THE LEXICAL-SEMANTIC FIELD OF IMPERTINENT BEHAVIOUR IN MODERN GERMAN S

The article presents comprehensive research of the semantic field comprising different parts of speech denoting impertinent behaviour in modern German. The author uses a combination of system-centric and anthropocentric approaches to determine the nominative space covered by the constituents of the lexical-semantic field and to identify their systemic, syntagmatic, paradigmatic and epidigmatic characteristics. The semantic features of the systemic structure (i.e. the lexical-semantic field) are described with the help of formalized quantitative (approximate and static) methods.


INTRODUCTION
Our literature review on lexical semantics shows that modern linguistics research is marked by an increasing interest in the anthropological paradigm.Its primary focus is linguistic consciousness, lexicon organization, the interaction between individual and collective world views across cultures; the role of language in mental representation is one the most topical issues in linguistics.An extensive analysis of the functions of lexical-semantic structures is essential for a comprehensive study of the lingual world view (LWV).A fine-grained description of such structures allows for identifying the functional regularities of lexical units in speech, exploring urgent issues in lexicography, and compiling empirical data which enables lexical semantics to fulfil its main goal of describing the semantic structure of a word and analyzing the lexical-semantic system of a language.
Being a perennial issue, human behaviour has often come into sharp focus in numerous studies.However, impertinent behaviour has not been explored as a separate issue in Germanic philology in Ukraine.This necessitates research that will identify the cognitive characteristics of the phenomenon, its verbalization, as well as its onomasiological and semasiological nature.
The research goal is to identify the semantic characteristics of the constituents of the lexical-semantic field (hereinafter LSF) comprising different parts of speech denoting impertinent behaviour in modern German by analyzing works in psychology and philosophy; reference materials; etymological, monolingual and bilingual dictionaries; as well as by compiling a lexicographic inventory and describing syntagmatic, paradigmatic and epidigmatic characteristics with the help of the systemic quantitative approach.
The object of research is the semantic field comprising different parts of speech denoting impertinent behaviour in modern German.
The research objectives include determining the nominative space covered by the constituents of the researched lexical-semantic field and identifying their systemic, syntagmatic, paradigmatic and epidigmatic characteristics with the help of formalized quantitative (approximate and static) methods.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
According to the reference materials, the study of impertinent behaviour dates back to antiquity, namely to the ante-ethics theories developed by Homer, Hesiod, Anaksimandar, Heraclito and the Pythagoreans; to the times of antique enlightenment and the establishment of an individual's moral sovereignty (Democritus, Socrates) [1].Impertinent behaviour was regarded as barbarous.Ancient Greek ethical norms were based on one important principle clearly described by Hesiod, "Observe due measure in all things".Evil was interpreted as lack of measure; and good, as judgment.The Greeks understood moral excess as profligacy and called it hubris, which implies arrogance, impertinence, brutality, insult [2, p. 119-120].
Hubris (derived from the ancient Greek word ὕβρις, i.e. impertinence, insolence, arrogance; in Greek mythology, Hubris is a goddess, an embodiment of dangerous over-confidence, arrogance, shamelessness, extreme pride [see 3]) -insolence, superciliousness, excessive pride, conceit, vanity.In ancient Greek culture, it was a personified trait, and later it became an important ethical doctrine.The word hubris was first used by Hesiod and Homer.In the Homeric tradition, hubris was regarded as violation of divine will associated with the desire for deification followed by retribution (nemesis).For instance, Achilles and Odysseus displayed such behaviour.The same line can be traced in the myths about Prometheus, Sisyphus, Oedipus and others.Similar characters can be found in monotheistic religions (Adam and Eve, builders of the Tower of Babel).For Hesiod, hubris was more of an ethical concept.It can be displayed by any person guided by vices, especially avarice.Traces of Hesiod's theory can be found in Solon's and Aristotle's works.In modern German, the concept die Hybris corresponds to die Anmaßung and der Übermut [see 3].
