This paper proposes a methodology of idiolect/idiostyle research based on identifying quantitative and qualitative markers of individual authorial conceptualization. We present statistical and metaphorical profiles of the concept of СМУТОК (SADNESS) [SMUTOK] in Ukrainian, in general, in the corpus of fiction texts, and also in the idiolects of individual writers. The functioning of the verbalizers of the concept in the writers' texts is analyzed by means of statistical data grouping, dividing the population into homogeneous groups based on a certain feature. Furthermore, we address the specificity of the metaphorization of the studied concept and focus on the metaphorical attributes of the concept's verbalizers. The data for this research were collected from GRAC-15.
With the rapid development of corpus linguistics, stylometric studies, in particular, of the idiolect,
have intensified [
This paper presents a comprehensive study of qualitative and quantitative markers of individual authorial conceptualization. In view of the significance of metaphor in a broad sense, an attempt has been made to analyze the statistical (quantitative and qualitative parameters of single-component verbalizers of the concept) and metaphorical (quantitative and qualitative parameters of multicomponent compounds) profiles of the concept of СМУТОК (SADNESS) [SMUTOK] in Ukrainian both on the basis of texts of the literary style and in the idiolects of individual writers.
In order to conduct the research, we created a number of subcorpora in GRAC-15, including subcorpora of fiction, as well as subcorpora of texts by a number of writers (Y. Andrukhovych, Y. Vynnychuk, I. Vilde, O. Zabuzhko, I. Karpa, A. Kokotiukha, V. Lys, M. Matios, H. Pahutyak, I. Rozdobudko, A. Chekh, V. Shklyar).
In stylometric studies, the concept of idiolect is traditionally understood as the language of the
individual which is peculiar only to a particular speaker at a certain point in his or her development
under the influence of society and experience. M. Grądziel notes that this implies that it is impossible
to find two people who speak the same language, which led to the development of an extreme
manifestation of the idiolect theory called a linguistic fingerprint, which due to its uniqueness compares
the linguistic trace to fingerprints [
M. Eder notes that when analyzing a writer's idiolect, it is worth remembering that writers always
evolve from a literary tradition, inspire each other, and enter into intertextual relations with their
predecessors, i.e., the existence of an individual style in its purest form is more of a theoretical dream
than a measurable fact [
An important remark is made by M. Eder: the paradox of authorial attribution by stylometric
standards is that such an analysis completely ignores the most important stylistic features of literary
texts: tropes, figures, stylization, archaization, irony, etc. [
By conceptualization we mean the peculiarities of concept verbalization, which consists in the use of both single-component units and multicomponent compounds, the latter, in turn, indicating to which category, in particular within the individual author's worldview, the phenomenon in question belongs. The research focuses on the analysis of the statistical and metaphorical profiles of the concept of СМУТОК (SADNESS) in Ukrainian both on the basis of texts of the literary style and in the idiolects of individual writers. We created a number of subcorpora in GRAC-15, including the subcorpus of Ukrainian fiction (FC) and subcorpora of the following writers: Y. Andrukhovych, Y. Vynnychuk, I. Vilde, O. Zabuzhko, I. Karpa, A. Kokotiukha, V. Lys, M. Matios, H. Pahutyak, I. Rozdobudko, A. Chekh, V. Shklyar.
Quantitative and qualitative parameters of single-component and multicomponent verbalizers of the concept СМУТОК (SADNESS) are determined and interpreted. The relative frequency (RF) of both core and peripheral verbalizers of this conceptual domain in Ukrainian literary texts is analyzed: банність (sadness) [bannist], жалоба (mourning) [zhaloba], жалощі (sorrow) [zhaloshchi], жаль (sorrow/regret/pity) [zhal], жур (sorrow) [zhur], жура (sorrow) [zhura], журбо́ та (sorrow) [zhurbó ta], зажура (sorrow) [zazhura], засмута (upset) [zasmuta], іпохондрія (hypochondria) [ipokhondriia], меланхолія (melancholy) [melankholiia], мінор (sadness) [minor], нуда (boredom) [nuda], нудота (boredom) [nudota], нудьга (boredom) [nudha], осму́ та (sadness) [osmú ta], печаль (sorrow) [pechal], при́ смуток (sadness) [prý smutok], притуга (grief) [prytuha], скорб (grief) [skorb], скорбота (grief) [skorbota], скруха (dejection) [skrukha], смута (dejection) [smuta], смуток (sadness) [smutok], сум (sadness) [sum], сухота (sorrow) [sukhota], туга (anguish) [tuha], тужба (anguish) [tuzhba], туженька (anguish) [tuzhenka], тума (anguish) [tuma], турбота (concern) [turbota], туск (sorrow) [tusk], туска (sorrow) [tuska], ту́ сок (sorrow) [tú sok]. In the round brackets, we provide English equivalents of the verbalizers and, on the pages that follow, mostly literal translation of the contexts in which the analyzed words are used). It should be noted that the words журбо́ та (sorrow) [zhurbó ta], жур (sorrow) [zhur], скорб (grief) [skorb], туска (sorrow) [tuska], ту́ сок (sorrow) [tú sok] were not found in GRAC-15.
In order to analyze the functioning of the verbalizers of the concept in the authors’ texts, we grouped statistical data, divided the population into homogeneous groups based on a certain feature. The number of groups was approximated by Sturges' formula.
The statistical analysis of verbalizers alone does not provide sufficient information concerning the specific features of a textual concept or idioconcept. It is also necessary to consider the specificity of metaphorization of this concept. Traditionally, emotional states are metaphorized using a number of metaphorical models, in particular, the following directions of metaphorization are characteristic of the conceptual domain of СМУТОК (SADNESS) [SMUTOK]: EMOTIONAL STATE IS A LIVING BEING; AN OBJECT (CONTAINER); A LOCUS; A FLUID SUBSTANCE, A LIQUID; AN ELEMENT (FIRE; WAVE), etc. We can consider the conventionality of the model (cognitive level) and the conventionality/creativity of filling in the model with verbal components. Mandatory components are the components necessary for meaning-making, while optional components in some cases ‘boost’ the metaphoricity and pragmatics of expressions. The image of an idio- or textual concept is created by metaphorizations and metaphorical attributes of the concept's verbalizers.
In the fiction subcorpus (FC), we found 29 verbalizers of the studied concept of СМУТОК (SADNESS) [SMUTOK], the largest repertoire of verbalizers of this concept was revealed in the texts of H. Pahutyak (17 verbalizers, listed in descending order of frequency in the author's texts: жаль (sorrow) [zhal], смуток (sadness) [smutok], туга (anguish) [tuha], жалоба (mourning) [zhaloba], [nudha], турбота (concern) [turbota], сум (sadness) [sum], печаль (sorrow) [pechal], скорбота (grief) [skorbota], нудота (boredom) [nudota], розпука (despair) [rozpuka], меланхолія (melancholy) [melankholiia], жалощі (sorrow) [zhaloshchi], нуда (boredom) [nuda], журба (sorrow) [zhurba], жура (sorrow) [zhura], зажура (sorrow) [zazhura], іпохондрія (hypochondria) [ipokhondriia]), I. Vilde (17: жаль (sorrow) [zhal], туга (anguish) [tuha], жалоба (mourning) [zhaloba], смуток (sadness) [smutok], турбота (concern) [turbota], сум (sadness) [sum], журба (sorrow) [zhurba], нудьга (boredom) [nudha], меланхолія (melancholy) [melankholiia], жура (sorrow) [zhura], жалощі (sorrow) [zhaloshchi], нуда (boredom) [nuda], нудота (boredom) [nudota], скорбота (grief) [skorbota], зажура (sorrow) [zazhura], скруха (dejection) [skrukha], туск (sorrow) [tusk]), Y. Andrukhovych (16: жаль (sorrow) [zhal], нудьга (boredom) [nudha], смуток (sadness) [smutok], туга (anguish) [tuha], турбота (concern) [turbota], скорбота (grief) [skorbota], нудота (boredom) [nudota], печаль (sadness), меланхолія (melancholy) [melankholiia], мінор (sadness), сум (sadness) [sum], розпука (despair) [rozpuka], жалоба (mourning) [zhaloba], жалощі (sorrow) [zhaloshchi], іпохондрія (hypochondria) [ipokhondriia], журба (sorrow) [zhurba], скруха (dejection) [skrukha]), V. Shklyar (15: жаль (sorrow) [zhal], печаль (sorrow) [pechal], туга (anguish) [tuha], смуток (sadness) [smutok], нудьга (boredom) [nudha], нудота (boredom) [nudota], сум (sadness) [sum], турбота (concern) [turbota], журба (sorrow) [zhurba], зажура (sadness) [zazhura], смута (dejection) [smuta], скорбота (grief) [skorbota], жалоба (mourning) [zhaloba], меланхолія (melancholy) [melankholiia], нуда (boredom) [nuda], осмута (sadness) [osmuta]); Y. Vynnychuk (14: смуток (sadness) [smutok], туга (anguish) [tuha], жаль (sorrow) [zhal], нудьга (boredom) [nudha], турбота (concern) [turbota], журба (sorrow) [zhurba], печаль (sorrow) [pechal], нудота (boredom) [nudota], меланхолія (melancholy) [melankholiia], сум (sadness), скорбота (grief) [skorbota], нуда (boredom [nuda]), зажура (sorrow) [zazhura], скруха (dejection) [skrukha]); V. Lys (13: жаль (sorrow) [zhal], сум (sadness), турбота (concern) [turbota], печаль (sorrow) [pechal], туга (anguish) [tuha], нудьга (boredom) [nudha], скорбота (grief) [skorbota], нудота (boredom) [nudota], смуток (sadness) [smutok], меланхолія (melancholy) [melankholiia], журба (sorrow) [zhurba], жура (sorrow) [zhura], жалощі (sorrow) [zhaloshchi]; M. Matios (13: жаль (sorrow) [zhal], туга (anguish) [tuha], печаль (sorrow) [pechal], смуток (sadness) [smutok], турбота (concern) [turbota], жалоба (mourning) [zhaloba], сум (sadness) [sum], скорбота (grief) [skorbota], смута (dejection) [smuta], нудота (boredom) [nudota], меланхолія (melancholy) [melankholiia], жура (sorrow) [zhura], журба (sorrow) [zhurba]; I. Rozdobudko (13: нудьга (boredom) [nudha], сум (sadness) [sum], жаль (sorrow) [zhal], туга (anguish) [tuha], нудота (boredom) [nudota], турбота (concern) [turbota], печаль (sorrow) [pechal], смуток (sadness) [smutok], скорбота (grief) [skorbota], журба (sorrow) [zhurba], меланхолія (melancholy) [melankholiia], зажура (sadness) [zazhura], смута (dejection) [smuta]; O. Zabuzhko (14: жаль (sorrow) [zhal], туга (anguish) [tuha], смуток (sadness) [smutok], меланхолія (melancholy) [melankholiia], нудота (boredom) [nudota], жалоба (mourning) [zhaloba], турбота (concern) [turbota], жура (sorrow) [zhura], нудьга (boredom) [nudha], сум (sadness) [sum], журба (sorrow) [zhurba], скорбота (grief) [skorbota], мінор (sadness), нуда (boredom) [nuda]; A. Kokotyukha (12: жаль (sorrow) [zhal], нудьга (boredom) [nudha], турбота (concern) [turbota], смуток(sadness) [smutok], сум (sadness) [sum], печаль (sorrow) [pechal], нудота (boredom) [nudota], скорбота (grief) [skorbota], туга (anguish) [tuha], жалоба (mourning) [zhaloba], жалощі (sorrow) [zhaloshchi], журба (sorrow) [zhurba].
