.png)
UDC 82-9
https://doi.org/10.20339/PhS.2-22.139
Tychinina Alyona R.,
Candidate of Philology, Assistant of the Foreign Literature and
Literary Theory Department
Fedkovich Chernivtsi National University (Ukraine)
e-mail: a.tychinina@chnu.edu.ua
Namestiuk Svetlana V.,
Candidate of Philology, Associate Professor of the
Foreign Languages Department
Bukovinian State Medical University (Ukraine)
e-mail: lapetitelarousse83@gmail.com
The specificity of children’s literature is been analyzed through the method of perception survey. The features of children’s literature were emphasized with their obligatory orientation to the addressee. The type of child-reader perception is different from an adult perception. The term “perception survey” refers to the result of recording readers’ reactions by answering questions about literary orientation, which allows establishing the characteristics of perception, impression or influence of a particular literary work / phenomenon / writer on perceptual consciousness. The perception survey is been tested as an experimental practical fragment of modern perceptive poetics, which allows considering the age dynamics of the perceptual factor. The perception survey allows the recipient children to identify frankly their tastes, preferences, and specifics of perception of literature. Finally, the questionnaire is a dialogical (question / answer), dynamic and intensive process. The survey is been based on a group, onymous (with an indication of the person) questionnaire, mainly based on 5–6 grades (10–12 years) of Chernivtsi secondary school (350 questionnaires, see: Appendices). The survey was conducted during world literature lessons through specific questions and with the use of content analysis. This allowed testing some scientific hypotheses about children’s perception of literature, establishing the state of reading of modern children, identifying the quality of reading texts, and finding “readable” authors. In addition, the survey shows which specific literary characters and works are preferred in juvenile perception.
Keywords: children’s literature, children’s perception, literary methodology, perception questionnaire, transgression.
References
1. Antipchuk N.V. Chehov і rozvitok ukraїns’koї ditiachoї prozi kіntsia XІX pochatku XX stolіt’ // Krymskie mezhdunarodnye Shmelevskie chteniia “Tvorchestvo I.S. Shmeleva v aksiologicheskom aspekte”. Vyp. XІІІ. Sіmferopol, 2005. S. 315–322.
2. Aristotel. O dushe // Sochineniia: v 4 t. T. 1. Moscow: Mysl’, 1976. S. 371–448.
3. Arnheim R. Iskusstvo i vizual’noe vospriiatie. Moscow: Progress, 1974. 198 s.
4. Bakіna T. Fol’klor iak mova ditiachoї subkul’turi // Suchasnі lіteraturoznavchі studії. Ditina і svіt: problemi kul’turnogo dіalogu. Kiїv: Vid. centr KNLU, 2005. Vyp. 2. S. 8–17.
5. Beket S. Naїvnі liudi: vіzualіzatsiia obrazu ditini v suchasnih opovіdiah pro chervonu shapochku // Іnozemna fіlologіia : ukraїns’kii naukovii zbіrnik. L’vіv: L’vіvs’kii nacіonal’nii unіversitet іmenі Іvana Franka, 2007. Vyp. 119 (2). S. 9–15.
6. Veselovsky A.N. Istoricheskaia poetika. Moscow: Vysshaia shkola, 1989. 405 s.
7. Vygotsky L.S. Psihologiia iskusstva. Rostov-na-Donu: Feniks, 1998. 480 s.
8. Gadamer H.-G. Aktual’nost’ prekrasnogo. Moscow: Iskusstvo, 1991. 367 s.
9. Genette G. Figury: v 2 t. Moscow: Izd-vo im. Sabashnikovyh, 1998. T. 1. 944 s.
10. Zhirmunsky V.M. Teoriia stiha. Leningrad: Sovetskii pisatel’, 1975. 664 s.
11. Ingarden R. Issledovaniia po estetike. Moscow: Izd-vo inostrannoi literatury, 1962. 570 s.
12. Maslinskaia S. Magiia pionerskoi simvoliki: sovetskoe proshloe v sovremennoi detskoi literature // Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie. 2021. No. 169 (3). S. 165–178.
13. Matsevko-Bekerska L. Ditiacha lіteratura iak forma dіalogu kul’tur: germenevtichnii aspekt // Lіteratura. Dіti. Chas: Vіsnik Centru doslіdzhennia lіteraturi dlia dіtei ta iunactva, Ternopіl’: Navchal’na kniga-Bogdan, 2011. Vyp. 1. S. 18–24.
14. Paceva M. Razvitie na prozodichnite modeli v rannata detska rech’ // Orbis Linguarum. 2021. Vol. 19, iss. 1. P. 70–81. URL: https://doi.org/10.37708/ezs.swu.bg.v19i1.8.
15. Podoroga V. Tekst protiv Proizvedeniia. Roland Barthes — chitatel’ // Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie. 2019. No. 159 (5). URL: https://www.nlobooks.ru/magazines/novoe_literaturnoe_obozrenie/159_nlo_5... (21.06.2021)
16. Potebnja A.A. Teoreticheskaia poetika. Moscow: Vysshaia shkola, 1990. 344 s.
17. Problemy detskoi literatury i fol’klor. Petrozvodsk: PetrGU, 2001. 228 s.
18. Slavova M.T. Volshebnoe zerkalo detstva: stat’i o detskoi literature. Kiev: IPC “Kievskii un-t”, 2002. 94 s.
19. Storі Dzh. Teorіia kul’turi ta masova kul’tura. Kiїv: Akta, 2005. 357 s.
20. Tolstoy N.I. Ocherki slavianskogo iazychestva. Moscow: Indrik, 2003. 624 s.
21. Chervіnska O.V., Zvarich І.M., Sazhina A.V. Psihologіchnі aspekti aktual’noї recepcії tekstu: Teoretiko-metodologіchnii pogliad na suchasnu praktiku slovesnoї kul’turi. Chernіvcі: Knigi — XXІ, 2009. 284 s.
22. Chukovsky K. Chukokkala. Rukopisnyi al’manah Korneia Chukovskogo. Moscow: Russkii put’, 2008. 582 s.
23. Schmid W. Narratologiia. Moscow: Iazyki slavianskoi kul’tury, 2008. 304 s.
24. Brewster J.C. Traveling the world with outstanding international children’s literature // Early Childhood Education Journal. 2008. No. 35 (4). P. 371–375.