Pages Navigation Menu
Submit scientific paper, scientific publications, International Research Journal | Meždunarodnyj naučno-issledovatel’skij žurnal

ISSN 2227-6017 (ONLINE), ISSN 2303-9868 (PRINT), DOI: 10.18454/IRJ.2227-6017
ЭЛ № ФС 77 - 80772, 16+


Download PDF ( ) Pages: 182-187 Issue: № 9 (111) Part 3 () Search in Google Scholar


Copy the reference manually or choose one of the links to import the data to Bibliography manager
Tsynk S.V. et al. "ABOUT THE ORIGINS AND PROBLEMS OF MODERN PSYCHOLINGUISTICS". Meždunarodnyj naučno-issledovatel’skij žurnal (International Research Journal) № 9 (111) Part 3, (2021): 182. Tue. 21. Sep. 2021.
Tsynk, S.V. & Kuzmina, M.K. (2021). OB ISTOKAH I PROBLEMAH SOVREMENNOY PSIHOLINGVISTIKI [ABOUT THE ORIGINS AND PROBLEMS OF MODERN PSYCHOLINGUISTICS]. Meždunarodnyj naučno-issledovatel’skij žurnal, № 9 (111) Part 3, 182-187.
Tsynk S. V. ABOUT THE ORIGINS AND PROBLEMS OF MODERN PSYCHOLINGUISTICS / S. V. Tsynk, M. K. Kuzmina // Mezhdunarodnyj nauchno-issledovatel'skij zhurnal. — 2021. — № 9 (111) Part 3. — С. 182—187. doi: 10.23670/IRJ.2021.9.111.107




Научная статья

Цынк С.В.1, *, Кузьмина М.К.2

1, 2 Димитровградский инженерно-технологический институт – филиал НИЯУ МИФИ, Димитровград, Россия

* Корреспондирующий автор (stsynk[at]


В статье описывается предыстория возникновения психолингвистики – исследуются концепции А. Марти и К. Бюлера, оценивается их влияние на последующее развитие науки о языке; рассмотрены современные представления психолингвистов о языке, его формах, особенностях и методах изучения языка, речевой деятельности.

Цель работы – анализ трудов А. Марти и К. Бюлера, заложивших основы психолингвистики, и представление современной проблематики этой науки. Новизна исследования заключается в том, что концепции немецких ученых впервые рассматриваются как важнейшая научная предпосылка для возникновения психолингвистики, а также в том, что сформулированы положения, отличающие психолингвистику от других лингвистических дисциплин.

В работе использовались общелогические методы и приемы исследования (анализ, синтез, абстрагирование, обобщение), а также специфические для гуманитарного знания методы – понимание и объяснение. Делается вывод о том, что современная психолингвистика, так же, как и концепции А. Марти, К. Бюлера, опирается на представление о речи как психическом процессе.

Ключевые слова: психолингвистика, истоки возникновения психолингвистики, актуальные проблемы психолингвистики, А. Марти, К. Бюлер.


Research article

Tsynk S.V.1, *, Kuzmina M.K.2

1, 2 Dimitrovgrad Engineering and Technological Institute of the National Research Nuclear University MEPHI,
Dimitrovgrad, Russia

* Corresponding author (stsynk[at]


This article describes the background of the emergence of psycholinguistics – explores the concepts of A. Marty and K. Buehler, assesses their impact on the subsequent development of the science of language; presents the modern ideas of psycholinguists about language, its forms, specifics and methods of language learning, speech activity.

The purpose of the work is to analyze the works of A. Marty and K. Buehler, who laid the foundations of psycholinguistics, and to present the modern problems of this science. The research novelty is in fact that the concepts of German scientists for the first time are considered as the most important scientific prerequisite for the emergence of psycholinguistics, and the provisions that distinguish psycholinguistics from other linguistic disciplines are formulated.

General-logical methods and techniques of research (analysis, synthesis, abstracting, generalization) have been used, as well as specific methods for the human knowledge are understanding and explanation. It is concluded that modern psycholinguistics, like the concepts of A. Marty and K. Buehler, is based upon the idea of speech as a psychical process.

Keywords: psycholinguistics, origins of psycholinguistics, actual problems of psycholinguistics, A. Marty, K. Buehler.


