Awareness of linguistic reality is a necessary condition for development. Children’s awareness of the phenomena of language and speech as a condition for preparing them for learning to read and write.

I. Consciousness

Lecture 5. Consciousness and cognition

Security questions

1. How do philosophical ideas (theories) about movement, space and time differ from natural scientific views?

2. What is movement, its main types and forms?

3. How do movement, change, development, and formation relate to each other?

4. Can movement exist on its own, without a carrier?

5. How have ideas about movement changed in the history of philosophical thought?

6. What are space and time?

7. What are the philosophical concepts of space and time?

8. How have ideas about space and time changed in philosophical thought?

9. What are the properties and characteristics of space?

10. What are the properties and characteristics of time?

11. What are symmetry and asymmetry?

12. Why is time irreversible?

13. What are finite and infinite, continuous and discrete, and how do they relate to space and time?

14. What are modern ideas about space and time?

15. How are material objects, movement, space and time related to each other?

16. What is a “biological clock”?

17. What are the features of social and individual time?

18. What is artistic space and time?

Plan:

I. Consciousness

1. Consciousness as an ideal reflection of reality, the function of consciousness

2. The problem of self-awareness.

3. Structure of consciousness. Conscious and unconscious.

II.Cognition

1. The process of cognition, its forms and features.

2. The problem of truth.

3. Rational and non-rational in knowledge.

4. Scientific knowledge.

Key words: reflection, ideality, subjectivity, unconscious, self-awareness, reflection, goal setting, language.

The problem of consciousness has attracted the attention of philosophers in all centuries, because it considers one of the most significant and specific aspects of human life. Consciousness is a specific property of a person, which is inherent only to him. Many philosophers have tried to analyze the nature of consciousness and have formulated several concepts in this regard.

The first of them identifies consciousness with knowledge. According to this understanding, everything we know is a phenomenon of consciousness, and everything we are aware of is knowledge. Most representatives of classical philosophy shared this idea, supporting it by reference to the etymology of the word: the Latin name for consciousness comes from the words cum and sciare, which means " shared knowledge"(the same in the Russian language), i.e. knowledge created and accepted jointly with other people. In reality, everything that is realized is knowledge of one kind or another. This applies, in particular, to the perception of an unfamiliar object. The subject's awareness of his emotions, desires, and volitional impulses is also knowledge. Of course, emotions, desires, and volitional impulses themselves cannot be reduced to knowledge, although they presuppose the latter. But their consciousness is nothing more than knowledge of their presence.

From what has been said, the conclusion about the identity of consciousness and knowledge does not at all follow. Modern philosophy, psychology and other human sciences are faced with the fact of unconscious knowledge. This is not only what I know, but which I am not thinking about at the moment and therefore am not conscious of, but which I can easily make available to my consciousness: for example, my knowledge of the Pythagorean theorem, the facts of my biography, etc. This is also the kind of knowledge that I have and use, but which can only be realized with great difficulty, if at all it can become so. This is individual tacit knowledge, used, for example, by experts, but it is also the tacit components of collective knowledge: awareness of all the premises and consequences of scientific theories is possible only in certain conditions and is never complete. Usually some emotions and desires, some deep attitudes of the personality are not realized. Thus, knowledge is a necessary condition for consciousness, but it is far from a sufficient condition.

A number of philosophers (primarily those who share the position phenomenology or close to her: F. Brentano, E. Husserl, J.-P. Sartre and others) highlight not knowledge as the main sign of consciousness, but intentionality: focus on a specific subject, object. From this point of view, all types of consciousness possess such a feature: not only perceptions and thoughts, but also ideas, emotions, desires, intentions, volitional impulses. According to this view, I may not know anything about an object, but if I single it out through my intention, it becomes the object of my consciousness. Consciousness, with this understanding, is not only a set of intentions, but also their source.

In assessing this concept, it should be noted that intentional experiences can be outside the sphere of consciousness: unconscious thoughts, emotions, intentions, etc. In phenomenology, the psyche and consciousness are essentially identified, the subject is interpreted as absolutely transparent to himself. The facts of incomplete evidence of the I for myself cannot find an explanation when consciousness is equated with intentionality. Thus, intentionality is also a necessary but not sufficient condition for consciousness.

Another concept of consciousness comes from the identification of consciousness with attention. This position is shared by a number of philosophers, but is especially popular among some psychologists, including modern ones, who are trying, from the point of view of cognitive science, to interpret consciousness (i.e., attention in this understanding) as a kind of filter on the path of information processed by the nervous system. Consciousness, with such an interpretation, plays the role of a kind of distributor of limited resources of the nervous system. Meanwhile, a number of facts of mental life cannot be explained from such a point of view. There are known, for example, facts of inattentive consciousness, which occurs, in particular, in the driver of a car, conducting a conversation, aware of what is happening along the way, but not closely following everything. We can talk about the center and periphery of the field of consciousness. Attention is directed only to the center of this field. But what is on the periphery is also realized, although not clearly. We can talk about different degrees consciousness. A sleeping person is not aware of what is happening around him, but there is a certain degree of consciousness during dreams. Some of the environment (although not all of it) is also realized during somnambulism.

The most influential understanding of consciousness in philosophy and psychology is associated with its interpretation as self-consciousness, as a self-report of the Self in its own actions. Such an understanding can be combined with the interpretation of consciousness as knowledge (in this case, it is believed that knowledge takes place only when the subject is reflectively aware of the ways of obtaining it) or as intentionality (in this case, it is believed that the subject is aware not only intentional object, but also the act of intention itself and oneself as its source).

The classical understanding of consciousness as self-awareness is associated with J. Locke’s theory of two sources of knowledge: sensations related to the external world, and reflection as the mind’s observation of its own activities. The latter, according to Locke, is consciousness. From here follows an understanding of consciousness as a specific reality, as a special “inner world” given to a person directly. Accordingly, the way to understand consciousness is self-perception, which, as a result of training, can take the form of introspection (introspection). The latter was widely used in sciences dealing with the phenomena of consciousness, in particular in psychology.

So, it should be taken into account that consciousness is part psyche, since in it (in the psyche) not only conscious, but also subconscious and unconscious processes occur. But the presence of a psyche (for example, in animals) does not yet mean the presence of consciousness. Conscious are those mental phenomena and actions of a person that pass through his mind and will, are mediated by them, and therefore are performed with the knowledge of what he is doing, thinking or feeling. Consciousness is the state of an individual’s mental life, expressed, firstly, in subjective experience events of the external world and the life of the individual himself, secondly, in report about these events.

In general, consciousness is the unity of three moments: 1) a person’s sense of his existence, 2) a sense of presence in a given place and at a given time, and 3) identification of oneself in the world (distinction between oneself and the world). Consciousness is the basis of our experience; it is the active beginning of a practical and cognitive attitude towards reality.

Consciousness as the highest form of mental reflection of reality is a function of the human brain, the essence of which lies in adequate, generalized, purposeful and carried out in speech (or generally in symbolic) form, active reflection and constructive and creative reworking of the external world, in linking newly received impressions with previous experience, in a person’s separating himself from the environment and opposing himself to it as a subject to an object. Today, criticism of the theory of reflection is based on the fact that if reflection is understood as a mirror image, i.e. mechanical process, it becomes difficult to explain activity consciousness. If consciousness only copied the objects around a person, then we would not have the opportunity to make plans or develop goals. Meanwhile, reflection should be understood as the ability reproduce in the structure of a reflective object(for example, the human brain), structure of the reflected object. Reflection is not easy repetition reflected: reflected in it changes or is transformed depending on the properties of the phenomenon or event in which the reflection occurs. When reading a book, we do not just repeat a set of words, but highlight the information that interests us.

Consciousness lies in the emotional assessment of reality, in ensuring goal-setting activity - in the preliminary mental construction of reasonably motivated actions and the provision of their personal and social consequences, in the ability of the individual to be aware of both what is happening in the surrounding material world and in his own world spiritual. Thus, consciousness is not just an image, but an ideal (mental) form of activity, focused on reflecting and transforming reality.

These properties of consciousness make it an instrument of cognition, communication, practical activity, and they are revealed in functions of consciousness:

The main function of consciousness is educational, which is a consequence of the development of information and orientation functions of the psyche of living organisms.

Creative the function is based on the fact that consciousness establishes a person’s relationship to the world, to objective reality. This function expresses the activity of consciousness: we not only reproduce the image of an object in our consciousness, but also find ways and opportunities to change this object in the direction we desire.

Estimated function is based on the ability to make a choice from what produces knowledge. Includes both rational and sensory assessments.

Regulatory and management function – determines the practical actions of a person.

In modern Russian philosophy, the prevailing understanding of consciousness as ideal form of activity, aimed at reflecting and transforming reality. Consciousness is understood as the ability of an ideal (mental) reflection of reality, the transformation of the objective content of an object into the subjective content of a person’s mental life, as well as specific socio-psychological mechanisms and forms of such reflection at its different levels. It is in the subjective world of consciousness that the reproduction of objective reality and mental preparation for transformative practical activity, its planning, the act of choice and goal setting are carried out.

Ideality lies in the fact that the images that make up consciousness do not have the properties of those reflected in it items, nor the properties of nerves processes, on the basis of which they arose.

Firstly, if objects of the material world have extension, then mental phenomena and processes occurring in our consciousness not extended. Secondly, if material processes occur simultaneously, synchronously (in relation to a person), then the phenomena of consciousness have a strict temporal sequence. Thirdly, the phenomena of consciousness are not accessible to external observation.

In Russian literature, two main concepts of understanding the ideal are formulated. The first is the concept of E.V. Ilyenkova: the ideal is not identical to subjective reality, to everything that exists in the individual consciousness. It is not so much part of the individual consciousness as component of social consciousness, to which the individual has become involved, these are elements of social culture that are directly related to the activities of the individual. The ideal is images that are subject to objectification or spiritual objectification. The ideal is widely represented in practical work activities. It differs from practice in that it itself does not contain a single atom of the substance of the object that is to be created. There is no “ideal” outside of man and apart from man.

Another approach to the problem of the ideal is presented by the works of D.I. Dubrovsky. He considers incorrect the position that the ideal is a fundamentally extrapersonal and transpersonal relationship, realized not in the human head, but in social objectivity itself. In the epistemological aspect, the ideal, subjective reality is:

1) reflection available objective reality and the project of future objective reality,

2) reflection and project herself.

