Characteristics of the utterance. Statements - Logic Library of Russian textbooks. Structure of an attributive utterance

It is possible that you have never paid attention to the content and structure of your everyday habitual phrases.
Characteristics of your statements. If all our sentences containing pronouns are divided into two large groups, then we can distinguish “You-statements” and “I-statements”.

What it is?

"You-statements" are a way of communicating information to someone about himself, his behavior, character traits, and so on, which creates the impression that you are right and the other person is wrong. They reflect the difference between your point of view and the point of view of the person with whom you are communicating. The way in which “You” statements are typically delivered can easily cause irritation or defensiveness in the person to whom they are addressed. He may be angry that the interlocutor considers himself so right that he can allow himself “You-statements.” Often in these cases a conflict may arise, which is associated not so much with some problem, but with the attitude of the person making “You-statements” to it.

An example of this would be a situation in which a parent becomes angry with a child for, for example, leaving his room untidy. Instead of asking the child to clean the room or come up with something that would encourage him to keep the room clean and tidy in the future (we will talk about this below), the parent says a phrase, constructing it as a “You-statement”: “ You always leave dirt in the room.” Now the conflict is no longer associated with
room. Having said that, a conflict situation arises in connection with what and why the child does, as well as whether he always or only sometimes does it. As a result, the child feels that he is bad and is offended.

Remember the situation when, with the help of the “You-statement,” you were instilled with personal qualities that made you unsuccessful in any activity. For example, you have been repeatedly told that you are always late, lose everything, study poorly, and the like. Such programming of bringing a person through with the help of “You-statements” sometimes negatively affects his self-esteem and level of aspirations.

"I-statements" are a way of communicating information to someone about your own needs, feelings, or scenes without insulting or judging the person to whom the statement is addressed. You talk about what you want, what you need, or what you think, not what you should do or say to someone else. You defend your interests, but do not put pressure on the other person. In this way, the other is not judged, blamed or attacked. He is not
will feel backed up to the wall, he will not have the need to defend himself and, therefore, start or escalate the conflict. With the help of the “I-statement”, a person’s action is discussed, and not his personal qualities.

“I” statements simply begin with the pronoun “I” and express one’s own feeling or reaction.

Examples of statements I make to a child.

In a situation with an uncleaned room, you can use the following “I-statement”: “I am unhappy that the room is not cleaned. What can be done to remove it?
In this case, the emphasis is on your feelings about the unclean room and you shift the responsibility for cleaning it to your child.

Compare expressions made in the form of "You-statements" and "I-statements" and judge which case is more likely for the speaker to achieve what he wants in a less confrontational way.

“YOU-STATEMENTS”: You bother me with your questions.
“I-STATEMENTS”: If you ask me something when I am busy with other things, I feel irritated because I am not ready to give you attention. I would be grateful if you asked me questions at a more appropriate time, for example, at ... (indicate the time).

“YOU-STATEMENTS”: You never do what I want. You always act on your own.
“I-STATEMENTS”: When you make decisions for both of us without asking my opinion, I feel offended and it seems to me that you are not interested in my point of view. I would like us to discuss these issues together so that the wishes of both are taken into account.

Pay attention to the model of constructing the “I-statement”. The phrase begins with a neutral, non-accusatory description of another person's behavior that does not satisfy you. This is followed by a description of your rational and emotional reactions to this behavior. Explain why the behavior makes you uncomfortable, or simply state how it affects you. Finally, in very polite, non-aggressive terms, describe what you would like. When doing this, use phrases such as “I would like,” “I would appreciate it,” or “I would prefer.”

The “I-statement” model, broken down into elements, looks like this:
When you (non-accusatory description of another person's behavior), I feel (your feelings or emotions about that behavior) because (why the behavior is a problem for you or how it affects you) and I would like, I I would be grateful, I would prefer (description of your desire).

Below we invite you to try to learn the elements of the “I-statement”. To begin with, you must learn to express your own feelings and emotions.

Right now, formulate one of the elements of the “I-statement”. Complete each of the sentences below in three different ways just to feel the sensation they evoke.

I feel... (excited, discouraged, hopeful, tired, confused, hungry, annoyed, etc.)

I want... (to fly on a glider, feel happy, have more friends, etc.)

I'm going to... (try some of your "needs" here just to see how they are experienced, or use the following completion options: take care of yourself, go to bed, read a little, etc.)

When completing these sentences, use a variety of options without thinking too much about whether they are “correct” or not, look at this exercise as a game, try out all kinds of sentences just to exercise your inner voice.

Make it a habit to write and say out loud at least three sentences like this every day for the next week:

I feel…

I love…

I'm going to…

Eliminate the pronouns “you,” “you,” and “we” from these sentences until using “I” becomes completely natural and comfortable for you.

Notice when talking to your child how often you ask him questions like “Where have you been?” or “What were you doing just now?” Try replacing them with an “I” statement: “I was worried about you because I expected you home by five o’clock.”

Below, write down three examples of your “I” statements that you could use to address your child right now:

Pay attention to how often negative expressions like “I can’t,” “I don’t want,” and the like are heard in your speech.

Often, a negative tells the listener something that doesn't exist, and therefore emphasizes the opposite of what you really mean.

When you want to use a negative judgment, imagine that you have just been dropped on a deserted island and the helicopter pilot, making the final turn over your head, shouts, asking what you want him to drop you with that you need. It is best to say what you really want, instead of listing what you don’t need to discard, for example: I don’t want perfume, I don’t want evening dresses, etc.

Try to replace negative judgments with positive statements in your speech.

We offer materials on the topic of interest:

If you feel depressed and have a complete breakdown, then imagine how...
We invite you to familiarize yourself with the recipes for increasing the self-esteem of parents; increasing self-esteem in the most favorable way will affect the child-parent relationship...
Prevention of emotional burnout syndrome is divided into three aspects. Individual - development of appropriate behavior, drug prevention,...
In psychology, the theme of the inner child implies getting rid of childhood traumas. Various psychological techniques are used, the meaning of which is...
Working with the inner child begins with giving the right to talk about your feelings. Not...

Strength of character lies not in the ability to withstand a blow, but in the strength to rise after it. (S. S. Povalyaev)
There is nothing more colorless than the character of a spineless person. (Jean de La Bruyère)
People with an ardent character rarely have constant friendships. (Luc de Clapier Vauvenargues)
People with weak character are not capable of being sincere. (Francois de La Rochefoucauld)
Despotism reigns only over automata. People only have character in free countries. (Claude Adrian Helvetius)
Character consists of an energetic desire to achieve the goals that each person sets for himself. (Goethe)
The best possible combination is power and mercy; the worst is weakness and pugnacity. (Winston Leonard Spencer Churchill)
Look at women's morals, but do not imitate them. (Menander)
Character is power over oneself, talent is power over others. (Vasily Osipovich Klyuchevsky)
To justify ourselves in our own eyes, we often convince ourselves that we are unable to achieve our goal; in fact, we are not powerless, but weak-willed. (Francois de La Rochefoucauld)
Frequent imitation becomes its own character. (Marcus Fabius Quintilian)
Character brings people together much more than intelligence. (Joseph Ernest Renan)
I like some of the good qualities of old age in a young man, and some of the good qualities of youth in an old man. (Marcus Tullius Cicero)
Nothing brings people closer together than the similarity of characters. (Marcus Tullius Cicero)
Stubbornness has only the form of character, but not its content. (Immanuel Kant)
Arrogance is stronger where defense is weaker. (Gaius Sallust Crispus)
Character is a certain form of will and interest that makes itself significant. (Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel)
18. If the character as a whole is good, then it does not matter if there are some shortcomings in it. (Charles Louis Montesquieu)
Activities leave an imprint on character. (Ovid)
You must have aversion to bloodshed in your blood. (Stanislav Jerzy Lec)
A decent person is always a simpleton. (Mark Valery Martial)
In the absence of other means, a person's character can never be understood more accurately than by the joke to which he is offended. (Georg Christoph Lichtenberg)
It is not the act as such, but the intentions that determine moral character. (Democritus)
There is no one more determined than him in indecision and stronger in weakness. (Winston Leonard Spencer Churchill)
Man himself is the final creator of his character. (Lev Mikhailovich Lopatin)
Strength of character is often nothing more than weakness of feelings. (Arthur Schnitzler)
The history of our feelings shapes our character and determines our destiny. (Sheldon Routh)
A person without firm rules almost always lacks character: if he had character, he would feel how much he needs rules. (Sébastien-Roch Nicolas de Chamfort)
You must have the strength of character to say and do the same thing. (A.I. Herzen)
Character is like a tree, and reputation is its shadow. We care about the shade, but what we really need to think about is the tree. (Abraham Lincoln)
Talents are formed in peace, characters are formed amid the storms of life. (Goethe)
Solid character must be combined with flexibility of mind. (Vauvenargues)
Weaker and simpler people are best judged by their characters, while more intelligent and hidden ones are best judged by their goals. (F. Bacon)
Character is nothing more than a long-term skill. (Plutarch)
Good characters, like good writing, are not so much striking at the beginning as at the end. (Voltaire)
Character consists of the ability to act according to principles. (Immanuel Kant)
The stronger a person’s character, the less prone he is to inconstancy in love. (Stendhal)
By their natural inclinations people are close to each other, but by their habits they are far from each other. (Confucius)
Constant importance is only a mask for mediocrity. (Voltaire)
Those who have an orderly character have a well-ordered life. (Democritus)
Those who lack a decisive will lack intelligence. (William Shakespeare)