In the texts of the representatives of the younger generation of writers, namely I. Karpa (12: жаль (sorrow) [zhal], нудота (boredom) [nudota], сум (sadness) [sum], смуток (sadness) [smutok], туга (anguish) [tuha], нудьга (boredom) [nudha], турбота (concern) [turbota], скорбота (grief) [skorbota], печаль (sorrow) [pechal], меланхолія (melancholy) [melankholiia], жалощі (sorrow) [zhaloshchi]) and A. Chekh (10: нудьга (boredom) [nudha], нудота (boredom) [nudota], жаль (sorrow) [zhal], туга (anguish) [tuha], смуток (sadness) [smutok], сум (sadness) [sum], скорбота (grief) [skorbota], жалоба (mourning) [zhaloba], меланхолія (melancholy) [melankholiia], нуда (boredom) [nuda]), this concept is represented by a smaller number of verbalizers.
It is interesting that the highest frequency of verbalizers of the studied concept is typical of the texts of M. Matios (RF 0,036598), H. Pahutyak (RF 0,031907), I. Vilde (RF 0,028892), V. Shklyar (RF 0,022659); Y. Vynnychuk (RF 0,021402), and the lowest frequency of verbalizers of this concept is revealed in the texts of I. Rozdobudko (RF 0,017314); O. Zabuzhko (RF 0,016982); V. Lys (RF 0,015919); I. Karpa (RF 0,014569), Y. Andrukhovych (RF 0,012334), A. Chekh (RF 0,00986), A. Kokotyukha (RF 0,008484) (see Table 1).
The words засмута (sadness) [zasmuta] (0,000002), банність (sadness) [bannist] ( (0,000001), тужба (anguish) [tuzhba] (0,000004), тума (sorrow) [tuma] (0,000008), туженька (anguish) [tuzhenka] (0,000001), присмуток (sadness) [prysmutok] (0,000010), притуга (sorrow) [prytuha] (0,000010), сухота (sorrow) [sukhota] (0,000320) are not recorded in the texts of the studied authors; yet, they are used in the fiction subcorpus with the relative frequency given in the brackets.
The statistical data on the functioning of the verbalizer смуток (sadness) [smutok] in the texts of studied authors is given in Table 2. The lexeme смуток (sadness) [smutok] is the most frequent verbalizer of the conceptual domain of СМУТОК (SADNESS) [SMUTOK] in Y. Vynnychuk’s texts.
The weighted mean (sample mean) is 0,00249. The mode is 0,00145. The median is the interval 0,000332 – 0,001932, which means that 50% of the units in the population will be less than 0,00182.
Thus, the most frequently lexeme смуток (sadness) [smutok] is used by Y. Vynnychuk (RF 0,008) and H. Pahutyak (RF 0,006), and the least frequently by V. Lys (RF 0,0003). Y. Vynnychuk assigns a number of attributes to СМУТОК (SADNESS) [SMUTOK], both stabilized and individually authorial. The stabilized attributes include глибокий (deep) [hlybokyi] (RF in Y. Vynnychuk is 0,000579, in FC it is 0,000029 excluding Y. Vynnychuk): Боржника він застав у чорній сорочці і в глибокому смутку (He found the debtor wearing a black shirt and deep sadness) [Borzhnyka vin zastav u chornii sorochtsi i v hlybokomu smutku] (Y. Vynnychuk)); – То що – та стара порхавка уже забула про мене? – з глибоким смутком… (So, has that old flutterer already forgotten about me? – with deep sadness…) [To shcho – ta stara porkhavka uzhe zabula pro mene? – z hlybokym smutkom…] (Y. Vynnychuk); we come across the use of the attribute щирий (sincere) [shchyryi] (RF in Y. Vynnychuk – 0,000058; RF in FC – 0,000003): – А я не казала? – зітхнула мамця і зі щирим смутком стежила, як той накинув петлю на шию, покрутив туди-сюди головою, мовби припасовуючи її до шиї якнайзручніше, і скочив додолу (— Didn’t I tell you? – mother sighed and watched with sincere sadness as he put the noose around his neck, turned his head back and forth, as if fitting it to his neck as comfortably as possible, and jumped down) [– A ya ne kazala? – zitkhnula mamtsia i zi shchyrym smutkom stezhyla, yak toi nakynuv petliu na shyiu, pokrutyv tudy-siudy holovoiu, movby prypasovuiuchy yii do shyi yaknaizruchnishe, i skochyv dodolu] (Y. Vynnychuk). Other attributes are not of high frequency (RF in FC 0,0000018; Y. Vynnychuk, I. Karpa, N. Herbish): …я знічев (я дивився на нього і не міг второпати, чому на його обличчі відбився такий вселенський смуток, ніби його щойно звільнили з китайської тюрми (...I stared at him in a daze and could not understand why his face reflected such a universal sadness, as if he had just been released from a Chinese prison) […ia znichev (ia dyvyvsia na noho i ne mih vtoropaty, chomu na yoho oblychchi vidbyvsia takyi vselenskyi smutok, niby yoho shchoino zvilnyly z kytaiskoi tiurmy] (Y. Vynnychuk); (RF in FC 0,000003, in particular, in Y. Vynnychuk – 0,000058): А за мить і те бриніння щезло, і у вухах знову засвітала тиша, але була вона тривожна й недобра, стискаючи серце пекучим смутком (And in a moment, that ringing disappeared, and silence dawned in my ears again, but it was disturbing and unkind, squeezing my heart with burning sadness) [A za myt i te bryninnia shchezlo, i u vukhakh znovu zasvitala tysha, ale bula vona tryvozhna y nedobra, styskaiuchy sertse pekuchym smutkom] (Y. Vynnychuk).
The attribute високий (high) [vysokyi] can be considered Y. Vynnychuk’s individual-author attribute to смуток (sadness) [smutok] since there are three occurrences in the entire GRAC-15, and two in the FC, which makes the frequency 0,0000012: Вулиці, які без зайвих слів дають раду собі з нашим високим смутком (Streets that without unnecessary words cope with our high sadness) [Vulytsi, yaki bez zaivykh sliv daiut radu sobi z nashym vysokym smutkom] (Y. Vynnychuk). A similar remark applies to the attributes самовдоволений (self-satisfied) [samovdovolenyi] (in GRAC – 2, in Y. Vynnychuk – 0,000058); приречений (doomed) [pryrechenyi] (only RF 0,000058 in Y. Vynnychuk); роз’їдаючий (corrosive) [rozidaiuchyi] (only in Y. Vynnychuk – 0,000058); жахливий (terrible) [zhakhlyvyi] (only RF 0,000058 in Y. Vynnychuk): Та коли вам нарешті вдасться з неї зірвати цей останній символ незалежності, вона враз опадає знесилено і з якимсь самовдоволеним смутком (But when you finally manage to tear this last symbol of independence from her, she immediately falls down exhausted and with a kind of self-satisfied sadness) [Ta koly vam nareshti vdastsia z nei zirvaty tsei ostannii symvol nezalezhnosti, vona vraz opadaie znesyleno i z yakyms samovdovolenym smutkom] (Y. Vynnychuk); Віра віддалася із якимсь приреченим смутком (Vira gave herself up with a kind of doomed sadness) [Vira viddalasia iz yakyms pryrechenym smutkom] (Y. Vynnychuk); Кажуть, що дзвін тоді дзвонив сам, дзвонив на сполох і то з таким роз’їдаючим смутком, що кров’ю серця обпікало (It is said that the bell rang then, rang the alarm with such a corrosive sadness that it burned the hearts with blood) [Kazhut, shcho dzvin todi dzvonyv sam, dzvonyv na spolokh i to z takym rozidaiuchym smutkom, shcho kroviu sertsia obpikalo] (Y. Vynnychuk); Я провів голодними очима її опуклу сідничку, яка до болю нагадувала ту апетитну хмарку над Чортовою скелею, і відчув жахливий смуток… (I ran my hungry eyes over her bulging buttock, which painfully resembled that appetizing cloud above Devil’s Rock, and felt a terrible sadness…) [Ya proviv holodnymy ochyma yii opuklu sidnychku, yaka do boliu nahaduvala tu apetytnu khmarku nad Chortovoiu skeleiu, i vidchuv zhakhlyvyi smutok…] (Y. Vynnychuk)).
