PSYCHOLOGICAL PRINCIPLES OF FORMATION OF LINGUISTIC THINKING OF FUTURE TRANSLATORS

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.32782/3041-2021/2024-2-5

Keywords:

linguistic thinking, abstractness of linguistic thinking, the uniqueness and originality of linguistic thinking, intellectual features, linguistic knowledge, analytical linguistic thinking

Abstract

Taking into account different approaches to understand the structure and specifics of linguistic thinking, we came to the conclusion that linguistic thinking is a qualitative new formation of the person that is formed in a case of future translators, when the process of learning is based on the study of the structure of the content of some concrete language elements. Analysing the features of the interrelationships of some elements of linguistic thinking, revealing the specifics of phonetic, lexical, grammatical and other phenomena and regularities of the language having been learned. A translator with a formed linguistic thinking will be characterized by us by the highest level of the development of his/her thinking operations, by the presence of positive motivation for the process of acquiring linguistic knowledge and skills, and by the most creative attitude to mastering a foreign language. According to the proposed definition of the concept of “linguistic thinking”, its structure, to our mind, will include the following elements: a high level of acquisition of linguistic knowledge; the ability to perform general thinking and actually linguistic operations; a high level of understanding of specifics of phonetic, grammatical, lexical and other phenomena and regularities of the English language having been learned; clear ideas about paradigmatics, syntagmatics and language hierarchy; the awareness and the most interesting attitude to the process of studying language phenomena; a creative approach to the performance of specific linguistic tasks in the course of mastering the techniques of providing translation activity. We believe that the success of translation activity is significantly influenced by the psychological principles of a specialist’s linguistic thinking, such as: focus of linguistic thinking on finding and solving linguistic translation problems; the complexity and problematic nature of the thinking process, which is caused by a great complexity and diversity, the scattering of translation goals and the means of their achievement; abstractness of linguistic thinking, which allows considering the product of translation activity in an abstract, general form; the uniqueness and originality of linguistic thinking caused by the novelty of information and the unique direction of a creative process; critical linguistic thinking, which allows the translator to be critical according to the product of translation activity; independence of linguistic thinking, which largely depends on the professional skills of the translator; a high level of formation of intellectual features affecting the acquisition, assimilation and development of the ability to apply linguistic knowledge, abilities and skills; speed of thinking; analytical linguistic thinking; the ability to adequately understand information, a high level of creative imagination, the formation of verbal and non-verbal intelligence, speech speed.

References

Alexandrov A. A., Boricheva D. O., Pulvermüller F., Shtyrov Y. Strength of word-specific neural memory traces assessed electrophysiologically. PLoS ONE. 2011. P. 2–29. URL: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0022999.

Aleksandrov A. A., Memetova K. S., Stankevich L. N. Referent’s Lexical Frequency Predicts Mismatch Negativity Responses to New Words Following Semantic Training. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research. Vol. 49. 2020. P. 187–198. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-019-09678-3.

Arbuthnott K., Frank J. Executive control in set switching: Residual switch cost and task-set inhibition. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology. Vol. 54. 2000. P. 33–41. URL: https://doi.org/10.1037/h0087328.

Batel E. Context Effect on L2 Word Recognition: Visual Versus Auditory Modalities. Journal of Psycholinguist Research. 2020. Vol. 49. P. 223–245. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-019-09683-6.

Bates D., Maechler M., Bolker B., Walker S. lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using Eigen and S4. Journal of Package Version. Vol. 1(7). 2014. P. 1–23.

Beauvillain C. Morphological structure in visual word recognition: Evidence from prefixed and suffixed words. Language and Cognitive Processes. Vol. 9(3). 1994. P. 317–339.

Blagovechtchenski E., Gnedykh D., Kurmakaeva D., Mkrtychian N., Kostromina S., Shtyrov Y. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) of Wernicke’s and Broca’s areas in studies of language learning and word acquisition. Journal of Visualized Experiments. 2019. P. 37–59. URL: https://doi.org/10.3791/59159.

Mykhalchuk N., Bihunova S. The verbalization of the concept of “fear” in English and Ukrainian phraseological units. Cognitive Studies | Études cognitives. Варшава (Польща), 2019. С. 11. URL: https://doi.org/10.11649/cs.2043.

Mykhalchuk N., Ivashkevych Er. Psycholinguistic Characteristics of Secondary Predication in Determining the Construction of a Peculiar Picture of the World of a Reader. Psycholinguistics. Переяслав-Хмельницький, 2019. Вип. 25(1). С. 215–231. URL: https://doi.10.31470/2309-1797-2019-25-1-215-231.

Михальчук Н., Онуфрієва Л. Психологічний аналіз різних типів дискурсу. Збірник наукових праць «Проблеми сучасної психології». Кам’янець-Подільський, 2020. Вип. 50. С. 188–210. URL: https://doi.org/10.32626/2227-6246.2020-50.188-210.

Downloads

Published

2024-09-17