Vol. 10 No. 1 (24) (2024)

DOI: https://doi.org/10.46991/BYSU.H/2024.10.1
Published: 2024-12-02

Full Issue

Literary criticism

  • Literary criticism

    Dominant in Poetic Supertextual Unit: Problem Statement

    Levon Hakobyan
    View PDF
    Abstract

    The article for the first time raises the question of the dominant in the main forms of poetic supertextual unit - in a crown of sonnets, in a lyric cycle and in a book of poems.

    The most important feature of the dominant in a supertextual unit is the potential possibility of its revelation at two levels: at the level of a word image and at the level of the text.

    The word-image dominant is based on the cross-textual repetition of a word/phrase, that is a multiple reproduction of a lexical image or its correlates in two or more texts of a given unit.

    The textual dominant is a poem that most fully embodies the main idea and meaning of the supertextual whole, and represents a force field that attracts many thematically and conceptually close texts that form a supertextual unit.

    The ideal example of a textual dominant is the master-sonnet of a crown of sonnets, which determines the structure-forming and meaning-forming system of the whole. Textual dominants in other supertextual forms can approach only to a greater or lesser extent the function performed by the master-sonnet.

    Unlike the crown of sonnets, the ideological and conceptual component of the lyrical cycle cannot be fully expressed in one single text, since it is generated only by the interaction of all the texts of the cyclic series, therefore no text, including the dominant one, is a full-fledged embodiment of the meanings of the whole. In the cycle, the textual dominant does not perform a genre-forming function, so the presence of a textual dominant here is an optional factor. 

    Poetic texts included in a book of poems do not have the intensity of intertextual connections that is characteristic of a lyrical cycle. The poems of one conceptual and thematic group are scattered throughout the entire space of the book of poems, forming structurally undetermined conceptual and thematic concenters. The compositional uncertainty of the concenters causes the specificity of the textual dominant in this type of book of poems. Having no other constructive function, the textual dominant in the book of poems plays an important meaning-organizing role in the concenter.

    References

    СПИСОК НАУЧНОЙ ЛИТЕРАТУРЫ

    Акопян, Л.Г., 1990. Лирический цикл как тип текста. В кн.: Семантические и коммуникативные категории текста: (Типология и функционирование). Ереван, Изд-во Ереванского ун-та, сс. 5-6.

    Акопян, Л.Г., 2011. Типологическая характеристика сверхтекстовых единств. В кн.: Материалы Международной конференции "Современная литература в меняющемся мире". Ереван, Изд-во РАУ,. сс. 9-11

    Акопян, Л.Г., 2022. Лексическая доминанта в поэтическом тексте. Вестник Ереванского университета. Серия «Русская филология». Том 8 № 2 (21) (2022), сс. 3-19. https://doi.org/10.46991/BYSU:H/2022.8.2.003

    Арнольд, И.В., 1978. Значение сильной позиции для интерпретации художественного текста. Иностранные языки в школе, 1978, № 4, сс. 28-31.

    Кушнер, А.С., 1991. Книга стихов. В кн.: Кушнер А.С. Аполлон в снегу: Заметки на полях. Ленинград: Советский писатель, сс. 35-51.

    Сильман, Т.И., 1977. Концовка лирического стихотворения. В кн.: Сильман Т.И. Заметки о лирике. Ленинград: Советский писатель, cc. 168-174.

    Словарь литературоведческих терминов URL: http://slovar.lib.ru/dictionary/cikllirich.htm [дата обращения: 10.02.2024].

    Фоменко, И.В., 1984. О поэтике лирического цикла. Калинин: Изд-во Калининского ун-та.

    Blois, F. de. Dīvān. URL: http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/divan [дата обращения: 10.02.2024].

    REFERENCES

    Hakobyan, L.G., 1990. Liricheskiy tsikl kak tip teksta [Lyrical cycle as a text type]. In: Semanticheskie i kommunikativnye kategorii teksta: (Tipologiya i funktsionirovanie) [Semantic and communicative categories of text: (Typology and functioning)]. Yerevan, Yerevan Univ. Publ., pp. 5-6. (In Russian).