The metaphorical models typical of Y. Vynnychuk have been identified. EMOTION IS A HUMAN BEING (BIRD/REPTILE). Незрозумілий смуток загніздився у його очах (An inexplicable sadness nested in his eyes) [Nezrozumilyi smutok zahnizdyvsia u yoho ochakh] (Y. Vynnychuk). The verbalizer загніздитися (nest) [zahnizdytysia] is typical of Y. Vynnychuk (RF 0,000347), among the studied writers only O. Zabuzhko’s texts have a similar verbalization of the conceptual sphere EMOTIONAL STATE, in general, RF in FC is 0,000038: Тут мені вперше загніздилася в серці тривога (Here for the first time anxiety nested in my heart) [Tut meni vpershe zahnizdylasia v sertsi tryvoha] (Y. Vynnychuk); …щез той страх, який загніздився було в душі, щезла примара невідомості, я сам пульсував, світився й перегукувався з зорею (...the fear that had nested in my soul disappeared, the ghost of the unknown disappeared, I myself pulsed, glowed and echoed with the star) […shchez toi strakh, yakyi zahnizdyvsia bulo v dushi, shchezla prymara nevidomosti, ya sam pulsuvav, svityvsia y perehukuvavsia z zoreiu] (Y. Vynnychuk); ...окрім нестримного потягу до уроків, загніздився у ній ще й острах, але він не заважав, він лише лоскотав нерви, збуджував і підбадьорював (...in addition to the unrestrained urge to study, also fear nested in her, but it did not interfere, it only tickled her nerves, excited and encouraged her) [...okrim nestrymnoho potiahu do urokiv, zahnizdyvsia u nii shche y ostrakh, ale vin ne zavazhav, vin lyshe loskotav nervy, zbudzhuvav i pidbadoriuvav] (Y. Vynnychuk); Не хотів собі в цьому признаватися, але Данка останнім часом надійно загніздилася в його свідомості (He did not want to admit it, but Danka had recently nested firm in his mind) (Y.Vynnychuk); …найпевнішим знаком їхньої чужости було те, що в місті загніздився страх, якого ніколи не знано перед тим (...the surest sign of their alienation was that a fear that had never been known before had nested in the city) […naipevnishym znakom yikhnoi chuzhosty bulo te, shcho v misti zahnizdyvsia strakh, yakoho nikoly ne znano pered tym] (O. Zabuzhko). For the most part, categorizing something as a BIRD and metaphorizing it in terms of the concept of BIRD is associated with a positive evaluation, which suggests that the above metaphors are based on the idea of reptiles and insects. For example, we come across the following extended metaphors: Я нікому не вірю, скрізь зрада, в кожного в душі, як у гнилому дуплі, гніздиться гадюка (I don’t believe anyone, betrayal is everywhere, in everyone’s sole, like in a rotten hollow, a viper is nesting) [Ya nikomu ne viriu, skriz zrada, v kozhnoho v dushi, yak u hnylomu dupli, hnizdytsia hadiuka] (R. Fedoriv); В їх душі сіра щоденна жура гуде, мов чмелі, що в землі гніздяться; за тим упертим гудінням куди їм чути гудіння кусливих шершенів, що гніздяться на високих дубах? (In their souls, the gray daily bugs buzz like bumblebees nesting in the ground; behind that stubborn buzz, where can they hear the buzz of biting hornets nesting on tall oaks?) [V yikh dushi sira shchodenna zhura hude, mov chmeli, shcho v zemli hnizdiatsia; za tym upertym hudinniam kudy yim chuty hudinnia kuslyvykh shersheniv, shcho hnizdiatsia na vysokykh dubakh?] (I. Franko).
EMOTION IS AN AGGRESSIVE BEING/AGGRESSIVE LIQUID, like rust, acid. For example: Пан учитель був морально розбитий і знівечений, (…) сльози текли йому по обличчю, і смуток роз’їдав душу... (Mr. teacher was morally broken and disfigured, (…) tears streaming down his face, and sadness ruining his soul like acid..) [Pan uchytel buv moralno rozbytyi i znivechenyi, (…) slozy tekly yomu po oblychchiu, i smutok rozidav dushu...] (Y. Vynnychuk);
SADNESS IS A NATURAL PHENOMENON, like the fog: …смуток разом із сутінками став непомітно обволікати їх зусібіч, занурюючи в задуму і малослів’я... (...sadness, together with twilight, began to imperceptibly cover them from all sides, immersing them in thoughtfulness and few words...) […smutok razom iz sutinkamy stav nepomitno obvolikaty yikh zusibich, zanuriuiuchy v zadumu i maloslivia...] (Y. Vynnychuk); Я запарив зеленого чаю і відчув, як з кожним ковтком у голові сходить сонце, проміння зблискує, розсіваючи тепло і радість, розганяючи смуток (I brewed green tea and felt the sun rising in my head with every sip, the rays sparkling, scattering warmth and joy, dispelling sadness) [Ya zaparyv zelenoho chaiu i vidchuv, yak z kozhnym kovtkom u holovi skhodyt sontse, prominnia zblyskuie, rozsivaiuchy teplo i radist, rozghaniaiuchy smutok] (Y. Vynnychuk).
EMOTION IS A PERSON: Минув час, і на сьомому році чорнокнижника обійняв неспокій і смуток (Time passed, and in the seventh year, restlessness and sadness embraced the sorcerer) [Mynuv chas, i na somomu rotsi chornoknyzhnyka obiiniav nespokii i smutok] (Y. Vynnychuk); ...Надходить смуток у плащі рудому І переслідує уперто й люто, Влива у спогади гірку отруту І не дає розрадити нікому (...Sadness comes in a red cloak and pursues stubbornly and fiercely, Pours bitter poison into memories and does not allow anyone to console) [...Nadkhodyt smutok u plashchi rudomu I peresliduie uperto y liuto, Vlyva u spohady hirku otrutu I ne daie rozradyty nikomu] (Y. Vynnychuk).
SADNESS IS A LIQUID: …розбите серце – неймовірний дар, який дає потужну наснагу, спонукає вилити свої смутки на папір, компенсувати у творчості всі життєві незгоди... (…A broken heart is an incredible gift that gives powerful inspiration, encourages you to pour your sorrows on paper, to compensate for all life (s trouble in your work...) […rozbyte sertse – neimovirnyi dar, yakyi daie potuzhnu nasnahu, sponukaie vylyty svoi smutky na papir, kompensuvaty u tvorchosti vsi zhyttievi nezghody...] (Y. Vynnychuk). In general, metaphors based on the generalized model EMOTIONAL STATE IS A LIQUID are frequent: вилити обурення (to pour out indignation) [vylyty oburennia], зневагу (contempt) [znevahu], лють (rage) [liut], крик душі (cry of the soul) [kryk dushi], душу (soul) [dushu], все (everything) [vse]; виливати мрії (to pour out dreams) [vylyvaty mrii], розпач (despair) [rozpach], жалі (regrets) [zhali] (Y. Vynnychuk).
This is the metaphorization evidenced by the attribute сповнений (full) [spovnenyi] (RF 0,002373) in Y. Vynnychuk’s texts, for example: сповнений апатією (full of apathy) [spovnenyi apatiieiu], безтурботністю (carelessness) [bezturbotnistiu], меланхолією (melancholy) [melankholiieiu], ностальгією (nostalgia) [nostalhiieiu], обуренням (indignation) [oburenniam], радістю (joy) [radistiu], розпачем (despair) [rozpachem], смутком (sadness) [smutkom], etc.
SADNESS IS AN ARTIFACT: В снігах заметено слова прокльонів, Серця загублено в заметах і завіях, І ми тепер у сніговім полоні Бредем в кайданах смутку й безнадії (The words of curses are covered in the snow, Our hearts are lost in snowdrifts and blizzards, And now we are in the snowy captivity, We are wandering in the shackles of sadness and hopelessness) [V snihakh zameteno slova prokloniv, Sertsia zahubleno v zametakh i zaviiakh, I my teper u snihovim poloni Bredem v kaidanakh smutku y beznadii] (Y. Vynnychuk)).
