Though of the same genre, two comparable proverbs from a given culture can operate in two distinct communicative spheres. Using an approach called discourse ecology, I explore the intertextual dynamics, semantics, and usage of two Kazakh proverbial calls to action. I consider the meaning and cultural background for each proverb. Based on searches of social media and a Kazakh corpus of news articles, I argue that one proverb operates in mass-media whereas the other is limited to use in interpersonal conversation and online chat forums. I conclude with considerations of the contrasting roles that the two comparable proverbs play in terms of representative and frame-aligning discourse for contemporary Kazakhs.

The word-stock of a language is usually enriched by units of language such as: words, word-groups and/or by phraseological units. The main difference between words and phrases lies in their form and meaning. A word is a smaller unit than a phrase. Phrases appear in languages describing the nation’s character, traditions and customs. As every nation has its own history, customs and traditions, the common history of humanity connects common things and phenomena such as: nature, war, animals, food, plants etc. Proverbs have mostly been formulated and coined on the basis of these topics. Idioms, proverbs and sayings are used to make a language colourful and fascinating; they are commonly used in all types of language: formal, informal, spoken or written. It is difficult to understand the meaning of the idioms from the words it consists of. If someone does not know that or another idiom they will not understand the whole text or speech. In our research work we would like to reveal the st...

In the systemic functional linguistic (SFL) tradition of discourse analysis by Berry (1981 a, b), Fawcett, Mije and Wissen (1988) and O'Donnell (1990), discourse has been studied but not proverbial discourse. In their models of discourse, how a choice is made can be motivated, but the WHY aspect of discourse has not been motivated from a causal dispositional action perspective. Such a causal motivation has been first attempted by Bhuvaneswar (1999, 2013, and 2017) and also in Bhuvaneswar, Fatima, Sarah, and Khadija (2009) in the discourse analysis of proverbial exchanges. These analyses focused only on Telugu, English, and Arabic. In the culture of the Maithili speaking community, the use of proverbs is very common in conversation and proverbs are used in a number of ways of their variety-range-depth. This paper, providing a principled account of the structure of the proverb in conversational exchanges, aims to initiate research in Maithili proverbial discourse analysis for the first time, and study how proverbs are used in Maithili conversational exchanges (casual conversation). As for data collection, 25 proverbial exchanges were recorded and transcribed, and out of them, only five representative samples were taken for analysis. As for data analysis, each exchange was analyzed using the dispositional choice of networks of Bhuvaneswar (2013) in terms of (i) the position of the proverb in the exchange, (ii) its sequential emergence in the structure of the proverbial exchange (PE),and (iii) the Proverb Meaning Triad (Literal-Prototypical-Contextual) are motivated from a dispositional causal perspective. An important finding worth-mentioning here is that Maithili proverbs have been generated-chosen-specified-directed-materialized (GCSDM) from dispositional choices made by the speakers as a result of their proverbial va:sana, knowledge, and likes and dislikes.

Adopting social, discoursal and contrastive view, this paper primarily aims at investigating the discoursal and content feature of Persian and English animal proverbs relating to cat, dog and donkey taking the prototype model. As the second goal, it investigates the similarities and differences between these two languages based on Duczmal and Schmitz's (1983 cited in Yarmohammadi 2002) framework. Based on the findings of the study proverbs are treasures of wisdom to both Persian and English and have shown particular characteristics of people, their ideologies and culture, but on the other side, they also reveal similarities and dissimilarities between these two societies. They are assigned to guide and stimulate their people to achieve the best of life in society, politics, law, belief and religion.

"Kazakhstan, like other former Soviet states, seeks national self-definition. For Kazakhs, proverbs are the traditional resource for defining problems, making moral judgments, and suggesting remedies. As a result, the Kazakhstani government mandates instruction in Kazakh proverbs to shape the nation. How can anthropological and folkloristic tools be implemented to assess the language ideologies brought into play in this situation without crossing the line into conjecture? Research into "national traits" using proverbs has validity issues since it relies on small proverb sets, fails to acknowledge the multi-voiced nature of language ideologies, and projects values onto the societies in question. More recent research utilizes larger proverb sets, surveys, and participant observation thus providing examples for addressing these shortcomings. In my own research, I have incorporated these proverb research methods while also addressing the shortcomings of the "national traits" research by setting three delimitations of my research concerning language ideologies expressed by means of Kazakh proverbs. First, I focus on youth, the societal group most likely to change linguistically in an environment of language revitalization. Second, I only explore language ideologies concerning "community". Third, I have worked with a speech community rather than attempting nationwide analysis. My field research was completed at Kazakh National Technical University in Almaty, Kazakhstan. I surveyed students concerning Kazakh proverbs addressing "community". Students reenacted the most familiar proverbs from the set, thereby narrativizing their language ideologies concerning "community". I analyzed the data using an adaptation of Goffman's frame analysis. The language ideology showing the most tension was individualism-collectivism. This cultural theme is best understood as a continuum going from individual to the extended family / friends, and finally to the nation. In their narratives, students grappled with the paradigm of strength in numbers and "elders" in the skits repeatedly opposed individualism. In the reenactments, students' agency received its clearest expression in terms of proverbs about extended family / friends. Thus the language ideologies concerning "community" showed the following frame issues (boundaries): 1. Tension over where the speech community should position itself along the individualism-collectivism continuum; 2. Scripts against individualism; 3. Preponderance of adaptations for smaller-scale collectives."

To research political discourse is the main problem of political science, including political linguistics. This concept is characterized between subjects, also specialists, who are engaged in the theory of sociology, social psychology; culture studies and mass communication are interested in it. So, we can research the political texts by the means of the present-day form of research, and thoroughly figure out public consciousness and socio-political questions. Discourse is considered as the form of political sciences in this article in the example of Sciences of the Republic of Kazakhstan.