    Hakobyan, L.G., 2011. Tipologicheskaya kharakteristika sverkhtekstovykh edinstv [Typological characteristics of supertextual units]. In: Materialy Mezhdunarodnoy konferentsii "Sovremennaya literatura v menyayushchemsya mire" [Proceedings of the International Conference "Modern Literature in a Changing World"]. Yerevan: RAU Univ. Publ., pp. 9-11. (In Russian).

    Hakobyan, L.G., 2022. Leksicheskaya dominanta v poeticheskom tekste [The lexical dominant in poetic text]. Vestnik Erevanskogo universiteta. Seriya «Russkaya filologiya» [Bulletin of Yerevan University. Russian Philology]. Vol. 8 № 2 (21) (2022), pp. 3-19. https://doi.org/10.46991/BYSU:H/2022.8.2.003. (In Russian).

    Arnol'd, I.V., 1978. Znachenie sil'noy pozitsii dlya interpretatsii khudozhestvennogo teksta [The importance of a strong position for the interpretation of a fiction text.]. Inostrannye yazyki v shkole [Foreign languages at school], 1978, № 4, pp. 28-31. (In Russian).

    Kushner, A.S., 1991. Kniga stikhov [Book of poems]. In: Kushner A.S. Apollon v snegu: Zametki na polyakh [Apollo in the snow: Notes in the margins]. Leningrad: Sovetskiy pisatel' Publ., pp. 35-51. (In Russian).

    Sil'man, T.I., 1977. Kontsovka liricheskogo stikhotvoreniya [The ending of a lyric poem]. In: Sil'man T.I. Zametki o lirike [Notes on lyrics]. Leningrad: Sovetskiy pisatel' Publ., cc. 168-174. (In Russian).

    Slovar' literaturovedcheskikh terminov [Dictionary of literary terms]. Available at: http://slovar.lib.ru/dictionary/cikllirich.htm [Accessed 10 February 2024]. (In Russian).

    Fomenko, I.V., 1984. O poetike liricheskogo tsikla [On the poetics of the lyric cycle]. Kalinin: Kalinin Univ. Publ. (In Russian).

    Blois, F. de. Dīvān - Available at: http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/divan [Accessed 10 February 2024]. (In English)

Linguistics

  • Linguistics

    Lexicographical Analysis of Russian and Armenian Synonymous Series with the Semantic Component ‘High’

    Rouzan Grdzelyan
    View PDF
    Abstract

    The article is devoted to a comparative typological analysis of synonymous series with the semantic component ‘high’ in the Russian and Armenian languages. Such an analysis helps to identify deep meaning-generating processes that influence the semantic organization of synonymous series, as well as to describe the linguocultural and lexico-typological features of two Indo-European languages ​​- Russian and Armenian. Research methods such as lexicographic analysis of synonymous series and application of dictionary entries of dominant lexemes make it possible to identify semantic components and semantic nodes in the structure of the lexical meaning of the group of words under study. Identification and description of such features of lexemes can become a starting point in further research into the lexical-typological and linguistic-cultural characteristics of the two languages. As a result of our lexicographic analysis of Russian and Armenian synonymic series with the semantic component ‘high’, we came to the following conclusions: 1. These series differ in the degree of synonymous variability: Armenian synonymous series are distinguished by greater variability. 2. The degree of variability is manifested in the length of the synonymous series: their approximate ratio is 15 lexemes in Russian, 70 lexemes in Armenian. 3. The degree of variability also affects the semantic asymmetry of the semantic organization of the synonymous series: in the Armenian language there are more semantic nodes, therefore, more semantic components.

    References

    СПИСОК ЛИТЕРАТУРЫ

    Восточноармянский национальный корпус (ВАНК). URL:

    http://www.eanc.net/EANC/search/?interface_language=ru [дата обращения: 10. 01. 2024]

    Национальный корпус русского языка (НКРЯ).

    URL: https://ruscorpora.ru/new/ [дата обращения: 10. 01. 2024]

    Ожегов, С.И., 2012. Толковый словарь русского языка. 28-е изд. перераб. Москва: Мир и Образование: ОНИКС.

