.png)
UDC 81`42
https://doi.org/10.20339/PhS.4-22.065
Starodubets Svetlana N.,
Doctor of Philology, Associate Professor,
Professor of the Socio-Economic and Humanitarian Disciplines Department
Petrovsky Bryansk State University
e-mail: starodubets.madam@yandex.ru
The paper discusses the specifics of the synthetic discourse of works by I.A. Ilyin, which connects the features of philosophical, religious and aesthetic discourses. The method of linguity literal interpretation, aimed at justifying the characteristics of the functioning of language units in the discourse of the individual, is established by the originality of the interaction of philosophical, religious, political and aesthetic plans of the content in the word and text. Three options for the interaction of discourses are described: philosophical plus political, plus religious, plus aesthetic; philosophical plus religious, plus aesthetic, philosophical plus aesthetic.
It is determined that in the discourse of I.A. Ilyin structural and semantic synthesis of word and text conditions implemented by the categories of personality, events, temporality, space and evaluation, asked by the philosophical mental vector, due to the interaction on the field of discourse of philosophical and religious, philosophical and aesthetic, philosophical and political conditions of content. Conceptually significant meaning is decoded by establishing the explicit and implicit methods of representation of the semantics of the word, micro and macrocontext, deterministic cohesion of the personal discourse. The proposed interpretation of the synthetic type discourse determines the discourse of the works of I.A. Ilyin as a specific communicative space, outlined by the following coordinate system: Actually thinking (philosophy), an active public position (polytick), the purpose of “seeing in the whole of God” (religion), “Justice in the subject / subject” (aesthetics).
Keywords: discourse, personality discourse, discourse categories, textual categories, conceptually significant meaning.
References
1. Schlegel F. Estetika. Filosofiia. Kritika: v 2 t. T. II. Moscow: Iskusstvo, 1983. 447 s.
2. Krasnykh V.V. Ot kontsepta k tekstu i obratno // Vestnik MGU. Ser. 9. Filologiia. 1998. No. 1. S. 53–69.
3. Dymarsky M.Ya. Problemy tekstoobrazovaniia i khudozhestvennyi tekst. 2-e izd., ispr. i dop. Moscow: Editorial URSS, 2001. 328 s.
4. Gutner G.B. Predel’nost’ filosofskogo diskursa // Sobytie i smysl: (sinergeticheskii opyt iazyka). Moscow: Izd-vo IF RAN, 1999. S. 257–266.
5. Kolesov V.V. Russkaia mental’nost’ v iazyke i tekste. St. Petersburg: Peterburgskoe Vostokovedenie, 2007. 624 s.
6. Starodubets S.N. Ideologizirovannaia leksika kak iazykovoe vyrazhenie personalisticheskoi kartiny mira v diskurse N.A. Berdyaeva: autoref. dis. … kand. filol. nauk. Bryansk, 1999.
7. Starodubets S.N. Spetsifika organizatsii iazykovykh simvolicheskikh sredstv v diskurse I.A. Ilyina: autoref. dis. … d-ra filol. nauk. Bryansk, 2010.
8. Ilyin I.A. Sochineniia: v 2 t. T. II. Moscow: Moskovskii filosofskii fond: Medium, 1994. 575 s.
9. Ilyin I.A. Aksiomy religioznogo opyta. Issledovanie. T. 1–2. Moscow: AST, 2002. 589 s.
10. Lotman Yu.M. Istoriia i tipologiia russkoi kul’tury. St. Petersburg, 2002. 768 s.
11. Papina A.F. Tekst: ego edinitsy i global’nye kategorii: uchebnik dlia studentov-zhurnalistov i filologov. Moscow: Editorial URSS, 2002. 367 s.
12. Arutiunova N.D. Tipy iazykovykh znachenii. Otsenka. Sobytie. Fakt. Moscow: Nauka, 1988. 338 s.
13. Zaliznyak A.A. O poniatii “fakt” v lingvisticheskoi semantike // Logicheskii analiz iazyka. Protivorechivost’ i anomal’nost’ teksta. Moscow: Nauka, 1990. S. 21–33.
14. Arutiunova N.D. Vremia: modeli i metafory // Logicheskii analiz iazyka. Iazyk i vremia. Moscow: Indrik, 1997. S. 51–61.