The ideal is a mental phenomenon; it is always represented only in the conscious states of individuals; a phrase recorded on paper or on a tape can be regarded as a product of mental activity, but such a product does not contain the ideal. The ideal is an exclusively subjective reality and exists only in the head of a social individual, without going beyond it, although this quality is associated with the influences of the external world, with the active activity of a person, and is due to the organic inclusion of the individual in the functioning of the social system. The category of ideal denotes a person-specific reflection and action on a subjective level, in contrast to objective actions that directly produce changes in material objects. This category denotes such a property of the activity of our brain, thanks to which we are directly given the content of an object, a dynamic model of the object, free from all the real physical qualities of the object, from its material “weight”, and therefore allowing free operation with it in time.

Understanding consciousness as an ideal reflection of the world raises questions that have not received an unambiguous solution: How did thinking matter arise in the process of evolution of inanimate, non-sentient nature? What is the mechanism for transforming material, biological stimulation in the central nervous system of living organisms into an ideal reflection, into an act of consciousness? These questions are directly related to the general philosophical and scientific problem of the origin of man, the solution of which is proposed by the concept of anthroposociogenesis. Within the framework of this hypothesis, several ideas are formulated, in particular the concept of reflection and the concept of the evolutionary-labor nature of human origin.

The emergence of consciousness - the result of long-term social development - is closely connected with the formation of highly organized matter - the brain, which functionally carries out the highest form of reflection of reality, which is the organ of human thought. However, it would be wrong to say that consciousness is a function of the brain only. A person has consciousness, not his brain. Man is included in a complex system of social connections and natural connections, therefore consciousness is determined (defined) in a complex way. For consciousness to emerge, it had to be formed biological background and these include: 1) complex mental activity of animals associated with the functioning of the central nervous system and brain; 2) the beginnings of tool activity, the instinctive work of humanoid ancestors, which required the release of the forelimbs in combination with upright posture, and 3) the herd form of animal habitation and the emergence of sound signaling for the transmission of information. These prerequisites are necessary, but not sufficient for the emergence of human consciousness.

Here it is necessary to turn to the history of the formation of human society. Domestic scientists, comprehending the process of anthroposociogenesis and relying on archaeological data, created two leap theory, corresponding to the beginning and end of anthroposociogenesis.

First leap associated with the beginning of the manufacture of tools, which was a turning point in the evolution of living things. From this moment, the process of formation of man as a special biosocial species and the emergence of social relations begins its history. Biological evolution, which requires the adaptation of the species to a changing external environment, is replaced by the adaptation of the external natural world to the changing needs of man through labor activity. The immediate predecessors of Pithecanthropus were the habilis (Homo habilis - skilled man), who made tools, but remained animals in their morphophysiological organization.

Second Leap ended with the replacement of the neoanthrope Homo sapiens (reasonable man) by a modern human species, as well as the establishment and dominance of social patterns.

In connection with man's transition to the production of tools, we can talk about three interrelated consequences of this process.

Firstly, a fundamentally new quality of human life inevitably causes a change in the physiological functions of the body and, accordingly, a change in its essential biophysiological qualities. A person moves to a systematic upright walking, the roles of the limbs are redistributed, the principle of blood circulation is updated, etc. These changes in the physiological functions of the body create biologically favorable conditions for the activation of brain activity and its development. The brain of primitive man is already significantly larger in volume and weight than the brain of an ape and is distinguished by a much greater complexity of its structure.

Secondly, the very process of making tools, billions of times from generation to generation, production operations repeated with the help of tools accumulate human experience. The logic is getting more complicated practical actions gradually consolidated in logic thinking, training and developing the brain, expanding information capabilities.

Thirdly, the improving production process simultaneously complicates the entire range of life manifestations of individuals. Their relationships with each other become more multifaceted and complex. Their communication is expanding and becoming more complex, in which new social motives appear: communication about tools and results of labor, relationships of subordination and coordination, etc., the range of social roles and their regulation is expanding.

All this gave rise to a new means of communication, a means of transmitting increasingly complex information. In addition to the first signaling system inherent in animals, a specifically human communication system appears - a second signaling system - speech, language. Outside of language, consciousness loses its reality, the fact of its specific existence.

Thus, we can talk about the biopsychosocial determination of consciousness. Nature creates that anatomical and physiological system without which consciousness is impossible. For example, a feature of the human visual organs allows one to focus attention; hand as a necessary condition for feedback between consciousness and the objective world for the development of a real image of an object or action; the role of differences between the right and left hemispheres of the brain. Consciousness also depends on the internal, mental organization (disputes about the fundamental difference between the female and male psyches, the question of innate abilities - the problem of left-handedness in the process of raising a child).

Consciousness is social. It cannot arise in a person excluded from human relationships (Mowgli effect). The sociality of consciousness appears primarily in word (language). The role of the word is that it replaces object, separates the idea of ​​the object from the object itself. This allows us to establish connections between ideas about objects that do not exist in nature. Consciousness works not with a physical object, but with its image. Without words, thinking is impossible, and thinking is the most essential property of consciousness.

It is also impossible outside of words communication, understood as communication between people, during which not only information is exchanged, but also a general picture of the world (worldview) is developed. Distinguish language as a common ability for people to transmit and exchange information and speech as an individual way for each person to carry out language activity.

From some psychophysiological experiments it follows that reactions person to many essential external stimuli slower approximately 1 second of similar reactions of the animal. It is possible that the reason for this fundamental delay or pause is hidden speech activity .

In the mentioned second gap, in this temporary “crack”, is born human historicity . Here, as it were, the whole history of man is collapsed, but it is collapsed not in the sense of its predestination, but as a kind of probability field , a certain set of possible states among which historical choice can be made.

The language is like forces us to stop and make our choice where “before” “instinct” did it without hesitation.

In modern philosophy, there is a theory of “linguistic relativity”, according to which it is not consciousness that determines language, but, on the contrary, language that determines the content and work of consciousness (if a language does not have a word for an object or event, then it is not fixed by consciousness). There is no clear answer to the survey about the essence of language and its origin.

The sociality of consciousness also lies in the fact that the formation and development of consciousness turns out to be impossible outside labor activity. Work inevitably requires a mental apparatus with the help of which it would be possible to imagine the desired result in an ideal form, i.e. set a goal and find the means to achieve it. The human mind develops according to the extent to which it has learned to change the environment. With the help of means of labor, which at the same time acted as means of cognition, he comprehended the properties of the objective world. Making tools, in which the identified properties of objects were consolidated, a person learned to isolate, generalize, and abstract them in his thoughts. The logic of sensory-objective activity was fixed in the head and turned into logic of thinking.

In the process of work activity, which from the very beginning is of a social nature, people enter into one or another form of relationship with each other, communication. Labor, since from the very beginning it is of a social character, gives rise to the need to transfer to other people the assigned target and possible means to achieve it, determines the need for language. It is goal setting that distinguishes work as a meaningful action from work as a physical action. A striking example: a horse is carrying sacks of flour, the driver is sitting on a cart and dozing. The answer to the question is which of them works and which of them works? - quite clear.

Recognizing the undoubted contribution of Marxism to the understanding of both the nature of labor and its role in the development of human consciousness (see Engels’s classic work “The Role of Labor in the Transformation of Ape into Man”), it should be noted that today the main subject of consideration is increasingly intellectual labor and related problems of a very different nature (for example, intellectual property). That is, when talking about labor, we should remember that it is not only physical labor (secondary school is “labor”).

In general, work activity is a decisive factor in the development of thinking, consciousness, and language as a means of communication and mutual understanding. In the process of this activity, a person creates means that allow him to “alienate” mental images, preserve and transmit their content in a form accessible to other people (speech, writing, works of art).

Transfer of social experience. The development of consciousness requires the assimilation of social experience, and also thanks to the word, the content of consciousness becomes accessible to other people and becomes an element of social experience.

The consciousness of an individual person in a sublated form includes the accumulated experience of many generations: plus and minus. Plus - a person is freed from the need to discover the simplest things himself, minus - past experience fetters a person, ties him to traditional conditions.

Concepts such as “consciousness”, “linguistic consciousness” and “image of the world” become the subject of many psycholinguistic studies. However, various aspects of the phenomenon of linguistic consciousness, including professional linguistic consciousness, require clarification and expansion. The need for a targeted study and comparison of these concepts determines the relevance of our work.

Problems of the relationship between language and consciousness, consciousness and thinking, language and culture are interpreted by scientists from various scientific and methodological positions. Analysis of the main paradigms for solving this problem by different scientists (E. Sapir, A. A. Potebnya, L. V. Shcherba, G. G. Shpet, L. V. Vygotsky, A. N. Leontiev, N. I. Zhinkin, A. A. Leontyev, A. A. Zalevskaya, E. F. Tarasov, Yu. A. Sorokin, N. V. Ufimtseva, etc.) allows us to draw a conclusion about the complexity of the concept of “linguistic consciousness”. Despite numerous studies in this area at the present stage, it is premature to talk about the existence of a single holistic theory of linguistic consciousness. Methods of analyzing linguistic consciousness come down to analyzing the forms of its externality, one of which (the most convenient and accessible) is language.

The essence of language is revealed in its dual function: to serve as a means of communication and an instrument of thinking. Consciousness and language form a unity; in their existence they presuppose each other - language is the immediate reality of thought, consciousness. Consciousness is not only revealed, but also formed with the help of language. The connection between consciousness and language is not mechanical, but organic. They cannot be separated from each other without destroying both.

As O. L. Kamenskaya notes, language is not only a means of acquiring and transmitting knowledge, but also the objectification of knowledge in a special structure, a certain life form, so that the use of language is the use of a certain strategy of orientation in the world, a certain interpretation of the human environment, a certain pattern of behavior . In this regard, each language reflects a certain way of perceiving and organizing the world and acts as a system of social guidelines necessary for human activity in the world around him; That. linguistic consciousness is a special type of world exploration.

A. A. Leontiev compares the concept of “linguistic consciousness” with the concept of “image of the world” and defines the latter as “reflection in the psyche individual objective world, mediated by objective meanings and corresponding cognitive schemes and amenable to conscious reflections". He points out that the image of the world is multidimensional, like the world itself, and knowledge about the world is inseparable from our activities in the world.