    Словарь русского языка, 1981-1984. Тт. 1-4 / А.П. Евгеньева, 2-е изд., испр. и доп. Москва: Русский язык.

    Толковый словарь русского языка, 1935-1940. Тт. 1-4 /Д.Н. Ушаков. Москва: Советская энциклопедия.

    Филлмор, Ч., 1983. Об организации семантической информации в словаре. В кн: Проблемы и методы лексикографии. НЗЛ, вып. 14. Москва: Прогресс, сс.23-60.

    Хроленко, А.Т., 2008. Основы лингвокультурологии. 4-е издание. Москва: Флинта-Наука.

    Աղայան, Է․, 1976. Արդի հայերենի բացատրական բառարան. Երևան, Հայաստան:

    Մալխասեանց, Ս., 1944-194. Հայերէն բացատրական բառարան. Երեւան, Հայկական ՍՍՌ Պետական Հրատարակչութիւն:

    Աւետիքեան, Գ., Սիւրմելեան, Խ. և Աւգերեան Մ., 1981, Նոր բառգիրք Հայկազեան լեզուի. Հհ 1-4․ Երևան, Երեւանի պետական համալսարանի հրատարակչություն:

    REFERENCES

    Vostochnoarmjanskyj natsional’nyj korpus (VANC) [Armenian National Corpus] URL: http://www.eanc.net/EANC/search/?interface_language=ru [Accessed: 10 January 2024]. (in Armenian)

    Natsional'nyj korpus russkogo yazyka (NKRYa) [Russian National Corpus] URL:

    https://ruscorpora.ru/new/ [Accessed: 10 January 2024]. (in Russian).

    Ozhegov, S.I., 2012. Tolkovyy slovar' russkogo yazyka [Explanatory dictionary of the Russian language]. 28-nd ed. Moscow: Mir i Obrazovanie, ONIKS Publ. (in Russian).

    Slovar' russkogo yazyka [Russian Dictionary], 1981-1984. Vv. 1-4 / A.P. Evgen'eva, 2-nd ed. Moscow: Russkiy yazyk Publ. (in Russian).

    Tolkovyj slovar' russkogo jazyka [Explanatory dictionary of the Russian language], 1935–1940. Vv. 1-4 /D.N. Ushakov, Moscow: Sovetskaja jenciklopedija Publ. (in Russian).

    Fillmore, Ch., 1983. Ob organizacii semanticheskoj informacii v slovarje [On the Organization of Semantic Information in a Dictionary]. In: Problemy i metody leksikografii. NZL, v. 14. Moscow: Progress Publ., pp.23-60. (in Russian).

    Khrolenko, A.T., 2008. Osnovy lingvokulturologii [Fundamentals of linguoculturology]. 4-th ed. Moscow: Flinta-Nauka Publ. (in Russian).

    Aghayan, E', 1976, Ardi hayereni bacatrakan bar'aran [Explanatory Dictionary of the Modern Armenian Language]. Erevan: Hajastan Publ. (in Armenian).

    Malkhaseanc, S. Hayere'n bacatrakan bar'aran [Explanatory dictionary of the Armenian language]. Erevan: Armenian SSR State Publ., 1944-1945. (in Armenian).

    Avetikean, G., Sjurmelean, Kh. and Avgerean M., 1981. Nor bar’girq Hajkazean lezui [Explanatory Dictionary of the Ancient Armenian Language]. Vv. 1-4. Yerevan: Yerevan State Univ. Publ. (in Armenian).

