Psycholinguistic peculiarities of the discourse of visual epistemology: from logos to visio

Keywords: psycholinguistics; visual; verbal; perception; image; language; epistemology.

Abstract

Introduction. The article is devoted to the psycholinguistic analysis of visual examination in the discourses of modern epistemology offering new formats of interaction between “word” and “vision”, and also determine the correlation between language and consciousness, verbal and visual in cognition and thinking.

Research goal is in theoretical substantiation the use of psycholinguistic methods in the conceptualization of visual studies as a new format of modern epistemological discourses based on hermeneutics, cognitivism, and psychology of perception and its modifications as well.

Research Methods. An interdisciplinary approach, the methods of hermeneutics, modern epistemology and visualisation, hermeneutic, phenomenological, cognitive practices, and experimental research data collection.

Results. Theoretical analysis has shown the importance of hermeneutic interpretation of texts, where a person through psychological contemplation and pre-logical, pre-reflective, pre-conceptual experience opens new horizons of knowledge about the world and himself. Language as the "house of being" is a psycholinguistic sphere that determines the transition from the general structures of consciousness to its psychosemantic correlation with the essential content of knowledge. The sphere of vision as a discourse of modern epistemology expands psychological, cognitive, intellectual, and verbal perception of the world and its understanding in the conditions of social, linguistic, media-visual activity. Visual perception as a perceptual activity in epistemology is inextricably linked with the culture of speech, the practice of logical argumentation, which allows psycholinguistic assessment of scientific, philosophical and cultural knowledge. The images obtained as a result of perception form a new reality, which presents itself in the intentions of visual culture.

Conclusions. Visual studies in the forms of visual culture, visual perception, and visual thinking ensue to be new aspects of modern epistemology, open perspectives of verbal communication in the processes of cognitive-intellectual activity, stimulating the psycholinguistic sphere of scientific analysis.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Batayeva, Ye.V. (2013). Vidimoye obshchestvo. Teoriya i praktika sotsial'noy vizualistiki: monografiya [Visible Society. Theory and practice of social visualism]. Kharkov: FLP Lysenko I.B. [in Russian].

Bryson, N. (1988). The Gaze in the Expanded Field. Vision and Visuality. Seattle: bay Press.

Cherepovska, N. (2014). Vizualna mediakultura: rozvytok krytychnoho myslennya i tvorchoho spryymannya [Visual media culture: development of critical messages and creative ideas]. Kyiv: Milenium [in Ukrainian].

Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.21236/AD0616323

Culter, A., Klein, W., & Levinson, S.C. (2005). The Cornerstones of Twenty First Century Psycholinguistics. In A. Culter (Ed.), Twenty First Century Psycholinguistics. Four Cornerstones (pp. 1-20). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Eisenstein, S.M. (1964). Izbrannyye proizvedeniya [Selected works]. (Vols. 1–6). (Vol. 2.). Moscow: Iskusstvo [in Russian].

Elkins, J. (2003). Visual Studies. A Skeptical Introduction. New York: Routledge.

Gaydenko, P.P. (1997). Proryv k transtsendentnomu: Novaya ontologiya ХХ veka [Breakthrough to the Transcendental: A New Ontology of the 20th Century]. Moscow: Respublika [in Russian].

Ilyina, H.V. (2018). Geneza kultury myslennya: lohos, ratsio, vizio [Genesis of the culture of thought: logos, ration, visio]. Kyiv, Nizhyn: Vydavets P.P. Lysenko M.M. [in Ukrainian].

Kalmykova, L.O. (2015). Movlennyeva diyalnist yak skladova predmeta psykholinhvistyky [Speech activity as a component of the subject of psycholinguistics]. East European Journal of Psycholinguistics, 2(1), 56-57 [in Ukrainian].

Karnap, R. (1971). Filosofskiye osnovaniya fiziki: vvedeniye v filosofiyu nauki [Philosophical Foundations of Physics: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Science]. Moscow: Progress [in Russian].

Kharari, YU.N. (2018). 21 urok dlya 21 stolittya [21 lessons for the 21st century]. Kyiv: Fors Ukrayina [in Ukrainian].

Khaydegger, M. (1993). Vremya i bytiye: Stati i vystupleniya [Time and Being: Articles and Speeches]. Moscow: Respublika [in Russian].

Khaydegger, M. (2003). Bytiye i vremya [Being and time]. Kharkov: «Folio» [in Russian].

Lanchikov, N. (2011). Topografiya poiska. Standartizatsiya v yazyke khudozhestvennykh perevodov i yeye preodoleniye [Search topography. Standardization in the language of literary translations and its overcoming]. Zhurnal perevodchikov – Journal of Translators, 2, 30-38 [in Russian].

Leontiev, A.A. (2003). Osnovy psikholingvistiki [Fundamentals of Psycholinguistics]. Moscow: Smysl; Izdatelskiy tsentr «Akademiya» [in Russian].

Losev, A.F. (1974). Istoriya antichnoy estetiki. Vysokaya klassika [History of ancient aesthetics. High classics]. Moscow: Iskusstvo [in Russian].

Mikeshina, L.A. (2008). Filosofiya poznaniya. Problemy epistemologii gumanitarnogo znaniya [Philosophy of knowledge. Problems of the methodology of humanitarian knowledge]. Moscow: «Kanon+ ROOI «Reabilitatsiya» [in Russian].

Mitchell, W.J.T. (2002). Showing Seeing: a Critique of Visual Culture. Journal of Visual Culture, 1(2), 165-181. https://doi.org/10.1177/147041290200100202

Pynker, S. (2019). Prosvitnytstvo sohodni [Enlightenment today]. Kyiv: Nash format [in Ukrainian].

Rozin, V.M. (1996). Vizualnaya kultura i vospriyatiye. Kak chelovek vidit i ponimayet mir [Visual culture and perception. How a person sees and understands the world]. Moscow: Editorial URSS [in Russian].

Sandywell, B. (2011). Dictionary of Visual Discourse: a Dialectical Lexicon of Terms. New York: Ashate.

Shalashenko, H. (2015). Fenomen ta dyskurs: rol antropolohichnykh perekonan u naukakh pro kulturu ta suspilstvo [Phenomenon and discourse: the role of anthropological beliefs in the sciences of culture and society]. Filosofski dialohy’2015. Filosofiya. Kultura. Suspilstvo – Philosophical dialogues’2015. Philosophy. Culture. Society (pp. 77–85). Kyiv: Instytut filosofiyi im. H.S. Skovorody NAN Ukrayiny [in Ukrainian].

Zinchenko, V.P. (2017). Vospriyatiye i vizualnaya kultura [Perception and visual culture]. Moscow; St. Petersburg: TSGI Print [in Russian].


Abstract views: 112
PDF Downloads: 60
Published
2020-11-08
How to Cite
Kremen, V., & Ilyin, V. (2020). Psycholinguistic peculiarities of the discourse of visual epistemology: from logos to visio. PSYCHOLINGUISTICS, 28(1), 168-186. https://doi.org/10.31470/2309-1797-2020-28-1-168-186