Phenomena of reality, perceived by a person in the structure of activity and communication, are displayed in his consciousness in such a way that this display records the causal and spatial connections of phenomena and emotions, caused by the perception of these phenomena, and the image of the world changes from one culture to another. The image of the world, in turn, is the main component of culture and contains all the knowledge essential from the point of view of a given culture, necessary for adaptation each of its members to the surrounding natural and social environment. This approach is comparable with the position of L.N. Gumilyov, who believed that culture is a system of consciousness associated with a certain ethnic system, and accordingly, the study of ethnic consciousness in its linguistic form makes it possible to reveal the features of the image of the world inherent in representatives of a particular ethnic group. At the same time, “the worldview and worldview of each people is based on its own system of objective meanings, social stereotypes, and cognitive schemes.” Consequently, we can conclude that the national image of the world is a universal form of organizing the knowledge of each people, which reflects the peculiarities of the worldview of its representatives and changes from one culture to another. In this case, language is interpreted as the main part of culture, the main instrument of its assimilation, the bearer of its specific features.

E. F. Tarasov defines linguistic consciousness as a set of images of consciousness, formed and externalized with the help of linguistic means - words, free and stable phrases, sentences, texts and associative fields. The main thing in this dichotomy “consciousness and language” is, naturally, consciousness. And if in 1993 the terms “consciousness” and “linguistic consciousness” were identified by E. F. Tarasov as equivalents “to describe the same phenomenon - human consciousness,” then the definition given in 2000 differentiates these concepts. Thus, the Moscow school of psycholinguistics considers linguistic consciousness as an integral part of consciousness in general. E.F. Tarasov connects linguistic consciousness with images of consciousness as a set of perceptual and conceptual knowledge of an individual about an object in the real world, which require externalizations achieved for an outside observer. These externalities are necessary for the “transmission” of images of consciousness from one generation to another.

Language serves as a system of reference points in the objective world; we use it for our own orientation and for the orientation of other people. After all, communication, communication, as A. A. Leontyev emphasizes, is, first of all, nothing more than a way of making one or another correction to the interlocutor’s image of the world. For language to serve as a means of communication, it must have a single or similar understanding of reality behind it. And vice versa: the unity of understanding of reality and the unity and consistency of actions in it have as their prerequisite the possibility of adequate communication.

To achieve mutual understanding, it is necessary that communicants have a common knowledge about the language used, as well as a common knowledge about the world in the form of images of consciousness. Psycholinguists see the reason for misunderstanding in the situation of intercultural communication, therefore, precisely in the difference in the national consciousness of the communicants, and not in the difference in languages. Any dialogue of cultures actually takes place only in the consciousness of a bearer of a particular culture, who has managed to comprehend the images of consciousness of the bearers of another (alien) culture in the course of reflection on the differences in the quasi-identical images of his own and foreign cultures.

The search for the national cultural specificity of linguistic consciousness sets status consciousness itself: it is considered as a means of understanding a foreign culture in its objective, activity and mental form, and also as a means of understanding one’s culture. The ontology of the study of linguistic consciousness is intercultural communication between speakers of different cultures, accompanied by inevitable communicative conflicts (conflicts of incomplete understanding) due to insufficient commonality of consciousness.

The specificity of communication when using a specific national language consists of 1) the specificity of constructing a speech chain, carried out according to the grammatical rules of this language; and 2) in the specificity of images of consciousness that reflect objects of a particular national culture. Therefore, to achieve mutual understanding, it is necessary that communicants have 1) a common knowledge about the language used (and a common skill in verbal communication), as well as 2) a common knowledge about the world in the form of images of consciousness. Thus, according to E.F. Tarasov, in order to analyze the problems of mutual understanding (misunderstanding) in intercultural communication, it is advisable to understand the problem of “communication between bearers of different national cultures” as a problem of “communication between bearers of different national consciousnesses.”

E. F. Tarasov makes an important conclusion: there are no identical national cultures, moreover, there are no identical images of consciousness that reflect the same or even the same cultural subject. Even if a cultural object were transferred from one national culture to another, then, consequently, the sensory image should be the same, but this does not happen, because for its formation, not only perceptual data obtained from the sensory perception of this object are used , but also a priori knowledge (perceptual standards), containing conceptual, cultural in nature, knowledge. The mental image of this object (transferred from one culture to another) always contains elements of national and cultural specificity.

Consequently, new knowledge when comprehending a foreign culture is formed by the cognizer only when he is prompted to do so by the need to look for differences between the images of his own and foreign cultures and to find out the essence of these differences, and this happens in the case when the cognizable image is perceived as alien, still retaining something unknown . With this method of learning about a foreign culture, one must remember that new knowledge about it is formed (constructed) from the old knowledge of the subject of analysis.

Knowledge as a cultural phenomenon has its own patterns of development, associated both with the general process of cognition and with those forms of organization and understanding of reality that are developed by culture. These are, first of all, forms of the categorical-semantic structure of knowledge associated with the structures of perception and comprehension of space, time, movement, and cause-and-effect relationships. The culture of each type of professional activity puts forward its own ways of organizing knowledge. Having studied the rules for constructing knowledge in professional culture, it is possible to more adequately recognize the value-semantic structure of professional consciousness.

In the methodological approach, professional consciousness appears, first of all, as an activity-based consciousness. Its most important characteristic is not just the presence of real reflection, but its dual, multi-vector orientation. “Whoever and whenever acts,” noted G.P. Shchedrovitsky, “he must always fix his consciousness, firstly, on the objects of his activity - he sees and knows these objects, and secondly, on the activity itself - he sees and knows himself as acting, he sees his actions, his operations, his means, and even his goals and objectives.”

The problem of the development and formation of professional consciousness should be considered in the unity of the three foundations of human existence, which represent a holistic model of any professionalism: activity, consciousness, community. Thus, professional activity is always conscious and joint (carried out in the community); professional consciousness is active and intersubjective (exists and arises in the community); professional community is determined by the involvement of subjects in joint collectively distributed activities, which is based on the conscious positional self-determination of each.

The structure of professional consciousness is set through the representation of the profession. As the most important element of such a structure, the image of the profession is considered, which includes the following components: the goals of professional activity - a reflection in the mind of a specialist of the social meaning of a given profession, its significance for society; means used by a professional to implement his functions; professional subject area – knowledge of the range of phenomena of the subject world with which representatives of a given profession operate. The image of a profession is a holistic reflection of the main content of the profession.

E. A. Klimov points out that in the world of professions, what is very important is not what is common, not what is similar among different people, but what is special and unique (individual). The scientist emphasizes that there are as many images of the world as there are people, and it is professional work activity that is one of the factors in the typification of these images, their greater or lesser similarity among different people as subjects of labor.

The difference between the perception of a layman and a professional is not that a professional sees a larger number of signs of an object, but that he organizes them differently.

R. M. Frumkina notes that “a professional is a professional because objects essential to his activity are represented in his memory in the form of gestalts (images). Then he can take the next step: try to exteriorize his understanding, i.e., make obvious to other people the composition of features on which he himself intuitively based himself, concluding about similarities or differences. To be an expert, a professional must be able to verbalize his intuition at this step, that is, bring his gestalt outward.”

The formation of a subject of professional activity occurs in the educational and professional community, which becomes an environment for the development of abilities for reflection and goal-setting, ensuring the co-organization of personal and subject positions. In educational and professional cooperation, the subject gets the opportunity to become familiar with the experience of truly professional activity (for example, the activity of a physician, doctor) as a necessary condition for the formation of meaning, problematization and acquisition of the ability to reproduce appropriate forms of consciousness.

Professional consciousness is formed through certain linguistic means, as they provide appropriate communication in the communication system of specialists. Mastery of the appropriate language of professional communication becomes possible as the subject content of the profession is identified and consciously mastered and ensures the transition of the future specialist from everyday life to professional consciousness.

We define professional linguistic consciousness as a special (professional, as opposed to everyday) vision of the world, formed and externalized with the help of professionally marked linguistic means.

Professional consciousness has certain specifics compared to ordinary consciousness, which includes, firstly, a certain subject area with professionally oriented linguistic means; secondly, images of consciousness, the content of which reflects the conceptual sphere of professional culture.

There are not many works devoted to the description of professional linguistic consciousness (I would like to highlight the research on the study of corporate culture conducted under the leadership of E. V. Kharchenko), however, this direction is very promising, since it expands the understanding of the impact of the profession factor on linguistic consciousness individual and may be of interest not only to linguists, psychologists and methodologists, but also to a wide range of people.

Consciousness – the highest form of generalized reflection of objective stable properties and patterns of the surrounding world, characteristic of a person, the formation of a person’s internal model of the external world, as a result of which knowledge and transformation of the surrounding reality is achieved.

Specifics of a conscious way of life a person lies in his ability

separate in your mind your “I” from your life environment

make your inner world a subject of reflection, understanding, and practical transformation.

This ability is called reflection. She is the essence of human consciousness.

Consciousness is the highest level of mental reflection and self-regulation, inherent only to man as a socio-historical being.

Criteria of consciousness:

productivity with mental illness activity– while awake

ability for adequate communication: verbal and non-verbal

Consciousness develops in humans. only on social media contacts. Consciousness is possible only in the conditions of the existence of language, speech, which arises simultaneously with consciousness in the process of labor.

awareness of one’s own “I” and identification with it

A necessary stage in the development reflective consciousness is self-awareness. Self-awareness- this is the level of consciousness at which a person’s awareness, assessment, and analysis of his knowledge, feelings, needs, motives of behavior and activity are carried out.

awareness of the surrounding world in time and space and in relation to one’s own “I”

activity level(opposition or complicity in relation to the environment)

state of attention(produced – requiring willpower and involuntary)

state of conditioned reflex activity

state is unconditionally a reflector. activity

ability to arbitrariness psycho. and engine activity, presence/absence arbitrary acts

degree of expression and adequacy of emotions

Intel characteristics activities, namely: mnemonic processes (memory, thinking, cognitive learning)

particular behavioral acts, the presence of ethical. and aesthetic values

objectively recorded indicators of the central nervous system, somatic, autonomic. and endocrine systems.

Functions of consciousness:

reflective (what happens in the outside world)

generative (creative-creative)

regulatory and evaluation (control and management of individual behavior, mental construction of actions and anticipation of their consequences)

reflective

There are two layer of consciousness (V.P. Zinchenko).

Being consciousness (consciousness for being), including:

1. action experience

   sensual images.

Reflective Consciousness (consciousness for consciousness), including:

1. meaning

Consciousness:

born into existence

reflects existence

creates being

Levels of Consciousness

Most of the processes occurring in the inner world of a person they are not aware of it. Unconscious mental processes, operations and states form a special sphere of mental life and are called unconscious.

conscious- what a person can do. verbalize, explaining to other people.

subconscious– when automating a number of activities, the implementation of which is possible without constant monitoring

unconscious– the bulk of neuro-reflex acts. to-rye nah. in f-tsional. interaction with consciousness, but under normal conditions they are never realized

preconscious– reflects the transition from the sphere of unconsciousness. into conscious

superconsciousness

Language and consciousness.