  • Linguistics

    Semantic Field of Anger in L.N. Tolstoy’s “Father Sergius” Novel

    Gayane Hovhannesyan
    View PDF
    Abstract

    The work examines L.N. Tolstoy’s story “Father Sergius” and the theme of anger/hot temper expressed in it. We consider the linguistic description of the topic within the framework of the concept of semantic field. Within a work of art, the semantic field shows a tendency towards expansion and contextual conditioning. Turning to the experience of scientists who have previously studied similar topics, we borrow from them the concept of a textual semantic field, which can be used as a tool for our work. We see that the semantic field as a linguistic category is capable of transformation in the text and provides material for new observation. The semantic field in a literary text goes beyond the use of its usual tools (synonymy, derivation) and acquires the transformational potential inherent in speech organics. This is the first we can see in the expansion of the field boundaries. Expansion occurs due to lexical content (unexpected to continue the field of lexemes), but also the semantic expression finds its manifestation in syntax through the techniques of tempo, intensification (frequency of use, repetition), compatibility. Anger is an important description trait of a personage. It is present in the overwhelming majority of the text. We see opportunities for highlighting this topic and considering it both in terms of filling the text (semantics, meaning, subtext, metaphors) and in terms of expression (external features of the text), which is supported by calculations and quantitative comparison. This theme coexists and intersects with other themes in the story and together creates a rich, tragically described image of human fate.

    References

    ИСТОЧНИКИ

    Толстой, Л.Н., 1953. Собрание сочинений в 14 томах. Т.12. Москва: Государственное издательство художественной литературы.

    Толстой, Л.Н., 1955. О литературе: статьи, письма, дневники. Москва: Государственное издательство художественной литературы.

    СПИСОК НАУЧНОЙ ЛИТЕРАТУРЫ

    Белянин, В.П., 2022. «Печальные» тексты в художественной литературе. Журнал филологических исследований. 7(4), сс.61-65.

    Караулов, Ю.Н., 2010. Общая и русская идеография. Москва: ЛИБРОКОМ.

    Лученецкая-Бурдина, И.Ю., 2014. Реконструкция художественного целого в повестях Л.Н. Толстого 1880-1890-х гг. Ярославский педагогический вестник. Гуманитарные науки, 1(2), сс.188-192.

    Новиков, Л.А., 2001. Эскиз семантического поля. В кн.: Новиков, Л.А. Избранные труды. Т.2. Эстетические аспекты языка. Miscellanea. Москва: Изд-во РУДН, сс.554-570.

    Попова, З.Д., Стернин, И.А., Беляева, Е.И. и др., 1989. Полевые структуры в системе языка: коллективная монография. Воронеж: Изд-во Воронежского гос. ун-та.

    Романов, Д.А., 2019. Философский и психологический опыт нравственно-этических поисков личности в художественно-языковой рефлексии (на материале повести Л.Н. Толстого «Отец Сергий»). Вестник московского государственного областного университета (электронный журнал). 3. URL: www.evestnik-mgou.ru [дата обращения: 20.11.2023]

    Тынянов, Ю.Н., 1965. Проблема стихотворного языка. Москва: Советский писатель.

    Тюпа, В.И., 2009. Анализ художественного текста. Москва: Академия.

    REFERENCES

    Belyanin, V.P., 2022. «Pechal'nye» teksty v khudozhestvennoy literature [“Sad” Texts in Fiction]. Zhurnal filologicheskikh issledovaniy [Journal of Philologycal Researches]. 7(4), pp.61-65. (in Russian).

    Karaulov, Yu.N., 2010. Obshchaya i russkaya ideografiya [General and Russian Ideography]. Moscow: LIBROKOM Publ. (in Russian).

    Luchenetskaya-Burdina, I.Yu., 2014. Rekonstruktsiya khudozhestvennogo tselogo v povestyakh L.N. Tolstogo 1880-1890-kh gg. [Reconstruction of Art Whole in L.N. Tolstoy's Stories of 1880-1890]. Yaroslavskiy pedagogicheskiy vestnik. Gumanitarnye nauki [Yaroslavl Pedagogical Bulletin. Humanitarium studies]. 1(2), pp.188-192. (in Russian).

    Novikov, L.A., 2001. Eskiz semanticheskogo polya [Semantic Field Sketch]. In: Novikov, L.A. Izbrannye trudy. T.2. Esteticheskie aspekty yazyka. Miscellanea [Selected Works.Vol.2. Aestetic Aspects of Language. Miscellanea]. Moscow: RUDN Publ., pp.554-570. (in Russian).