In their mental-speech activity, when exchanging information and information with each other, people use forms of thinking that contain a certain thought about the real world, about objects, about the properties of these objects, about the connections between really existing objects of reality or imagined ones. All this is fixed in statements or judgments.

Judgment- a form of thinking in which something is affirmed or denied regarding the existence of objects, connections between an object and its properties, or between objects.

For example, “Sidorov V.A. - Judge of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation"; “The Soviet Army saved world civilization from fascism.”

In our ordinary logic, which is two-valued, a proposition has one of two truth values: it is either true or false. If what is affirmed or denied in a judgment corresponds to reality, then it is true. Otherwise the proposition is false. However, if the correspondence of a judgment to reality is not obvious and cannot be easily established, then its truth must be confirmed by other judgments, the truth of which has been established. It is impossible, for example, to recognize the judgment as either true or false: “Citizen Petrov I.A. committed an official misconduct." This proposition must be proven.

In three-valued logic, a third value is added to these two values - uncertainty. For example, the proposition: “Venus has no life” is currently indefinite.

Judgments are divided into simple And complex. A simple proposition is a proposition that expresses the connection between two concepts. A judgment consisting of several simple judgments is called complex. The characteristics of complex judgments will express the content of simple ones.

A simple proposition has: subject, predicate, connective and quantifier. They have their own definition and designation.

Subject of judgment- this is the concept of the subject of judgment, the logical subject. It is denoted by the Latin letter “S” (from the Latin - subjectum).

Predicate of judgment The concept of a sign of an object considered in a judgment is called a logical predicate. Its designation is “P” (from the Latin - praedicatum).

Subject and predicate are terms of judgment. Each of them plays its own cognitive role.

Bunch can be expressed in one word (is, essence, etc.), or a group of words, or a dash, or a simple agreement of words.

Quantifier(quantifier word) indicates the relation of the judgment to the entire volume of the concept expressing the subject, or to its part. It is expressed by the words: “all”, “none”, “some”, etc.

For example, in the judgment: “All students of the Russian Academy of Justice are active participants in scientific conferences,” the subject (S) is the concept: “students of the Russian Academy of Justice”; as a predicate (P) - the concept of “active participants in scientific conferences”. The predicate reflects what is asserted in relation to the subject of the judgment. The connective in this example is the word “is”, the quantifier is “all”.

The linguistic form of expressing a judgment is a sentence. Just as concepts cannot arise and exist outside of words and phrases, judgments cannot arise and exist outside of sentences. However, this does not mean a complete coincidence of the judgment and the proposal. There is a certain relationship between them: a sentence is the grammatical form of a judgment, and a judgment is the logical content of the sentence. Moreover, judgments are not expressed by all types of sentences. They are expressed using narrative sentences that contain some kind of message or information. The sentences themselves are divided into narrative, incentive and interrogative.

Interrogative sentences, with the exception of sentences with a rhetorical question, are not judgments. For example, such a rhetorical question “Who doesn’t want happiness?” involves a statement expressing the belief that everyone wants happiness. Therefore, this sentence is a judgment.

Incentive sentences are also not judgments, with the exception of those expressing military commands, orders, appeals, slogans. Such sentences contain a thought and are judgments. For example, such commands as: “Not a step back!”, “Attack!”, as well as the exclamation “Take care of the world!” contain specific thoughts and therefore can be called judgments.

To understand the essence of judgments, as well as their role in cognitive and practical activities, including judicial ones, their classification is of great importance. In the history of logic, several classification options are known, differing in the chosen bases. The most stable of them remains the option put forward by Aristotle. It has an undoubted advantage in terms of understanding the structure of the judgment itself, forming a complete understanding of the objects of the external world. The Aristotelian classification is based on the following features: the content of the predicate; quality of the bundle; subject volume; modality of judgment; type of logical conjunctions.

Let's consider this classification. It is necessary to know it so that in the presentation of a specific thought everyone can see the largest palette of forms of judgments, their advantages and disadvantages.

1. Division of judgments according to the content of the predicate.

On this basis, simple judgments are divided into existence judgments, attributive judgments and relational judgments, in which something is affirmed or denied and which carry knowledge about the very subject of thought, its signs (attributes) and relationships:

A) existence judgments contain information about the presence or absence of the subject of our thought. For example: “In Russia there are different types of property”;

b) attributive judgments provide knowledge about the properties of an object or whether it belongs to a certain class of objects. They are divided into property judgments and inclusion judgments.

- Property judgments represent an affirmation or denial of the belonging of any properties or characteristics to an object. For example: “In our time, the formation of a legal culture among citizens is the most important component of the formation of civil society in the country.”

- Judgments of inclusion express the belonging of an object to a class of objects or one class to another class of objects. For example: “The Russian Academy of Justice is a state educational institution.”

Attributive judgments can be given a comprehensive interpretation. It is represented through the connection between the inclusion of the scope of one concept in the scope of another or the exclusion of one from the other.

The use of circular diagrams makes it possible to visualize the relationships between the terms of a judgment. The volumetric interpretation of attributive judgments is widely used in the activities of judges to analyze certain types of inferences.

V) Attitude judgments express various relationships between objects in place, size, time, causal dependence, etc. For example: “Every investigator knows some lawyers better than some prosecutors.”

2. Division of judgments according to the quality of the connection.

This division is an operation of classifying judgments according to their logical functions: affirmation or negation. This is the “quality” of judgment. It is expressed by the connective “is” or “is not.” Depending on this, all judgments are divided into affirmative And negative. For example: “Honest labor is the source of the well-being and power of our society.” This affirmative judgments. Such judgments express the belonging of a certain attribute to an object. A judgment expressing the absence of a certain attribute in an object is called negative. For example: “Protecting honor, dignity and personal safety is not a crime.”

It is necessary to distinguish between a negative judgment and a negative form of expression of an affirmative judgment. For example: “Any intelligence against another state has no legal basis” and “Intelligence is illegal.” This type of judgment is not always identical,

If for an affirmative judgment the logical scheme is: “S is P,” then for a negative one: “S is not P.”

In addition to negative judgments, there are also negative judgments. They exclude the truth of another proposition. For example: “The statement that it is impossible to find humanists in any country in the world is false.”

