance: natural origin of anger (habit to be angry).

The example below demonstrates spontaneity and uncontrolled character of anger:

The other, that you do not peremptorily break off, in any business, in a fit of a n g e r ; but howsoever you show bitterness, do not act anything, that is not revocable [1*, Of Anger].

The features of this type of anger can be illustrated by the following conceptological

range:

anger→ severance of business relations, conduct of the irreparable.

The analyzed type of anger is demonstrated as a feeling, causing irretrievable actions, that in their turn, cause harm to its promotion. Bitterness is represented as a reason (motive) of anger. The ways to avoid negative effects of anger, to escape the deeds that lead to negative, fatal phenomena are exemplified. Thus, anger is permissible, though its negative effects are undesirable and to be avoided.

It is necessary to determine the feature of anger, represented by this example, that is

“spontaneity”, objectified by the lexeme: fit [of anger], as well as “anger – the emotion leading to negative effects”. Negatively marked phenomena, caused by anger, are verbalized by the following word combinations: break off, in any business; show bitterness; act anything, that is not revocable.

Cognitive structure of the concept “anger” in the philosophical discourse of F. Bacon is illustrated by the following scheme:

43