The category of consciousness in psychology is one of those categories regarding the content of which there is no unanimity. At the same time, many psychologists agree that consciousness represents the highest form of mental reflection, which is a product of human historical development and arises in the process of joint productive, objective activity of people and their communication through language.

A special feature of a person is the possession of language - a complex system of signs, which is main means of communication And social inheritance- transfer of accumulated experience from generation to generation.

The relation of consciousness to being is linguistic. Language permeates all structures of existence and consciousness. A person’s awareness of the external world is so closely connected with language that it is essentially impossible to separate consciousness and being from language. After all, the consciousness of being becomes complete only in linguistic forms and with the help of linguistic means, and the expression of acts of consciousness and their exchange (communication) without language is difficult to imagine. Consciousness and language form a unity: in their existence they presuppose each other as internally; logically formed ideal content presupposes its external material form. Language is the immediate reality of thought, consciousness.

Possession of language leads to the emergence of new opportunities for manipulating mental images. Using language as a means of reflecting reality, a person can carry out a basic mental action inaccessible to any animal - highlight and generalize the essentially ideal relationships and connections between an object and its properties and between individual objects.

The use of language leads to a radical restructuring of a person’s entire mental life. The ability to form categories allows a person to construct ideal “objects” in the internal, mental space, which serve as a means of reconstructing real reality, which allows one to detect and highlight in it what is not amenable to direct perception.

According to the theory linguistic relativity Whorf's perception and interpretation of events by a person depend on the structural properties of the language he uses. According to Whorf, we dismember nature in the direction suggested by our language. The world appears before us as a kaleidoscopic stream of impressions, which must be organized by our consciousness, and this means mainly by the language system stored in our consciousness.

e.g. When describing a falling stone, a European involuntarily divides it into two specific concepts - the concept of a stone and the concept of a fall, and then connects them in the statement “the stone is falling.” A Chippewa Indian cannot construct such an expression without indicating that the stone is an inanimate object. The Quatiutl Indian will certainly reflect the fact of the visibility or invisibility of the stone for the speaker at the moment of speaking. In the Nootka language, it is not necessary to talk about a stone separately, and the whole phenomenon can be described with one word of the verb form like “stone.”

At the same time, language itself is also not the creator of the picture of the world of the people of a given community; it itself is arbitrary from the conditions and way of life, the specifics of communication and activities of these people.

e.g. In the language of people who have lived on the plain for many generations, there may be no such concept as “mountain”, as well as such concepts (meanings) associated with it, such as, for example, “slope” or “foot of the mountain.”

ADDENDUM 5.Human consciousness as the highest stage of mental development. The role of language in the formation of consciousness.

Consciousness - this is a reflection in which objective reality seems to separates from a person’s subjective attitude towards it. As a result, two stand out in the image of consciousness plane : objective, or World, And subjective, or "I", personal experience, attitude to the subject.

Tales to understand :For example, you read a book, imbued with its plot, without realizing it, without controlling how you perceive words and thoughts, leaf through the pages, sit in a subway car. The events described in this book are reflected in your psyche; psychologically, you exist in book reality. But then you arrive at the station where you need to get off, and for a moment your consciousness “turns on”: this is the subway, this is a book, this is “I”, who is going there and reading. You see yourself as if from the outside, you stand out from objectively existing conditions, and therefore they appeared in front of you in a conscious manner. You seem to understand that the metro, the book and everything else exist on their own, objectively, and your immersion in reading, experiences and impressions are secondary, subjective, and belong only to you. It becomes clear that this is not the same thing: the objective world and its image in a specific person. Consciousness is acceptance, awareness is real, regardless of the personality of the existing being.

It is impossible to accept and cognize the World without isolating oneself in it, without isolating the subjective “I” from the reflected world as an object and as an experienced relationship associated with it.

Consciousness is necessary for goal planning. This is possible only with the participation of consciousness, which separates in the mental image what is objectively existing and what is mentally, subjectively assumed.

Structure of consciousness:

sensory content , which represents the “picture” itself, the original image of the reflected world. You must first reflect, create a secondary world in the form of a mental image, and then, if necessary, divide it into objective and subjective

meaning - this is an objective component of consciousness, which is a system of objective knowledge, interpretations, methods of using a given object or a word that replaces it, developed in the historical practice of people.

meaning - this is a subjective, personal, individual meaning that most corresponds to the situation, context, personality as a whole and is born in human activity, i.e. in the relationship of actually acting motive and purpose.

In the structure of consciousness, objective meaning and subjective meaning, of course, do not coincide. Complex interplanar relationship determine between them specifics of any individual consciousness. A person is inherent in a certain optimum of such

objective-subjective relations, and in cases of its violation in psychology it is customary to talk about the phenomena disintegration consciousness, when there are sharp contradictions and obvious inconsistencies between meaning and meaning.

Like everything in the psyche, consciousness is dynamic, since objective being is changeable, and man himself is changeable. There are two main direction of change (development or, on the contrary, reduction) of consciousness.

Firstly, it changes circle of objects and phenomena of the conscious world. A person is aware only of what is part of his real existence, with which he has material or mental, ideal interactions and relationships. The child’s first “I” is built on a rather narrow circle of comparisons with the closest adults. The circle of the conscious world expands along with the development of the child’s real independence

changing relationships between meaning and meaning existing in the individual consciousness. Here, three interdependent sources of possible changes are distinguished: through meanings, through meanings, through changes in relationships and connections between them. The expansion of the system of meanings is carried out through knowledge, the acquisition of life experience, through teaching and learning. Meaning is created in the very structure of human activity, in the relationship of motive and purpose. Subjective meaning cannot be taught, it is formed in the individual himself Meaning of consciousness:

The emerging consciousness does not simply complement the unconsciously existing mental image. Consciousness qualitatively changes and transforms it, transferring it to a fundamentally new meaningful, actually human level. Conscious mental processes become voluntary, relatively stable, and controllable. Opportunities arise reflections as reflection, planning and control of one’s own mental processes, properties and states. In the human psyche is formed self-awareness. That is why consciousness not only reflects the world and existence, but to a certain extent creates and transforms them. Between the conscious and unconscious world, between the conscious and unconscious in the psyche, there are certain, sometimes contradictory, relationships, interactions, and connections. Consciousness “roams” through the human psyche, works according to its own special laws, which are not always subordinate to objective, material rules. Conscious behavior and the human psyche itself become free.

The role of language in the formation of consciousness.

Human language is a system of codes through which people communicate with each other. The presence of language or a second signaling system is so critical to the formation of consciousness.

In the process of social labor, as Engels pointed out, people had an objective need to say something to each other. This was a necessary phenomenon; when several people are working on one object, for example, the trunk of a fallen tree is being dragged by a group of people, then an objective need arises not just to accompany this with some exclamations or shouts expressing an emotional state, but to indicate the object of the action or the action itself with a well-known sign. .

A word has two main functions that should always be kept in mind when talking about language. The first of them is item substitution function or representation function, that is, a function that replaces an object with a sign placed in place of the object. If a word denotes an object, then we can deal with the object in its absence. A word denoting an object, as it were, doubles the world next to the world of directly, sensually perceived objects; it puts the idea of ​​objects, images of objects that the word can artificially evoke even when these objects are not here

There is, however, a second, even more essential function of the word - the word processes experience, it allows a person to perform complex work with a perceived image. The word is a tool that allows one to analyze and synthesize the impressions that a person receives from the outside world. The word is a powerful tool not only of memory, but also a powerful tool of abstraction and generalization. The word, therefore, is a means of abstraction and a means of generalization. Distraction and, at the same time, generalization of signals reaching a person is the main property of the second signal system or the system of words of a language. This plays a particularly important role for all the material with which we will deal further.

The word, first of all, not only replaces things, but also selects a corresponding important feature from things. The word “table” has STL as its root - lay, spread, bed, flooring. In this way, the word analyzes this thing. It extracts from it a feature that is essential for a table: a flooring, a board on which something can be laid.

But the word not only denotes an object, highlighting the corresponding important signs and properties in it. The word of a developed language makes it possible to perform abstract work that is very difficult to do without words. A whole class of words - adjectives (black - white, yellow - green, sour - sweet) - all these words highlight the signs of things that are included in these things, but do not exist independently.

After all, there is no sweetness or bitterness, yellow or red, hard or soft - they always exist in an object and it is sometimes difficult to separate them from objects.

Consequently, language as a second signaling system, in addition to functions substitution objects, has more And function analysis And synthesis, distractions And generalizations. In this way, the word is an automatic tool for the awareness of objects and thinking.

FORMATION OF PHONOLOGICAL REPRESENTATIONS IN PRESCHOOL CHILDREN

N.S.STARZYNSKA

One of the most important aspects of the general development of preschool children is their acquisition of their native language, which includes not only the formation of practical speech skills, but also the ability to navigate linguistic reality, awareness of linguistic relationships and dependencies. These two sides of one process - the process of mastering the native language - are closely interconnected. On the one hand, improving speech skills and practical mastery of language tools are a necessary condition for subsequent awareness of linguistic reality; on the other hand, “conscious operation of language, its elements and their relationships is not a self-contained, purely theoretical attitude to linguistic reality, isolated from the construction of a speech utterance. The importance of awareness of linguistic phenomena also lies in the fact that on its basis, speech skills and abilities are transferred from an automatic plan to a voluntary plan... which ensures greater efficiency of communications and further speech development.”

The turning point in children's speech development is teaching them to read and write. It is in the process of mastering literacy that speech first becomes an object of knowledge for children. As a result of learning to read and write, the entire system of the child’s linguistic representations, primarily phonetic and phonological, is reconstructed.

Before considering the question of the transformation of a child’s phonetic and phonological concepts under the influence of literacy training, it is necessary to briefly dwell on the basic principles of phonetics and phonology.

Phonetics and phonology study the same object - the shortest sound units (or speech sounds). This is their closest relationship. They differ from each other in various aspects of the study of their main object. Phonetics considers the shortest sound units in themselves, phonology - in their functioning as distinguishers of the sound envelope of words and forms.

The basic concepts of phonetics are: speech sound, syllable, vowel and consonant sounds, dynamic stress, phonetic word (i.e., a word in which the shortest sound units appear in all the richness of their actually pronounced physiological and acoustic properties).