Psycholinguistics is a science that emerged in the United States in the early 50s of the twentieth century, uniting scientists from different countries. Psycholinguistics appeared on the interfaces of two “oldest” sciences –psychology and linguistics, it became one of the main linguistic sciences in a relatively short period of its existence. The emergence of this new science was objectively determined by the needs of social development of human society, in particular, the need for scientific knowledge of the nature of human mental intellectual activity. This science is developed on the basis of modern experimental psychology based on physiology, which studies the higher nervous activity of a person, on objective methods of studying the human psyche. As part of the synchronous study of language in the twentieth century, many original concepts were put forward, based on a psychological understanding of the nature of the object of linguistics. Regardless of how the language developed in its history, it remains a psychological phenomenon, and representatives of modern psycholinguistics believe that it is possible to know its essence, based on how speakers currently use the language in the process of communication.

The theoretical significance of the work is that for the first time it describes in detail the concepts of A. Marty and K. Buehler in terms of influence on the formation of modern psycholinguistics. Thus, an analysis of the development of psycholinguistic thought is made and also a vision of the main problems of modern psycholinguistics associated with the use of language in the processes of speech communication and individual speech-thinking activity is proposed.

The practical significance of the work is determined by the possibility of using the results of the research in the educational process, during the teaching university courses “Introduction to Linguistics”, “History and Theory of Linguistic Teachings”, “Theory of Language”, “Psycholinguistics”, in the preparation of teaching aids.

Review of literature

The history of psycholinguistics development is dedicated to the works of V. P. Belyanin [2], G. Guillaume [6], V. A. Kovshikov and V. P. Glukhov [11], I. N. Gorelov and K. F. Sedov [5], G. Miller [16] and others. The problem of studying the mechanisms of internal speech was investigated by N. I. Zhinkin [8], the description of language ability (the ability to create languages) is contained in the works of E. F. Arsenteva and Y. S. Arsenteva [1], S. V. Tsynk [26], [27] and others. One of the central problems of psycholinguistics (the problem of constructing the grammatical structure of a sentence in speech perception) is considered in the article by D. A. Chernova, N. A. Slioussar, V. K. Prokopenya, T. Ye. Petrova, T. V. Chernigovskaya [29]. Experimental psycholinguistic methods are used by the authors N. B. Lebedeva [13], Z. I. Rezanova and E. Yu. Ershova [20]. Z. I. Rezanova and A. A. Miklashevsky [21] write about the possibilities of research based on psycholinguistic databases. The works of O. V. Fedorova [24], M. V. Shcherbakova [30] and others are dedicated to the problems of studying the mechanisms of production, understanding, and perception of speech. A.A. Yakovlev [31] in his article raises the topical problem of interpreting linguistic consciousness as a psycholinguistic concept.


A number of general logical methods and techniques of research have been used. They are: analysis (mental division of the object (texts of psycholinguists) into its component parts (problems)), synthesis (identification of common features of psycholinguistic research), abstraction (finding out which of the considered properties are essential and which are secondary) and generalization (establishment of common properties and features of various psycholinguistic concepts). We also have used such specific methods as understanding (comprehension of the meaning of the psycholinguistic direction, its place in science, its functions), and explanation (identification of the essence of the studied subject, conditions, sources of its development). 


Consider the background of psycholinguistics. The emergence of the actual synchronous psychological direction was preceded by the appearance of two interesting conceptions created in the early twentieth century by German linguists Anton Marty and Karl Buehler.

