Chapter I. Modern Stylistics and the Novel
Until the 20th century, there was no clear statement of the problems of the style of the novel, a statement that would proceed from the recognition of the stylistic originality of the novel (artistic and prose) word.
The novel has long been the subject of only abstract ideological consideration and publicistic evaluation. Specific questions of stylistics were either completely avoided, or were considered in passing and unprincipled: the artistic and prosaic word was understood as poetic in a narrow sense, and the categories of traditional stylistics (with its basis - the doctrine of paths) were uncritically applied to it; or they simply limited themselves to empty evaluative characteristics of the language - "expressiveness", "imagery", "strength", "clarity", etc. - without putting any definite and thoughtful stylistic meaning into these concepts.
By the end of the last century, as opposed to abstract ideological consideration, interest began to grow in specific issues of artistic skill in prose, in the technological problems of the novel and short story. However, in matters of style, the situation has not changed at all: attention is focused almost exclusively on the problems of composition (in the broad sense). But as before, there is no principled and at the same time concrete (one is impossible without the other) approach to the peculiarities of the stylistic life of the word in the novel (and in the short story as well); the same random evaluative observations of language in the spirit of traditional style continue to dominate, completely ignoring the true essence of artistic prose.
A very common and characteristic point of view, which sees in the novel word a kind of extra-artistic environment, devoid of a special and peculiar stylistic processing. Not finding in the novel word the expected purely poetic (in the narrow sense) design, it is denied any artistic value, it, as in life-practical or scientific speech, is only an artistically neutral means of communication.
Such a point of view frees one from the need to deal with stylistic analyzes of the novel, removes the very problem of the style of the novel, allowing one to confine oneself to purely thematic analyzes of it.
However, it was in the 1920s that the situation changed: the novel prose word began to win a place for itself in style. On the one hand, a number of concrete stylistic analyzes of novel prose appear; on the other hand, fundamental attempts are being made to recognize and define the stylistic originality of artistic prose in its difference from poetry.
But precisely these specific analyzes and these attempts at a principled approach have clearly revealed that all the categories of traditional stylistics and the very concept of the poetic, artistic word underlying them are not applicable to the novelistic word. The novel word turned out to be a touchstone for all stylistic thinking, revealing the narrowness of this thinking and its inadequacy to all spheres of the artistic life of the word.
All attempts at specific stylistic analyzes of novel prose either strayed into linguistic descriptions of the novelist's language, or were limited to highlighting individual stylistic elements of the novel that can be (or only seem to be) subsumed under the traditional categories of stylistics. In both cases, the stylistic whole of the novel and the novelized word eludes researchers.
The novel as a whole is a multi-style, contradictory, discordant phenomenon. The researcher encounters in it several heterogeneous stylistic units, sometimes lying on different linguistic planes and subject to different stylistic patterns.
Here are the main types of compositional-stylistic unities into which a novel whole is usually divided:
2) stylization of various forms of oral everyday narration (skaz);
3) stylization of various forms of semi-literary (written) everyday narration (letters, diaries, etc.);
4) various forms of literary, but non-artistic authorial speech (moral, philosophical, scientific reasoning, rhetorical recitation, ethnographic descriptions, protocol information, etc.);
5) stylistically individualized speeches of the characters.
These heterogeneous stylistic unities, entering the novel, are combined in it into a coherent artistic system and are subject to the highest stylistic unity of the whole, which cannot be identified with any of the unities subordinate to it.
The stylistic originality of the novel genre is precisely in the combination of these subordinate, but relatively independent units (sometimes even multilingual) in the higher unity of the whole: the style of the novel is in the combination of styles; the language of the novel is a system of "languages". Each isolated element of the language of the novel is most closely determined by the subordinate stylistic unity into which it directly enters: the stylistically individualized speech of the hero, the everyday tale of the narrator, writing, and so on. This closest unity determines the linguistic and stylistic appearance of a given element (lexical, semantic, syntactic). At the same time, this element, together with its closest stylistic unity, is involved in the style of the whole, carries the accent of the whole, participates in the construction and disclosure of the unified meaning of the whole.