Phonology is a higher level of phonetics. The main concept of phonology is phoneme - a certain class of speech sounds, the belonging of which to one phoneme is determined by their functional identity - the ability to distinguish the sound side of words.

The phonological system of the modern Russian language is characterized primarily by two rows of relations between vowels and consonants

phonemes - syntagmatic and paradigmatic. The syntagmatic series is characterized by those relationships that are associated with the possibilities and limitations in the compatibility of various phonemes with each other in their linear arrangement. (Thus, the most typical combination in the Russian language is the combination “consonant-vowel” - a direct open syllable, as well as combinations of various groups of consonants.) The paradigmatic series is characterized by those relationships that are associated with the possibilities and limitations of contrasting different phonemes with each other in identical phonetic positions. (For the Russian language, the most typical opposition of phonemes within the vowel system and within the consonant system.) Paradigmatic relations are determined primarily by syntagmatic relations.

For the first time, the question of the need to study the patterns of formation of phonological categories in the process of learning to read and write was raised by V.K. Orfinskaya. She made an attempt to study this process in children of primary school age.

Before the start of systematic literacy training, writes V.K. Orfinskaya, the phonological differentiation of children is limited to consonants. At the same time, its content does not include the selection of consonants from the general complex of the word. As a result of learning to read and write, children begin to recognize the word not as a whole, but as dismembered.

In addition to the phonological division of the word, the content of the restructuring of children’s phonological representations includes, according to the author, “awareness of the patterns of graphic-phonetic and phonological relationships, i.e., awareness of the general patterns of construction of the entire phonological system as a whole.” By awareness of these patterns, V.K. Orfinskaya understands children’s concentration of “active attention” not only on consonants, but also on vowel sounds, on the “musical” components of the word (i.e., stress), as well as their assimilation of the relationship between letter and phoneme , including the rules for writing iotated vowels after consonants and ь (soft sign) at the end of a word.

As you can see, V.K. Orfinskaya is not entirely accurate when speaking in this case about the phonological representations of children. The division of a word produced by primary schoolchildren is not phonological, but phonetic, since a phonetic word is divided into its constituent sounds. The belonging of different speech sounds to one sound of a language is determined only by their identity or proximity in acoustic-articulatory terms. The simplest speech representation of children is not a phoneme, but a sound (sound type).

Thus, the work of V.K. Orfinskaya reveals, first of all, the process of phonetic, rather than phonological, education of younger schoolchildren during the period of teaching them to read and write. It is even more premature to talk about children’s awareness of the general laws of construction of the entire phonological system as a whole. The main goal of our research was to determine the possibility of developing in six-year-old preschoolers, in the process of teaching them to read and write, a certain degree of generalized spelling action based on children’s awareness of the phonemic, or phonemic, principle of spelling.

With the phonemic principle of spelling, the unit that has a stable designation in writing is the phoneme, interpreted from the standpoint of the Moscow phonological school: “... sound units appearing in weak positions and alternating with one or another sound unit that differs in a strong position and is a phoneme, are combined with this latter into one unit (phoneme) at the position of its variants." The main type of phoneme and its variants form a paradigm-phoneme.

The sound structure of a word in writing is conveyed purified “of all positional interactions between sounds. All positional changes are eliminated by reducing each sound paradigm to its main variety, which appears in a strong position." This is a universal way to determine the letter for a sound paradigm that appears in a weak position.

To construct the phonemic principle of writing, as P. S. Zhedek established in her research, it is necessary and sufficient to isolate and generalize the following range of phonological properties: 1) the relationship between the sound form of a linguistic unit and its meaning, 2) the relationship between the sound form and the phonological structure of the language units, 3) the relationship between the phonological structure of a unit and its graphic form.

Thus, teaching preschoolers the elements of spelling while focusing on the phonemic principle of writing is directly related to the formation of their phonological concepts.

A method of teaching preschoolers literacy, which forms in children an in-depth orientation in the field of language phenomena, in its internal laws, fosters a theoretical attitude to linguistic reality and thereby creates optimal conditions for the formation of elementary knowledge in preschoolers in the field of phonetics and phonology in literacy classes, is the method D. B. Elkonina - L. E. Zhurova, .

When learning to read and write using this method, preschoolers master very broad skills in any work with the sound (phonetic) side of the language. They master the action of phonemic (sound) analysis of a word, which they learn to perform mentally, and can analyze the sound composition of words of almost any complexity. Children are able to distinguish vowels, hard and soft consonant sounds, find stress in words and transfer it from one vowel sound to another; acquire their distinctive properties.

The sufficiently deep knowledge acquired by children of the phonetic system of their native language undoubtedly contributes to the assimilation of its elementary phonological properties.

In the process of learning to read and write, preschoolers receive a certain linguistic development, which means awareness of the phenomena and relationships of language, assimilation of elementary linguistic concepts and knowledge. The subject of awareness by preschoolers are such properties of language (in particular, phonology), the assimilation of which lays the foundation for the development of a broad orientation in linguistic phenomena in general.

First of all, in the process of learning to read and write, children learn the property of phonological syntagmatics - linearity. This is one of the most important general properties of linguistic reality. F. de Saussure wrote about it: “... this is the basic principle, and its consequences are inexhaustible. The whole mechanism of language depends on it.” The leading role in the assimilation of the properties of phonological syntagmatics is played by the understanding of sound analysis adopted in the analyzed methodology as an action to establish the sequence of sounds in a word. Children's mastery of sound (phoneme) analysis allows them to consider the language form from the point of view of the compatibility of sound units, linearity, and the sequence of their pronunciation, i.e. syntagmatics.

Based on the isolation of syntagmatic relations and simultaneously with it, the sound units of specific word forms are generalized into phonemes. Preschoolers master the word-phonemic aspect of the phonetic system of the language. This means that the shortest sound units are considered by children not by themselves, but as elements of the sound side of the word form, i.e. as phonemes.

Constructed by a child in the process of sound (phonemic) analysis of a word, his syntagmo-phonemic object model is a kind of word-phonemic transcription. Word-phonemic transcription reflects the sound shell of a word, “partially “undressing” the shortest sound units included in its composition - freeing them from everything “external”, positional, determined in a given specific linguistic fact by phonetic position and preserving “internal”, independent and functionally significant.” Children, when constructing syntagmo-phonemic models of words, also do not convey those aspects of sound that are positionally conditioned and functionally insignificant (do not serve to distinguish different word forms). The subject model reflects only independent, functionally significant properties of the phoneme. (Compare, for example, phonetic and word-phonemic models of the words “mal” - [small], /mal/; “crumpled” - [m "al", /m "al/; "mother" - [mat"]; /mat "/; “mia” - [m"at"], /m"at"/. In the first case, a more anterior or posterior formation of the vowel “a” is conveyed, depending on its position after and before hard and soft consonants. In the second In this case, these features that are not essential for distinguishing the sound shells of word forms are ignored. All shades of this vowel are combined into one phoneme /a/ on the basis of their functional similarity.)

This is exactly what A. A. Leontyev had in mind when he wrote that teaching sound analysis using the method of D. B. Elkonin means “first of all, the disclosure of phonemic paradigmatics, i.e., awareness of the systematic nature of phonology and the independence of individual members of this system from positional conditioning ".

Thus, in the process of learning to read and write according to the method of D. B. Elkonin - L. E. Zhurova, preschoolers learn one of the most important language relations - syntagmatics-paradigmatics.”

Let us show with an example how, in the process of constructing and transforming a materialized phonemic (sound) model, the child’s knowledge of this relationship is realized.

This is especially evident in the didactic game “Living Sounds”. Several children are called to the board, each of whom receives a chip and the name of the sound of the word being analyzed. For example, when analyzing the word “fox”, the teacher calls out four children who become the sounds “l”, “i”, “s”, “a”. Then the teacher randomly calls the “sounds” to him: “The sound “s”, the sound “i”, etc. will do. Children should stand so that the sequence of sounds corresponds to the word “fox.” The rest of the children check the correctness of the task by “reading” the word with intonation underlining each sound: “liissaa.” If the order of sounds is disrupted, it will be impossible to “read” the word. During the game “Living Sounds,” preschoolers, on the one hand, seeing the need for a certain sequence of sounds in a word, isolate syntagmatic relationships. On the other hand, by distinguishing between the pronunciation of a sound type in a whole word and its generalized pronunciation separately from the word (in the word “fox” the first sound is “l”), children reveal the property of phonological paradigmatics.

Isolation by preschoolers of the properties of syntagmatics and word-phonemic paradigmatics brings them close to the identification of the properties of morphophonematic paradigmatics - positionally determined alternation within one morpheme of a number of sounds that perform

the same function. The establishment and analysis of the positional alternation of sounds in the same morphemes leads to the identification of the relationship between the sound form and the phonological structure of a linguistic unit, that is, one of those phonological properties, the isolation of which is necessary for the assimilation of the phonemic principle of writing.

Another cardinal relationship that preschoolers learn in literacy classes is the relationship between the sound form of a linguistic unit and its meaning. Actions that lead to children identifying and generalizing this relationship are: 1) changing the sound shell of the original word by replacing one sound with another and obtaining a new word (for example, poppy - varnish, lac - onion); 2) comparison of the meanings of the original and new words; 3) comparison of the sound shells of both words and identification of phonemes that distinguish their sound side and thereby indicate differences in the meaning of these words. In this way, children discover for themselves the most significant connections between the sound structure and the lexical meaning of a word. They distinguish sound not only as an element of the syntagmatic structure of a word form (as a “sound type”), but also as a distinguisher of the sound shells of words and their forms, i.e., as a functional unit.

Let us recall that isolating and generalizing the relationship between the sound form of a linguistic unit and its meaning is also one of the conditions for constructing the phonemic principle of writing.

As we can see, the assimilation of the phonemic principle of spelling is largely prepared by the methods of teaching literacy by D. B. Elkonin - L. E. Zhurova.

The methodology we have chosen for teaching preschoolers literacy is designed for 2.5 years (six months of study in the middle group and then two years in the senior and preparatory school groups). In our experiment, in the middle and senior groups of kindergarten, preparatory work was carried out before teaching children proper spelling. Describing it is beyond the scope of this article. The formation of phonological concepts in preschoolers and, on their basis, an idea of ​​the phonemic principle of writing was carried out in a preparatory group for school.