  1. Marty [15] believed that linguistics should be thoroughly psychological even when it comes to statement of individual facts, and he was convinced that on a psychological basis it is possible to create not only a descriptive (non-historical) grammar of a particular language, but also a universal one. The researcher saw the possibility of building a universal grammar in the fact that 1) all languages express the same content; 2) all of them are built on the same principles, since all people, regardless of the language they speak, have a common psychophysical organization. Therefore, the task of linguistics is to discover and describe these general principles of language organization. Thus, A. Marty revived the ideas of universal grammar of the XVII century. However, unlike his predecessors, he was limited to purely descriptive purposes. The linguist, in his opinion, should state the general language means of expression of psychology, and the principles of their use are not under the jurisdiction of linguistics as a science. It is only important to classify these means. A. Marty divided all means of language into autosemantic and synsemantic. Autosemantic means express non-linguistic content, mental functions of a person by themselves, that is, regardless of others. These means are used independently. They do not need the support of others to disclose their content. These are, for example, mostly nouns. On the contrary, synsemantic means are not used independently, their purpose is to supplement and clarify the content of other means – autosemantic. These are, for example, adjectives that are not used without nouns. The so-called “auxiliary parts of speech” are typical synsemantic means, since they do not have their own content and only link other means of expression. The difference between autosemantic and synsemantic means of languages is relative, since it is not formal, but semantic. Thus, nouns as a whole, as a class, belong to autosemantic means, but they can also perform the role of synsemantic means, for example, a noun in a sentence is not only a subject – independent means, but also a complement (object) – dependent, synsemantic means. The nouns “brother”, “father”, “father-in-law” and other kinship terms should be recognized by themselves as synsemantic means, since they express the relationship between objects. So Marty’s idea has a very broad and deep meaning.
  2. Buehler [32] in the 30s of the twentieth century created a theory, which partly developed the ideas of Marty. The scientist connected linguistics with the so-called situational psychology that emerged at that time, which investigated the dependence of the human psyche, his psychological behavior on a particular situation in which a person is put. Among the many possible situations, K. Buehler singled out a communicative situation, that is, a situation of communication: the speaker – the listener. He proposed to study the language from the view point of how this situation is reflected, in the language system. For example, he investigated the index “field” of this situation, that is, the system of pronominal words. This system is entirely determined by the language situation. This is obvious when we refer to personal pronouns: ich – speaker, du – listener, er – outsider for the speaker and listener: ich – du – er. But it turns out that other pronominal words reflect the same situation. For example, pronominal adverbs are similarly related: hier (here) – da (here) – dort (there). And since pronominal words replace their equivalent words, their system reflects the system of the language as a whole and, therefore, it is possible to build a situational grammar of the language. Moreover, as the language situation is universal, so this grammar will also be universal at its core (this is the coincidence of views with A. Marty).
  3. Buehler, therefore, focuses on the role of a person, the features of his activities and situations of activity in understanding the phenomenon “language”. According to the scientist “each expression can be interpreted as a human act, because each specific statement is associated with other conscious actions of this person” [3, P. 53]. In contrast to W. von Humboldt and F. de Saussure, K. Buehler distinguishes not two, but four components (“phenomena”) of the speech process, namely:

1) speech action;

2) language behavior;

3) speech act;

4) language structure.

As for speech actions, he writes that there are situations in which speech is used to solve a relevant at the moment vital task, so speech actions are performed. In speech activity, its result always arises, and the language work tends to be independent of the individual’s position in life and the author’s experiences. The speech act is defined by K. Buehler as “subjective sense-making”. Language, according to the researcher, has the ability to adapt to the inexhaustible wealth of facts that are subject to language formulation in each particular case. This is what provides a certain degree of “freedom of sense-making”. The language structure (the language formation) is “intersubjective”. K. Buehler explains this position: “The verb, the article and the accusative refer to linguistic formations in the same way as a “right triangle” refers to “formations” of elementary geometry” [3, P.61]. In accordance with this, the scientist identifies three functions of language: representative, expressive and appellative. When a language sign is correlated with objects, it acts as a symbol. Hence the representative function of the language is taken. Being dependent on the speaker, the sign is a symptom. Hence its expressive function is taken. When appealing to the listener, the sign becomes a signal. Therefore, the language has an appellative function.

The speech situation, according to K. Buehler, is formed by: the speaker, the listener, and the objects of speech. He emphasizes that in creating a speech situation not only the sender but also the recipient has their own positions. They reach for the language of the agreements, which are governed by the interpersonal communication. The “actional field” necessarily includes two synchronous aspects: internal and external situations. All this to a certain extent determines the nature of the actions of the subjects of speech communication, makes it possible to establish what the speaker means.

In our opinion, the conceptions of A. Marty and K. Buehler are very valuable for the development of modern psycholinguistics.

Representatives of modern psycholinguistics C. Osgood [35], G. Miller [16], J. Carroll [33], N. Chomsky [34], I. A. Zimnaya [9], R. M. Frumkina [25], A. E. Suprun [23] and others also proceed from the definition of language as an activity given by Wilhelm von Humboldt [7]. Therefore, the focus of their attention is the speaker. For them, the subject of research is not a grammatical and lexical system of language usage, a product, an abstract result of the activity of society, but the speech activity of speakers. But psycholinguists do not dissolve language in the speech activity of each speaker. They consider that language is a deeply social phenomenon, even when it expresses itself in an individual speech act, which is especially emphasized by Russian psycholinguists (A. A. Leontiev [14], L. V. Sakharny [22] and others).

