Liberal Arts in Russia EN-rus logo
russian flagRussian
ISSN 2305-8420 (Print)
ISSN 2312-6442 (Online)
Current Issue

The problem of inexpressibleness of the speech object

Liberal Arts in Russia. 2016. Vol. 5. No. 5. Pp. 532-538.
Get the full text (Russian)
Mikhailova M. Yu.
Samara State University of Social Sciences and Education
65/67 M. Gorky St., 443099 Samara, Russia


In the article the author’s solution of the inexpressibleness of the speech subject is given taking into account the asymmetry of the linguistic sign - signifying and signified - in relation to the elements of the functional-semantic category of the inexpressible . It was determined that the elements of the field of inexpressible are marked by the nomination of abstract vocabulary of three subclasses: 1) the most general feature, 2) the concept or term 3) the generic notions in relation to the aspectual. On the other hand, the names, which are the surreal constructs of subject, in spite of an empty denotative value are not marked with an inexpressible, expressing a specific holistic image. From the object of speech, it can be said about a single inexpressibleness of the speech object signifying or signified, or the dual inexpressibleness - both signifying and signified. It is determined for the first time that under the dual inexpressibleness the categories denoting imaginary creatures in fiction or extraordinary beings, whose properties are impossible with nothing to relate, are actively being labeled with the elements of the field of inexpressible. The inexpressibleness of signified is conditioned by factors of external or internal linguistics. The factor of the internal linguistics is an aspect of existential inexpressibleness, the inexpressibleness of the subject of speech due to its otherness. This inexpressibleness is marked with the discursive pronouns usage ( something , it , indivisible combinations like “something inexpressible”). The factor of external linguistics is a competitive or psychophysical inexpressibleness due to the peculiarities of speech subject. The meaning of inexpressible is transmitted by interrogative sentences with a negative value, the particle if , indivisible combinations like “something untold”. In situations with the meaning of a signifier, in which the speaker actually knows the meaning and only marks this sector as inexpressible - And she was an indescribable beauty (= very beautiful) - means of transferring of semantics of inexpressible finds centrifugal forces; from the field of inexpressible it migrates to the field of a very high quality concentration. This “migration” is being observed in the folk formulas (so beautiful that it cannot be told in words, it cannot be described with a pen ...), in the formulas of feeling expression (I love so much - no words!).


  • • functional-semantic category
  • • semantics of inexpressible
  • • the asymmetric duality of the linguistic sign
  • • signifier
  • • signified


  1. Zaika V. I. Ocherki po teorii khudozhestvennoi rechi [Essays on the theory of artistic speech]. Velikii Novgorod: Novg. gos. unt-t, 2006.
  2. Gak V. G. Sokrovennye smysly: Slovo. Tekst. Kul'tura: Sb. st. Moscow: Yazyki slavyanskoi kul'tury, 2004. Pp. 489-496.
  3. Gorshkova L. A. Semantika i funktsii neopredelennykh mestoimenii v proze B. K. Zaitseva: avtoref. dis. ... kand. filol. Nauk [Semantics and functions of indefinite pronouns in the prose of B. K. Zaitsev: PhD thesis]. Ufa, 2005.
  4. Ivanyan E. P. Obshchee yazykoznanie: Kurs lektsii [General linguistics: Lectures]. Samara: PGSGA, 2013.
  5. Ivanyan E. P. Semantika umolchaniya i sredstva ee vyrazheniya v russkom yazyke. 2 ed. [The semantics of reticence and the means of its expression in the Russian language. 2nd edition]. Moscow: FLINTA, 2015.
  6. Karasik V. I. Kontseptual'nye issledovaniya v sovremennoi lingvistike: Sb. st. Saint Petersburg: Izd-vo GGPIIYa, 2010. No. 12. Pp. 45-53.
  7. Kartsevskii S. O. V. A. Zvegintsev. Istoriya yazykoznaniya XIX-XX vekov v ocherkakh i izvlecheniyakh. Moscow: Prosveshchenie, 1965. Pt. 2. Pp. 85-90.
  8. Kobozeva I. M. Lingvisticheskaya semantika: Uchebn. Posobie [Linguistic semantics: Textbook]. Moscow: Editorial URSS, 2000.
  9. Kostikova O. I. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. No. 3. 2010. Pp. 41-53.
  10. Kuksina A. E. Vestnik MGOU. Seriya "Russkaya filologiya". 2007. No. 3. Pp. 87-91.
  11. Mikhailova, M. Yu. Liberal Arts in Russia. 2016. Vol. 5. No. 4. Pp. 376-384.
  12. Morgunova A. A. Vysshee gumanitarnoe obrazovanie XXI veka: problemy i perspektivy: Materialy. konf. Samara: PGSGA, 2013. Pp. 189-192.
  13. Nikolaeva T. M. Funktsii chastits v vyskazyvanii [Functions of particles in a statement]. Moscow: Nauka, 1985.
  14. Popova Z. D. Sternin A. I. Semantiko-kognitivnyi analiz yazyka. Monografiya [Semantic-cognitive analysis of language. Monograph]. Voronezh: Istoki, 2007.
  15. Serebryakov A. A. Romanticheskii tekst v lingvopoeticheskom aspekte (na materiale khudozhestvennoi prozy i metapoetik G. fon Kleista): avtoref. dis. ... d-ra filol. nauk. Rostov-na-Donu, 2010.
  16. Syritsa G. S. Slavyanskie yazyki i kul'tury v sovremennom mire. Moscow: MGOU, 2009. Pp. 294-295.
  17. Syritsa G. S. Aktualizatsiya avtorskikh smyslov v khudozhestvennom tekste. Lingvopoeticheskii aspect [The actualization of the author's meanings in a literary text. Linguopoetic aspect]. Moscow: FLINTA, 2014.
  18. Ufimtseva A. A. Leksicheskoe znachenie. Printsip semiologicheskogo opisaniya leksiki [Lexical meaning. The principle of semiological description of vocabulary]. Moscow: Nauka, 1986.
  19. Mikhailova M. Yu. Russian Linguistic Bulletin. 2015. No. 3(3). Pp. 19-21.
  20. Mikhailova M. Yu. Expression of inexpressible: time of globalization. Chapter 7. Actual problems of the humanities: Monograph. Vienna: East West, 2016. Vol. 3. Pp. 69-83.