The initial concept of the phonemic principle of writing is the concept of paradigm-phoneme. When forming an idea of ​​the paradigm-phoneme among preschoolers, we settled on its interpretation given by one of the representatives of the Moscow phonological school - R.I. Avanesov. R.I. Avanesov distinguishes two functionally identical units - strong and weak phonemes. A strong phoneme appears in the position of maximum phonemic discrimination (the main type of phoneme, according to the general terminology of the school), and a weak one - in positions of lesser phonemic discrimination (a variety, variant of the phoneme). The entire set of positional alternations of sounds in a morpheme is called a phoneme series. In fact, R.I. Avanesov’s concept of a phoneme series corresponds to the concept of a paradigm-phoneme. (Cf.: “Two sounds, positionally alternating within one morpheme, are recognized as variants of one identity, one paradigm-phoneme.”) We think that it is easier for preschoolers to learn the terms “weak and strong phonemes” (even “strong and weak sounds” is not necessary introduce a new term “phoneme”),

than "sound paradigms acting in positions of strength and weakness."

The identification and generalization by six-year-old preschoolers of the phonemic principle of writing as a single internal basis of various spelling phenomena occurred in the process of performing a system of specific objective actions that reproduced in a concise form accessible to children the process of theoretical research of this concept:

1. Comparison of the lexical meanings and sound shells of pairs of words that differ in one sound, as a result of which the phoneme stands out as a distinguisher of the sound compositions of these words, simultaneously indicating the difference in their meaning. This action leads to the identification of the linguistic relationship “sound form - meaning”. The formation of an understanding of this relationship, as already indicated, occurs in the process of learning to read and write, regardless of spelling goals. Isolation by preschoolers of the named phonological property occurred in the process of their transformation of the syntagmo-phonemic composition of the word presented in the materialized (subject) model.

2. Formation from the original word of a number of words close in meaning and sound composition (related) and the construction of their subject syntagmo-phonemic models, reflecting the sequence of sounds of each word.

3. Comparison, based on object models or by ear, of sound structures of words with similar meanings. In the process of this action, preschoolers discovered the phenomenon of positional alternation of sounds in the same morphemes (roots of words), the presence of different sounds in the same place of related words, for example k[a]za, k[o]zy, k[o] zochka, k[a]green. (Although supporters of the Moscow phonological school consider the paradigm-phoneme only as a component of a morpheme, the identification of positional alternation of sounds can, in principle, occur at the level of the whole word.)

The fact that the children discovered different sounds in the same place in related words contradicted their past experience, from which they firmly learned that a change in at least one sound in a word leads to the formation of a new word that is not related to the first. Thus, a problematic situation was created that required, in order to be resolved, the introduction of the concept of a phoneme series (paradigm-phonemes).

4. Practical transformation of subject syntagmo-phonemic models of related words by moving alternating sounds from one model to the same place in another model and semantic analysis of the resulting new words.

The children discovered that if instead of an unstressed vowel sound in a word, a stressed sound is substituted from another, related word, the word remains understandable, “we recognize it.” For example, a chip denoting the stressed sound [o] is moved from the phonemic model of the word [cat] to the place of a chip denoting the unstressed sound [a], into the phonemic model of the word [katy]. It turns out [cats] - the meaning of the word does not change. If you do the opposite - instead of a stressed vowel sound, substitute an unstressed vowel sound from a related word into a word - you may end up with nonsense or a completely different word. So, if the sound [a] is transferred to the place of the sound [o] in the word [cat], a meaningless sound combination [cat] is formed. A stressed vowel sound “has the power” to distinguish words, but an unstressed vowel sound does not. Stressed vowels are strong sounds, unstressed vowels are weak.

With regard to consonant sounds, children learned in the same way that a consonant sound is strong when it is followed by a vowel, and in other cases it is weak. For example, but [w] - but [f] and, you can say in [f], but you can’t but [w]i.

In fact, related words have the same sounds in the same place. Only weak sounds can “cunning”, “pretending”.

A weak sound can be replaced by a strong one that never “pretends.” Strong sounds help us distinguish words.

As a result of the analysis of the phenomenon of positional alternation of sounds within the vowel system and within the consonant system, children, with the help of the experimenter, determined the strong and weak positions of vowels and consonants and identified the distinctive function of the phoneme in the strong position.

The establishment and analysis by preschoolers of the phenomenon of positional alternation of sounds led to their identification of the linguistic relationship “sound form - phonological structure.” Positionally alternating sounds were combined by children into one phoneme series (or one paradigm-phoneme) on the basis of their functional identity. For example, m[a]rya - sea; the weak vowel [a] can be replaced by the strong [o]. In this way, the children came to understand the paradigmatic-phonemic (phonological) structure of the word (m [a o] rya).

Let us note once again that the analysis of the relationship between the syntagmo-phonemic (k[a]za) and paradigm-phonemic (k[a o ]za) structures of a word does not require necessarily referring to the letter form of the word. It was conducted by children on the basis of subject phonemic models of words. The more conventional the modeling is, the easier it is, according to psychologists, to identify the properties that serve as the basis for orientation.

5. Construction by ear (on a phonetic basis) of letter models of homophone words. This action convinced the children of the indistinguishability of words written in this way with different meanings.

6. Reducing phonemes in a weak position to a strong one (based on the distinctive function of phonemes in a strong position) and constructing letter models of homophone words on a phonemic basis.

Thus, the children identified the relationship between the phonological structure and the graphic form of the linguistic unit - the content of the phonemic principle of writing.

Here is an abbreviated lesson protocol illustrating how children perform the last two actions.

The experimenter reminded the children of the fairy tale about the Cockerel - the Golden Comb. When the Fox carried the Cockerel away, he called the Cat for help:

Fox carries me

For the dark forests.

Experimenter. When I say the word “fox” from the first half of the sentence “The Fox is carrying me...”, who are we talking about? Children. Oh fox, it's a beast.

Experimenter. And when I say the word “fox” from the second half of the sentence “... For the dark forests,” what are we talking about? Children. About the forest, about the trees.

According to the experimenter’s instructions, two children placed chips on the board: one - the word “l[i]sa” from the passage “The Fox is Carrying Me...”, the other - the same word from the passage “...For the Dark Forests.” The result was two identical subject models: soft consonant, unstressed vowel, hard consonant, stressed vowel.

Experimenter. Using the model of chips, can you find out who posted which word? Where is the “fox” - the beast, and where is the “fox” - the forest?

Children.No. These words are laid out the same way. They have the same sounds.

At the experimenter's suggestion, the children carried out a positional analysis of the phonemic compositions of both words. During the process of positional analysis, the children moved chips denoting weak sounds - in this case, the unstressed vowel sounds “and” - down from the model. The word models for “fox” and “forest” were still impossible to distinguish, as they contained the same faint sounds.

Experimenter. What sounds help us distinguish between words?

Children.Only strong sounds help us distinguish words. Instead of them, you can immediately put letters.

Children replace the chips denoting strong sounds with letters: they get two identical mixed models: L□SA and L□SA.

Experimenter. Is it possible to distinguish between these two words by strong sounds, to find out where “fox” is an animal, and where “fox” is trees, many forests?

Children.No, again you can’t - they have the same strong sounds.

Experimenter. And if we label weak sounds with letters the way we hear them, will we be able to distinguish words?

The children working at the board put the letters “i” in both words. We got the same words again: FOX and FOX.

The children watched with increasing interest their own attempts to distinguish word patterns. The fact that the words turned out to be impossible to distinguish even in letter writing caused them to laugh in unison.

Several children. It seems to us that there are two foxes here - animals.

Experimenter. Yes, again we cannot distinguish the words. But these children think there are two foxes here - animals. What should we do?

Children.Some weak sound, either in the word “fox” - an animal, or in the word “fox” - trees, deceives us, does not allow us to distinguish the words.

Experimenter. How do we know which weak sound is deceiving us? Let's see what the stressed sound is in this place in related words. Come up with related words for the word “fox” - animal, so that there is a strong sound in this place of the word.

Children."Foxes", "foxes".

Experimenter. What is the stressed vowel sound in this word (the experimenter asks about each word chosen by the children separately)?

Children."AND".

Experimenter. We hear the weak vowel sound (unstressed) in the word “fox” as “and”, and the strong one also turns out to be “and”. Was this faint sound faked?

Children.No, I didn't pretend.

Experimenter. This means that we correctly designated this sound with the letter “i”. Let's check the weak sound in another word, fox, which refers to trees.

Children.A related word is "forest".

Experimenter. How strong is the sound here?

Children."E".

Experimenter. The unstressed, weak vowel sound in the word “fox” - trees is “i”, and the strong one is “e”. Was this faint sound faked?

Children. Yes, I pretended to.

Experimenter. What is the actual sound here?

Children."E" is a real sound.

Experimenter. Which letter should I put?

Children.After soft consonants, when the sound “e” is heard, the letter “e” is written. Let's put the letter "e".

In the word “l[i]sa” - trees, the person answering at the board puts the letter “e”.

Experimenter. Now can we distinguish the words?

Children.Yes, we can. (Show which word is which.)

Experimenter. What did we do to find out where which word was written?

Children.We did not record weak sounds, but only strong ones.

Preschoolers, with the help of an experimenter, formulate the most important rule of Russian writing: only strong sounds are written in writing, because only strong sounds help us recognize words.

Experimenter. But what if there is a weak sound in a word? How to write it down?

Children.If there is a weak sound in a word, it must be checked; come up with a related word so that a weak sound becomes strong.

In this case, the graphic model of the word constructed by the children is a morphophonemic transcription in which the letter is a sign of the phoneme series: “All members of each phoneme series are denoted by one letter corresponding to the strong phoneme of this series.”

As can be seen from the course of the sequential formation of phonological representations in preschoolers described above, only the establishment of the relationship between the phonological structure of a word form and its graphic form required children to know the letters, and not necessarily the entire alphabet. The phonemic principle of writing was revealed using the simplest words, which the children wrote using several letters they had learned. The range of spelling problems solved by children on the basis of the acquired phonemic principle expanded as they became familiar with new letters.

It is important to note that the subject syntagmo-phonemic model of the word form made it possible to carry out its practical transformation, gradually identifying the orthographic properties of the word (positional relationship of phonemes, bringing a weak phonemic position to a strong one), and as they are identified, display them in the model. Thus, knowledge of internal,

preschoolers were able to realize the essential relationships of a word that make up its spelling in the process of transformative sensory-objective activity, which is a necessary condition for children of this age to acquire knowledge of a theoretical type.