    Popova, Z.D., Sternin, I.A., Belyaeva, E.I. and etc., 1989. Polevye struktury v sisteme yazyka: kollektivnaya monografiya [Field Structures of Language: Collective Monograph]. Voronezh: Voronezh State Univ. Publ. (in Russian).

    Romanov, D.A., 2019. Filosofskiy i psikhologicheskiy opyt nravstvenno-eticheskikh poiskov lichnosti v khudozhestvenno-yazykovoy refleksii (na materiale povesti L.N. Tolstogo «Otets Sergiy») [Philosophical and Phsycological Experience of Moral and Ethical Person Searches in Art-Language Reflection (Based on the Material of L.N. Tolstoy’s Novel “The Priest Sergiy”]. Vestnik moskovskogo gosudarstvennogo oblastnogo universiteta (elektronnyy zhurnal). 3. URL: www.evestnik-mgou.ru [Accessed: 20 November 2023] (in Russian).

    Tynyanov, Yu.N., 1965. Problema stikhotvornogo yazyka [Problem of Poetic Language]. Moscow: Sovetskiy pisatel' Publ. (in Russian).

    Tyupa, V.I., 2009. Analiz khudozhestvennogo teksta [Literary Text Analisys]. Moscow: Akademiya Publ. (in Russian).

  • Linguistics

    Phytonyms in Russian, Chinese and Korean Linguistic Cultures

    Yuehao Han
    View PDF
    Abstract

    The study of phytonyms in Russian, Chinese and Korean linguistic cultures is a comprehensive comparative analysis aimed at identifying common and specific features in the names of the flora of these languages. This work aims at a comprehensive analysis of the influence of natural and climatic conditions, cultural traditions, worldview and mentality of native speakers on the formation of phytonyms in these linguistic cultures.

    The structure of the study includes a detailed review of phytonyms in each of the languages under consideration, an analysis of the features of their use in linguistic practice and symbolic significance in the culture of the corresponding ethnic group. Special attention is paid to identifying universal and unique features in plant names due to the specifics of the natural environment, economic activity, religious beliefs, mythology and folklore.

    The conclusions of the work emphasize the need for further in-depth study of phytonyms in the language system and in the cultural context, since this lexical group is a valuable source of information about the worldview, value orientations and cultural dominants of the ethnic group. The results of the study show that phytonyms can express not only the real, objective characteristics of plants, but also associative, culturally determined meanings reflecting the specifics of the national mentality and worldview.

     The results obtained can be applied in the theory and practice of intercultural communication, in teaching Russian, Chinese and Korean as foreign languages, as well as in lexicographic practice in compiling specialized dictionaries of phytonymic vocabulary.

    References

    ИСТОЧНИКИ

    Чхунхян джон, Пхеньян, 1954. Русский перевод: История о верности Чхун Хян: корейские средневековые повести. – Москва: Изд-во восточной литературы, 1960.

    СПИСОК ЛИТЕРАТУРЫ

    Аникина, Т.В., 2018. Словообразовательная структура фитонимической лексики в английском и русском языках. Научный результат. Вопросы теоретической и прикладной лингвистики, 4(4), сс.3-13. DOI: 10.18413/2313-8912-2018-4-4-0-1

    Бабина, Л.В., 2021. Метафорические когнитивные модели создания сложных фитонимов. Когнитивные исследования языка. 1(44), сс.221-228.

    Выготский, В.С. К этимологии русских названий растений. Часть 1. URL: https://proza.ru/2021/07/19/1318 [дата обращения: 28.03.2024].

    Выготский, Л.С., 2007. Мышление и речь. Москва: Лабиринт.

    Го Жунжун, Ян Хайюнь, 2020. Различия культурных коннотаций фитонимов в русском и китайском языках. Международный журнал гуманитарных и естественных наук. 1-2(40), сс.17-21. DOI: 10.24411/2500-1000-2020-10051.

