.png)
https://doi.org/10.20339/PhS.4-19.042
Vashunina Irina V.,
Doctor of Philology, Associated Professor,
Professor of the German Language Department
Russian Academy of Foreign Trade
e-mail: vashunina@yandex.ru
Ryabova Marina E.,
Doctor of Philosophy, Professor,
Professor of the Theory and Practice of Translation Department
Russian New University
e-mail: ryabovame@mail.ru
The article is devoted to the problem of dependence of perception of creolized text on its intertextuality. The article interprets the results of an experiment conducted to identify the relationship between the memorization of information of the popular science creolized text and the intertextuality of discourse. Considering all popular scientific texts to have the property of intertextuality, we propose to distinguish between intertextuality of the text and intertextuality of discourse. The first is an objective characteristic of the text, depending on the presence of (explicit or implicit) references to other texts. The second depends on the recipient and characterizes the existence of intertextuality of the text for him (that is, knowledge of previous texts).During the experiment, the influence of visual realistic representation of the main and peripheral information of various degrees of awareness for recipients on the perception of popular science text was studied. It was found that if the discourse is intertextual, the visual representation of information leads to its unmistakable memorization by recipients. If the property of intertextuality is absent, the image helps to get an idea of the content of the illustrated fragment of the verbal text, but one hundred percent assimilation of information does not occur.The results of the experiment show that the pictorial representation of information does not lead to improved perception and memorization of structural models not known to recipients, for example, classification by various parameters.
Keywords: intertextuality, visual perception, creolized text, popular scientific text, experimental research, information storage.
References
1. Vashunina I.V., Riabova M.E. Inoiazychie na perekrestke lingvokul’tur: problemy XXI veka i puti ikh resheniia. Moscow: Izd-vo RUDN, 2018. 156 s.
2. Cherniavskaia V.E. Interpretatsiia nauchnogo teksta. Moscow: DomKniga, 2005. 128 s.
3. Koroleva N.V. Sredstva i sposoby realizatsii intertekstual’nosti v nauchnom diskurse: avtoref. dis. … kand. filol. nauk. Piatigorsk, 2004. 211 s.
4. Mikhailova E.V. Intertekstual’nos’ v nauchnom diskurse: avtoref. dis. … kand. filol. nauk. Volgograd, 1999.
5. Novikov A.I. Semantika teksta i ee formalizatsiia. Moscow: Nauka, 1983. 215 s.
6. Karasik V.I. Opredelenie i tipologiia kontseptov // Etnokul’turnaia kontseptologiia: mezhvuz. sb. nauch. tr. Vyp. 1. Elista, 2006. S. 14–20.
7. Dem'iankov V.Z. “Kontsept” v filosofii iazyka i kognitivnoi lingvistike // Kontseptual’nyi analiz iazyka: sovremennye napravleniia issledovaniia. Moscow: IIaz RAN: TGU im. G.R. Derzhavina, 2007. S. 26–33.
8. Russkii assotsiativnyi slovar’: v 2 t. T. 1 / pod red. Iu.N. Karaulova. Moscow, 2002. 782 s.
9. Amichba D.P. Konstrukt “boloto” v rakurse lingvomental’nogo opisaniia // Vestnik Dnepropetrovskogo universiteta. 2013. T. 21. No. 11. S. 13–18.
10. Bock M., Hörmann H. Einfluss von Bildern auf das Behalten von Sätzen. Eine Untersuchung zu Olsons “kognitiver” Semantiktheorie // Psychologische Forschung. 1973. Vol. 36. Nr. 4. S. 343–357.