Another verbalizer of the concept of СМУТОК (SADNESS) [SMUTOK] is сум (sadness) [sum] (see Table 3).
The weighted mean (sample mean) is 0,00151. The mode, i.e., the most frequent value of the series is 0,000681. The median is the interval 0,000231 – 0,001003. This means that 50% of the units in the population will be less than 0,000948.
The verbalizer of сум (sadness) [sum] is the most frequently used by V. Lys (RF 0,0035), and the least frequently by Y. Vynnychuk (RF 0,00023) (see Figure 1).
V. Lys uses сум (sadness) [sum] with the following attributes: бездонний (bottomless) [bezdonnyi] (RF in V. Lys is 0,00008, in FC – 0,0000018); безпробудний (untried) [bezprobudnyi] (RF in V. Lys is 0,00008, in FC – 0), благородний (noble) [bezprobudnyi] (RF in V. Lys is 0,00008, in FC – 0), зеленкуватий (greenish) [zelenkuvatyi] (RF in V. Lys is 0,00008, in FC – 0), пекельний (hellish) [pekelnyi] (RF in V. Lys is 0,00008, in CS – 0), тихий (quiet) [tykhyi] (RF in V. Lys is 0,00008, in FC – 0,000024). It should be noted that the frequency of the phrase тихий сум (quiet sadness) [tykhyi sum] in the subcorpus FC is 0,000023, which proves the stability of this attribute in the Ukrainian linguistic worldview. A similar observation applies to the phrase глибокий сум (deep sadness) [hlybokyi sum] (RF in FC is 0,000042).
A number of metaphorical models are actualized in V. Lys (s texts: SADNESS IS AN ARTIFACT: Сум був особливим, трішки дратівливим і довгим, наче розтягнута гумова стрічка, але й приємним своїм чеканням… (Sadness was special, a bit irritating and long, like a stretched rubber band, but also pleasant in its waiting..) [Sum buv osoblyvym, trishky drativlyvym i dovhym, nache roztiahnuta humova strichka, ale y pryiemnym svoim chekanniam…] (V. Lys); SADNESS IS A NATURAL PHENOMENON: Сум огорнув Віталію, боронячись від нього, вона покликала ту пустотливість, що тільки-тільки було оселилася в ній (Sadness shrouded [like the fog] Vitalia, fighting against it, she called up the mischievousness that had just settled in her) [Sum ohornuv Vitaliiu, boroniachys vid noho, vona poklykala tu pustotlyvist, shcho tilky-tilky bulo oselylasia v nii] (V. Lys); SADNESS IS A LIVING BEING: Сум, що сидів у глибині цих диво-очей, раптом наче покликав його за собою (Sadness, which sat in the depths of those wonderful eyes, suddenly seemed to call him after it) [Sum, shcho sydiv u hlybyni tsykh dyvo-ochei, raptom nache poklykav yoho za soboiu] (V. Lys); SADNESS IS AN AGGRESSIVE LIVING BEING/SOMETHING IN THE CONTAINER (HEART): Сум роздирав левове серце, але йти мусив (Sadness tore the lion (s heart, but it had to go) [Sum rozdyrav levove sertse, ale yty musyv] (V. Lys); SADNESS IS A LIVING BEING (ANIMAL): Очі в неї сміються, а в глибині їх сидить пташка суму . А може, й комашка. Ні, краще звірина. Не хом’ячок, звісно, а киця, готова в будь-який момент випустити кігті (Her eyes are laughing, and deep in them there is a bird of sadness. Or maybe an insect. No, an animal is better. Not a hamster, of course, but a cat, ready to release its claws at any moment) [Ochi v nei smiiutsia, a v hlybyni yikh sydyt ptashka sumu . A mozhe, y komashka. Ni, krashche zviryna. Ne khomiachok, zvisno, a kytsia, hotova v bud-yakyi moment vypustyty kihti] (V. Lys); SADNESS IS A LIQUID: Василько докидав часом і своє якесь слово, тико очі в нього наливалися сумом все більше, таким сумом, що як вода з наповненої циберки, на ноги проливається, мокрить і холодить… (Vasylko would sometimes add a word of his own, and his eyes would fill with sadness more and more, such sadness that, like water from a filled flask, spills onto his feet, wetting and cold...) [Vasylko dokydav chasom i svoie yakes slovo, tyko ochi v noho nalyvalysia sumom vse bilshe, takym sumom, shcho yak voda z napovnenoi tsyberky, na nohy prolyvaietsia, mokryt i kholodyt…] (V. Lys); А я немовби став частинкою цієї просякнутої то болем, то сумом, то гіркотою, то жорсткою, майже жорстокою, іронією розповіді (And I seemed to become a part of this story saturated with pain, sadness, bitterness, and harsh, almost cruel, irony) [A ya nemovby stav chastynkoiu tsiiei prosiaknutoi to bolem, to sumom, to hirkotoiu, to zhorstkoiu, maizhe zhorstokoiu, ironiieiu rozpovidi] (V.Lys); SADNESS IS A SUBSTANCE: Я подивився на нього весело і нахабно, хоч дещо і з сумом. Подумав і додав до суму трохи печалі. Потім докинув до цієї суміші дрібку каяття (I looked at him cheerfully and impudently, though somewhat sadly. I thought about it and added a little sadness to the sorrow. Then I added to this mixture a pinch of remorse) [Ya podyvyvsia na noho veselo i nakhabno, khoch deshcho i z sumom. Podumav i dodav do sumu trokhy pechali. Potim dokynuv do tsiiei sumishi dribku kaiattia] (V. Lys).
The highest frequency of the word печаль (sorrow) [pechal] is characteristic of M. Matios’ texts (0,00832), whereas A. Chekh, O. Zabuzhko, and I. Vilde do not use this verbalizer of the concept (see Table 4).
The weighted mean (sample mean) is 0,0016. The mode, the most frequent value of the series is 0,00083. The median is the interval 0 – 0,00166, so 50% of the units of the population will be less than 0,000981
M. Matios uses a number of individually authorial verbalizations of the metaphors of ПЕЧАЛЬ (SORROW) [PECHAL]. For example, emotional states are traditionally given color attributes that, according to the symbolism of a particular color, enhance metaphoricality: Дивилася на тих двох п’яних мужиків, і чорна жура, ніби ніч землю, огортала її душу (She looked at those two drunken men, and a black sorrow enveloped her soul like night) [Dyvylasia na tykh dvokh pianykh muzhykiv, i chorna zhura, niby nich zemliu, ohortala yii dushu] (I. Vilde); І часами западав у дивний стан відчуження: нічого не чув, не бачив, а в очах переливалась чорна туга (And at times I fell into a strange state of alienation: I heard nothing, saw nothing, and black anguish shimmered in my eyes) [I chasamy zapadav u dyvnyi stan vidchuzhennia: nichoho ne chuv, ne bachyv, a v ochakh perelyvalas chorna tuha] (H. Pahutyak); Ні, напевно щось більше, як знайомий, бо скільки-то разів мама в приступі жовтого розпачу вигукувала: – Він умів собі добрати компанію... такий Пастух! (No, probably something more than an acquaintance, because many times my mother exclaimed in a fit of yellow despair: "He knew how to find a company... such a Shepherd!") [Ni, napevno shchos bilshe, yak znaiomyi, bo skilky-to raziv mama v prystupi zhovtoho rozpachu vyhukuvala: – Vin umiv sobi dobraty kompaniiu... takyi Pastukh!] (I. Vilde), etc. M. Matios uses a hyperonym, not a specific color: І думаю про тебе, огорнутого шкурами самотності у безбарвному натовпі міста, де все нагадує про нас: зіпсований годинник перед парком, пофарбована в колір печалі лавка під липою... (And I think of you, wrapped in the skins of loneliness in the colorless crowd of the city, where everything reminds of us: a broken clock in front of the park, a bench painted in the color of sorrow under a linden tree...) [I dumaiu pro tebe, ohornutoho shkuramy samotnosti u bezbarvnomu natovpi mista, de vse nahaduie pro nas: zipsovanyi hodynnyk pered parkom, pofarbovana v kolir pechali lavka pid lypoiu...] (M. Matios). Глибокий (deep) [hlybokyi] is a common attribute of сум (sadness) [sum] (RF 0,000042), смуток (sadness) [smutok] (RF 0,000035), and печаль (sorrow) [pechal] (RF 0,000013) in fiction. Meanwhile, we can find an individually authorial verbalization of the typical model of the metaphor глибина печалі (depth of sorrow) [hlybyna pechali] in M. Matios’ works: На перший погляд, малоестетичні випуклі очі дюрерівських героїнь із неземною глибиною печалі в них, жилаві перетруджені жіночі руки без слідів минулої... (At first glance, the unaesthetic bulging eyes of Dürer (s heroines with an unearthly depth of sorrow, wiry, overworked female hands without traces of the past...) [Na pershyi pohliad, maloestetychni vypukli ochi diurerivskykh heroin iz nezemnoiu hlybynoiu pechali v nykh, zhylavi peretrudzheni zhinochi ruky bez slidiv mynuloi...] (M. Matios).