In psycholinguistics not only certain language forms are of interest, but the mechanisms of using these forms by speakers, the mental mechanism of their perception and awareness by listeners. This means that researchers cannot limit themselves to describing the observed ready-made texts, fixing text units, and generalizing them. It is important to recreate the process of formation of texts and language units. This implies the reference to the description of not only the external, but also the internal speech of the speakers. In psycholinguists’ opinion, for example, N. I. Zhinkin’s one [8], modern psychology provides the necessary means to penetrate the internal mechanism of language.

This way of research makes it possible to differentiate the language itself. Since mother-tongue speakers do not equally assimilate ready-made language forms, and use known rules differently, psycholinguists conclude that the global concept of language must be strictly differentiated. The language of the speaker is not identical with the language of the listener, since in the first case speech is made, and in the second case it is recognized. The mechanism of speech making and the mechanism of recognition are different concepts. Therefore, it’s necessary to create two grammars: one for speakers and one for listeners. The concept of “language” must be differentiated in many other ways: the language of children is not the same as the language of adults; the language of books and science is not the same as the language of casual conversation.

The merit of psycholinguists before linguistics is that they have developed an objective method of studying the “speaking person” – a psycholinguistic experiment that allows making reasonable conclusions about not only this individual, but also a wide range of mother-tongue speakers. The application features of experimental methods of psycholinguistic analysis are described, for example, in the articles of A.A. Golub, M.Yu. Ivanov [4], E.Yu. Kabanovskaya [10], S.I. Popov [19].

An outstanding achievement of psycholinguists is that they managed to build a reliable experimental base under the usage of neogrammarians (H. Osthoff, K. Brugman [17], H. Paul [18], and others), obtained by intuitive averaging of individual languages. If only phonetics was experimentally studied before psycholinguists (sounds can be recorded with devices), then psycholinguists experimentally study the semantics of language. The essence of their experiments is that they turn to a certain mass of mother-tongue speakers in order to find out the assessment of certain language phenomena by each speaker. The obtained results are mathematically (statistically) treated and serve as objective material for linguistic generalizations.

In recent years, as S. V. Tsynk, M. K. Kuzmina note, “interest in the personal aspect of language learning has significantly increased” [28, P.7], [12, P.54]. The relationship “personality – language and speech” is also actively studied in modern psycholinguistics. The language abilities of the individual are being studied, for example, the ability to create language, which is clearly manifested in many poets and writers (see, for example, [26], [27]).


  1. Marty’s and K. Buehler’s concepts contributed to the emergence of the psycholinguistic study. They are characterized by the idea of speech as a psychical process; Modern psycholinguistics is based on them. The main provisions of modern psycholinguistics are as follows:
  2. Language is not an abstract system, but it is the activity of the speakers, that is fundamentally social and psychological.
  3. Language is studied from the view point of language communication conditions.
  4. Two processes are distinguished fundamentally: speaking and listening (the speaker’s code and the listener’s code).
  5. Language expresses itself in two forms: external and internal speech. Hence, there is an interest in the mechanisms of formation and functioning of language units.
  6. Psycholinguistics is a science that is entirely experimental in terms of research methodology.
  7. In recent years, psycholinguistics has been actively considering an actual problem – the study of the relationship «personality – language and speech».

We have identified the scientific background and the main trends in the development of modern psycholinguistics, its methods, its current problems and achievements – a description of the mechanisms of speech, language personality, etc., showed the methodological foundations and historical continuity of the teachings of linguists, elucidated the works of A. Marty and K. Buehler from the view point of the significance of their views for today’s understanding of the same scientific problems.


Thus, psycholinguistics is an interdisciplinary field of science about the laws of formation in ontogenesis and formed processes of speech activity in the system of various types of human activity. Psycholinguistics studies the following aspects of speech: its processes, motives of speech, its subject and addressee, speech intention, internal processes of speech, code transitions, recognition of speech by the listener. It explores the development of a person’s speech ability throughout life, non-native languages acquisition, speech influence. Modern psycholinguistics is largely based on the provisions that were put forward in the 30s of the twentieth century by A. Marty and K. Buehler.

Конфликт интересов

Не указан.

Conflict of Interest

None declared.