3. Division of judgments according to the volume of the subject.

This division is usually called division by quantity. Depending on this characteristic, all judgments are divided into single, particular, general:

A) single judgments- these are judgments in which the scope of the subject includes only one object - individual or conceivable collectively. For example: “Moscow is the capital of Russia.” The logical scheme of such judgments is: “This S is P” and “This S is not P”;

b) private judgment- this is a judgment where the scope of the subject includes part of a class of objects that have common essential features. This part can be indefinite or definite. Depending on the circumstances, private judgments are divided into uncertain And certain:

In indefinites the logic is: “At least some S are P.” This word gives some uncertainty. For example: “Some people are prudent”; "Some people are criminals";

A certain private judgment contains knowledge about both parts of the subject of judgment. It has the following logical scheme: “Only some S are P.” For example: “Only some lawyers will be able to become lawyers”;

V) general judgment- this is a judgment in which something is affirmed or denied about all objects of a given class. General judgments reflect the unity, similarity and difference of objects in the real world. Among them there are registering And non-registering:

Registrations are such general judgments in which something is affirmed or denied in relation to a class with a certain number of objects. For example: “All judges are obliged to follow the law in making judicial decisions”;

Non-registering are those judgments that affirm or deny something relating to an unlimited number of objects. For example: “All courts in the Russian Federation perform the functions of protecting the rights and freedoms of Russian citizens.”

Each of the considered types of judgments has its own cognitive and practical value. The forms of individual judgments contain knowledge about individual phenomena and persons. They are needed in the practical work of lawyers when they carry out relationships with people. Private judgments have the potential for greater cognitive value. The knowledge contained in general judgments is characterized by its completeness, integrity and consistency. Through these judgments, the laws of science and the state are formed and deciphered.

General judgments are formed on the basis of individual and particular ones and are connected with them. Their logical analysis allows people to form a motive for action and to visualize the information included in them.

4. Division of judgments according to the type of logical conjunctions.

This kind of judgment applies to complex judgments. Each such judgment consists of terms that have their own content. There can be relationships of a different nature between the content of the terms of a judgment and the type of logical conjunctions. Some attribute expressed by a predicate may relate to the subject of thought unconditionally, alternatively, conditionally. Depending on this, all judgments are divided into connecting, dividing, conditional. The truth value of a complex statement depends solely on the truth of the simple statements included in it:

A) connective A (conjunctive) proposition is a complex proposition in which one or both terms consist of two or more concepts joined by the conjunction “and” (sometimes “nor”). For example: “High organization and creativity of a student are the key to success in studies and judicial practice.” The logical scheme of such a judgment is: “S1 Ù S2 is P.”

In natural language, conjunctive propositions are expressed in one of three ways:

The connective connective is expressed in a complex subject consisting of conjunctively related features: “S1 Ù S2 is P”;

The connective connective is expressed in a complex predicate consisting of conjunctively related concepts according to the scheme: “S is P1 L P2.” For example: “Armed conflict, war are socially dangerous and illegal acts”;

The connective ligament is represented by a combination of the first two methods according to the scheme: “S1 Ù S2 is P1 Ù P2.” For example: “With the police chief And Prosecutor Nozdryov was also on first name terms And treated him in a friendly manner."

In cognitive terms, the conjunctive copula is very important, because it allows such judgments to be made equivalent. The meaning of a judgment does not change from rearranging its members.

A conjunctive proposition will be true if each of its constituent members is true, and false if at least one of its members is false. When constructing truth tables, the left column gives the truth value (true - “and”, false - “l”) of the initial statements, and the right column gives the results of the general truth. (See table No. 1);

b) dividing(disjunctive) judgment is of an alternative nature. It is formed from simple propositions by connecting their terms with the logical conjunction “or”. These judgments are characterized by their uncertainty. They are convenient to use if it is necessary to avoid specificity and unambiguity of the conclusion. For example: “This military-political situation is either conflictual, or pre-war, or contains a tendency towards détente.” The logical scheme of such a judgment is: “S is P1 Ú P2 Ú P3.”

In logic there is a distinction two type of disjunctive judgments: strictly dividing and connecting-dividing:

Strict disjunction is a judgment in which the connective “or” is used only in a disjunctive meaning (symbol Ú). For example: “A weapon can be fired either carelessly or intentionally.” The terms of a strict disjunction are called alternatives and cannot be both true;

A loose disjunction is a judgment in which the connective “or” is used in a connective-disjunctive meaning (symbol Ú). For example: “Success in science is achieved either by talent or by hard work.” Here the conjunction “or” can be replaced by the conjunction “and”.

The truth of a disjunctive judgment is determined by the truth of its constituent disjuncts (members). With a weak disjunction, a disjunctive judgment will be false if all its constituent members are false and true if one or two of its constituent members are true. With a strict disjunction, a disjunctive proposition will be false if two of its components are false or true, and true if one of its components is true. (See table no. 2).

A disjunctive judgment is expressed in natural language by one of three ways:

The disjunctive connective is located in the complex subject of judgment and connects concepts with each other according to the scheme: “S1 Ú S2 is P.” For example: “The commander (chief) who committed injustice or illegal action towards a subordinate for a complaint (statement) filed by him, bears strict liability for this.” (Article 124 of the Disciplinary Charter of the Armed Forces);

The disjunctive connective occurs in judgments in which the features are disjunctively connected and form a complex predicate according to the scheme: “S is P1 Ú P2.” For example: “The complaint can be made orally or submitted in writing." (Article 113 of the Disciplinary Charter of the Armed Forces);

The disjunctive connective is clearly expressed both in the subject and in the predicate of the judgment according to the scheme: “S1 Ú S2 is P1 Ú P2.” For example: “For violation by a junior in the presence of a senior of military discipline, public order or of the rules of salutation, the elder is obliged to remind the younger And, if it turns out to be unsuccessful, he may arrest the younger one.” (Article 86 of the Disciplinary Charter of the Supreme Court).

The disjunctive connective in language is sometimes expressed with the help of the conjunction “and”, replacing the conjunction “or” in connective-disjunctive judgments, as can be seen from the last example.

In the activities of judges, disjunction is used to reveal the scope of normative legal acts and concepts that reflect legal norms, because over time and in a specific historical situation, region, their meaning becomes ambiguous;

V) negative judgment allows you to form a contradictory statement from a specific statement. In natural language, such an operation is expressed by the words “it is not true that” or simply “not.” The logical scheme of such a statement will be as follows: “A Ø A”. For example, the negation of the statement “The judiciary is a branch of political power” will be the statement: “It is not true that the judicial power is a branch of political power.” Let us pay attention to the fact that a statement obtained by negating the original is contradictory to it. It denies something, but does not affirm something. If the first statement is true, then the statement that contradicts it will be false. If the first is false, then the contradictory will be true (see table No. 3);

Table No. 1 Table No. 2 Table No. 3

d) operation implications consists in the formation of a complex statement from two simple statements through a logical connective, denoted by the words “if..., then...” and approximately corresponding to a conditional sentence in natural language.

Conditional statement- this is a judgment that reflects the material connection between objects and the dependence of any characteristics of the object on certain conditions. The first part, introduced by the word "if", is called the base, antecedent(the previous statement), and starting with the word “that” is a consequence of the conditional statement, consequential(subsequent statement). For example: “If the ways to achieve a goal are true, then it can be successfully and quickly achieved.”

The logical connective “if..., then...” shows that the phenomenon referred to in the previous judgment acts as a condition for the emergence, existence or change of another phenomenon - conditioned, referred to in the subsequent judgment. If we denote the basis by the letter “A”, and the consequence by “B”, then the conditional proposition will have the scheme: “A ® B”.

A conditional proposition will be false only in one case - when the reason is true and the consequence is false. For example: " If a person suspected of committing a crime has a large circle of acquaintances, That his non-involvement in the commission of the crime is obvious.” In all other cases, the conditional proposition will be true. (See table No. 4).

Conditional propositions (statements) come in three varieties:

Judgments about causal communications. For example: " If illuminate the film, That the captured images will not be developed";

Judgments about logical basis. For example: " If violate the principles of crime investigation, That this will entail the formulation of false versions about the causes and conditions of the committed act”;

Judgments about condition. For example: " If you know your specialty well, That you will overcome all difficulties in practical work.”