In addition, in M. Matios (texts we can observe metaphorization based on models: EMOTION IS A LIQUID (І з мене випарувалася навіть печаль (And even sorrow evaporated from me) [I z mene vyparuvalasia navit pechal] (M. Matios)); EMOTION IS A LIVING BEING (BIRD/REPTILE/INSECT) (Печаль гніздилася в іншому: у відчутті моєї цілковитої відсутності й розчинності, а також у даремному намаганні збагнути, що все-таки від мене зосталося? (Sorrow nested in something else: in the feeling of my complete absence and solubility, as well as in a vain attempt to understand what was left of me?) [Pechal hnizdylasia v inshomu: u vidchutti moiei tsilkovytoi vidsutnosti y rozchynnosti, a takozh u daremnomu namahanni zbahnuty, shcho vse-taky vid mene zostalosia?] (M. Matios). Cf. the metaphorization of other emotions with the verbalizer гніздитися (nest) [hnizdytysia]: Однак сили, які ми повинні зрозуміти, пізнати і приборкати, – це сили Зла, які є в нас самих, сили Зла, що гніздяться в серці людини, і від сплеску цих сил ніхто не застрахований (However, the forces that we must understand, cognize, and tame are the forces of Evil that are in ourselves, the forces of Evil that nest in the human heart, and no one is immune from the outburst of these forces) [Odnak syly, yaki my povynni zrozumity, piznaty i pryborkaty, – tse syly Zla, yaki ye v nas samykh, syly Zla, shcho hnizdiatsia v sertsi liudyny, i vid splesku tsykh syl nikhto ne zastrakhovanyi] (M. Matios); Маріца не могла би пояснити, чим вона принадила той жах до себе і де він гніздився в її єстві (Maritza could not explain how she attracted that horror to her and where it nested in her being) [Maritsa ne mohla by poiasnyty, chym vona prynadyla toi zhakh do sebe i de vin hnizdyvsia v yii yestvi] (M. Matios). In general, this use of verbalizer is typical for metaphors of emotional, mental states and physical actions of a person (meaning ‘to settle, to be’, mostly with a negative evaluation). For example: Але впевнилася сама, що ці два, вже, здавалося б, віджиті почуття, гніздяться в її душі, як почула, що Славко вступає до війська (But she became convinced herself that these two seemingly outdated feelings were nesting in her soul when she heard that Slavko was joining the army) [Ale vpevnylasia sama, shcho tsi dva, vzhe, zdavalosia b, vidzhyti pochuttia, hnizdiatsia v yii dushi, yak pochula, shcho Slavko vstupaie do viiska] (D. Yaroslavska); А щирості мені треба було, щоб розв’язувати питання, які в мені все життя гніздяться (And I needed sincerity to solve the questions that have been nesting in me all my life) [A shchyrosti meni treba bulo, shchob rozviazuvaty pytannia, yaki v meni vse zhyttia hnizdiatsia] (D. Humenna); Найяскравіші спогади гніздилися в старому місті, яке стало занадто побутовим, проте залишало свій неповторний аромат, чи що? (The most vivid memories were nested in the old city, which became too domestic, but left its unique flavor, or what?) [Naiiaskravishi spohady hnizdylysia v staromu misti, yake stalo zanadto pobutovym, prote zalyshalo svii nepovtornyi aromat, chy shcho?] (Y. Koretnyuk); EMOTION IS A LIVING BEING (Цікаво, на старості людина печальнонеметушлива лише від досвіду і знань, чи печаль старіє разом зі своїм носієм-господарем і робить людину мудрішою? (I wonder if in old age a person is sad and serene only because of experience and knowledge, or does sorrow grow old together with its carrier-host and make a person wiser?) [Tsikavo, na starosti liudyna pechalno-nemetushlyva lyshe vid dosvidu i znan, chy pechal stariie razom zi svoim nosiiem-hospodarem i robyt liudynu mudrishoiu?] (M. Matios); …та так і не знайшла у жодній книжці: вселенська печаль душі, що зусібіч пізнала печаль, як людину (...but I never found it in any book: the universal sorrow of a soul that has known sorrow from every angle as a human being) […ta tak i ne znaishla u zhodnii knyzhtsi: vselenska pechal dushi, shcho zusibich piznala pechal, yak liudynu] (M. Matios); EMOTION IS A NATURAL PHENOMENON (fog): Іноді я дивлюся з вікна, як його згорблена вісьмома десятками років постать зникає за рогом лікарні – й мене огортає ота печаль, про яку я колись хотіла… (Sometimes I look out of the window and see his figure, hunched over for eight decades, disappear around the corner of the hospital, and I am enveloped in the sadness I once wanted...) [Inodi ya dyvliusia z vikna, yak yoho zghorblena vismoma desiatkamy rokiv postat znykaie za rohom likarni – y mene ohortaie ota pechal, pro yaku ya kolys khotila…] (M. Matios).
The attribute високий (high) [vysokyi] is used much less frequently with the name of a specific feeling than with the hyperonym почуття (feeling) [pochuttia] (RF in FC – 0,000045): смуток (sadness) [smutok] (RF – 0,000001, Y. Vynnychuk, O. Zabuzhko); печаль (sorrow) [pechal] (RF – 0,000003); сум (sadness) [sum] (RF – 0,000001). In M. Matios, for example we find: Про еверести печалі (On the Everest of Sorrow) [Pro everesty pechali] (M. Matios). The specificity of idioconcepts in A. Chekh and I. Rozdobudko is that they do not use attributes to смуток (sadness) [smutok].
The verbalizer туга (anguish) [tuha] most often occurs in M. Matios’ texts (see Table 5). The author gives the following attributes to туга (anguish) [tuha]: безнадійна (hopeless) [beznadiina]; вселенська (universal) [vselenska]; незбагненна (incomprehensible) [nezbahnenna]; одвічна (eternal) [odvichna]; розпачлива (desperate) [rozpachlyva]; чорна й свіжа (black and fresh) [chorna y svizha]; чорна (black) [chorna], etc.
The weighted mean (sample mean) is 0,00322. The mode, the most frequent value of the series is 0,0018. The median is the interval 0,000206 – 0,002116, which means that 50% of the units in the population will be less than 0,00283.
The actualization of the model EMOTION IS FIRE can be seen in this context: Як добре, що вітер не пускав мене назад, туди, де вже не стало радості і сміху, де лиш горіла, як свічка, туга… (How good it was that the wind did not let me go back, to the place where there was no more joy and laughter, where only anguish burned like a candle...) [Yak dobre, shcho viter ne puskav mene nazad, tudy, de vzhe ne stalo radosti i smikhu, de lysh horila, yak svichka, tuha…] (M. Matios); EMOTION IS AN OBJECT: А я відлітала, знаючи, що вони пом (януть мене чаркою вина, зробленого татовими руками, (…) – і забудуть в якімсь часі, полишивши тугу лише моїй родині (And I flew away, knowing that they would remember me with a glass of wine made by my father, (…) – and would forget in some time, leaving my anguish only to my family) [A ya vidlitala, znaiuchy, shcho vony pom (ianut mene charkoiu vyna, zroblenoho tatovymy rukamy, (…) – i zabudut v yakims chasi, polyshyvshy tuhu lyshe moii rodyni] (M. Matios); EMOTION IS A CONTAINER: Тепер, щоб не втратити глузд і остаточно не впасти в тугу, а якщо точніше – не сказитися, все частіше згадую застосовне на всі випадки життя «Прорвемося!» (Now, in order not to lose my mind and eventually fall into anguish, or rather, not to go mad, more and more often I am recalling the applicable for all occasions "We will break through!") [Teper, shchob ne vtratyty hluzd i ostatochno ne vpasty v tuhu, a yakshcho tochnishe – ne skazytysia, vse chastishe zghaduiu zastosovne na vsi vypadky zhyttia «Prorvemosia!»] (M. Matios). The metaphorization впадати/впасти в тугу (falling into anguish) [vpadaty/vpasty v tuhu] is not frequent in the corpus (RF 0,000008). Most often we come across such verbalization in the texts of I. Nechuy-Levytsky: Не впадайте в тугу та в одчай! – обізвалась Уляся (Don’t fall into anguish and despair! – Ulyasya called out) [Ne vpadaite v tuhu ta v odchai! – obizvalas Uliasia] (I. Nechuy-Levytsky); Параска зажурилась і впала в тугу (Paraska became sad and fell into anguish) [Paraska zazhurylas i vpala v tuhu] (I. Nechuy-Levytsky), etc.
This model is typical of metaphorization of deep, sinful, negatively evaluated states (emotional, mental, physiological). We come across examples of such metaphorizations in the authors under study: …чи так, якби тамтешні люди раптово об’їлися маковиння – і надовго впали у сплячку, як лісові вуйки-ведмеді (... or as if the people there suddenly ate poppy seeds and fell into hibernation for a long time, like forest bears) […chy tak, yakby tamteshni liudy raptovo obilysia makovynnia – i nadovho vpaly u spliachku, yak lisovi vuiky-vedmedi] (M. Matios); І жінка впала у гріх іще до того, як зів’яли вінки на могилі (And the woman fell into sin even before the wreaths on the grave wilted) [I zhinka vpala u hrikh ishche do toho, yak zivialy vinky na mohyli] (M. Matios); …ні з якими іншими людьми ще не траплялося такого дива, щоб здорова з вечора людина на ранок упала в лежу, три роки лежала снопом (…no other people have ever experienced such a miracle that a person who was healthy in the evening fell into a bed in the morning and lay in like a sheaf for three years…) […ni z yakymy inshymy liudmy shche ne traplialosia takoho dyva, shchob zdorova z vechora liudyna na ranok upala v lezhu, try roky lezhala snopom] (M. Matios). If we talk about the verbalizers of the concept СМУТОК (SADNESS) [SMUTOK], then according to the metaphorization model, such deep states are відчай (distress) [vidchai], розпач (despair) [rozpach] (cf. впадати в депресію (fall into depression) [vpadaty v depresiiu]).
