The inquiry about Truth is one of the indispensable inquiries closely associated with the use of linguistic communication. The procedure of communicating considers earnestness between the middlemans. and that logically excludes non merely apparent prevarication. but besides propositional. Thereby the perusal of Lie ( in general ) is a direct topic of lingual probe. particularly in state of affairss. when Lie starts to be cultivated as an art. The societal sphere extension of such constructs as Truth and Lie presents serious obstructions in the way to accomplishment of common apprehension and cooperation between people.

No admiration that these phenomena attract attending of philosophers. sociologists. political analysts. specializers in selling. communicating theory etc. With the concentration of lingual attending on the probe of human factor in linguistic communication ( Aratjunova N. D. . Kubrjakova O. S. . Gibbs R. . Lakoff G. . etc. ) prevarication and misrepresentation occupy their topographic point among objects of lingual survey ( Bolinger D. . Vaynrych H. ) . Harmonizing to Bolinger. the truth is reliable on built-on common cognition or “common sense” of the talker and listener ; therefore it is no longer a lingual inquiry. but surely a matter-of-fact.

The linguist explains that it is the context. and non abstract sentences. that is of import in an appropriate description of facts. More than that. it is necessary to advert that in Bolinger’s reading of the construct “context” it implies speaker’s purpose to portion his sentiments and cognition ( 543 ) . On the premise of mentioned speculation. it stands to ground to handle truth and prevarication as constructs of cognitive linguistics.

From the academic point of position. we can stipulate the undermentioned characteristics of the construct: abstraction. sameness in understanding by representatives of the same cultural environment. who have the indistinguishable outlook. The construct is a merchandise of corporate witting that has cultural value for native talkers ; it gives an chance to pattern a pictured world. Therefore. we perceive the linguistic communication non merely as a tool of communicating and knowledge. but besides as a phenomenon that represents the mental-cultural codification of the whole state. interprets ocular environment. and creates a peculiar world. where human

lives. This world. created by linguistic communication. has a considerable impact on the manner how we react and percept everything that surrounds us. The perceptual experience is a particular. drawling in clip procedure. regulated by specific regulations and criterions. Its initial stage is the phenomenon realisation of a different nature. the regulations of which can be both to the full consciously realized. explicit. and unconscious. implicit. incorporated in a system of variety meats of sense perceptual experience ( Workachev 27 ) .

In English linguistic communication the construct “Truth” is represented by merely one word – Truth. The word Verity. which can be besides considered within the research of a given construct. has no apparent fanciful difference from the word Truth. and it usage frequence is so undistinguished that it permits to go forth it out of history. In conformity with N. Zemskova. even in interlingual renditions of the Old and New Testaments linguists chiefly prefer to utilize the word Truth ( 238 units ) . Cases of utilizing the word Verity are instead lone ( 2 units ) ( Çåìñêîâà 12 ) .

We distinguish general significances matching to the construct “Truth” : 1 ) conformance to fact or actuality ; 2 ) earnestness. unity ; 3 ) fidelity to an original or standard ; 4 ) world. actuality. The construct “Lie” we consider as resistance to the construct “Truth” . every bit shortly as it besides actualizes in the same Fieldss of cognition. However. it is necessary to indicate out that there is the sentiment that linguists should handle lying non as a matter-of-fact inquiry. every bit shortly as it is a “defective assumption” ( Searle. and John 321 ) . that lacks an inducement and. therefore. looses significance of information.

To the contrary. Austin claims that the procedure of lying is non null. but hypocritical ; hence. we should see it as an emphasized address act. in which both talker and listener wholly take part ( 11 ) . Harmonizing to assignment of semantic derivation of the chief significances of the lexeme Lie. we can specify informational and behavioural dimensions in the conceptual class Lie ( Ìîðîçîâà 22 ) .