A novel is an artistically organized social heteroglossia, sometimes a different language, and an individual dissonance. Internal stratification of a single national language into social dialects, group manners, professional jargons, genre languages, languages of generations and ages, languages of trends, languages of authorities, languages of circles and fleeting fashions, languages of socio-political days and even hours (every day has its own slogan, its own vocabulary, its own accents) - this internal stratification of each language at every given moment of its historical existence is a necessary prerequisite for the novel genre: social heteroglossia and individual dissonance growing on its soil - the novel orchestrates all its themes, all its depicted and expressed subject-semantic world. The author's speech, the speeches of narrators, inserted genres, the speeches of heroes - these are only those basic compositional units with the help of which heteroglossia is introduced into the novel; each of them allows for a variety of social voices and a variety of connections and relationships between them (always dialogized to one degree or another). These special connections and relationships between utterances and languages, this movement of the theme through languages and speeches, its fragmentation in jets and drops of social heteroglossia, its dialogization - such is the main feature of novelistic style.
Traditional stylistics does not know this kind of combination of languages and styles into a higher unity; it does not have an approach to the peculiar social dialogue of languages in the novel. That is why stylistic analysis focuses not on the whole of the novel, but only on this or that subordinate stylistic unity of it. The researcher passes over the main features of the novel genre, replaces the object of research and instead of the novel style analyzes, in essence, something completely different. He transposes a symphonic (orchestrated) theme to the piano.
Two types of such substitution are observed: in the first case, instead of analyzing the novel style, a description is given of the novelist's language (or, at best, the "languages" of the novel); in the second, one of the subordinate styles is singled out and analyzed as the style of the whole.
In the first case, the style is renounced from the genre and from the work and is considered as a phenomenon of the language itself; the unity of the style of a given work turns either into the unity of some individual language (“individual dialect”), or into the unity individual speech(parole). It is the individuality of the speaker that is recognized as the style-forming factor that turns a linguistic, linguistic phenomenon into a stylistic unity.
For us, in this case, it is not essential in what direction this kind of analysis of the novel style proceeds: whether it goes to the disclosure of some individual dialect of the novelist (that is, his dictionary, his syntax) or to the disclosure of the features of the work as a certain speech whole, as a “statement” . In both cases, style is equally understood in the spirit of Saussure - as an individualization of a common language (in the sense of a system of common language norms). At the same time, stylistics turns either into a kind of linguistics of individual languages, or into the linguistics of utterance.
The unity of style, according to the point of view under consideration, thus presupposes, on the one hand, the unity of language in the sense of a system of general normative forms, and, on the other hand, the unity of individuality, realizing itself in this language.
Both of these conditions are indeed obligatory in most poetic genres, but even here they are far from exhaustive and do not yet determine the style of the work. The most accurate and complete description of the individual language and speech of the poet, even if with an emphasis on the figurativeness of linguistic and speech elements, is not yet a stylistic analysis of the work, since these elements refer to the system of language or to the system of speech, that is, to some linguistic unities, but not to the system of a work of art, which is governed by completely different laws than the linguistic systems of language and speech.
But, we repeat, in most poetic genres the unity of the language system and the unity (and uniqueness) of the poet's linguistic and speech individuality directly realizing itself in it are necessary prerequisites for poetic style. The novel, however, not only does not require these conditions, but even, as we said, the prerequisite for genuine novelistic prose is the internal stratification of the language, its social heterogeneity and individual discord in it.
Therefore, the substitution of novelistic style for the individualized language of the novelist (since it can be found in the system of "languages" and "speech" of the novel) is doubly indefinite: it distorts the very essence of the style of the novel. Such a substitution inevitably leads to the selection from the novel of only those elements that fit within the framework of a single language system and that express directly and immediately the author's individuality in the language. The whole of the novel and the specific tasks of constructing this whole out of contradictory, discordant, disparate, and often multilingual elements remain outside the scope of such a study.
Such is the first type of substitution of the object of the novel's stylistic analysis. We do not delve into the various variations of this type, determined by different understandings of such concepts as "speech whole", "language system", "author's linguistic and speech individuality", and the difference in understanding the very relationship between style and language (as well as between stylistics and linguistics). With all possible variations of this type of analysis, which knows only one and only language and the only individuality of the author directly expressing itself in it, the stylistic essence of the novel hopelessly eludes the researcher.
The second type of substitution is characterized by an orientation no longer on the language of the author, but on the style of the novel, however, this style narrows down to the style of only one of the subordinate (relatively independent) units of the novel.