It is interesting that the verbalizer жаль (sorrow) [zhal] is most often found in women’s texts (of course, this conclusion applies to the texts of the authors studied). We do not take into account the data on the frequency of the lexeme жаль (sorrow) [zhal] in literary texts, since the corpus does not distinguish part of speech of the studied unit (see Table 6).
The weighted mean (sample mean) is 0,00624. The most frequent value of the series is 0,00366. The median is the interval 0,001452 – 0,004102, which means that 50% of the population units will be less than 0,0051.
We have revealed a number of attributes of the verbalizer жаль (sorrow) [zhal] (see Table 7) used by the authors under study. Here are several of them used in contexts: …Марія вслід за Коганом витерла рукавом сорочки спітніле чоло, так, ніби сама припасовувала німий жаль за Машталером у камінь (Maria, following Kogan, wiped her sweaty forehead with her shirt sleeve, as if she herself was putting her mute sorrow over Mashtaler into stone) […Mariia vslid za Kohanom vyterla rukavom sorochky spitnile cholo, tak, niby sama prypasovuvala nimyi zhal za Mashtalerom u kamin] (M. Matios); Мені іноді здається, що моя печаль – достойна вселенського жалю й розуміння... (Sometimes it seems to me that my sorrow is worthy of universal compassion and understanding...) [Meni inodi zdaietsia, shcho moia pechal – dostoina vselenskoho zhaliu y rozuminnia...] (M. Matios); …хотілося доторкнутися до них усіх, як до живих, і плакати від незрозумілого жалю і щему (...I wanted to touch them all as if they were alive and cry with inexplicable sorrow and pain) […khotilosia dotorknutysia do nykh usikh, yak do zhyvykh, i plakaty vid nezrozumiloho zhaliu i shchemu] (M. Matios); The attribute пекельний (burning) [pekelnyi] is used only by H. Pahutyak: І зразу ж серце моє огорнув пекельний жаль (And immediately my heart was filled with burning sorrow) [I zrazu zh sertse moie ohornuv pekelnyi zhal] (H. Pahutyak). In addition, the author uses: Трава обвила йому ноги, спутала до колін, і він покірно віддався їй, почуваючи якийсь безмірний жаль (The grass wrapped around his legs, tangled them up to his knees, and he surrendered to it, feeling some kind of immense sorrow) [Trava obvyla yomu nohy, sputala do kolin, i vin pokirno viddavsia yii, pochuvaiuchy yakyis bezmirnyi zhal] (H. Pahutyak); Вигляд цього іржавого хаосу, майже засипаного піском, викликав у нього безмежний жаль за тією мертвою жінкою... (The sight of this rusty chaos, almost covered with sand, caused him to feel boundless sorrow for that dead woman) [Vyhliad tsoho irzhavoho khaosu, maizhe zasypanoho piskom, vyklykav u noho bezmezhnyi zhal za tiieiu mertvoiu zhinkoiu...] (H. Pahutyak); Жаль такий великий, що я не можу навіть заплакати (The sorrow is so great that I cannot even cry) [Zhal takyi velykyi, shcho ya ne mozhu navit zaplakaty] (H.Pahutyak); А там покину Добромиль, повернуся до сина, може, ще все налагодиться, жаль мій великий перетреться… (And there I will leave Dobromyl, return to my son, maybe everything will get better, my great sorrow will be ground...) [A tam pokynu Dobromyl, povernusia do syna, mozhe, shche vse nalahodytsia, zhal mii velykyi peretretsia…] (H. Pahutyak).
I. Vilde’s texts are characterized by a number of attributes: Дарка пішла спати із своїм новеньким пам (ятником і глухим жалем до своєї сестрички за те, що зіпсувала вечір, на який треба було чекати пів року (Darka went to bed with her new monument and a dull sorrow over her sister spoiling the evening, for which she had to wait half a year) [Darka pishla spaty iz svoim novenkym pam (iatnykom i hlukhym zhalem do svoiei sestrychky za te, shcho zipsuvala vechir, na yakyi treba bulo chekaty piv roku] (I. Vilde); Був безсилий перед доконаністю факту, проте тим більше проймав його душу пекучий жаль: чого... чого поспішилася з присягою? (He was powerless before the completeness of the fact, but even more burning sorrow pierced his soul: why... why did she hurry with the oath?) [Buv bezsylyi pered dokonanistiu faktu, prote tym bilshe proimav yoho dushu pekuchyi zhal: choho... choho pospishylasia z prysiahoiu?] (I. Vilde); І раптом звідкись – несподіваний приплив гарячого жалю, хвиля докорів і каяття… (And suddenly from somewhere – an unexpected surge of hot regret, a wave of reproaches and remorse...) [I raptom zvidkys – nespodivanyi pryplyv hariachoho zhaliu, khvylia dokoriv i kaiattia…] (I. Vilde). There are two examples of the use of the phrase холодний жаль (cold sorrow) [kholodnyi zhal] in the FC. We also come across ‘taste’ attributes: Любов не розбирає… пияк чи злодій, але мала я таку уразу до нього, такий гіркенький жаль (Love does not distinguish between... a drunkard or a thief, but I had such a grudge against him, such a bitter grievance) [Liubov ne rozbyraie… pyiak chy zlodii, ale mala ya taku urazu do noho, takyi hirkenkyi zhal] (I. Vilde). The absolute frequency of гіркий жаль (bitter grievance) [hirkyi zhal] in I. Vilde is 0,000337; гіркенький (bitterish) [hirkenkyi] – 0,000112, whereas in V. Shklyar, we can find: І тоді в Миколиній душі прокидалися солодкий жаль і всепрощення, і хотілося всіх обійняти (And then sweet compassion and forgiveness awoke in Mykola’s soul, and he wanted to hug everyone) [I todi v Mykolynii dushi prokydalysia solodkyi zhal i vseproshchennia, i khotilosia vsikh obiiniaty] (V. Shklyar).
It is interesting that, for example, such antonymic attributes to великий (great) [velykyi] , as малий (small) [malyi], невеликий (not great) [nevelykyi] are not used, but the attributes найбільший (the greatest) [naibilshyi] (RF in FC – 0,000002) and менший (smaller) [menshyi] (RF in FC – 0,000002) are found: Воно, либонь, тому і менший жаль за старим, що іде в землю, ніж за дитиною (That is probably why one feels less sorrow over an old man who goes into the ground than for a child) [Vono, lybon, tomu i menshyi zhal za starym, shcho ide v zemliu, nizh za dytynoiu] (I. Vilde); найменший (the smallest) [naimenshyi] (RF in FC – 0,000014): Що ж це значить: раз їде в світ за очі без найменшого жалю..? (What does it mean: once he leaves for the world without the smallest regret..?) [Shcho zh tse znachyt: raz yide v svit za ochi bez naimenshoho zhaliu..?] (I. Vilde); we have revealed only one occurrence of the phrase тупий жаль (dull sorrow) [tupyi zhal]: Чи не відразу – з тупим жалем і смутком – усвідомив, що Веклина «осіння линька» вкупі з відчуттям власної провини вельми похитнули мою здатність… (I realized almost immediately – with dull sorrow and sadness – that Vekla’s "autumn molt", coupled with a sense of guilt, had greatly shaken my ability...) [Chy ne vidrazu – z tupym zhalem i smutkom – usvidomyv, shcho Veklyna «osinnia lynka» vkupi z vidchuttiam vlasnoi provyny velmy pokhytnuly moiu zdatnist…] (O. Polyakov).
Let’s look at typical models of metaphorization with the verbalizer жаль (sorrow) [zhal]. EMOTION IS A LIVING BEING (an active agent). We observe a number of stabilized metaphorizations: І такий жаль його взяв, аж відсторонився від Орка (And such sorrow took him that he distanced himself from the Orko) [I takyi zhal yoho vziav, azh vidstoronyvsia vid Orka] (H. Pahutyak) – RF in FC – 0,000014; Чи то їй так було жаль своїх родичів із хворими від роботи хребтами, чи брав жаль за теперішню нестачу надмірного сонця над головою (…Either she felt so sorry for her relatives with sore spines from work, or sorrow took her because of the current lack of excessive sun over her head...) [Chy to yii tak bulo zhal svoikh rodychiv iz khvorymy vid roboty khrebtamy, chy brav zhal za teperishniu nestachu nadmirnoho sontsia nad holovoiu] (M. Matios), RF in FC – 0,000056; Пригадую події двадцятирічної давності – і мене охоплює легкий жаль за тим, що не відбулося…? (I recall the events of twenty years ago – and I am overwhelmed by a slight regret for what did not happen…) [Pryhaduiu podii dvadtsiatyrichnoi davnosti – i mene okhopliuie lehkyi zhal za tym, shcho ne vidbulosia…?] (M. Matios); І Якова охопив жаль за бібліотекою, таким затишним спокійним місцем, де нема ні хаосу, ні сум’яття, куди заходиш неквапливо, з надією (And Yakov was overwhelmed with sorrow over the library, such a cozy, calm place where there is no chaos or confusion, where you go slowly, with hope) [I Yakova okhopyv zhal za bibliotekoiu, takym zatyshnym spokiinym mistsem, de nema ni khaosu, ni sumiattia, kudy zakhodysh nekvaplyvo, z nadiieiu] (H. Pahutyak), охоплює жаль (sorrow overwhelms) [okhopliuie zhal] – RF in FC – 0,000007; охопив жаль (sorrow overwhelmed) [okhopyv zhal] – 0,000018; Він втратив її, не знав, де шукати, і жаль стиснув йому серце (He lost her, did not know where to look, and sorrow squeezed his heart) [Vin vtratyv yii, ne znav, de shukaty, i zhal stysnuv yomu sertse] (H. Pahutiak), RF of жаль стиснув (sorrow squeezed) [zhal stysnuv] in FC is 0,000022; жаль стискав (sorrow was squeezing) [zhal styskav] – 0,000021; Він нахилився до мене й тихо мовив: – Кожного разу, як бачу пана, жаль мені крає серце (He leaned over to me and said quietly: – Every time I see the master, sorrow cuts my heart) [Vin nakhylyvsia do mene y tykho movyv: – Kozhnoho razu, yak bachu pana, zhal meni kraie sertse] (H. Pahutiak), AF in FC – 0,000007.