We construction the informational dimension of the conceptual class Lie in understanding with the profaned posit of communication-the posit of measure. quality. relevancy. or mode ( Ìîðîçîâà Å . 16 ) . In conformity with the rules mentioned above. linguists differentiate a subgroup of quality and measure deformation of information. lie. and ambiguity. To the first subgroup. the quality deformation of information. linguists attribute linguistic communication units used for verbalising such constructs as “Guessing” . “Concealment” . or “Falsification” ( Ìîðîçîâà 22 ) . It

is possible to talk about agencies of verbalising the constructs “Overstatement” and “Underestimation” depending on the happening of semes “Overstatement” or “Underestimation” in semantic construction of linguistic communication units. which characterize the deformation of information harmonizing to its measure parametric quantities. We should acknowledge the linguistic communication units of two subcategories are so closely related that it can be hard to specify a periphery between some constructs of these groups. Bella’s slander about drink baffled him. but at the same clip it strangely took root. until he did so get down drinking a good trade ( Davies ) .

The seme slander ( slur. calumny. belittlement ) . that means “a false and malicious statement or study about someone” ( Collins ) . is an illustration of a such linguistic communication unit. while it at the same time combines a significance of quality ( manufacturing the man’s cumshaw ) and measure ( overstating the information about how much a adult male drinks ) deformation of information. Language units verbalising the construct “Prevarication” of given information and the construct “Nonsense” have the same or about the same significance ( Ëåíåö 90 ) .

This includes the word trifle that can intend “nonsense ; absurdnesss ; pretentious or fallacious talk” ( Collins ) : “… and let’s halt speaking about our friend the honest interrogator and learned tongue-cutter Reverend Sigurdur ; alternatively state us some trifle about the kingdom of the universe ” -it was Snaefridur who spoke. casually and insuppressably. her eyes radiant. a wholly different adult female than the one to whom they had raised their spectacless last eventide in the Grand Salon ( Davies ) . The used in this work stuffs show that English discourse largely has the typical features of maximal believable implicational.

Its chief characteristics are verbal manner of communicating. self-interested purpose of addresser. instead harmful effects for the addressee and direct contact between addresser and addressee. For case. You’re seeking to draw a fast 1. aren’t you? You’ve been frolicing someplace! ” “We haven’t! It was the train. truly it was! ” “All right so. your train was delayed. So what do you anticipate me to make about it? Lay on a destroyer and bodyguard? ( Davies ) . The look to be seeking to draw a fast one means to overreach or outwit person by a clever and timely manoeuvre ( Dictionary. com Unabridged ) .

Whereas such characteristics as experiential. ontological and epistemological. that are typical for the state of affairs of prevarication and signifier intense implicational of the construct Lie. are seldom met in English discourse. For illustration: The following clip that President went to war in Iraq in 1991. coverage of returning coffins was banned. The younger President Bush was accused of utilizing the prohibition to cover up the true cost of his ain war in Iraq ( Davies ) . The phrase to cover up has a significance to hide something. particularly a offense ( Dictionary of American Slang and Colloquial Expressions. ) .

Seme screen up is an intense implicational of the construct Lie ( the presence of Addresser – the President Bush Junior. the presence of theoretical Addressee –the national of the USA ; the cognition of being province –the existent costs of the war in Iraq ) . While look intoing the ways of nominalization the construct Lie in English discourse. we noticed that the characteristics of weak implicational have diffused external boundary lines of the construct Lie. in such manner neutralizing it. This includes: I should be on telecasting? Cut out the banana oil! ( Davies ) .

We use the look Cut out the banana oil! largely in Slang and has a significance Insincere flattery ; absurd hyperbole ( Collins ) . Compare this phrase with the parlance a snake oil ( Slang delusory talk or actions ; stuff ; buncombe ) ( The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language ) . The conducted cognitive onomasiological analysis gave us an chance to do a decision that from the point of informal dimension in English discourse. harmonizing to the posits of communicating. the quality of information is the most deformed.

The deformation of informal quality leads to mixture. privacy. and information fiction. while the deformation of informational quality causes whether overestimate. or underestimate. It should be mentioned that the linguistic communication units which are included into the deformation of informal quality and deformation of informal measure subcategories. are so closely connected that the external boundary lines between some constructs of these groups are diffused.