In most cases, the novelistic style is subsumed under the concept of "epic style", and the corresponding categories of traditional stylistics are applied to it. At the same time, only elements of the epic image stand out from the novel (mainly in the direct author's speech). The profound difference between novelistic and purely epic figurativeness is ignored. The differences between the novel and the epic are usually perceived only in terms of composition and thematic.
In other cases, other elements of the novelistic style are singled out as more characteristic of a particular work. Thus, the element of narration can be viewed not from the point of view of its objective figurativeness, but from the point of view of subjective expressiveness (expressiveness). It is possible to single out elements of everyday, non-literary narration (skaz) or moments of a plot-informative nature (for example, when analyzing an adventure novel). Finally, one can single out the purely dramatic elements of the novel, reducing the narrative moment to a mere remark to the dialogues of the novel characters. Meanwhile, the system of languages in the drama is organized in a fundamentally different way, and therefore these languages sound completely different than in the novel. There is no embracing language, dialogically turned to separate languages, there is no second embracing non-plot (non-dramatic) dialogue.
All these types of analyzes are not adequate to the style not only of the novelistic whole, but also of the element that they single out as the main one for the novel, because this element, withdrawn from interaction with others, changes its stylistic meaning and ceases to be what it really was in the novel.
The current state of the issues of novel stylistics reveals with complete obviousness that all categories and methods of traditional stylistics are not capable of mastering artistic originality words in the novel, its specific life in it. “Poetic language”, “linguistic individuality”, “image”, “symbol”, “epic style” and other general categories developed and applied by stylistics, as well as the whole set of specific stylistic devices that fall under these categories, with all the difference in understanding by their individual researchers, are equally focused on monolingual and monostyle genres, on poetic genres in the narrow sense. A number of essential features and limitations of traditional stylistic categories are associated with this exclusive orientation. All these categories and the underlying philosophical concept of the poetic word are narrow and cramped and do not fit within their limits the artistic and prose novelistic word.
The stylistics and philosophy of the word are, in essence, facing a dilemma: either to recognize the novel (and, consequently, all artistic prose gravitating towards it) as a non-fiction or quasi-artistic genre, or to radically revise the concept of the poetic word that underlies traditional stylistics and determines all of it. categories.
This dilemma, however, is far from being recognized by everyone. The majority is not inclined to a radical revision of the basic philosophical concept of the poetic word. Many do not see at all and do not recognize the philosophical roots of the style (and that linguistics) in which they work, and shy away from any philosophical adherence to principles. Behind separate and disparate stylistic observations and linguistic descriptions, they generally do not see the fundamental problem of the novelistic word. Others, more fundamental, stand on the basis of consistent individualism in understanding language and style. In the stylistic phenomenon, they seek, first of all, a direct and immediate expression of the author's individuality, and such an understanding is least of all conducive to revising the main stylistic categories in the right direction.
Perhaps, however, there is such a fundamental solution to our dilemma: we can recall the forgotten rhetoric, which for centuries was in charge of all artistic prose. Indeed, having restored rhetoric in its ancient rights, one can remain with the old concept of the poetic word, referring to “rhetorical forms” everything in novel prose that does not fit into Procrustean bed traditional stylistic categories.
Such a solution to the dilemma was once proposed by us with all the integrity and consistency of G.G. Shpet. Artistic prose and its ultimate realization - the novel - he completely excludes from the realm of poetry and refers to purely rhetorical forms.
Here is what G. G. Shpet says about the novel: “Consciousness and understanding that modern forms of moral propaganda - novel- not the essence of the form poetic creativity, but the essence of purely rhetorical compositions, apparently, barely arises and immediately runs into an obstacle that is difficult to overcome in the form universal recognition yet behind a novel of some aesthetic significance.
Shpet completely denied aesthetic significance to the novel. The novel is a non-fiction rhetorical genre, " modern form moral propaganda"; an artistic word is only a poetic word (in the indicated sense).
He adopted a similar point of view in his book “On fiction” and V. V. Vinogradov, referring the problem of artistic prose to rhetoric. Adjacent to Shpet in the basic philosophical definitions of "poetic" and "rhetorical", Vinogradov, however, was not so paradoxically consistent: he considered the novel to be a syncretic mixed form ("hybrid formation") and allowed for the presence in it of the presence of rhetorical and purely poetic elements.