In medieval times, with the establishment of regulatory and ideological restrictions, impertinent behaviour came to be regarded as sinful for a Christian to display.Outstanding scholiasts of the 12-13 th centuries (Johannes Scotus Eriugena, Anselm of Canterbury, Peter Abelard, Thomas Aquinas) [1] and leading scholiasts of the 14-15 th centuries (Duns Scotus, Henry Suso, Johannes Tauler) focused on unification with God, denouncing impertinence as impious, sinful behaviour.René Descartes, Spinoza, Hobbes [1] highly praised intellect, which opposes the chaos of passions characteristic of familiar, impertinent behaviour.
According to the Belgian professor M. Meyer, who has been studying the phenomenon of impertinence for years and has written the book "Über die Frechheit" ("About impertinence"), impertinence is primarily "a philosophy of life, a mode of existence, a form of spiritual independence, one's own path".It manifests itself in words and gestures, in the disrespectful doubt about norms and standards.The researcher believes that Jesus and Socrates suffered for telling the truth, which is often regarded as impertinence.The author concludes that the greatest impertinence is a search for justice, truth, the ability to tell the kind of truth which nobody wants to hear.He wishes there were such impertinent fellows, "buffoons who can see through us in order to reveal our secrets".М. Мeyer points out that nowadays impertinence "is limited to the egocentric desire to be different, and it eventually 'dies' of itself" [4].
Therefore, having analyzed and summarized the main conceptual characteristics of "Frechheit" [3], we can conclude that it has the following primary meaning: im Umgang mit anderen Personen ungezogen, böse, respektlos; Respektlosigkeit; die Verachtung der Gesetze, des Anstandes u. der guten Sitten.In other words, impertinence manifests itself as contempt for other people, disregard for laws and decency, as disrespect, familiarity, impudence.It can refer to impertinent, shameless behaviour, impertinent actions or speech, ill-mannered interruption (freches, unverschämtes Benehmen, freches Tun, freches Reden, Unverschämtheit).It also manifests itself as superciliousness, insolence, conceit (аnmaßendes Benehmen, Anmaßung), audacity, daring (Tapferkeit, Kühnheit, Waghalsigkeit).Such behaviour reflects the desire to stand out, which can manifest itself in clothing style or personal image (eine kesse modische Erscheinung haben), as well as in various kinds of artistic activity (literature, fine arts, music etc.).Impertinence contrasts with shyness, modesty, common decency, politeness, tact, delicacy.A special impertinence as a qualifying characteristic of malicious hooliganism manifests itself in extremely impudent, rude actions.In some cases, impertinence can be regarded as a consequence of annoyance, a certain mental disease, contempt, hatred, humiliation, inferiority complex; it is perceived negatively -as the inability to contain oneself, as ill-breeding [see 3].Therefore, impertinence is considered to be a vice and a weakness, a negative behavioural indicator, a symptom of discourtesy; in religion, it is a sin.
Having performed an epidigmatic analysis of the field constituents on the basis of dictionaries and news texts, we identified the constituent semes and seme clusters of the lexemes under research and explored their hierarchy.The analysis of news texts shows that some of the lexical units have additional seme clusters not recorded in dictionaries, and certain seme clusters, even though found in dictionaries, are hardly ever used in the news texts researched.
The noun Anmaßung contains the seme clusters die Willkür, die Eigenmächtigkeit, der Übergriff (willfulness, excess of authority, abuse of position).It was found that its semantics changed to acquire the meaning of Frechheit, which is hardly ever recorded in the dictionaries we used (Die Liste der Protestler gegen monarchische Anmaßung ist lang und eindrucksvoll [18]).
The comprehensive analysis of the LSF constituents shows that though denoting various aspects of impertinent behaviour, these paradigms cover a common semantic space.In other words, the paradigm elements, despite belonging to different parts of speech, mostly express the same meaning, which is why they can be used interchangeably.

CONCLUSIONS
Therefore, using a combination of system-centric and anthropocentric approaches allows to objectively identify the cognitive characteristics of the LSF of impertinent behaviour and to determine the nominative space they cover in LWV.Future studies might analyze the LSF of impertinent behaviour on the basis of a broader corpus of fiction texts, which will provide a better representation of the researched fragment in the lexicon.Our algorithm can be used for further objective research of LWV, which will open prospects for improving the analysis of lexicon organization.