Education of the republic of uzbekistan state university of world languages

CHAPTER III. CONTRASTIVE ANALYSIS OF THE EVALUATIVE CATEGORIZATION OF THE CONCEPT OF “INTELLIGENCE”
3.1. Procedure of the experiment: research questions, methods
Nowadays, scholars tend to pay more attention to studying complex issues of the interaction between language and cognitive processes (Rowe, Leech & Cabrera, 2016; Remkhe, 2016; Wang & Jia, 2016; Baroni, 2016). Researchers examine various aspects of this categorical organization of the language – they study both the language system in general, and its various aspects (Shirai, 2016).⁴⁰ For example, American anthropologists C. Kluckhohn and F. Strodtbeck (2011) suggest the following categorization of values orientation in the world image: “human nature; human – the world; time; activity; interrelationship between humans”.
Some researchers use an inadequate approach to describing categorization as a format of presenting knowledge within categories – by “emphasizing the limitation of the prototype theory of categorization”⁴¹ or by “criticizing the prototype theory “⁴²(Evans & Green, 2006). At the same time, the studies of S. Harnad (2005) prove the importance of the classic categorization doctrine.
After comprehensively examining the peculiarities of the structural, functional, and cognitive approaches to studying language categories, N. Boldyrev (1994) concluded that the prototypical (cognitive) approach incorporates the best there is in all considered approaches, because, firstly, central elements of prototypical categories have most differential characteristics, secondly, prototypical categories are flexible and necessary for efficient human thinking.
Scholars who specialize in cognitive linguistics view the evaluative categorization of objects of reality and concepts as a secondary conceptualization and secondary categorization within the framework of another coordinate system, a system of opinions, evaluations, values, stereotypes, which is performed by the human “as an individual” (personal evaluation) or as a member of a specific community (generally accepted, collective evaluation) (Boldyrev, 2000; Vorontsova, 2012; Boyarskaya, 2011).
A tendency to isolate various fields in the evaluative categorization of objects can also be selected, for example, the categorization of evaluative semantics in English advertisement texts (Gribova, 2011; Kumakhova, 2010). This can be explained by the fact that such division has social causation and finds complex reflection in language structures.
Therefore, evaluative categorization is secondary, which is expressed by the fact that the subject, firstly, operates ideal and psychic objects, rather than natural ones, secondly, in order to evaluate the results of cognitive activity, uses evaluations borrowed from logic, which considers them statements on values, thirdly, it reconceptualizes the concepts of any field of knowledge within the framework of evaluations and evaluative linguistic categories of “good-bad”, “smart-foolish”, “like-dislike”, “much-little” and others. ⁴³