This point of view, which completely excludes novelistic prose as a purely rhetorical formation, from the limits of poetry, the point of view is basically incorrect, nevertheless has some indisputable merit. It contains a fundamental and justified recognition of the inadequacy of all modern stylistics, with its philosophical and linguistic basis, specific features novel prose. Further, the very appeal to rhetorical forms is of great heuristic significance. The rhetorical word, brought to study in all its living diversity, cannot but have a profoundly revolutionary influence on linguistics and the philosophy of language. In rhetorical forms, with a correct and unbiased approach to them, such aspects of any word (the internal dialogism of the word and the phenomena accompanying it) are revealed with great outward clarity, which have not yet been sufficiently taken into account and understood in their enormous relative weight in the life of the language. This is the general methodological and heuristic significance of rhetorical forms for linguistics and the philosophy of language.
Just as great is the special significance of rhetorical forms for understanding the novel. All artistic prose and the novel are in the closest genetic relationship with rhetorical forms. And throughout the further development of the novel, its closest interaction (both peaceful and struggle) with living rhetorical genres (journalistic, moral, philosophical, etc.) did not stop and was, perhaps, no less than its interaction with artistic genres ( epic, dramatic and lyrical). But in this continuous relationship, the novelistic word retains its qualitative originality and is irreducible to the rhetorical word.
The novel is a literary genre. The novel word is a poetic word, but it really does not fit into the framework of the existing concept of the poetic word. This concept is based on some restrictive assumptions. The very concept in the process of its historical formation - from Aristotle to the present day - was oriented towards certain "official" genres and is associated with certain historical trends verbal-ideological life. Therefore, a number of phenomena remained outside her horizons.
Philosophy of language, linguistics and stylistics postulate a simple and direct relation of the speaker to the single and only "own" language and the simple realization of this language in the monologue statement of the individual. They know, in essence, only two poles of linguistic life, between which are located all the linguistic and stylistic phenomena accessible to them - the system of a single language and the individual speaking this language.
Various trends in the philosophy of language, linguistics and stylistics in different eras (and in close connection with various specific poetic and ideological styles of these eras) introduced various shades into the concepts of "language system", "monologic utterance" and "speaking individual", but their main content remains stable. This main content is due to certain socio-historical destinies European languages and the fate of the ideological word and those special historical tasks that the ideological word solved in certain social spheres and at certain stages of its historical development.
These fates and tasks determined both certain genre varieties of the ideological word, and certain verbal-ideological directions, and, finally, a certain philosophical concept of the word and, in particular, the poetic word, which formed the basis of all stylistic trends.
In this conditionality of the main stylistic categories by certain historical destinies and tasks of the ideological word, the strength of these categories, but at the same time, their limitations. They were born and shaped by the historically actual forces of the verbal and ideological formation of certain social groups, they were the theoretical expression of these active, linguistic life-creating forces.
These forces are the forces of unification and centralization of the verbal-ideological world.
The category of a single language is a theoretical expression of the historical processes of linguistic unification and centralization, an expression of the centripetal forces of language. A single language is not given, but, in essence, is always given and at every moment of linguistic life it opposes real heteroglossia. But at the same time, it is real as a force that overcomes this heteroglossia, sets certain boundaries for it, ensures a certain maximum of mutual understanding and crystallizes in the real, albeit relative, unity of the dominant spoken (everyday) and literary language, the “correct language”.
A common single language is a system of linguistic norms. But these norms are not an abstract obligation, but the creative forces of linguistic life, overcoming the heteroglossia of the language, uniting and centralizing verbal and ideological thinking, creating a solid and stable linguistic core of the officially recognized literary language within the heteroglossy national language or defending this already formed language from the pressure of growing heteroglossia. .
We do not mean an abstract linguistic minimum of a common language in the sense of a system of elementary forms (linguistic symbols), which provides a minimum of understanding in practical communication. We take language not as a system of abstract grammatical categories, but an ideologically filled language, language as a worldview and even as a specific opinion, providing maximum mutual understanding in all spheres of ideological life. Therefore, a single language expresses the forces of a specific verbal-ideological unification and centralization that takes place in inseparable connection with the processes of socio-political and cultural centralization.