Conditional propositions are used to express a wide variety of relationships between statements, but not in all cases, and their content and meaning are taken into account. For example, the statement “If 2´2 = 5, then Moscow is a big city” is considered not only acceptable, but also a true implication. And the statement “If 2´2 = 4, then Moscow is a small city” is false, since here the basis is a true statement, and the consequence is false. These statements do not take into account the difference between formalized language and natural language and therefore paradoxes arise.

In judicial practice, it is required to use logical concepts that would more adequately reflect the semantic connection in conditional statements. For example: " If a crime has been committed That there is definitely a reason and reason that determined it.”

There is a special class of judgments that are divided according to the type of logical conjunctions - these are equivalent judgments. Equivalence statements are judgments that assert the mutual conditionality of two situations. They are expressed, as a rule, through sentences with the conjunction “if and only if..., then...” (“if and only then..., when...”). In this kind of judgment, as well as in conditional ones, one can distinguish both the basis and the consequence. What is characteristic of these judgments is that the basis and consequence can be swapped. For example, in the statement: “ If the judge strictly and precisely follows the requirements of professional ethics, That he is a highly moral person,” the basis and consequence can be swapped and the essence of the thought will not change.

The logical scheme of this judgment is as follows: “A “B”.

In an equivalence judgment, the event described by the consequence is also a sufficient and necessary condition for the event described by the reason.

An equivalent proposition is true if its parts are either true or false. Consequently, true statements will be equivalent, on the one hand, and false statements, on the other. In all other cases it is false. (See table no. 5).

Table No. 4 Table No. 5

As you can see, the classification of judgments is their division according to different criteria. This division allows for the compatibility of division members and their crossing. Moreover, although the above classification reveals the diversity and characteristics of many types of judgments, not all of them are widely used. Public practice has identified from all the types considered four most common. These are general affirmative, general negative, particular affirmative and particular negative judgments. They reflect the qualitative and quantitative aspects of real phenomena, and through them the types of judgments that we examined earlier manifest themselves.

General affirmative propositions. They are characterized by subjects that are general in volume and connectives that are affirmative in quality. The general formula for them is: “All S are P.” The symbol is the letter "A", the first vowel of the verb affirmo- “I affirm.” For example: “Everyone is equal before the law and court”; “All lawyers are lawyers.” In these judgments, the scope of the predicate is wider than the scope of the subject and is a subordinate concept. Graphically, this relationship is depicted as follows:

In some general affirmative propositions, subject and predicate will be equivalent concepts. For example: “All people are inhabitants of planet Earth.” Here the scopes of the terms coincide and this judgment is depicted as follows:

In general affirmative propositions, the subject is either subordinate to the predicate, or both terms are equivalent concepts.

General negative judgments. They are general in terms of the volume of the subject and negative in terms of the quality of the connective tissue. The general formula for them is: “No S is P.” Their symbol is the letter "E", the first vowel of the verb nego- I deny. For example: “No active advocate of peace supports the arms race.” Complete incompatibility of subject and predicate is characteristic of all generally negative judgments. There can be no exceptions here. Graphically, these judgments are depicted as follows:

In general negative judgments, the scope of the subject and the scope of the predicate completely exclude each other.

Particularly affirmative judgments. They are particular in terms of the volume of the subject and affirmative in terms of the quality of the connective. The general formula for them is: “Some S are P.” Their symbol is “I”, the second vowel of the verb affirmo. For example: “Some lawyers are lawyers”; “Some RAP students are residents of regional centers of the Russian Federation.” In these judgments, the subject and the predicate represent intersecting concepts. Their scopes partially coincide. They are represented by Euler circles like this:

In some particular affirmative propositions, the scope of the subject is wider than the scope of the predicate. Here the predicate is subordinate to the subject. For example, “Some RAP students are excellent students.” In this case, the scope of the predicate is included in the scope of the subject, but the scope of the subject only partially coincides with the scope of the predicate. This judgment is depicted as follows:

As we see, in particular affirmative judgments the subject and the predicate are intersecting concepts and the predicate is subordinate to the subject.

Partial negative judgments. They are partial in the volume of the subject and negative in the quality of the connective. The general formula for them is: “Some S are not P.” The symbol of partial negative judgments is the letter “O” - the second vowel of the word nego. For example: “Some people don’t know how to hide their feelings”; “Some Russian citizens are not liable for military service.” The volumetric relations of terms in these judgments are similar in scheme to the volumetric relations of terms in particular affirmative judgments. But here we are talking about a discrepancy between a part of the scope of the subject that is incompatible with the scope of the predicate. Graphically, these judgments are depicted as follows:

Thus, in partial negative judgments we are talking about a part of the volume of the subject that is incompatible with the volume of the predicate.

These are the main types of judgments under which any categorical judgment can be subsumed. These are attributive judgments, the analysis of which is primarily dealt with by formal logic.

Mastering the skills of logical analysis of the considered types of statements (judgments) using symbolic language important to understand the meaning of all types and forms of legal relations, allows a lawyer (judge) to accurately determine the essence and content of real events and correctly apply legal means and methods of resolving contradictions in their activities, make fair decisions on committed illegal acts, based on legality, legal order, as well as on traditions, customs and the way of life of ethnic groups and nationalities and the nations living in our country.

Related information.

Logic does not study words, but studies statements

L. Wittgenstein

In modern logic, two terms have emerged - “judgment” and “statements”. They denote a special form of thinking, in contrast to concepts and inferences. In traditional logic, the term “Judgment” is used, and in modern symbolic logic, “expressions” (logic of statements), we will further operate with the term “statements” and we will operate with the term “philosophy”.

Statements are a logical-semantic category that denotes a form of expression of thoughts and a form of expression of knowledge; it has a certain meaning and, accordingly, can be true or false. This is a form of thinking through which it is somewhat affirmed or denied about a class of empirical or abstract objects, the relationship between objects of thought is established, the presence or absence of properties in a class of objects or elements of a certain class is recorded.

The linguistic form of expression of a statement is made up of sentences, but not every sentence expresses statements. Such proposals include: announcements, promises, apologies, oaths, advice, oaths, etc.

The main logical characteristic of a statement is truth or falsity (see 25)

Statements as an element of a certain reasoning have the form of affirmation or negation

affirmative statements somewhat assert, in particular, the existence of objects, phenomena, processes; the departure of certain events; inherent in certain properties of a certain object, etc. For example: “All people by nature strive for knowledge” (Aristotle), “Some people violate the laws of social life.”

negative statements somewhat deny, say, the fact of the existence of objects, phenomena, processes; the departure of certain events; inherent in certain properties of a certain object and under: “Chimeras do not exist,” “Some sentences do not express statements of love.”

Confirming and negative statements are also called categorical statements (Greek - affirmative, unconditional)

All statements that are the object of logical analysis are divided into the following types: simple and complex, statements about attitude; modal expressions; Questions and answers

Simple saying

A simple statement is a statement that does not contain other statements. In modern logic they are called atomic statements. A simple statement is divided into attributive, existential, relational.

attributive statement (Latin - property, sign) - a statement in which one or another property is attributed to a certain class of objects, subclass, individual elements of the class or is denied from them: "All goods have their own value","Some students do not study mathematics" .

Existential statements (lat - existence) somewhat assert the existence of certain objects or deny their existence: “Organic life on Earth exists”, “There are no causeless phenomena” The formal expression of the existential statement x - exists; x - does not exist - exists; x - I don’t understand.

Existential statements are the object of study of a special direction of modern logical research, called the logic of existence (see 433)

Relational statements (Latin - report) affirms or denies relationships between individual objects or classes of objects; same as attitude statements

A statement in which the existence of a certain relationship between objects is determined is called affirmative. For example: "All metals are heavier than water"

A statement that defines the absence of a specific relationship between subjects is called negative (“There is no good neighborliness between states X and B”)

Relational expressions are the object of study of a special direction of logical research, called relational logic, which is an integral part of predicate logic (see 422)

Logical characteristics of an attributive statement

attributive statement (Latin - property, sign) - attributes this or that property to a known class of objects, subclass, individual elements of the class, or denies these properties from them. It is the object of study of traditional logic and predicate logic (a direction of research in symbolic logic).