Список литературы / References

  1. Арсентьева Е. Ф. Расширенная метафора как один из типов окказионального использования фразеологизмов-эвфемизмов: экспериментальное исследование / Е. Ф.Арсентьева, Ю. С. Арсентьева // Вестник Томского государственного университета. Филология. – 2017. – № 50. – С. 5-16.
  2. Белянин В. П. Психолингвистика / В. П. Белянин. – М. : Флинта : Московский психолого-социальный институт, 2003. – 232 с.
  3. Бюлер К. Теория языка. Репрезентативная функция языка / К. Бюлер. – М. : Прогресс, 1993. – 502 с.
  4. Голубь А. А. Экспериментальные методы психолингвистического анализа / А. А. Голубь, М. Ю. Иванов // Психология личности: актуальные исследования. Сборник научных трудов. – Магнитогорск: МГТУ, 2020. – С. 111-116.
  5. Горелов И. Н. Основы психолингвистики / И. Н. Горелов, К.Ф. Седов. М. : Лабиринт, 2001. – 304 с.
  6. Гийом Г. Принципы теоретической лингвистики / Г. Гийом. – М. : Прогресс, 1992. – 224 с.
  7. Гумбольдт В. Избранные труды по общему языкознанию / В. Гумбольдт. – М. : Прогресс, 1984. – 394 с.
  8. Жинкин Н. И. Механизмы речи / Н. И. Жинкин. – М. : Издательство Академии педагогических наук, 1958. – 370 с.
  9. Зимняя И. А. Лингвопсихология речевой деятельности / И. А. Зимняя. – М. : Московский психолого-социальный институт, 2001. – 432 с.
  10. Кабановская Е. Ю. Изучение вербальных ассоциаций в психолингвистике / Е. Ю. Кабановская // Символ науки. – 2020. – № 5. – С. 139-140.
  11. Ковшиков В. А. Психолингвистика. Теория речевой деятельности / В. А. Ковшиков, В.П. Глухов. – М. : Астрель, 2007. – 318 с.
  12. Кузьмина М. К. Подходы к исследованию дискурса / М. К. Кузьмина // Научная перспектива. – 2010. – №7. – С. 54-56.
  13. Лебедева Н. Б. Опыт типологизации орфографических личностей на основе эксперимента «Три диктанта с визуальным изучением текста» / Н.Б. Лебедева // Вестник Томского государственного университета. – 2017. – № 45. – С. 116-125.
  14. Леонтьев А. А. Основы психолингвистики / А. А. Леонтьев. – М. : Смысл; СПб. : Лань. 2003. – 287 с.
  15. Марти А. Об отношении грамматики и логики / А. Марти. – [Электронный ресурс]. URL:—ob-otnoshenii-grammatiki-i-logiki (дата обращения: 31.07.2021).
  16. Миллер Дж. Психолингвисты / Дж. Миллер // Теория речевой деятельности (Проблемы психолингвистики). – М. : Наука, 1968. – 272 с.
  17. Остгоф Г. Предисловие к книге «Морфологические исследования в области индоевропейских языков / Г. Остгоф, К. Бругман // Звегинцев В. А. История языкознания XIX-XX веков в очерках и извлечениях. – Ч. 1. – М. : Просвещение, 1964. – С. 187-199.
  18. Пауль Г. Принципы истории языка / Г. Пауль. – М. : Издательство иностранной литературы, 1960. – 499 с.
  19. Попов С. И. Ассоциативный эксперимент как основа формирования принципов отбора лексического материала / С. И. Попов //Лингвистика и лингводидактика в свете современных научных парадигм. Сборник научных трудов. – Иркутск, 2019. – С. 315-323.