In the process of “quasi-research” of the origin of the phonemic principle of writing, children simultaneously consistently formed spelling actions focused on this principle. Such an orthographic action is “the determination of the graphic form of a linguistic unit based on the transition from its sensory-perceptible sound shell to the paradigmatic-phonemic structure.” In its expanded form, the orthographic action can be represented as a series of sequential actions: 1) sound (syntagmo-phonemic) analysis of the word; 2) paradigm-phonemic analysis of the word: a) positional characteristics of phonemes, which ensures the detection of spelling patterns in the word, b) transformation of a weak phonemic position into a strong one, which is a solution to the spelling problem; 3) construction of a letter model of the word form.

Let us note that the formation of knowledge in preschoolers about the phonological properties of the Russian language and, on their basis, orthographic action took place in a form that was entertaining for children. During the classes, special problem situations were created that interested the children and at the same time contributed to the fact that they, as it were, independently “discovered” certain phonological relations. A large number of games and entertaining exercises were used in the learning process. All this corresponds to the age characteristics of six-year-old children.

The quality of six-year-olds’ assimilation of orthographic actions (and, consequently, the corresponding phonological relations) is evidenced by the digital data we obtained at the end of training during a control experiment.

Since the step-by-step formation of the actions of setting a spelling problem and solving it began from different levels (the first - from materialized, the second - from loud speech), by the end of training the children reached different levels in mastering each of the components of the spelling action.

37.5% of children completed the spelling task in the form of “external speech to oneself.” 25% of children identified strong and weak positions of phonemes in loud speech terms. 12.5% ​​of preschoolers performed the action of positional analysis of the phonemic composition of a word in a materialized manner, but acting silently and quickly. Some of the children - 25%, acting either in the mental, or in the loud-speech plane, or in the loud-speech, or in the materialized, positions of vowel and consonant phonemes were determined differently.

51.2% of children solved the spelling problem mentally, although most of them needed operational control. The remaining preschoolers (46.8%) solved the spelling problem using loud speech.

Thus, it can be argued that preschoolers have mastered a generalized method of setting and solving spelling problems based on their awareness of certain phonological properties.

Preschool children's acquisition of phonological relations contributes to their overall linguistic development. R.I. Avanesov claims that “phonology is not only a field of linguistics, but also a way of linguistic thinking, an element of a linguistic worldview.” Whatever the child studies in the future - spelling, grammar, vocabulary, stylistics - he is always helped by phonological training and, as R.I. Avanesov put it, phonological thinking.

In general, the process of learning to read and write, being associated with the acquisition of the basics of the orthographic structure and, consequently, phonology, to an even greater extent performs the function of “methodological propaedeutics” in teaching children various sections of their native language.

1. Avanesov R.I. Phonetics of the modern Russian literary language. - M., 1956.

2. Avanesov R.I. Russian literary and dialect phonetics. - M., 1974.

3. Galperin P. Ya., Zaporozhets A. V., Elkonin D. B. Problems of developing knowledge and skills in schoolchildren and new methods of teaching at school. - Questions of psychology, 1963, No. 5.

4. Zhedek P.S. Mastering the phonemic principle of writing and the formation of orthographic action / Abstract. Ph.D. dis. - M., 1975.

5. Zhurova L. E. Teaching literacy in kindergarten. - M., 1974.

6. Kuznetsov P. S. On the basic principles of phonology. - Questions of linguistics, 1959, No. 2.

7. Leontyev A. A. Language, speech, speech activity. - M., 1969.

8. Luria A. R. Traumatic aphasia. - M., 1947.

9. Orfinskaya V.K. On the education of phonological concepts in primary school age. - Scientific notes of Leningrad State Pedagogical Institute named after. Herzen, vol. 53. - L., 1946.

10. Panov M. V. On improving Russian spelling. - Questions of linguistics, 1963, No. 2.

11. Panov M. V. Russian phonetics. - M., 1967.

12. Saussure F. General linguistics course. - M., 1933.

13. Sokhin F. A. On the Problem of Speech and Linguistic Development of the Child / Materials of the IV All-Union Congress of the Society of Psychologists. - Tbilisi, 1971.

14. Elkonin D. B. How to teach children to read. - M., 1976.

The term “linguistic consciousness” is made up of such words and touches on such concepts that relate to different, although converging areas: psychology and linguistics. The convergence of relevant concepts should be considered as a very progressive trend. This statement follows from the fact that we constantly observe the close connection of the corresponding phenomena in reality. In fact, language and its speech manifestation are used by people to express meaning, reflect the state of consciousness, and manifest the psychological content of a person’s inner world. Undoubtedly, this is the essence and meaning of language and speech.

Let's try to take a closer look at the content of the concept that interests us. Consciousness is a long-standing and in some sense central object of psychological study. Already in the 19th century, major ideas were proposed in this area - such as the theory of apperception by W. Wundt, the intentional act of F. Brentano, the stream of consciousness of W. James, and reflection by E. Titchener. Consciousness is interpreted by these authors, first of all, as the representation, the manifestation of certain contents to the subject.

In Russian psychology, significant developments on the topic of consciousness are contained in the works of S.L. Rubinstein and A.N. Leontyev.

According to S.L. Rubinstein, consciousness is a mental activity consisting of reflection of the world and oneself. The “unit” of conscious action is the integral act of reflection of an object by the subject, including the unity of two opposing components: knowledge and attitude.

According to A.N. Leontiev, “consciousness in its immediacy is the picture of the world that is revealed to the subject, in which he himself, his actions and states are included.” The function of consciousness is to enable the subject to act on the basis of the emerging subjective image. In characterizing the phenomenon of consciousness A.N. Leontiev emphasizes its systematic nature and describes its psychological structure, including meanings, personal meaning and sensory fabric. Moreover, the latter gives reality to the conscious picture of the world.

We find interesting characteristics of the phenomenon of consciousness in Teilhard de Chardin. Considering the “rise of consciousness” as a step in the general course of the evolution of the earth, the living, man, this author endows consciousness with such qualities as the ability to think, create, perform mental operations of abstraction, generalization and, most importantly, to carry out reflection. According to Teilhard, these mental qualities underlie the emergence of the so-called noosphere, which contains the fruits of human management on earth, the creation of industry and agriculture. Let us pay special attention to the fact that, analyzing the stage of the emergence of consciousness, Teilhard considers the material prerequisites for this: a sharp increase in the size of the brain, upright posture, which freed up the arms, and reduced the lower jaw, which made it possible to use it not only for chewing, but also for articulation sounds, etc.

Modern cognitive psychology has introduced a lot of new things into the problem of consciousness, which has imbued this concept with the idea of ​​representative structures, features of the organization of mnemonic processes, processing and storage of information.

So, the highest forms of mental functioning are associated with consciousness: the ability to think, rationality, creativity, reflection, the ability to understand the hidden properties of the world, to develop abstract abstract and generalized ideas, to form moral concepts, to bear responsibility for one’s actions, the ability to carry out large-scale actions involving significant natural and human resources.

From the perspective of these definitions, let us turn again to the term “linguistic consciousness”. Several uses of the term can be identified. One of its main meanings should be seen in the fact that it addresses the area where consciousness expresses itself externally verbally, and also receives linguistic influences. Let us pause at this point for the necessary terminological clarification. Language as such is a hidden essence, therefore outward expression is possible through the manifested word, verbally, i.e. through speech. Thus, the term “language”, “linguistic” should be used in our case in its broad meaning - as a verbal means of expression, i.e. is equivalent to the term “speech”, “speech”. By the way, the expression “speech consciousness” is found quite often in modern psycholinguistic literature.

The fact of the existence of this type of linguistic consciousness is obvious in life. We know that, in principle, any state of our consciousness with one degree or another of perfection is subject to verbal expression. This is undoubtedly evidenced by both our everyday speech and, to an even greater extent, the works of writers, poets, writers, scientists, and philosophers. The work of word professionals to a large extent consists precisely in expressing their understanding, thought, feeling in words, i.e. state of consciousness. Another thing is also true: the consciousness of people is constantly and at every step exposed to verbal influences. This happens in everyday life, in the educational and educational process, in scientific forums, in political discussions and debates.

The noted vast areas of functioning of linguistic consciousness could be characterized as a dynamic form of its manifestation. They receive a lot of attention in the field of psycholinguistic problems. In fact, psycholinguistics has focused on them since its inception. In addition to the dynamic forms of manifestation of linguistic consciousness, we can identify another area of ​​much less obvious, but no less interesting, manifestations of it. When, from the combined action of language, speech and consciousness, a kind of new structural formations are born in the psyche of the subject. These are language thesaurus, verbal networks, semantic fields. I would like to dwell on this phenomenon, most often studied by the method of verbal associations.

Among many linguistic and psycholinguistic studies of verbal associations is the approach implemented by Yu.N. Karaulov, Yu.S. Sorokin, E.F. Tarasov, N.V. Ufimtseva, G.A. Cherkasova and others. The authors conducted an extensive study of the associative-verbal network, which identified direct and reverse connections covering more than a million word usages. The received data is considered as a material substrate of the subject's linguistic ability. According to the authors, this is a language thesaurus of a native speaker, representing his linguistic consciousness. It contains a core that includes a finite number of “knowledge-recipes.” It is believed that the core of linguistic consciousness is a linguistic projection of a person’s existence, which persists throughout his life, orienting him in the surrounding reality and forming the basis of his linguistic picture of the world.

It can be seen that this approach thus reveals an orientation toward assessing the global structure of human linguistic consciousness, identifying its “macro levels,” and characterizing high levels of its organization. We must agree with the authors that obtaining such characteristics is hardly possible when using the subject’s discourse material. Reliance on the study of the associative-verbal network is probably the most adequate way to solve the problems set by the authors. Assessing the “large blocks” of the structure of linguistic consciousness also creates a unique opportunity for making convincing cross-cultural and cross-historical comparisons.

At the same time, the considered direction of research into linguistic consciousness leaves open the question of why the manifestation of human consciousness should be seen in the lexicon, in the associative thesaurus. Yes, the use of words in psychology is often considered a conscious process. For example, I.P. Pavlov believed that “the transition of the process to the second signaling system”, i.e. verbalization, this is awareness. It is known from psychological research, however, that many elements in operating with verbal material are not realized. There is no reason to believe that this question, like many aspects of the topic of consciousness, is sufficiently clarified. Nevertheless, it is necessary to achieve possible clarity in how consciousness is “anchored” in the word, how some subjective mental element is associated with an element of a different nature - a word spoken, sounded, written down, etc. This question is so fundamental that A.A. Potebnya spoke about him in the spirit that the relationship between speech and thought (and in fact, consciousness, psyche) actually exhausts all linguistics. This is a very serious remark.