In traditional logic, the structure and types of attributive statements are defined, artificial symbols are introduced to designate their structural parts and types, relationships between various types of attributive statements are established, and a theory of deductive inference is developed based on the establishment of relationships between attributive statements.

In symbolic logic, attributive statements are formalized in the language of predicate logic, that is, with the help of universality and existence quantifiers, which makes it possible to more accurately determine their content and truth value (see 422.2).

The structure of an attributive statement of an attributive statement consists of the following structural parts: subject, predicate and connection

Subject (Latin subjectum - enclosed) - part of a statement that expresses the subject of reflection and is denoted by the symbol S

Predicate (Latin praedicatum - said) - part of a statement, means a property (attribute) inherent in the subject (subject considerations), and is denoted by a symbol. R

The copula (Latin copula) establishes the relationship between the subject (S) and the predicate (P) due to the assertion of the presence of a certain property. P (attribute) of the subject of consideration or the negation of this property of connections in an attributive statement can be expressed explicitly or implicitly. In natural language, an explicitly expressed connection is expressed by the words “is”, “the essence” or “is not”, “not the essence”, and an implicitly expressed connection is indicated by the content of the statement; the language is indicated by the meaning of language.

The subject and predicate, which by means of a connection create attributive statements, are called terms. Symbolically, the structure of an attributive statement has the form: S is. R; S is not there. R. For example, in the vis word "Earth is a living planet", the subject (S) is the term "Earth", the predicate (P) is a term expressing the property "living planet", the copula is "is" Structure: S is, sound language - "є".. Structure: S є. R.

Types of attributive statements

Attributive statements are divided into types according to quality and quantity. The quality distinguishes between affirmative and negative statements.

An affirmative statement has the logical form S is. P, and the negative - the logical form of S is not. R

By quantity, general, partial, single utterances are distinguished

A general statement is a statement in which the property. P is attributed to or negated in all elements of a certain class. In traditional logic, it is depicted by the formula “All S are. P” or “No S is there. P” For example: “All states have their own symbols of statehood”, “No true statement is false, no true statement is not false.”

A partial statement is a statement that contains a certain property. P is attributed to some elements of a certain class (subclass) or is denied from them: “Some authors publish their works under the pseudonym OM”, “Some people do not go in for sports” In traditional logic, it is depicted by the formula: “Some S are. P” or “Some S are not is. R є. R" or "Acts S not є. R".

A single statement is a statement in which the property. P is assigned to or denied to an element of a certain class: “Jupiter is the largest planet in the solar system”, “Newton did not invent hypotheses” (“I don’t invent hypotheses,” wrote Newton), “J. Lamarck is the author of the term “biology” In traditional logic it is represented by the formula: “This S is. P" or "This S is not. Use the formula: “Tse S є. Р” or “Tse S not є. Р”.

In modern symbolic logic, the quantity of an attributive statement is expressed by a quantifier (Latin quantum - how much). In natural language, a quantifier is expressed by the words “all”, “none”, “some”, “only one”, “and exists” These words indicate how many objects belonging to a certain class (a class as a whole, a subclass or an element of a class) are inherent property of a class or element class) power is attached. R.

The general statement, which contains the words “all”, “nor”, is expressed by the universal quantifier and is denoted by the symbol V. The formal expression of the general statement with the quantifier “all” is VxP (x)

A partial statement containing the word “some” is expressed by an existential quantifier and is denoted by the symbol 3. The formal expression of a partial statement with the quantifier “some” is Zxr (x)

Separation of attributive statements by quality and quantity together:

zagalnosverdzhuvalni, zagalnozaperechny, chastkovostverjuvalni and chastkovozoperechny statements

Zagalnostverdzhuvalne statements assert the inherent properties. P to all elements of a certain class. For example: “All norms. The Constitutions of Ukraine are norms of direct action.” In traditional logic, the verjuvalne of a statement is a formal expression: “All S is. P” and is denoted by a symbol. A (the first loud letter of the Latin word Affirmo - affirmationAffirmo - confirmed).

The behind-the-scenes statement denies the property. P for all elements of a certain class: “Not a single student in our group knows the ancient Greek language.” In traditional logic, it is represented by the formula: “Not a single S is. P” and is denoted by the symbol. E (the first vowel of the Latin word Neqo - negation and Neqo - crossed).

A partial statement asserts a certain property. P in a certain number of elements of a certain class (in a subclass of class. A): "Some ancient Greek philosophers are students. Socrates" In traditional logic and it bears the formal expression "Some S are. P" and is denoted by the symbol / (the second loud letter of the Latin word Af firmo - statement firmo - confirmation).

A partial statement denies a certain property. P in a certain number of elements of a certain class (a subclass of class. A): “Some scientists do not come up with hypotheses”, “Some languages are not difficult to learn” c. Traditional logic bears the formal expression "Some S are not. P" and is denoted by the symbol. O (the second loud letter of the Latin word Nego - the negation of the word Nego - crossed).

The distribution of terms in an attributive statement is the relationship between the terms - subject (S) and predicate (P) in the structure of the attributive statement, when the scope of the subject (S) and predicate (P) is determined. If the term (S or. P) is accepted in full, then it is distributed and indicated by a sign; If the term is not used in full, then it is unallocated and is indicated by the sign -.

The distribution of terms is determined based on the following rules:

1. The term, which denotes the subject (S), is distributed in general expressions and undistributed in private statements

2. The term that the predicate (P) denotes is distributed in negative statements and undistributed in affirmative statements. The distribution of terms has the form

The relationships between terms in an attributive statement have the following circular images

Relations between attributive statements - the relationship between four types of attributive statements:. L-zagalnostverdzhuvalnym (all 5 are there. R); ostverjuvalnym (some 5 is. R); 0-partially transverse (some 5 not e.P). These relationships are depicted using a “logical square” that looks like this.

Based on the establishment of relationships between the four types of attributive statements, their spivism or spivhibness is determined

1. Statements that are in a relation of contrariness (Latin contrarius - opposite) - all S is. P(A) and there is no S. P (E) - cannot be simultaneously true, but can be false at the same time. For example: “All scientists come up with hypotheses” (x) and “Not a single scientist comes up with hypotheses * (*guess hypotheses* (*).

2. Statements are in a relation of subordination - all S are there. P (L) and some S are there. R (G) is not 5. P(E) and some S are not. P (0) - can be both true or fall into the sea" (and) and "Some rivers fall into the sea" (/ fall into the sea" (/).

3. Statements that are in relation to contrariety (pidprotility) - there are some S. P(I) and some S are not. P (O) - can be true at the same time. For example: “Some planets of the solar system have their own satellites” (s) and “Some planets of the solar system do not have their own satellites” (/).

4. Statements that are in relation to counter-narrative (Latin contradictorius - contradiction) - all S is. P(A) and some S are not. P (O) is not S. P(E) and some S are there. P (true or at the same time false; one of them is true and the other is false: “All students pass exams” (i) and “Some students do not take exams” (hayut іspitiv" (x).

Complex statements

Complex statements are formed from two or more simple statements using logical unions (sentence connections) negation, conjunction, disjunction, implication, equivalence. New development of complex statements based on simple ones with the help of logical unions is a special logical operation. Each simple statement included in the structure of a complex statement is its generic part and, accordingly, the truth of a complex statement is determined on the basis of establishing the truth of a simple statement.

negative statements (Latin nego - negation) - a complex statement formed as a result of the negation of an affirmative statement using the conjunction not, the phrase is incorrect, which is a logical operation of transformation (Latin - inversion) of an affirmative statement. A, as a result of which a negative statement not-A is created, which takes on a new meaning. For example: “Language is only a means of communication between people” (A), “It is wrong that language is only a means of communication between people” (not-Anya between people) (not-A).

Negation - in symbolic logic - is a propositional connection, which is expressed by the words “wrong”, which is denoted by the symbol -i. The negation formula is *. A. If an affirmative statement. But it is true, then in its negation - “And false ones -”. And hibne.