That can be seen in the undermentioned illustration: And athleticss present a peculiarly good topographic point to kind of survey this. as you merely indicate out. which is that it’s non merely used to condemn your oppositions but abuses are frequently used among your ain squad ( Davies ) . To condemn. “publicly denounce ( Collins ) ” . has the intensified deformation of informal quality ( concocting false information about the challengers ) and decreasing underestimate of informal quality ( decreasing their virtues ) . The construct Nonsense is near to the linguistic communication units verbalising the construct of Irrelevance of dealing information.

For illustration. one of the significances of the noun a trifle. like in the following sentence. is nonsensical ; absurdnesss ; pretentious or fallacious talk ( Collins ) : … and let’s halt speaking about our friend the honest interrogator and learned tongue-cutter Reverend Sigurdur ; alternatively state us some trifle about the kingdom of the universe ” -it was Snaefridur who spoke. casually and insuppressably. her eyes radiant. a wholly different adult female than the one to whom they had raised their spectacless last eventide in the Grand Salon ( Davies ) .

The agencies of verbalisation of the construct Ambiguity have the homonomous seme and harmonizing to its significance this construct is similar to the construct of Deviation. For illustration. the lexeme a lie means talking falsely or deceptively ; prevarication. and can be illustrated in the 6th sentence ( Collins ) : She might possibly flim-flam off her female parent and twin sister with some narrative. but lie was non something that came easy after all her old ages with the nun ( Davies ) .

From the point of behavioural dimension. the manner of lying can be either verbal or gestural. The consequences of our research show that for the English discourse the most typical is the verbal manner of lying. As we have mentioned above. in English linguistic communication there is merely one word that represents the construct Truth. However. it is necessary to acknowledge that in the categorical construction of the construct Truth. there is no such verb that means to state the truth or truth. While. the “net” of the construct Lie has the core-verb to lie.

However. the linguists claim that is non the lone difference that is between the constructs Truth and Lie. On the one manus. with the measure addition of chief standards. lexemes of the semantic infinite Lie ( intending disagreement ) get a new shadiness of significance: bunk. absurdness. awkwardness. stupidity. psychotic belief. N. Zemskova suggests that such addition becomes a ground of the fact that the participant of communicating does non measure a state of affairs harmonizing to parametric quantities Truth-Lie. Hence. we specify lie. as a grammatical class ( Çåìñêîâà 75 ) .

On the manus. an addition of truth measure. or else veracity. does non alter its content – truth remains truth. The consequences of our research show that the verbal manner of prevarication is the most typical for English discourse. For illustration: That was before you were born. so I don’t expect you’d understand it. And. honest to God. I’d ne’er say this outside the household. but the Blacks have got a whole different state they live in ( Davies ) . The phrase honest to God means something you say in order to stress that you are stating the truth ( Cambridge Idioms Dictionary ) .

In add-on. we have such metaphorical image of Truth as Height. which can be seen in the undermentioned illustration: He says she the lone 1 in the whole high-hat crowd that has ever been on the up-and-up with us ; her information has been dependable ( BNC ) . The parlance on the up and up agencies frank ; honest ; sincere individual ( Dictionary of American Slang and Colloquial Expressions ) . The metaphorical significance Earnestness can be presented with such parlances as the bare truth. unfastened as the twenty-four hours. throw off one’s camouflage.

Pay your attending to the illustration: … some of the gringo adult females are copying me and seeking to dress “a la Mexicana” . but the hapless psyches merely look like chous and to state you the naked truth they look perfectly impossible ( Davies ) . Òhe bare truth is used in English discourse in order to give the significance of the complete. plain truth ( The American Heritage® Dictionary of Idioms ) . From the point of behavioural dimension. discourseme belongs to the verbal manner of communicating.