  20. Резанова З. И. Влияние грамматического рода на концептуализацию объектов (экспериментальное исследование) / З. И. Резанова, Е. Ю. Ершова // Вестник Томского государственного университета. Филология. – 2017. – № 50. – С. 104-124.
  21. Резанова З. И. Моделирование образно-перцептивного компонента языковой семантики при помощи психолингвистической базы данных / З. И. Резванова, А. А. Миклашевский // Вестник Томского государственного университета. Филология. – 2016. – № 5 (43). – С. 71-92.
  22. Сахарный Л. В. Введение в психолингвистику / Л. В. Сахарный. – Л. : Издательство «ЛГУ», 1989. – 180 с.
  23. Супрун А. Е. Лекции по теории речевой деятельности / А. Е. Супрун. – Минск : Белорусский фонд Сороса, 1996. – 287 с.
  24. Федорова О. В. Отечественная психолингвистика: вчера, сегодня, завтра (субъективные заметки об изучении механизмов порождения и понимания речи) / О. В. Федорова // Вопросы языкознания. – 2020. – № 6. – С. 105-129.
  25. Фрумкина Р. М. Психолингвистика / Р. М. Фрумкина. – М. : Академия, 2001. – 320 с.
  26. Цынк С. В. Лексические окказионализмы (имена существительные) в произведении А.И. Солженицына «Двести лет вместе» / С. В. Цынк // Вестник Московского государственного областного университета. Серия «Русская филология». – 2013. – № 1. – С. 5-10.
  27. Цынк С. В. О некоторых лексических окказионализмах исторического очерка А.И. Солженицына «Двести лет вместе» / С. В. Цынк // Вестник Московского государственного областного университета. Серия «Русская филология». – 2015. – № 2. – С. 35-39.
  28. Цынк С. В. Языковая личность А.И. Солженицына как автора научно-публицистического текста (на материале исторического очерка «Двести лет вместе») / С. В. Цынк. – Димитровград : Издательство ДИТИ НИЯУ МИФИ, 2016. – 145 с.
  29. Чернова Д. А. Экспериментальные исследования грамматики: синтаксический анализ неоднозначных предложений / Д. А. Чернова, Н. А. Слюсарь, В. К. Прокопенко и др. // Вопросы языкознания. – 2016. – № 6. – С. 36-50.
  30. Щербакова М. В. Восприятие письменного высказывания в психолингвистическом аспекте / М. В. Щербакова // Sciences of Europe. – 2020. – № 47. – С. 38-40.
  31. Яковлев А. А. К анализу содержания понятия «языковое сознание» / А. А. Яковлев // Вестник Тверского государственного университета. Филология. – 2020. – № 4. – С. 69-73.
  32. Buehler K. Sprachtheorie. Die Darstellungs funktion der Sprache / K. Buehler. – Jena, 1934. – 434 p.
  33. Carroll J. B. The Study of Language / J. B. Carroll. – Cambridge, Mass. : Harvard University Press, 1953. – 289 p.
  34. Chomsky N. Aspects of the Theory of Syntax / N. Chomsky. – Cambridge, Mass. : MIT Press, 1965. – 251 p.
  35. Osgood C. E. Psychlinguistics / C. E. Osgood // Psychology: a Study of a Science. – 1963. – Vol. 6. – P. 244-316.