. Truth table negation:

The operation of objection is carried out over all types of statements: simple (attributive, relational, existential), complex, modal, etc.

A conjunctive statement (Latin - connection, association) is formed from two or more simple statements (conjunctive) using the conjunctions and, a, and,. In symbolic logic, it is denoted by the symbol l (ab so. Rome a complex statement. A l. B l. C (“Every person has the right to life, liberty and personal integrity”), four simple statements. A,. B,. C,. And), - we get a complex statement. A l. In l. S l 2) (“Means of fast communication are television, radio, fax, e-mail)” and pos, e-mail)” and under.

. Truth table for conjunction:

disjunctive expressions (Latin - disjunction) are formed from two or more simple statements (disjuncts) using the conjunctions or, or. Disjunction is divided into strict (strong) and non-strict (sl labkuu).

a non-strict disjunction is expressed in natural language by the conjunctions or, or and is denoted by the symbol V. The formal expression of a non-strict disjunction takes the form. A V. B (“Face. L likes to read books or watch movies “ilmi”).

a non-strict disjunction is true when the simple expressions (clauses) are true or at least one of the clauses is true

. Truth table for non-strict disjunction.

Strict disjunction is expressed in natural language by the conjunctions either, or (or, or) and is denoted by the symbol X depending on the number of disjuncts, the formal expression of strict disjunction takes the form ALB ("The whole world either always existed in an unchanged state, or was created at some time in past"). A _L. In 1C (“Trucks use either gasoline, diesel fuel, or natural gas as fuel”). A 1. B J_. From 1 D (“All bodies move either in a circle, or in a parabola, or in a hyperbola, or in an ellipse”) and hyperbola, or in an ellipse”) and under.

A strict disjunction is true when only one of the disjuncts (statements A, B, C, etc.) is true.

. Truth table for strict disjunction:

The conditional statement is constructed using conjunctions if, then; only on condition: then, when, then (“If the crystal is heated, it will melt”, “Only if the article is shortened, will it be published.”) In modern logic, a conditional statement is defined in the context of logical implication and is called an implicative statement and equivalent statements and equivalent statements.

Implicative statements (Latin implico - closely connect) are formed on the basis of two simple statements. A and. B using the conjunction if, then. In symbolic logic, the conjunction if y then is affected by the symbol vol - (or). Formal expression of an implicative statement. A -. In, where. A and. In simple expressions, - is the following symbol. B is a follow symbol. In iz. A.

The peculiarity of this statement (implication) is that it is formed as a result of combining two simple statements. A and. B, of which. A - antecedent (Latin antecedens - previous), i.e. Length of stav, a. B - consequent (Latin consequens - logical conclusion), there is a consequence. Antecedent. A precedes the consequent. In, as a consequence, if the antecedent. And if it is true, it is also a consequent. In true. For example: “If you believe in a student, if he does not pass all exams perfectly, then he will not receive an increased scholarship.”

depending on the establishment of a formal or informal connection between the antecedent. And the consequent. In an implicative statement, the following types of implication are distinguished: causal; material; strict; flax strength

Causal implication (Latin causa - cause) is a relationship between an antecedent. And consequent 2?,. Which in content expresses the cause-and-effect relationship between objects and phenomena of the objective world. Accordingly, antecedent. A is the cause, and the consequent. B - consequence: “If there is fire, then there is smoke” (fire is the cause of smoke), if there is a phenomenon. Ah, that is a phenomenon. B (phenomenon. And there is a reason for the phenomenon. The fault of the phenomenon. B).

The concept of “causal implication” defines the ontological connection between objects, phenomena of the objective world, which is established on the basis of objective laws - the laws of nature, social development, and this connection in the statement has an informal high character.

The concept of “material implication”, “strict implication”, “strong implication” defines a purely formal connection between the antecedent. And the consequent. In a statement abstracted from its content according to the formula rmulo. A. B (for the content of these concepts, see 432 for more details; see the amazing details in 4.3.2).

An equivalent expression (late Latin aequivalens - even and to be strong; to weigh, to have a price) is formed on the basis of two simple statements using conjunctions if and only if, then and only then, when; only on condition; only in case. In symbolic logic it is denoted by the symbol = (or -). Formal expression of equivalent expression. A d. B, where. A and. B - simple statements (“If and only and if in a state. If the principles of the rule of law really apply, then it is a legal state”, “Two parallel lines if and only if they do not intersect” then, if the stench does not stir”) .

Equivalent statements are true when simple statements. A and. B have the same truth value (both true or both false)

. Truth table for equivalent expression:

Modal statements

The modal statement establishes the type of connection between the subject and the predicate and clarifies its ontological or logical status. The type of connection is determined using the words included in the structure of the vislovlyuv. Anna. These words are called modality or modal operators.

Modality (lat. modus - measure, method) is a property of a statement that determines the nature of the objective relationships between objects and phenomena discussed in the statement. These are additional words that enter the structure of statements and give them new meaning. Such words include: “necessary”, “possible”, “really”, “random”, “allowed”, “forbidden”, “knows”, “believer”, “well fenced”; "know"; "believes"; "good"; "bad" ta in.

Depending on which modality provides the statement with a new meaning and evaluates whether it is affirmed or denied, types of modalities are distinguished:

Aletichni: necessary; Maybe; really; by chance (“It is necessary to protect nature”, “Perhaps the person. H has the ability to draw”, “Indeed, everything is changing in the world”, “He met a friend on the street by chance””), from a friend on Vipadkovo Street”);

Deontic: obligatory; allowed; prohibited (“All citizens of Ukraine must necessarily comply with the law in their actions”, “The defendant is allowed to have a lawyer”, “Students are prohibited from talking on mobile phones during lectures and practical classes”) and practical classes”);

Epistemic: knows; believes; doubts; known; unknown; convinced (“Oleg knows where the city is. Canberra”, “Igor believes that there is life after death”, “N doubts that the politician 3. Keep your election promises”, “Person. K knows who committed this crime”) obi. K. knows who is evil");

Temporary: was; There is; will be (“Yesterday there was a flood”, “Tomorrow the weather will be good”)

In addition to those mentioned, there are other types of modalities. Modal statements are the object of study of modern modal logic (see 432)

assistant at the French language department

Center for Humanitarian and Social Education

FUNCTIONAL CHARACTERISTICS OF APHORISMS

Aphorisms (from ancient Greek aphorismos - saying) are the repository and catalyst of human thought, the intellectual property of the nation and humanity as a whole. They represent a complete thought expressed in an extremely brief form. Aphorisms deepen our knowledge about the history, culture and life of the people, reflecting the picture of the world of both all humanity and a certain ethnic group; are an unwritten law that reflects the way of life of the people, their spiritual and material values, forming the addressee’s picture of the world.

Aphorisms belong to the category of universal statements, which “have extremely broad semantics, lack of direct connection with reality, and transition into the realm of “pure ideas”1. Universal statements typify life phenomena, impart a timeless and all-encompassing character, and do not contain an exact indication of the place and time of any action.

This article discusses aphorisms-statements.

Aphorisms are a means of comprehending the system of worldview and worldview of the people. Thanks to cumulative function they serve as carriers of the spiritual values of the people, their wisdom and centuries-old history, a receptacle of common experience, reflecting the national specificity of the imaginative perception of the surrounding reality. Aphorisms reflect, record and store information about perceived reality in linguistic units.

According to "<… >aphorisms, as a mirror of national culture, contain a large amount of information about the traditions, foundations, uniqueness of the worldview and mentality of a particular language community”2. Aphorisms express in the most succinct form the cultural priorities of civilization, ethnic group, and social system. Expressing the cultural priorities of an ethnic group, aphorisms reflect the characteristics of the economy, geography, social structure, literature and folklore, all types of art, science, details of everyday life, and customs of the native people of the corresponding language. Thus, reflecting the culture of a particular ethnic group, aphorisms are a reflection of the national picture of the ethnic group. Aphorisms reflect not only the national picture of the world, but also the picture of the world of all humanity, preserving for a long time the centuries-old wisdom of peoples.

