The human brain (Russian mozg) consists of two hemispheres (Russian polusharii), which are referred to as pravoje/levoje polushariye (‘left/right hemisphere’). Neither mozg (‘brain’) is used to name them, nor does mozgi (‘brains’) mean ‘two parts of the brain’.[4] Meanwhile the usage of the plural form of the somatic object’s name to convey the meaning ‘two parts of this object’ is one of the triggers for identifying a naïve biological pair. This shows that although the brain has two parts these parts are not considered to form a biological pair from an ordinary speaker’s point of view.
In summary, there are two types of biological pairs – (a) naïve biological pairs, which consist of somatic objects in the domain of naïve picture of the world, and (b) scientific biological pairs, which consist of somatic objects in the domain of a scientific picture of the world. Further on we will use the term biological pair to demote only the naïve pairs.
2. The notion of semiotic pairs of somatic objects
To construct the semiotic conceptualization of human body one should describe not only relationships between the somatic objects but also relationships between their linguistic names. The latter are more complicated than those between parts of a biological pair and are established between the objects that form a semiotic pair[5]. This type of relationship is more significant for the linguists and students of nonverbal communication than the one inside a biological pair.
A semiotic pair of somatic objects should satisfy two criteria:
(1) each of the somatic objects has a nomination that includes (a) a linguistic component which is used to name each member of a pair (cf. noga ‘leg’, glaz ‘eye’, guba ‘lip’, veko ‘eyelid’) and (b) a linguistic component which demotes the location of these objects in relation to the vertical axis of body (cf. levaja/pravaja noga ‘left/right leg’, levyj/pravyj glaz ‘left/right eye’) or, less often, the horizontal axis of body (verkhn’aja/nizhn’aja guba ‘upper/lower lip’, verkhneje/nizhneje veko ‘upper/lower eyelid’).
(2) the nominations of these somatic objects are not terminological, i.e. they belong to the lexicon of the everyday language, e.g. levaja/pravaja ruka ‘left/right hand’ and ruka ‘hand’. The speakers know how to pronounce and spell them, what their morphological structure is, what they mean and in which contexts they are used. They understand, for example, phrases like On – moja pravaja ruka ‘He is my right-hand man’, Ja sdelaju eto odnoj levoj (rukoj) ‘I’ll do it easily’ (lit. ‘I’ll do it with my left hand only’)[6], they know idioms like ruka ob ruku ‘hand in hand’ and the cultural connotations of the word levsha ‘left-handed person’.
As we can see, the notion of a semiotic pair is based on the notion of a biological pair and “brings in” some linguistic requirements concerning the names of somatic objects. Thus, semiotic pairs, unlike biological, are not universal, but specific for the language and the culture given.