For clarity, it is necessary to note that the term “linguistic consciousness” combines two different entities: consciousness - a mental phenomenon of an immaterial nature (it cannot be measured by spatial characteristics, it is non-spatial, cannot be heard or looked at) - and the material phenomenon of spoken or recorded speech, as well as the physiological process of forming verbal language connections. Speech can be recorded using physical devices, heard, recorded a myogram of articulatory muscles, registered an EEG specific to the spoken speech, the progress of the formation and decay of interword (linguistic) communication can be objectively recorded, etc. Speech is a material process that carries information.

In connection with the above, let us pose two questions: 1) Can we consider that consciousness finds its expression in words through the direct interaction of the mental and physiological? 2) Is there a scientific understanding of how the mental non-material process and the process of material nature interact?

In connection with the first question, it can be stated that science has not currently introduced into the circle of established facts the possibility of a direct influence of the mental on the material and vice versa. There is an unusually large current interest in various kinds of parapsychological phenomena. These phenomena would seem to demonstrate extraordinary cases of mutual influence and interaction of mental and physiological phenomena. However, such cases have not yet received a scientific explanation. It is also clear that human speech is by no means included in the circle of parapsychological phenomena; its nature is completely different. The ability to verbally communicate in a particular language is developed and lost naturally; it reproduces all the features of a normally determined psychophysiological process. From the above it follows that in the scientific study of linguistic consciousness it is not enough to refer to the fact that consciousness is “reflected” or “found its expression” in the speech-language product. The “reflection” of consciousness in speech is, on the one hand, an everyday fact of our life, on the other hand, it is a huge scientific problem that requires a lot of effort to resolve.

Let us now turn to the second question about the scientific understanding of how a mental immaterial process turns into a process of material nature (that is, the state of consciousness turns into speech, language), and in the opposite direction: how a materially expressed influence (say, sounding speech) affects thought, consciousness of the listener. Today only the most general answer can be given to this question. You can only outline the direction in which you need to move to get an answer to the question posed. There is no doubt that nature has done special work so that this process of interaction between mental and material, physiological, can take place. This work took place in phylogeny, when there was a grandiose evolution of the ascent of relatively simple animal forms to homo sapiens and speech. Similar work takes place in the ontogenesis of each human individual, when the organism of a newborn, implementing a genetic program and subject to environmental influences, reaches the state when the individual begins to use a common language and express his psychological states through words, i.e. when his linguistic consciousness is formed. In order for our knowledge to reach a state where we can give a specific and fairly fully determined answer to the question posed, it is necessary for science to identify all the main points of this natural work, to understand what physiological structures are created by nature to perform the function in question, what processes proceed in them, how these structures and processes develop, what breakdowns occur in them, how they react to influences, in particular educational ones, and much more. etc.

Today, when considering the problem of linguistic consciousness, it is useful to highlight two lines of research that bring us closer to understanding the deep nature of the connection between language and consciousness. One of these lines is psychophysiological data on interword temporal connections. The fact is that verbal associations, the data of which serve as material for judging linguistic consciousness, are a reflection of interverbal connections developed by respondents throughout their lives and form the material of the so-called “verbal networks” in their nervous system.

The nature of these connections began to be studied in our country by physiologists already in the 20s. Student of I.P. Pavlov N.I. Krasnogorsky conducted, together with his employee V.K. Fedorov conducted experiments on children and, using objective methods, discovered the existence of interword temporary connections and described the conditions for their development. This topic was picked up in America by G. Razran, B. Rees, Lacey and others. In the 50s, interesting work was carried out by O.S. Vinogradov using plethysmographic techniques and together with A.R. Luria published an article based on her experiments. Somewhat later, experimental work with a new version of the technique, revealing the peculiarities of the functioning of interword connections, was carried out by Ushakova.

Taken together, the research data confirmed the existence of interword temporal connections and showed the importance of life conditions and a person’s mental experience in the formation of verbal associations. This means that mental (psychological!) experience leads to structural changes in the system of physiological temporary connections, verbal networks. In the works of the cycle outlined here, it was thus possible to touch exceptionally closely on the moment of interaction between mental and physiological elements, using a completely scientific, deterministic approach. Here the path to “anchoring” consciousness in linguistic structures is revealed. It is discovered that a verbal-associative experiment in psychological manifestation reveals the existence of physiologically established temporary connections. An associative experiment records the existence of an established system as some final result of psychophysiological activity, however, within the framework of verbal-associative studies, the question of the formation of this system and the mechanisms of its formation are not addressed. At the same time, the strength of the verbal-associative approach is that it allows one to characterize the structure of the system as a whole, reveals the national specificity of its organization, and reveals the mental history of a given population. Thus, it is revealed that combining the data obtained in a linguistic experiment with a psychophysiological study of interword temporal connections allows us to come much closer to solving the question of the nature of linguistic consciousness. And this is an extremely interesting and unconventional approach to studying the relationship between consciousness and language.

Another line of approach to the topic under consideration turns to speech ontogenesis, where the early stage of speech development and the so-called pre-speech period turn out to be especially informative.

The field of early ontogenesis of speech ability now attracts many specialists in our country and abroad. In some countries, joint teams of researchers work, obtaining materials from large samples of children. Efforts are aimed at determining age-related and individual norms for the formation of different aspects of a child’s speech ability; data on children's acquisition of languages ​​of various types are examined, and the forms of existing deviations are identified. The study of early speech ontogenesis revealed many variations in its course.

The surprising aspect of many excellent works is that they are usually satisfied with simply stating the facts they obtain. Of course, there are also explanatory theories. But even in the best of them, for example, in Piaget, the question of the infant’s linguistic consciousness is not directly raised. Piaget proposed a remarkable idea about the so-called symbolic function. This idea undoubtedly reveals an appeal to the psychological side of speech development. However, this function, according to Piaget, appears as if on its own, out of nothing; its origin is not traced by the author. This feature shows that the development of children's speech, despite all the elaboration of this topic, turns out to be considered rather one-sidedly, only from the side of its external manifestations.

Longitudinal observation of infants up to one year of age was carried out, starting, if possible, from the earliest moment of their birth. The peculiarity of our approach is that the development of linguistic ability and linguistic consciousness is considered in the context of the functioning of a range of other functions: vocal manifestations, communication with others, motor development. Such a comprehensive consideration helps to see hidden developmental features behind external manifestations.

As a result of the study, a very consistent and beautiful picture of the natural, apparently naturally programmed, development of the function that gives rise to linguistic consciousness in its development was revealed. This process follows the general laws of evolution: first, rough, simple vocal manifestations are introduced; As the child develops and grows, they become enriched, diversified, then refined and differentiated. And only on this developed, prepared soil, enriched and differentiated structure, do the first shoots of sound language appear. When does the psychic element, consciousness, appear in the baby’s vocalizations? My answer may sound disappointing: its simple embryo is found in a newborn from the very beginning of birth.

The psychic element is found in the first cry of a newborn. The screaming and crying of a baby is a physiological reaction of an indicative and defensive nature. At the same time, it is an expression of the subjective state of the baby. A child cries when he is hungry, cold, in pain, i.e. he experiences negative subjective states. In the vocal manifestation of a newborn there are always two elements: physiological (activity of the corresponding organs) and mental (psychological states). The child has few positive emotions in the first weeks of life. At the moment of screaming, a negative mental state massively and inertly takes over his nervous system.

Quite soon, normally after 2-3 weeks, the baby begins to show vocalizations of a positive sign. These are short sound responses to the voices of others (hooting). Then - the roaring, a widely known phenomenon. From the physiological point of view, humming is a body-wide circular reaction described by Piaget. These kinds of reactions are found at this time in other areas of child functioning: movement of limbs, communication. In all cases, this happens because the baby’s body has matured to the ability to turn on and use the mechanism of repetition, exercise, and thereby adaptation. From the psychological point of view, humming is a reflection of a positive mental state, differentiated from the state of a negative sign. The time of babbling already reflects the action of mature forms of circular reactions. Close in time to these reactions, voluntary control appears, which is explained by physiologists as the development, in addition to direct ones, also of a mechanism of feedback conditioned connections. Voluntary control of vocalizations is a new form of linguistic consciousness for the infant. One of its curious manifestations is long-lasting, variously emotionally colored vocalizations, which we call “baby singing.” These processes together form the framework on which the baby's first words appear.

The described events in the development of the infant show that the child comes to his first words with a certain level of linguistic consciousness, which at the critical moment under consideration remains quite diffuse. This is the reason for the unique semantics of children's first words, noted by all specialists. It is blurry, diffuse. Experts often equate children's first words with an entire sentence.

The entire course of the process demonstrates the existence of a certain driving force that causes both the first vocalizations of the infant and subsequent speech activity, including adulthood. We see this motivating principle in the fact that the excitation that has entered the nervous system, according to the general laws of brain function, causes a response in the form of activation of motor organs, in our case, activation of vocal activity. In an infant, this is a primitive form of intention, the intention for a specific vocalization of a positive or negative sign. Developing with age, this intentional impulse retains and develops its meaning. In an adult, it becomes the core of the speech process and constitutes a rich characteristic of the psychological content of speech.

Let's summarize. The term “linguistic consciousness” emphasizes the most important aspect of a person’s psychological functioning, emphasizing the importance of internal psychological states, the consciousness of the subject, when using language and speech. The term emphasizes the unification, fusion of the main components of speech activity: psychological and linguistic elements.

The concept (term) “linguistic consciousness” has a wide reference field, including its two main varieties: dynamic - expression of the state of consciousness in verbal form, influencing consciousness through speech - as well as structural, formed by linguistic structures formed as a result of the mental experience of the subject , the actions of his consciousness. With all the breadth of this reference field, the concept of linguistic consciousness has its own specificity, emphasizing the moment of closure, the totality of the phenomenon of consciousness, thought, the inner world of a person with linguistic and speech manifestations external to it. This important point highlights the main essence of language/speech - to be an exponent of the speaker’s mental state.

Despite all the significance of the concept of “linguistic consciousness,” it is fraught with danger for scientific thought: given the enormity of the problem of the connection between the psyche and matter, there is a temptation to present the transition from one to the other as simple and immediate. However, this transition is possible only as a result of the enormous work of nature, and without understanding it we cannot claim a scientific explanation of the relationship between the mental and the material. This implies the importance of the genetic aspect of the connection between consciousness and language and speech.

Developing the concept of linguistic consciousness in a specific research plan opens up the opportunity to enrich our knowledge not only in relation to the phenomena of speech and language, but also in relation to the phenomenon of the psyche - consciousness.