Aphorisms are multifunctional types of statements. The versatility of aphorisms is explained by the different types of information contained in aphorisms. identifies the following types of information content of the text in aphorisms: “substantive-factual information - containing messages about facts, events, processes occurring in the surrounding reality or in unreal reality; content-conceptual information – containing the author’s individual understanding of phenomena and their significance; content-subtextual information - hidden information extracted from content-factual information due to the ability of language units to generate associative and connotative meanings in<…>aphorisms"3.

By conveying meaningful and factual information, aphorisms implement nominative function, which consists in stating a certain state of affairs, phenomena, in indicating a certain sign, that is, in naming and isolating fragments of reality. 4 calls these types of aphorisms aphorisms-properties, and 5 – attributive aphorisms, which reveal the presence or absence of a property of the described object. These aphorisms are characterizing, existential statements. emphasizes that the denoter names not the specific objects and situations themselves, but lexical concepts and judgments.

The nominative meaning of an aphorism is compared with a lexical concept - “the nominative meaning of an aphorism is similar to a lexical concept”6. An aphorism reflects a typical situation, i.e. a set of circumstances, signs, assessments, provisions, but at the level of abstraction - in abstraction from small and unimportant characteristics. That is, the nominative function is inextricably linked with classifying function aphorism, which manifests itself in isolating, isolating and naming situations, in typing phenomena of reality, in isolating the rich life experience of the masses, in drawing conclusions about the patterns of development of nature and society. In this function, aphorisms are realized as signs of situations.

7 correlates the logical-semantic structure of the aphorism with the following types of situations, reflecting the nature of the relationship between the objects of reality and the properties of these objects: 1) the property of the object manifests itself under certain conditions; 2) the property is inherent in the object regardless of the circumstances; 3) phenomena of reality are contrasted due to the presence of different, often mutually exclusive properties; 4) a property is inherent in several objects of reality, which unites them. For example : Politicians have neither love nor hate. They are guided not by feelings, but by interest (Lord Chesterfield)(statement of the generally accepted line of behavior of political figures) ; Society often forgives the criminal. But not a dreamer (Oscar Wilde)(statement of society’s attitude towards criminals and dreamers) ; Those who know how to fight do not know how to make peace. Those who sign a peace treaty that is beneficial to themselves would never win the war (Winston Churchill)(based on the antithesis, a conclusion is drawn about the warring parties) ; A growing need for a strong person is an irrefutable sign of weakness (Gilbert Keith Chesterton)(a certain circumstance is noted, the presence of which indicates the presence of a certain property) ; Complete fools are drawn to intelligence like cats to fire (Gilbert Keith Chesterton)(an expression of the generally accepted truth about fools) ; There is only one sin - stupidity (Oscar Wilde)(an expression of the generally accepted negative attitude towards sin) .

The aphorism retains its significance over time due to its aesthetic function, consisting in influencing the addressee. An aphorism not only conveys thoughts and feelings, but also evokes a response in the interlocutor, which should be predicted by the very content of the emotional information of the aphorism. Aphorisms are used “in the process of a communicative act with a specific purpose - to influence the interlocutor, to argue one’s own point of view on a particular subject of conversation - they are a verbal expression of the speaker’s communicative strategies<…>"8. With the help of aphorisms, the speaker achieves certain pragmatic effects that enhance the impact on the listener. 9 emphasizes that with the help of aphorisms one can more expressively give advice, recommendation, express praise, good wishes, illness, fear, ridicule, resentment, grief, sadness, melancholy, warning, shame, shyness, critical attitude towards an object or participant in a speech act and etc. According to the opinion, “the impact on the addressee is more significant, the more accurately the phenomenon described and assessed in the aphorism is noted and the more typical it is for the cultural community”10.

Thus, an aphorism is capable of evoking certain emotions, ideas, and associations in us. “The aphorism is provocative in nature. Its ultimate task is to provoke the reader to any kind of response, be it an action or simply a response thought and emotion”11. The aesthetic function of an aphorism affects the psychological side (sensation, perception, idea) of the addressee: “<…>Thanks to aphorisms, the speaker’s thought is expressed not only more accurately, but also more informatively, figuratively and, most importantly, emotionally”12.

Content-subtextual, implicit information, used in aphorisms for emotional and aesthetic purposes and having an expressive coloring, is expressed through figurative stylistic means (metaphor, metonymy, comparison, personification, allusion, paradox, irony, etc.), lexical and grammatical means (use of suffixes with positive and negative connotations, use of capital letters to emphasize the importance of the statement, use and non-use of articles, use of personal (we, you, etc.), indefinite (all), demonstrative and negative pronouns to give the statement a certain pragmatic settings, substantivization of adjectives, use of adjectives in comparative and superlative degrees with possible repetition of the adjective, use of verbs in a certain tense, use of modal verbs, use of adverbs with semantics of limitation (only), use of particles and explanatory phrases (of a kind), phonetic means ( euphony or instrumentation, assonance, alliteration, etc.), rhyme and rhythmic organization of the text (alternation of sounds (stressed, unstressed), incorrect word order (inversion), postposition of the adjective, repetition of words (anaphora, epiphora), parallelism, antithesis, ellipsis, etc.), that is, means that form a special area of the aesthetic structure of the text. For example:

Based on antithesis, sharp opposition of concepts marriage by forced – love marriage, the sublime, dreamy, ideal attitude towards marriage for love is revealed more clearly in comparison with marriage under duress. The aphorism makes us want to fall in love. Phonetic and semantic consonance of words bliss (bliss, happiness) –peace (peace) at the end of lines enhances the impact.

An expressive metaphorical expression of insubordination, the inability to do anything, not everything is in our power, suggesting the thought “do not exaggerate your strengths, capabilities, do not be mistaken, not everyone is capable of serious action.” Under cloudy means a person, and the word storm- a certain action, an act that not every person is able to perform.

The expression and instillation in us of a sublime attitude towards love through the transmission of an emotionally sublime state of love, when one wants to embrace the immensity, the expression of the emotional intensity of feelings, a state of happiness is achieved by the general phonetic coloring of the aphorism with the help of rhyme, namely, the repetition of sounds [аiә] in words fireaspire at the end of lines, which enhances the speaker’s emotionally elevated state.

The expression of regret, sadness about deceived feelings, expectations towards someone you trusted is enhanced by rhyme, consonance of words hide-side at the end of the lines. The rhythm in this aphorism is achieved by changing the strictly fixed word order in the English version mayman, instead of manmay.

The given aphorisms are poetic, presented in poetic form. However, prosaic aphorisms also have an emotional and aesthetic mood using the previously mentioned means. For example : All crime is vulgar, just as all vulgarity is crime (Oscar Wilde) All sorts of thingscrimevulgar, HowAndanyvulgaritycriminal; The soul is born old, but grows young. Thatisthecomedyoflife.Thebodyisbornandgrowsold.Thatislife’stragic (OscarWilde) The soul is born old, but becomes younger. This is the comedy of life. The body is born young, but grows old. This is the tragedy of life.. The special rhythm of the aphorism is created using parallelism in the syntactic structure of the aphorism: crimeisvulgarvulgarityiscrime,thesoulisborn –thebodyisborn, and also with the help of antithesis growsyoung –growsold.

English common sense is the inherited stupidity of our fathers (Oscar Wilde). An expression of a cynical attitude towards English common sense is created by comparing and identifying opposing concepts common sense is the stupidity of fathers.

Bachelors are sure that ribs are just the beginning (G. Malkin). The ironic attitude of bachelors towards women and towards marriage is created through an allusion, a mention of the biblical version of the creation of a woman from the rib of Adam, a hint that first the woman took his rib from the man, but it does not stop there.