However, there are individual authorial metaphorizations: …і розтанула за сяючою брамою восьмого саду, гнана жалем і радістю нездійсненного, зате солодкого і незабутого сердечного трепету (...and melted behind the shining gate of the eighth garden, driven by sorrow and joy of unrealizable, but sweet and unforgettable heart’s trembling) […i roztanula za siaiuchoiu bramoiu vosmoho sadu, hnana zhalem i radistiu nezdiisnennoho, zate solodkoho i nezabutoho serdechnoho trepetu] (M. Matios); cf. Нестримний жаль гнав його в ніч (Unrestrained sorrow drove him into the night) [Nestrymnyi zhal hnav yoho v nich] (Kh. Lukashchuk) – RF in FC is 0,00000061, which corresponds to AF – 1; Смуток гнав мене далі й далі (Sadness drove me further and further) [Smutok hnav mene dali y dali] (V. Kilchensky) – RF in FC – 0,00000061; Бо співати вміє кіт голосно й жалібно-пронизливо тоді, коли туга жене його в місячну ніч у садок чи на дах (Because a cat can sing loudly and pitifully when anguish drives it to the garden or to the roof on a moonlit night) [Bo spivaty vmiie kit holosno y zhalibno-pronyzlyvo todi, koly tuha zhene yoho v misiachnu nich u sadok chy na dakh] (S.Parfanovych), RF in FC is 0,0000012; Тому й важко в ньому щось змінити, бо цей жаль пригнічує (That is why it is difficult to change something in it, because this sorrow is depressing) [Tomu y vazhko v nomu shchos zminyty, bo tsei zhal pryhnichuie] (H. Pahutyak) – RF in FC is 0.
It should be noted that жаль (sorrow) [zhal] can be metaphorized as a heavy object: Він був їй винен за той день, коли вона маленька хотіла розділити його тягар жалю за мамою, хоч майже не знала бабусі (He owed her for the day when she wanted to share his burden of sorrow over her mother, even though she hardly knew the old lady) [Vin buv yii vynen za toi den, koly vona malenka khotila rozdilyty yoho tiahar zhaliu za mamoiu, khoch maizhe ne znala babusi] (H. Pahutyak), RF – 0,00000061; however тягар смутку (burden of sadness) [tiahar smutku] – 0,0000012; тягар суму, журби, печалі (burden of sadness, sorrow, grief) [tiahar sumu, zhurby, pechali] – 0,00000061 each; І ніхто не міг знати, що не туга за рідним селом гризе Петра, а жаль за навіки загубленою душею (And no one could know that it was not the homesickness for his native village that was gnawing at Petro, but the sorrow over his forever lost soul) [I nikhto ne mih znaty, shcho ne tuha za ridnym selom hryze Petra, a zhal za naviky zahublenoiu dusheiu] (H. Pahutyak), RF in FC – 0,0000024; І разом зі мною поснули жаль, туга, страх і заздрість (And sorrow, anguish, fear and envy fell asleep with me) [I razom zi mnoiu posnuly zhal, tuha, strakh i zazdrist] (H. Pahutyak), RF in FC – 0; У ньому прокинувся жаль і до човника, наче той мав душу, мужньо злітаючи на гребені каламутних хвиль (The pity for the boat awoke in him, as if it had a soul, courageously taking off on the crest of muddy waves) [U nomu prokynuvsia zhal i do chovnyka, nache toi mav dushu, muzhno zlitaiuchy na hrebeni kalamutnykh khvyl] (H. Pahutyak), RF in FC – 0,0000073; прокинувся смуток (sadness awoke) [prokynuvsia smutok] – RF in FC – 0,00000061; прокинувся сум (sadness awoke) [prokynuvsia sum] – 0,00000061; прокинулася туга (anguish awoke) [prokynulasia tuha] – 0,000003; прокинулася печаль, нудьга, скорбота, жалоба (sadness, boredom, sorrow, mourning awoke) [prokynulasia pechal, nudha, skorbota, zhaloba] – 0; Тонконогий, анемічний жаль закрадається до Дарчиного серця: “Боже…” (…A thin-legged, anemic sorrow creeps into Darya (s heart: “God...” ) [Tonkonohyi, anemichnyi zhal zakradaietsia do Darchynoho sertsia: “Bozhe…”] (I.Vilde), RF in FC – 0,00000061; смуток закрадається (sadness creeps in) [smutok zakradaietsia], RF in FC – 0,00000061; туга закрадається (anguish creeps in) [tuha zakradaietsia] – 0,0000012; закралася печаль (sadness creeps in) [zakralasia pechal] – 0,00000061; скорбота, журба закрадається (grief, sorrow creeps in) [skorbota, zhurba zakradaietsia] – 0; Навала жалю підсувалась під саме серце: як можна, як можна так легко говорити про розлуку з усім і… всіма? (The invasion of sorrow was moving under the heart: how can you, how can you talk so easily about separation from everything and... everyone?) [Navala zhaliu pidsuvalas pid same sertse: yak mozhna, yak mozhna tak lehko hovoryty pro rozluku z usim i… vsima?] (I. Vilde), RF in FC – 0,00000061; навала жалоби, скорботи, нудьги, смутку, суму, туги (invasion of mourning, sorrow, boredom, sadness, grief, anguish) [navala zhaloby, skorboty, nudhy, smutku, sumu, tuhy] – 0.
High productivity is not typical of the model EMOTION IS AN ANIMAL: Цей жаль, ця щоденна туга за тобою (так: таки за тобою), стискає мене, як удав... (This sorrow, this daily longing for you (yes: for you) constricts me like a boa... ) [Tsei zhal, tsia shchodenna tuha za toboiu (tak: taky za toboiu), styskaie mene, yak udav...] (M. Matios).
In contrast, the model EMOTION IS A WATER ELEMENT is characterized by high productivity: На зміну втомі й люті надійшла хвиля жалю до самої себе (Fatigue and rage were replaced by a wave of self-pity) [Na zminu vtomi y liuti nadiishla khvylia zhaliu do samoi sebe] (M. Matios); Я й сам незчувся, як мене почала підносити хвиля жалю: високо-високо, а тоді враз опускає вниз (I did not even realize how a wave of sorrow began to lift me up: high and high, and then immediately brought me down) [Ya y sam nezchuvsia, yak mene pochala pidnosyty khvylia zhaliu: vysoko-vysoko, a todi vraz opuskaie vnyz] (H. Pahutiak); Явилась йому зелена смужка її плечей <…> над верстатом в її майстерні, і нова хвиля спізненого жалю хлюпнула на його серце (He saw the green strip of her shoulders <...> above the workbench in her workshop, and a new wave of belated regret splashed over his heart) [Yavylas yomu zelena smuzhka yii plechei <…> nad verstatom v yii maisterni, i nova khvylia spiznenoho zhaliu khliupnula na yoho sertse] (I. Vilde). It should be noted that in the FC, DX is 0,000014; however, хвиля туги (wave of longing) [khvylia tuhy] is 0,000007; хвиля смутку (wave of sadness) [khvylia smutku] – 0,000004; хвиля печалі (wave of sorrow) [khvylia pechali] – 0,000004; хвиля нудьги (wave of boredom) [khvylia nudhy] – 0,0000012; хвиля суму, хвиля жалоби, хвиля скорботи (wave of sadness, mourning, grief) [khvylia sumu, khvylia zhaloby, khvylia skorboty] – 0. It is typical for M. Matios to use this metaphorical model to metaphorize the concept under study: …і ріки невимовного sorrow й гострого болю заливали її всю, до останнього фібра душі (...and rivers of indescribable sorrow and acute pain flooded her every fiber of her soul) […i riky nevymovnoho sorrow y hostroho boliu zalyvaly yii vsiu, do ostannoho fibra dushi] (M. Matios); cf. Сон був реальніший, бо в ньому лились через верх емоції – роздратування, невдоволення, жаль… (The dream was more real because it was full of emotions – irritation, dissatisfaction, sorrow...) [Son buv realnishyi, bo v nomu lylys cherez verkh emotsii – rozdratuvannia, nevdovolennia, zhal…] (H. Pahutyak); ...свої жалі до Бронка виливала перед чоловіком: – Не хотів мене слухати… вперся… вона або ніхто… (...she poured out her sorrows over Bronko to her husband: – He did not want to listen to me... he stubbornly refused... she or no one...) [...svoi zhali do Bronka vylyvala pered cholovikom: – Ne khotiv mene slukhaty… vpersia… vona abo nikhto…] (I. Vilde); І раптом звідкись – несподіваний приплив гарячого жалю, хвиля докорів і каяття… (And suddenly, from somewhere, there was an unexpected surge of hot regret, a wave of reproaches and remorse...) [I raptom zvidkys – nespodivanyi pryplyv hariachoho zhaliu, khvylia dokoriv i kaiattia…] (I. Vilde).