Aristotelian poetics, the poetics of Augustine, the medieval church poetics of the "single language of truth", the Cartesian poetics of neoclassicism, the abstract grammatical universalism of Leibniz (the idea of "universal grammar"), the concrete ideolologism of Humboldt - with all the differences in shades - express the same centripetal forces of social linguistic and ideological life, serve the same task of centralizing and unifying European languages. The victory of one dominant language (dialect) over others, the displacement of languages, their enslavement, enlightenment by the true word, the familiarization of barbarians and social classes with a single language of culture and truth, the canonization of ideological systems, philology with its methods of studying and teaching the dead, and therefore, like everything dead, virtually unified languages, Indo-European linguistics with its installation from a plurality of languages to a single proto-language - all this determined the content and strength of the category of a single language in linguistic and stylistic thinking and its creative, style-forming role in most poetic genres that have developed in line with the same centripetal forces of verbal-ideological life.
But the centripetal forces of linguistic life, embodied in the "single language", operate in an environment of actual heteroglossia. The language at any given moment of its formation is stratified not only into linguistic dialects in the exact sense of the word (according to formal linguistic features, mainly phonetic), but, which is essential for us here, into socio-ideological languages: social-group, "professional" , "genre", languages of generations, etc. From this point of view, the literary language itself is only one of the languages of heteroglossia, and it, in turn, is also stratified into languages (genre, directional, etc.). And this actual stratification and heterogeneity is not only the statics of linguistic life, but also its dynamics: stratification and heterogeneity expand and deepen as long as the language is alive and developing; next to the centripetal forces, there is a continuous work of the centrifugal forces of language, next to the verbal-ideological centralization and unification, processes of decentralization and separation are continuously going on.
Each specific utterance of the speech subject is the point of application of both centripetal and centrifugal forces. The processes of centralization and decentralization, association and separation intersect in it, it dominates not only its own language as its individualized speech embodiment, it also dominates heteroglossia, is an active participant in it. And this active participation of each utterance in living heteroglossia determines the linguistic appearance and style of the utterance no less than its belonging to the normative-centralizing system of a single language.
Each utterance participates in a “single language” (centripetal forces and tendencies) and at the same time social and historical heteroglossia (centrifugal, stratifying forces).
This is the language of the day, the era, social group, genre, direction, etc. It is possible to give a concrete and detailed analysis of any utterance, revealing it as a contradictory tense unity of two opposing tendencies in linguistic life.
The real environment of the utterance in which it lives and forms is dialogized heteroglossia, nameless and social like a language, but concrete, content-filled and accentuated as an individual utterance.
While the main varieties of poetic genres develop in line with the unifying and centralizing, centripetal forces of verbal and ideological life, the novel and the artistic and prose genres gravitating towards it were historically formed in line with decentralizing, centrifugal forces. While poetry in the official socio-ideological elites solved the problem of cultural, national, political centralization of the verbal-ideological world, - in the lower classes, on the farce and fair stages, clownish heteroglossia sounded, mimicking all "languages" and dialects, the literature of fables and schwanks developed. , street songs, sayings, anecdotes, where there was no language center, where live game"languages" of poets, scientists, monks, knights, etc., where all "languages" were masks and there was no true and indisputable linguistic person.
The heteroglossia organized in these low genres was not just a heteroglossia in relation to the recognized literary language(in all its genre varieties), that is, in relation to the linguistic center of the verbal-ideological life of the nation and era, but it was a conscious opposition to it. It was parodic and polemically pointed against the official languages of modernity. It was dialogized heteroglossia.
The philosophy of language, linguistics and stylistics, born and developing in line with the centralizing tendencies of linguistic life, ignored this dialogized heteroglossia, which embodied the centrifugal forces of linguistic life. Therefore, they could not have access to linguistic dialogicity, due to the struggle of socio-linguistic points of view, and not the intra-linguistic struggle of individual wills or logical contradictions. However, even the intralinguistic dialogue (dramatic, rhetorical, cognitive and everyday) has not been studied linguistically and stylistically until recently. It can be said directly that the dialogical moment of the word and all the phenomena associated with it remained until recently outside the purview of linguistics.