Directive function The aphorism consists in influencing the addressee, namely, in controlling, directing, demanding to perform or not perform any action. They contain a direct incentive to a certain course of action or behavior, which is expressed either in an imperative way, or through advice, recommendation, or wish. calls these types of statements deontic, in which “<…>contains a direct incentive to a certain course of action or behavior”13. 14 defines such aphorisms as imperative. 15 emphasizes the ability of aphorisms to control human behavior, which is expressed on the basis of a special grammar - the axiomatics of behavior. An axiom is understood as a conventional-behavioral text of a moral or utilitarian nature, which expresses the moral ideal and behavioral stereotypes and postulates the basic values of society. Axioms of behavior are often not expressed explicitly in language: “Normative judgments in the form<…>aphorisms can be reduced to standard axioms of behavior that have a moral<…>character. These axioms of behavior are expressed, as a rule, through implication, while<…>subtextual information plays the most significant role”16.

17 identifies the following axioms of behavior: axiom of interaction, axiom of life support, axiom of communication, axiom of responsibility, axiom of control, axiom of realism, axiom of security, axiom of prudence.

The directive function of an aphorism has a didactic meaning. An aphorism not only controls, directs, influences, but also educates and shapes personality. For example :

It is better to make a mistake yourself than to point out the mistake to your husband (D. Savile, Marquis of Halifax). Expressing motivation for a specific action through advice.

Beware of a woman who has many friends, for they will constantly seek to destroy your rich union, your “we”. However, one friend is even worse: in the future she may become your wife (Cyril Connolly); Don't make a fool of yourself to make others laugh (Robert Burton). An expression of direct motivation, an order to a certain course of action in an imperative manner.

You cannot serve beauty and power at the same time. (Cyril Connolly); Self-sacrifice must be punished by law. It demoralizes those for whom sacrifices are made (Oscar Wilde); Each person must live according to his own laws established for him alone. For some, for example, familiarity is ordered; others can take any liberties (Samuel Johnson). The expression of direct encouragement to a certain line of behavior, which is the only correct, stereotypical one in society, contains a peremptory judgment that does not tolerate objection, expressed in the words “impossible,” “must,” “must.”

A woman should get married as early as possible, a man should remain single as long as possible (Bernard Shaw). Expression of advice.

If you want to win a war, you need to remember the old truth: the slower you go, the further you will go (Winston Churchill); If you are idle, avoid being alone; if you are alone, do not be idle (Samuel Johnson); To control humanity, one must not overestimate it, just as an orator, if he wants to be loved by the public, must despise it (Lord Chesterfield). Expressing a recommendation to do something under certain circumstances.

emphasizes that “in addition to the main communicative function<…>aphorisms generalize knowledge about objects and phenomena through definitions, which include a generally accepted assessment of these objects and phenomena. This function is called definitional-evaluative”18.

Thus, aphorisms, reflecting objective reality and attributing to reality a certain evaluation scale with polar concepts of good-bad, moral-immoral, acceptable-unacceptable, realize definitional-evaluative function. Evaluating objective reality, aphorisms characterize an object, reveal its most general feature, showing its place among others similar to it - they are called definitional aphorisms19, or definitive aphorisms20.

21 identifies alethic statements that carry two types of evaluation: moral and meliorative/derogatory evaluations. Evaluation in aphorisms can be expressed objectively and subjectively. In definitive aphorisms, content-conceptual information comes to the fore, containing the author’s individual understanding of phenomena and their significance. The following types of assessments are distinguished: ethical, aesthetic, functional, reverent, comparative22. These types of assessments express both the social and individual worldview of the author in aphorisms.

Thus, aphorisms determine value guidelines for a person’s perception of the objective world. Reflecting the picture of the world, aphorisms highlight its value side, which reflects both evaluative stereotypes (the own properties of an object, forming standard sets of features) and stereotypical ideas about the place of the object in the value picture of the world. Thus, the definitional and evaluative function of an aphorism is to form certain ideas and stereotypes of behavior. They expand the world of people's spiritual needs and form their moral beliefs through the values expressed in them. For example :

Honesty without knowledge is weak and meaningless, and knowledge without honesty is very dangerous (Samuel Johnson). An objective aphorism expressing stereotypical ideas about the place of an object in the value picture of the world.

In the war of the sexes, carelessness is the weapon of the man, vindictiveness is the weapon of the woman (Cyril Connolly). An aphorism expressing the standard properties of the objects “man” and “woman” in certain circumstances.

The education of the Scots is comparable to bread in a besieged city: everyone gets a little and no one eats enough (Samuel Johnson); Of all the connections that arise between people, the most fickle, the most confusing and changeable is the connection between the writer and the reader (Lord Shaftesbury); The royal court is a society of noble and fashionable beggars (Marquis of Halifax); England is heaven for women and hell for horses, Italy is heaven for horses and hell for women (Robert Burton); Ministers are like the sun. The brighter they are, the more they burn (Lord Chesterfield); Truth is rarely pure and never unambiguous. Modern life would be very boring if it were either one or the other, and in this case there would be no literature at all. (Oscar Wilde). Subjective aphorisms with a clearly expressed author’s understanding of phenomena and their significance.

Power is the same temptation for a monarch as wine or women are for a young man, as a bribe is for a judge, money is for an old man and vanity is for a woman (Jonathan Swift); A clear conscience is a constant holiday (Robert Burton); Vanity, this unbearable, painful thirst for success, is a great torture for the mind and consists of envy, pride and greed. This is high madness, sweet poison (Robert Burton); Hope and patience are the two softest pillows on which we can lay our heads in hardship (Robert Burton). Aphorisms expressing the assessment of objects through metaphors and comparisons. Both a positive assessment is expressed: “hope and patience are the two softest pillows”, “a clear conscience is a constant holiday”, and a negative assessment: “power is a temptation for a monarch”, “vanity is torture for the mind, consists of envy, pride and greed ", "vanity is a sweet poison."

So, aphorisms are multifunctional types of statements. Aphorisms as linguocultural texts reflect and preserve for a long time the national picture of the world and the picture of the world of humanity as a whole, express certain stereotypes of behavior and universal, national, group and individual values, emotionally affect the addressee, encourage them to perform an action or refuse an action, educate .

NOTES:

1. Gavrilov’s statements and other generalizing judgments // Philol. Sciences. 1986, no. 3. P. 56.

2. Artemova - evaluative objectification of the concept woman in the semantics of phraseological units (based on the material of English and Russian phraseology). Diss. ...cand. Philol. Sci. Pyatigorsk, 2000. P. 58.

3. Galperin as an object of linguistic research. M., 1981. P. 28.

4. Dmitrieva - linguistic characteristics of proverbs and aphorisms (based on the material of the French and Russian languages). Diss. ...cand. Philol. Sci. Volgograd, 1997. P. 53.

5. Ammer of a fragment of the concept sphere “moral and ethical values” in aphorisms and proverbs (based on the material of English and Russian languages). Diss. ...cand. Philol. Sci. Voronezh, 2005. P. 62.

6. Rapoport’s concept of “French national personality” (based on aphorisms). Diss. ...cand. Philol. Sci. Ufa, 1999. P. 57.

7. See note. 5. P. 63.

8. See note. 6. P. 68.

9. See note. 6. P. 68.

10. See note. 5. P. 33.

11. Koryakovtsev A. Carnival of language: Aphorism as a literary genre//Ural. –Ekaterinburg, 2002, No. 3. pp. 191-192.

12. See note. 6. P. 58.

13. See note. 4. P. 52.

14. See note. 5. P. 62.

15. Martemyanov: problems of constructing an implicit text///Implicity in language and speech. M., 1999. pp. 115-124.

16. See note. 4. P. 113.

17. See note. 4. pp. 76-77.

18. Tyapkina definitive aphorisms of the English language (functional-semantic aspect): Author's abstract. dis. ...cand. Philol. Sci. M., 1975. P. 9.

19. See note. 4. P. 54.

20. See note. 5. P. 62.

21. See note. 4. P. 52.

Also on topic

Statements - Logic Library of Russian textbooks

Traditional types of composition of a work of art

Horse Man - Rat Woman Rat and Fire Horse

Tarot horoscope for Scorpios for December

How to plant a money tree to make money?

Characteristics of the utterance. ﻿ Statements - Logic Library of Russian textbooks. Structure of an attributive utterance

Characteristics of the utterance. Statements - Logic Library of Russian textbooks. Structure of an attributive utterance