Список литературы на английском языке / References in English

  1. Arsenteva E. F. Rasshirennaya metafora kak odin iz tipov okkazional’nogo ispol’zovaniya frazeologizmov-evfemizmov: eksperimental’noe issledovanie [Extended metaphor as one of the types of occasional use of phraseological euphemisms: an experimental study] / E. F. Arsenteva, Y. S. Arsenteva // Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Filologiya [Bulletin of the Tomsk state university. Philology]. – 2017. – № 50. – P. 5-16. [in Russian].
  2. Belyanin V. P. Psiholingvistika [Psycholinguistics] / V. P. Belyanin. – M. : Flinta : Moskovskij psihologo-social’nyj institut, 2003. – 232 p. [in Russian]
  3. Buehler K. Teoriya yazyka. Reprezentativnaya funkciya yazyka [Theory of language. Representative function of the language.] / K. Buehler. – M. : Progress, 1993. – 502 p. [in Russian]
  4. Golub A. A. Eksperimental’nye metody psiholingvisticheskogo analiza [Experimental methods of psycholinguistic analysis] / A. A. Golub, M. YU. Ivanov // Psihologiya lichnosti: aktual’nye issledovaniya. Sbornik nauchnyh trudov [Personality psychology: current research. Collection of scientific papers]. – Magnitogorsk: MGTU, 2020. – P. 111-116. [in Russian]
  5. Gorelov I. N. Osnovy psiholingvistiki [Basics of psycholinguistics] / I. N. Gorelov, K.F. Sedov. M. : Labirint, 2001. – 304 p. [in Russian]
  6. Guillaume Principy teoreticheskoj lingvistiki [Principles of theoretical linguistics] / G. Guillaume. – M. : Progress, 1992. – 224 p. [in Russian]
  7. Humboldt Izbrannye trudy po obshchemu yazykoznaniyu [Selected works on General linguistics] / V. Humboldt. – M. : Progress, 1984. – 394 p. [in Russian]
  8. Zhinkin N. I. Mekhanizmy rechi [The mechanisms of speech] / N. I. Zhinkin. – M. : Publishing house of Akademy of pedagogical sciences, 1958. – 370 p. [in Russian]
  9. Zimnaya I. A. Lingvopsihologiya rechevoj deyatel’nosti [Psycholinguistics of speech activity] / I. A. Zimnaya. – M. : Moskovskij psihologo-social’nyj institut, 2001. – 432 p. [in Russian]
  10. Kabanovskaya E. YU. Izuchenie verbal’nyh associacij v psiholingvistike [The study of verbal associations in psycholinguistics] / E. YU. Kabanovskaya // Simvol nauki [Science symbol]. – 2020. – № 5. – P. 139-140. [in Russian]
  11. Kovshikov V. A. Psiholingvistika. Teoriya rechevoj deyatel’nosti [Psycholinguistics. Theory of speech activity] / A. Kovshikov, V.P. Gluhov. – M. : Astrel’, 2007. – 318 p. [in Russian]
  12. Kuzmina M. K. Podhody k issledovaniyu diskursa [Approaches to the study of discourse] / M. K. Kuz’mina // Nauchnaya perspektiva [Scientific perspective]. – 2010. – №7. – P. 54-56. [in Russian]
  13. Lebedeva N. B. Opyt tipologizacii orfograficheskih lichnostej na osnove eksperimenta «Tri diktanta s vizual’nym izucheniem teksta» [Experience of typologization of orthographical personalities on the basis of the experiment «Three Dictations with the Visual Study of the Text»] / N. B. Lebedeva // Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Filologiya [Bulletin of the Tomsk state university. Philology]. – 2017. – № 45. – P. 116-125. [in Russian]
  14. Leontiev A. A. Osnovy psiholingvistiki [Basics of psycholinguistics] / A. A. Leontiev. – M. : Smysl; SPb. : Lan’. 2003. – 287 p. [in Russian]
  15. Marty A. Ob otnoshenii grammatiki i logiki [About the relation of grammar and logic] [Electronic resource] / A. Marty. – URL:—ob-otnoshenii-grammatiki-i-logiki (accessed: 31.07.2021). [in Russian]
  16. Miller G. Psiholingvisty [Psycholinguists] / G. Miller // Teoriya rechevoj deyatel’nosti (Problemy psiholingvistiki) [Theory of speech activity (Problems of psycholinguistics)]. – M. : Nauka, 1968. – 272 p. [in Russian]
  17. Osthoff C. Predislovie k knige «Morfologicheskie issledovaniya v oblasti indoevropejskih yazykov [Introduction to the book “Morphological research in the field of Indo-European languages”] / G. Osthoff, K. Brugman // Zvegintsev V. A. Istoriya yazykoznaniya XIX-XX vekov v ocherkah i izvlecheniyah [History of linguistics of the XIX-XX centuries in essays and extracts]. – Part 1. – M. : Prosveshchenie, 1964. – P. 187-199. [in Russian]
  18. Paul H. Principy istorii yazyka [Principles of language history] / H. Paul. – M. : Publishing house of foreign literature, 1960. – 499 p. [in Russian]
  19. Popov S. I. Associativnyj eksperiment kak osnova formirovaniya principov otbora leksicheskogo materiala [Associative experiment as the basis for the formation of the principles of selection of lexical material] / S. I. Popov //Lingvistika i lingvodidaktika v svete sovremennyh nauchnyh paradigm. Sbornik nauchnyh trudov [Linguistics and linguodidactics in the light of modern scientific paradigms. Collection of scientific papers]. – Irkutsk, 2019. – P. 315-323. [in Russian]
