Search

Introduction. The article deals with absurd and paradoxical proverbs resulting from the categorization of proverbial semantics according to the criterion of ‘relation to reality’ in the ontological or logical aspects. Goals. The study aims to identify quantitative and qualitative features of ontological and logical contradictions to reality traced in semantics of Tuvan proverbs. Materials and methods. The work analyzes a total of 770 Tuvan proverbs contained in Tuvan Proverbs and Sayings (1966), Proverbs and Sayings of the Tuvan People (2020), and other sources. The publication employs the author’s methodology for semantics categorization of aphoristic units and their differentiation into semantic types according to the criterion of ‘relation to reality’. Results. The article reveals that one in eight Tuvan proverbs literally (in the direct sense) contradict the existing order of things in the world. The ontological nature of a contradiction to reality in a proverb is implemented via the semantics of the absurd, which is motivated by a situational or verbal context, and it is impossible to interpret the literal content of the proverb — from the viewpoint of logical (rational) thinking — being unaware of that very context. The logical nature of the contradiction to reality in the proverb is implemented via the semantics of the paradox, which can be motivated epistemologically, semantically or formally, and logically. Only one structural part of a proverb can be contrary to reality, and this part always dominates in terms of general content. The Tuvan proverbs that contradict reality are distinguished by the presence of absurdity semantics in one of their structural parts, and that of paradox in the other one. Conclusions. An unexpectedly large number of absurd and paradoxical proverbs in the Tuvan proverb corpus attests to that it is reality’s perception and comprehension — based on the ontological and/or logical contradictions to objective reality — that take a significant place in the Tuvan view of the world.

Copyright of Praxis Filosófica is the property of Universidad del Valle and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)