Rather frequently in English discourse the semantic group Purity has the verbal presentation by agencies of phrases make a clean chest of something. come clean ; which can be seen in the illustration: “Perfectly. ” she replied. and preceded him out of the lift really much aware that. no affair how scruples and love might take a firm stand that she do a clean chest of everything. to squeal was something she merely could non make ( Davies ) . The idiom make a clean chest of something consists of the nominal portion «breast» . intending the topographic point where someone’s feelings are hold. “heart/soul” ( McGraw-Hill Dictionary of American Idioms and Phrasal Verb ) .

To talk about someone’s true feelings has the metaphorical significance to unclutter the psyche of crud. In another context the construct of Truth is represented by agencies of phrase a candid talk: After a candid talk. she had gently ordered him place for the remainder of the hebdomad. and since that clip they had been friends in a reserved kind of manner ( Davies ) . A phrase a candid talk means candid ; blunt conversation and has the verbal manner of communicating. The semantic dimension of prevarication is more abundantly presented in the English discourse than the construct of Truth on the lexical and phraseological degrees.

It is important that both nominal and verbal sememes contain in the semantic construction of the construct Lie. For illustration: I ne’er used to dream-I Tell a prevarication. I did dream when I was small ( Davies ) . I tell a prevarication has a significance in this context I’m mistaken. while the talker does non desire to lead on a hearer. One of the semes of the verb to lie is defined as to convey a false image or feeling ( Collins ) . Pay your attending to the illustration: Unfortunately. by restricting yourself to traping literary tickets on your ain. closely ascertained coevals. the image lies ( Davies ) .

In the given illustration. the seme to lie has about the same significance as to falsify and to corrupt. To sum up. in the class of observation of theoretical issues about the construct as a complex cognitive unit. we came to the decision that concepts “Truth” and “Lie” are important lingua-cognitive constructions for linguistic communication representation. On the whole. the findings could be a footing for drawn-out probe of the verbalisation distinctive features of the construct Lie in English discourse. Works Cited Austin. John. How to make Thingss with Wordss: The William James Lectures delivered at Harvard University in 1955.

Ed. J. O. Urmson. Oxford: Clarendon. 1962. Print. “banana oil. ” Collins English Dictionary – Complete and Unabridged. 1991. 1994. 1998. 2000. 2003. HarperCollins Publishers 21 Dec. 2012 hypertext transfer protocol: //www. thefreedictionary. com/banana+oil Bolinger. Dwight. “Truth is a Linguistic Question” . Language. 49. ( 1973 ) : 539-550. Print. “cover-up. ” Dictionary of American Slang and Colloquial Expressions. 21 Dec. 2012. . Davies. Mark. ( 2004- ) BYU-BNC. ( Based on the British National Corpus from Oxford University Press ) . Available online at hypertext transfer protocol: //corpus. byu. edu/bnc/ .

— ( 2008- ) The Corpus of Contemporary American English: 450 million words. 1990-present. Available online at hypertext transfer protocol: //corpus. byu. edu/coca/ . “decry. ” Collins English Dictionary – Complete and Unabridged. 1991. 1994. 1998. 2000. 2003. HarperCollins Publishers 21 Dec. 2012 hypertext transfer protocol: //www. thefreedictionary. com/decry “honest to God. Cambridge Idioms Dictionary. 2nd erectile dysfunction. . 2006. Cambridge University Press 21 Dec. 2012 hypertext transfer protocol: //idioms. thefreedictionary. com/Honest+to+God “lie” . Collins English Dictionary – Complete and Unabridged. 1991. 1994. 1998. 2000. 2003. HarperCollins Publishers 21 Dec.

