Theoretical problems of studying space in language consciousness 10

3.2. Space category in Russian and English
Space is a basic and universal category, because it is directly related to people. All our activities and life take place in space, so space is of interest to researchers of various disciplines. The spatial category is universal and relevant in all linguistic cultures. It is interesting and promising to compare the comparative characteristics of Russian and English means of expressing spatial concepts from the point of view of national and cultural characteristics.
Language tools that express spaces can be classified according to various criteria: for example, the actual measure: far, near( far, near), vertical axis: up, down( up, down), the position of someone, something in relation to the subject: near, close (nearby, close). Let's analyze the basic units of the Russian and English languages: close, near, far, far, far away, far away, and from afar in Russian and English denote the distance from the real world in terms of scale. We consider the semantic structure as a hierarchy of categorical, integral, and differential lexemes. The categorical-lexical classification of the semantic structure of these units is defined as "extension in space". Let's take a closer look at the implementation features that cover the concept of "nature of extension".
In the semantic structure of language unitsclose, near(close,near)integral seme "character of extension" is implemented in the differential seme "extension over a small distance".
Explanatory dictionaries contain synonyms for these words. For example, close – "to be, appear at a short distance, stand nearby";36close – "at a close distance"37. However, these units are not exactly the same or interchangeable. These units are not completely interchangeable. For example: We stood side by side, close to each other, at the window, which smelled fresh of water and the city's wet dust, and seemed only to stare and listen with intense excitement. - We stood side by side, close to each other, at the window, which smelled freshly of water and city wet dust, and seemed only to watch and listen with intense excitement. In this example, you can't replaceclose near, because the meaning of the sentence changes. The presence of a contextual qualifier near indicates that the distance between the subject and the object is minimal, whilenearindicates the length somewhat indistinctly. For example,near by, in the vast expanse of the valley, in the cool and moist freshness of the mist, lay a blue, transparent and deep lake. - Nearby, in the vast expanse of the valley, a blue, clear, and deep lake lay in the cool and damp freshness of the mist. The contextual qualifier in the vast expanse of the valley emphasizes that this language unit denotes a certain special space that is located in close proximity to the subject of perception.
In English, the differential seme "extension over a small distance" is implemented in the semantic structureclose( close), close, near (close, near),near(near). For example:'t go near it. - Don't get close to him. Anna was standing so close that I could feel her breath. - Anna stood so close that I could feel her breath. But our city is here and near and far can not be confused. - But our city here you can’t confuse near and far. Language unitsclose, close, near, (near)used to indicate the minimum spatial extent between two or more objects or between the subject and the object of perception. For example,Headmaster blushed and approached the student so close that the student took two steps back. - The director flushed and approached the student so close that he stepped back two steps. The long-distance differential attribute is implemented in the semantic structure of the units from afar within the specified integral seme. The peculiarity of the above-mentioned units is that they are all derived from the adjective, one of the meanings of which is "located, occurring at a great distance or having a long extension"38. Adverbs derived from the adjectivedistantused in cases when we are talking about the most remote, extreme of two or several objects or objects, for example:far away-from far away the measured and ringing voice of a bell reached us. It was so far away that sometimes we could barely catch it. In this example, contextual qualifiers emphasize the extreme distance of the bell from the subject. We imagined ourselves far away in the heart of the mountains, where no man had ever set foot before. In the distance, everything was covered in a light mist, and the pavement at the end of the street glittered like gold in the sun. In this sentence, far away refers to a certain space that the subject perceives, which is also emphasized by the contextual qualifier pavement at the end of the street.
In English, the differential seme "long distance extension" is implemented in the semantic structure of language units, for example,far away, far far away, far away afar. For example: His home was far,far beyond the mountains. - His home was far, far beyond the mountains. Contextual qualifiers emphasize thatfarmeans someone, something that is very far away.
Thus, the semantic structure of the language unitsclose (closely), near (near), far (far), far (away), far away (far away), afar (from afar)in Russian and English, which denote distance in terms of the actual length, was considered. The general categorical seme in their semantic structure is the seme "extension in space", which is implemented in several integral lexemes and which are represented by differential features. The relevant integral lexeme is the "extension character" lexeme.
As a result of a comparative analysis, we came to the conclusion that the designation of spatial extent by native speakers of Russian and English largely coincides. However, in English, there is a clearer structuring of the nature of the object's length relative to any subject.