EMOTION IS AN OBJECT. Це єдине місце, де вона не має ні сорому, ні жалю – самий лише плач (This is the only place where she has neither shame nor regret – only crying) (M. Matios); …щоб Марічка втопила свій жаль до нього у глибокій річці… (...so that Marichka drowned her sorrow over him in a deep river...) […shchob Marichka vtopyla svii zhal do noho u hlybokii richtsi…] (I.Vilde); …брати у своєму горі про сестру забули чи, може, свідомо не хотіли додавати сердечного жалю… (...the brothers in their grief forgot about their sister or, perhaps, deliberately did not want to add heartfelt sorrow...) […braty u svoiemu hori pro sestru zabuly chy, mozhe, svidomo ne khotily dodavaty serdechnoho zhaliu…] (M. Matios). In H. Pahutyak’s texts, жаль (sorrow) [zhal] is metaphorized as an object: …а той хлопець мав кудись подіти свій жаль (...and that guy had somewhere to put his sorrow) […a toi khlopets mav kudys podity svii zhal] (H. Pahutyak).
H. Pahutyak metaphorizes жаль (sorrow) [zhal] as a sharp object (artifact): Жаль краяв лисові серце, та коли він подумав, що, можливо, хтось зараз тішиться з того, що знищено його працю… (Sorrow cut the fox (s heart, but when he thought that perhaps someone was now rejoicing in the fact that his work had been destroyed…) [Zhal kraiav lysovi sertse, ta koly vin podumav, shcho, mozhlyvo, khtos zaraz tishytsia z toho, shcho znyshcheno yoho pratsiu…] (H. Pahutyak).
EMOTION IS SOUND: Поки що співчуття мало дивовижну форму – лише розбухлі жіночі язики від перемивання здогадів про те, що насправді відбувається за глухим парканом, але без жодної нотки задуми чи жалю... (So far, compassion has had a strange form – only swollen women (s tongues from the guesses about what is really happening behind the blank fence, but without a single note of thought or pity...) [Poky shcho spivchuttia malo dyvovyzhnu formu – lyshe rozbukhli zhinochi yazyky vid peremyvannia zdohadiv pro te, shcho naspravdi vidbuvaietsia za hlukhym parkanom, ale bez zhodnoi notky zadumy chy zhaliu...] (M. Matios); Тепер, коли жаль трохи втих, священик казав своїм людям на похороні: я теж стратив найдорожче, але, видите, живу далі (Now that the sorrow has become a bit quieter, the priest told his people at the funeral: I also have lost the most precious, but, you see, I live on) [Teper, koly zhal trokhy vtykh, sviashchenyk kazav svoim liudiam na pokhoroni: ya tezh stratyv naidorozhche, ale, vydyte, zhyvu dali] (H.Pahutyak);
The categorization of жаль (sorrow) [zhal] as a content is quite typical: in the fiction subcorpus, the frequency of the expression у/в жалю (in sorrow) [u/v zhaliu] is 0,15 per million, but among the texts of the studied writers it occurs only in H. Pahutyak: Чи то так у жалю, в голосінні Проминуть молодії літа? (Is it so in sorrow, in lamentation, that the young years will pass away?) [Chy to tak u zhaliu, v holosinni Promynut molodii lita?] (H. Pahutyak). A similar remark can be made about the model EMOTION IS LOCUS, but this metaphorization is also found only in H. Pahutyak: Отак від праці до жалю переходив Петро, а тоді знову – від жалю до праці (So from work to sorrow Petro moved, and then again – from sorrow to work) [Otak vid pratsi do zhaliu perekhodyv Petro, a todi znovu – vid zhaliu do pratsi] (H. Pahutyak).
The verbalizer нудьга (boredom) [nudha] is most frequently found in the texts of I. Rozdobudko and A. Chekh.
The weighted mean (sample mean) is 0,00147. The most frequent value of the series is 0,00133. The median is the interval 0,001212 – 0,001818, which means that 50% of the units of the population will be less than 0,00139.
I. Rozdobudko (s idiolect is characterized by metaphorizations of нудьга (boredom) [nudha] based on the models EMOTION IS A WATER ELEMENT/EMOTION IS A LIQUID: Нудьга зійшла з Дана, немов тягуча хвиля олії (Boredom washed out of Dan like a viscous wave of oil) [Nudha ziishla z Dana, nemov tiahucha khvylia olii] (I. Rozdobudko); Нудьга дня, що вилилась у невинний жарт, прорвалася бурхливим потоком слів: – Маєш для усіх час, крім мене! (The boredom of the day, which poured into an innocent joke, broke through in a stormy stream of words: – You have time for everyone, except me!) [Nudha dnia, shcho vylylas u nevynnyi zhart, prorvalasia burkhlyvym potokom sliv: – Maiesh dlia usikh chas, krim mene!] (I. Rozdobudko).
EMOTION IS A NATURAL OBJECT: Так, саме РАПТОМ на цей людський острівець, зітканий з млосного очікування, дорожньої нудьги, спраги, задухи і дитячого вереску повільно, мов дев’ятий вал на картині Айвазовського, накочується мерехтлива, свіжа, зіткана з невагомого світла хвиля кохання (Yes, it was SUDDENLY that a shimmering, fresh wave of love woven from weightless light slowly rolled over this human island, woven from languid expectation, road boredom, thirst, heat and children’s screams, like the ninth rampart in Aivazovsky’s painting) [Tak, same RAPTOM na tsei liudskyi ostrivets, zitkanyi z mlosnoho ochikuvannia, dorozhnoi nudhy, sprahy, zadukhy i dytiachoho veresku povilno, mov deviatyi val na kartyni Aivazovskoho, nakochuietsia merekhtlyva, svizha, zitkana z nevahomoho svitla khvylia kokhannia] (I. Rozdobudko).
The metaphorical model EMOTION IS AN (AGGRESSIVE) BEING is implemented in such contexts: Долаючи свою ватяну нудьгу, я важко підвівся зі стільця, кивнув їм і пішов до свого номера, тяжко розгрібаючи ногами невидимі пустельні дюни (Overcoming my cottony boredom, I got up from the chair with difficulty, nodded to them and went to my room, heavily raking my feet over the invisible desert dunes) [Dolaiuchy svoiu vatianu nudhu, ya vazhko pidvivsia zi stiltsia, kyvnuv yim i pishov do svoho nomera, tiazhko rozghribaiuchy nohamy nevydymi pustelni diuny] (I. Rozdobudko); А на мене навалилася безмежна, ватяна нудьга, оповила відчуттям марності і безглуздя (And I was attacked by boundless, cottony boredom, enveloped in a feeling of futility and meaninglessness) [A na mene navalylasia bezmezhna, vatiana nudha, opovyla vidchuttiam marnosti i bezghluzdia] (I. Rozdobudko).
The analysis of the frequency of studied verbalizers is visualized in Figure 2, which shows how significant the author’s deviation from mode is.
Thus, the proposed methodology is generally aimed at identifying quantitative and qualitative markers of an idiolect/idiostyle. The analysis of single-component verbalizers of the concept of СМУТОК (SADNESS) [SMUTOK] shows that their fullest repertoire is inherent in the idiolects of H. Pahutyak and I. Vilde (17), although the highest relative frequency of verbalizers of the studied concept is a characteristic feature of the texts of M. Matios (0,036598). Meanwhile, I. Karpa (0,014569), Y. Andrukhovych (0,012334), A. Chekh (0,00986), and A. Kokotyukha (0,008484) relatively infrequently refer to sadness.
The analysis shows that a repertoire of attributes that authors ascribe to a concept can be considered a specific feature of a writer (s idiolect. Within the repertoire of attributes, it is important to distinguish between stabilized attributes (which are characterized by a high frequency of > 3 in fiction and which occur in texts of other styles) and individual-author attributes, whose frequency ranges from 1 to 3.
The specificity of metaphorization of a particular concept is also a marker of the idiolect. On the one hand, the set of metaphorical models used by the author to verbalize a concept has been shown to characterize an idiolect. On the other hand, we consider both the metaphorical model and its implementation at the verbal level to be significant. For example, the model EMOTION IS A LIVING BEING (animal) is typical, particularly, of the Ukrainian worldview. At the same time, its verbal realization (загніздитися (nest) [zahnizdytysia] in Y. Vynnychuk, гніздитися (nest) [hnizdytysia] in M. Matios) is one of the markers of the idiolect.
The further study of quantitative and qualitative markers of individual authorial conceptualization using corpus data and statistical methods appears to be promising in idiolect/idiostyle research. 7. References