2012 hypertext transfer protocol: //www. thefreedictionary. com/lie “make a clean chest of. ” McGraw-Hill Dictionary of American Idioms and Phrasal Verbs. 2002. The McGraw-Hill Companies. Inc. 21 Dec. 2012 hypertext transfer protocol: //idioms. thefreedictionary. com/make+a+clean+breast+of “naked truth. ” The American Heritage® Dictionary of Idioms by Christine Ammer. Houghton Mifflin Company. 21 Dec. 2012. . “on the up-and-up. ” Dictionary of American Slang and Colloquial Expressions. 21 Dec. 2012. . “prevarication. ” Collins Thesaurus of the English Language – Complete and Unabridged 2nd Edition. 1995. 2002. HarperCollins Publishers 21 Dec.

2012 hypertext transfer protocol: //www. thefreedictionary. com/prevarication “pull a fast 1. ” Dictionary. com Unabridged. Random House. Inc. 21 Dec. 2012. . “slander. ” Collins English Dictionary – Complete and Unabridged. 1991. 1994. 1998. 2000. 2003. HarperCollins Publishers 21 Dec. 2012 hypertext transfer protocol: //www. thefreedictionary. com/slander Searle. Gf. . and R. John. “The Logical Status of Fictional Discourse. ” New Literary Criticism. 6. ( 1975 ) : 319-332. Print. “snake oil. ” The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language. Fourth Edition. 2003. Houghton Mifflin Company 21 Dec. 2012 hypertext transfer protocol: //www. thefreedictionary.

com/snake+oil “trifle. ” Collins English Dictionary – Complete and Unabridged. 1991. 1994. 1998. 2000. 2003. HarperCollins Publishers 21 Dec. 2012 hypertext transfer protocol: //www. thefreedictionary. com/trifle Âîðêà÷åâ . Ñ . “Ìåòîäîëîãè÷åñêèå îñíîâàíèÿ ëèíãâîêîíöåïòîëîãèè . ” Òåîðåòè÷åñêàÿ è ïðèêëàäíàÿ ëèíãâèñòèêà 3: Àñïåêòû ìåòàêîììóíèêàòèâíîé äåÿòåëüíîñòè . Âîðîíåæ ( 2002 ) : 79-95. Ïðîáëåìû ëèíãâîêîíöåïòîëîãèè . Web. 20 Dec 2012. . Çåìñêîâà Í . “ßçûêîâàÿ ëè÷íîñòü è êîíöåïò «Ëîæü» : ïðîáëåìà èíòåðïðåòàöèè” Ñîöèàëüíûå âàðèàíòû ÿçsêà – III: Ìàòåð . Ìåæäóíàð . íàó÷ . êîíô . Í. Íîâãîðîä : ÍÃËÓ èì . Í. À. Äîáðîëþáîâà ( 2004 ) : 370-372.

Print. Ëåíåö . À . “Îòå÷åñòâåííûå è çàðóáåæíûå òåîðèè ëæè è ðå÷åâîãî îáìàíà . ” Âåñòíèê ×åëÿáèíñêîãî ãîñóäàðñòâåííîãî óíèâåðñèòåòà . Ôèëîëîãèÿ . Èñêóññòâîâåäåíèå . . 26 ( 127 ) . ×åëÿáèíñê : ÃÎÓ ÂÏÎ ×åëÃÓ ( 2008 ) : 79-87. Print. Ìîðîçîâà . Å . “Èìÿ ñóùåñòâèòåëüíîå prevarication êàê êîãíèòèâíî-äèñêóðñèâíîå îáðàçîâàíèå . ” ³ñíèê Õàðê³âñüêîãî íàö³îíàëüíîãî óí³âåðñèòåòó . Ñåð³ÿ Ðîìàíî-ãåðìàíñüêà ô³ëîëîã³ÿ . 500. ( 2000 ) : 18-26. Print. — “Êîíöåïò è êîíöåïòóàëüíàÿ êàòåãîðèÿ : ê ïðîáëåìå ðàçãðàíè÷åíèÿ ïîíÿòèé . ” ³ñíèê Õàðê³âñüêîãî íàö³îíàëüíîãî óí³âåðñèòåòó . Ñåð³ÿ Ðîìàíî-ãåðìàíñüêà ô³ëîëîã³ÿ . 636. ( 2004 ) : 115-119. Print.