  20. Rezanova Z. I. Vliyanie grammaticheskogo roda na konceptualizaciyu ob”ektov (eksperimental’noe issledovanie) [The influence of the grammatical gender on the conceptualisation of the objects (an experimental stady)] / Z. I. Rezanova, Yu. Ershova // Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Filologiya [Bulletin of the Tomsk state university. Philology]. – 2017. – № 50. – P. 104-124. [in Russian]
  21. Rezanova Z. I. Modelirovanie obrazno-perceptivnogo komponenta yazykovoj semantiki pri pomoshchi psiholingvisticheskoj bazy dannyh [Modeling of the perceptual-based component of language semantics using a psycholinguistic database] / Z. I. Rezanova, A. A. Miklashevsky // Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Filologiya [Bulletin of the Tomsk state university. Philology]. – 2016. – № 43. – P. 71-92. [in Russian].
  22. Sakharny V. Vvedenie v psiholingvistiku [Introduction to psycholinguistics] / L. V. Saharnyj. – L. : «LGU», 1989. – 180 p. [in Russian]
  23. Suprun A. E. Lekcii po teorii rechevoj deyatel’nosti [). Lectures on the theory of speech activity] / A. E. Suprun. – Minsk : Belorusskij fond Sorosa, 1996. – 287 p. [in Russian]
  24. Fedorova O. V. Otechestvennaya psiholingvistika: vchera, segodnya, zavtra (sub”ektivnye zametki ob izuchenii mekhanizmov porozhdeniya i ponimaniya rechi) [Domestic psycholinguistics: yesterday, today, tomorrow (subjective notes on the study of the mechanisms of production and understanding of speech)] / O. V. Fedorova // Voprosy yazykoznaniya [Questions of linguistics]. – 2020. – № 6. – P. 105-129. [in Russian]
  25. Frumkina R. M. Psiholingvistika [Psycholinguistics] / R. M. Frumkina. – M. : Akademiya, 2001. – 320 p. [in Russian]
  26. Tsynk S. V. Leksicheskie okkazionalizmy (imena sushchestvitel’nye) v proizvedenii A.I. Solzhenicyna «Dvesti let vmeste» [Lexical occasionalisms (nouns) in the work «Two hundred years together» by A. Solzhenitsyn] / S. V. Tsynk // Vestnik Moskovskogo gosudarstvennogo oblastnogo universiteta. Seriya «Russkaya filologiya» [Bulletin of the Moscow state regional university. Series «Russian philology»]. – 2013. – № 1. – P. 5-10. [in Russian]
  27. Tsynk S. V. O nekotoryh leksicheskih okkazionalizmah istoricheskogo ocherka A.I. Solzhenicyna «Dvesti let vmeste» [On lexical occasionalisms in the historical essay Two hundred years together by A. Solzhenitsyn] / S. V. Tsynk // Vestnik Moskovskogo gosudarstvennogo oblastnogo universiteta. Seriya «Russkaya filologiya» [Bulletin of the Moscow state regional university. Series «Russian philology»]. – 2015. – № 2. – P. 35-39. [in Russian]
  28. Tsynk V. Yazykovaya lichnost’ A.I. Solzhenicyna kak avtora nauchno-publicisticheskogo teksta (na materiale istoricheskogo ocherka «Dvesti let vmeste») [A. I. Solzhenitsyn’s linguistic personality as the author of a scientific and journalistic text (based on the historical essay “Two hundred years together”)] / S. V. Tsynk. – Dimitrovgrad : Publishing house DITI NIYAU MIFI, 2016. – 145 p. [in Russian]
  29. Chernova D. A. Eksperimental’nye issledovaniya grammatiki: sintaksicheskij analiz neodnoznachnyh predlozhenij [Experimental studies of grammar: syntactic analysis of ambiguous sentences] / D. A. Chernova, N. A. Slioussar, K. Prokopenya and other. // Voprosy yazykoznaniya [Questions of linguistics]. – 2016. – № 6. – P. 36-50. [in Russian]
  30. Shcherbakova M. V. Vospriyatie pis’mennogo vyskazyvaniya v psiholingvisticheskom aspekte [Perception of a written statement in a psycholinguistic aspect] / M. V. Shcherbakova // Sciences of Europe. – 2020. – № 47. – P. 38-40. [in Russian]
  31. Yakovlev A. A. K analizu soderzhaniya ponyatiya «yazykovoe soznanie» [To the analysis of the content of the concept of «linguistic consciousness»]/ A. A. Yakovlev // Vestnik Tverskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Filologiya [Bulletin of the Tver state university. Philology]. – 2020. – № 4. – P. 69-73. [in Russian]
  32. Buehler K. Sprachtheorie. Die Darstellungs Funktion der Sprache / K. Buehler. – Jena, 1934. – 434 p.
  33. Carroll J. B. The Study of Language / J. B. Carroll. – Cambridge, Mass. : Harvard University Press, 1953. – 289 p.
  34. Chomsky N. Aspects of the Theory of Syntax / N. Chomsky. – Cambridge, Mass. : MIT Press, 1965. – 251 p.
  35. Osgood C. E. Psychlinguistics / C. E. Osgood // Psychology: a Study of a Science. – 1963. – Vol. 6. – P. 244-316.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Лимит времени истёк. Пожалуйста, перезагрузите CAPTCHA.