    Жаркова, Е.К., 2021. Фитонимы: особенности перевода. В кн.: Материалы Всероссийской научной конференции молодых ученых и специалистов с международным участием, посвященной 155-летию со дня рождения Н.Н. Худякова. Москва: Изд-во Российского гос. аграрного ун-та – МСХА им. К.А. Тимирязева, сс.237-240.

    Пак, С.Г., 2000. Фитонимы в русской и корейской фразеологии. В кн.: В.В. Красных и А.И. Изотов, ред. Язык, сознание, коммуникация. Вып. 12. Москва: Диалог-МГУ, сс.20-27.

    Сультимова, Н. Б., 2019. Фразеологизмы с названиями растений в корейском языке. В кн.: М.В. Егошина, ред. Наука молодых: сборник научных статей по материалам XII Всероссийской научно-практической конференции. Арзамас: Изд-во Нижегородского гос. технического ун-та им. Р.Е. Алексеева, сс.1354-1360.

    REFERENCES

    Anikina, T.V., 2018. Slovoobrazovatel'naja struktura fitonimicheskoj leksiki v anglijskom i russkom jazykah [Derivational structure of phytonymic lexicon in the English and Russian languages]. Nauchnyj rezul'tat. Voprosy teoreticheskoj i prikladnoj lingvistiki [Scientific result. Questions of theoretical and applied linguistics], 4(4), pp.3-13. DOI: 10.18413/2313-8912-2018-4-4-0-1 (in Russian).

    Babina, L.V., 2021. Metaforicheskie kognitivnye modeli sozdanija slozhnyh fitonimov [Metaphorical cognitive models of creating complex phytonyms], Kognitivnye issledovanija jazyka [Cognitive studies of language], 1(44), pp. 221-228. (in Russian).

    Vygotsky, V.S. K jetimologii russkih nazvanij rastenij. Chast' 1 [On the etymology of Russian plant names. Part 1] URL: https://proza.ru/2021/07/19/1318 [Accessed: 28 March 2024]. (in Russian).

    Vygotsky, L.S., 2007. Myshlenie i rech' [Thinking and speech]. Moscow: Labyrinth Publ. (in Russian).

    Guo Zhunzhun and Yan Haiyun, 2020. Razlichija kul'turnyh konnotacij fitonimov v russkom i kitajskom jazykah [Differences in the cultural connotations of phytonyms in Russian and Chinese] Mezhdunarodnyj zhurnal gumanitarnyh i estestvennyh nauk [International Journal of Humanities and Natural Sciences], 1-2 (40), pp.17-21. DOI: 10.24411/2500-1000-2020-10051 (in Russian).

    Zharkova, E.K., 2021. Phytonyms: features of translation [Fitonimy: osobennosti perevoda]. In: Materialy Vserossijskoj nauchnoj konferencii molodyh uchjonyh i specialistov s mezhdunarodnym uchastiem, posvjashhjonnoj 155-letiju so dnja rozhdenija N. N. Hudjakova [Materials of the All-Russian scientific conference of young scientists and specialists with international participation dedicated to the 155th anniversary of the birth of N. N. Khudyakov]. Moscow: Russian State Agrarian Univ. – Moscow Timiryazev Agricultural Academy Publ, pp.237-240. (in Russian).

    Pak, S.G., 2000. Fitonimy v russkoj i korejskoj frazeologii [Phytonyms in Russian and Korean phraseology] In: V.V. Krasnyh and A.I. Izotov, red. Jazyk, soznanie, kommunikacija [Language, Consciousness, Communication]. Vol. 12. Moscow: Dialog-MGU Publ, pp.20-27. (in Russian).

    Sultimova, N.B., 2019. Frazeologizmy s nazvanijami rastenij v korejskom jazyke [Phraseological units with plant names in the Korean language] In: M.V. Egoshina, red. Nauka molodyh: sbornik nauchnyh statej po materialam XII Vserossijskoj nauchno-prakticheskoj konferencii [Nauka molodykh: collection of scientific articles based on the materials of the XII All-Russian Scientific and Practical Conference]. Arzamas: Nizhny Novgorod State Technical Univ. named after R.E. Alekseev Publ. pp.1354-1360. (in Russian).