The style was completely deaf to dialogue. A literary work was conceived by stylistics as a closed and self-sufficient whole, the elements of which constitute a closed system that does not presuppose anything outside itself, no other statements. The system of the work was conceived by analogy with the system of the language, which cannot be in dialogical interaction with other languages. The work as a whole, whatever it may be, from the point of view of style, is a self-contained and closed author's monologue, suggesting beyond its limits only a passive listener. If we imagined a work as a replica of some dialogue, the style of which is determined by its relationship with other replicas of this dialogue (as a whole, conversation), then from the point of view of traditional stylistics there is no adequate approach to such a dialogized style. The most sharply and externally expressed phenomena of this kind - polemical style, parodic, ironic - are usually qualified as rhetorical, and not poetic phenomena. Stylistics locks each stylistic phenomenon into a monological context of a given self-sufficing and closed utterance, as if enclosing it in the dungeon of one context; it cannot resonate with other utterances, cannot realize its stylistic meaning in interaction with them, it must exhaust itself in its own closed context.
Serving the great centralizing tendencies of European verbal and ideological life, the philosophy of language, linguistics and stylistics sought, above all, unity in diversity. This exceptional “attitude towards unity” in the present and past of the life of languages focused the attention of philosophical and linguistic thought on the most stable, solid, little-changing and unambiguous moments of the word - phonetic, first of all, moments - the most distant from the changeable social and semantic spheres of the word. The real, ideologically filled "linguistic consciousness", involved in real heteroglossia and multilingualism, remained out of sight. The same orientation towards unity forced to ignore all verbal genres(everyday, rhetorical, artistic and prosaic), which were carriers of the decentralizing tendencies of linguistic life, or, in any case, were too significantly involved in heteroglossia. The expression of this heterogeneous and multilingual consciousness in specific forms and phenomena of verbal life remained without any definite influence on linguistic and stylistic thought.
That is why the specific sensation of language and word, which found its expression in stylizations, in tales, in parodies, in various forms of verbal disguise, "not direct speaking" and in more complex art forms organization of heteroglossia, orchestration of their themes by languages, in all the characteristic and deep samples of novel prose - in Grimmelshausen, in Cervantes, Rabelais, Fielding, Smollett, Stern and others - could not find adequate theoretical awareness and coverage.
The problems of the novel's stylistics inevitably lead to the need to touch upon a number of fundamental questions of the philosophy of the word, related to those aspects of the life of the word that were almost not covered by linguistic and stylistic thought - with the life and behavior of the word in a heterogeneous and multilingual world.
From the book Wrath of the Orc author Kalashnikov MaximChapter 19. The modern economy is the enemy of development As I tried to show, the immediate cause of the Fifth World War, or the decisive factor in its unleashing, is the inability of authorities at all levels to produce sociality of a normal quality and level.
From book Secret societies XX century author Bogolyubov Nikolay From the book Socialist States of America author Fridman Viktor PavlovichChapter 4 Modern America: Constitution or Manifesto? We will try to take all the money we deem necessary from those who have it, and give it to those who do not have it, but who need it badly. Lyndon Johnson, 36th President of the United States (Speech Excerpt January 15, 1964) Constitution
From the book Dostoevsky and the Apocalypse author Karyakin Yury FedorovichChapter 3 A novel in a panorama (Flying around) Comparison of the beginnings and ends of the novel (flying around) immediately - and sharply - clarifies the scale of the artist's intention, all the grandiosity that was revealed to him and recreated by him
From the book Big City Money with Dr. Kurpatov author Kurpatov Andrey VladimirovichChapter 5 Novel ("Casuistry") Still, the question arises: the unambiguity of the true motives of the crime - isn't it too simple? However, after all, the very struggle of two goals, two laws in Raskolnikov’s soul, if it is exposed, if everything and every veil is thrown off it, in fact -
From the book you are not a gadget. Manifesto author Lanir JaronChapter 6 Roman (Cramps of conscience) Thirteen days pass from the moment Raskolnikov left, “as if in indecision”, from his closet (“for a test”), until the moment he said in the police office: “It was I who killed ...” All these days, the darkness of his self-deception is continually pierced by lightning bolts of the truth about
From the book Earth in Trouble author Smorodin IgorChapter 8 Once again a novel (Children) What gives this or that idea to a person? What does she do with him? What forces awakens, what - kills? What does a person do with an idea? In this radical test of ideas, the test of man, children occupy an exceptional place in Dostoevsky - an inevitable theme,
From the book And in our yard author Miller LarisaChapter Four OFFICIAL ROMANCE ON WILL AND CAPTIVACY The girls and I were sitting in a cafe and, I confess, we were gossiping. Anya talked about the affair of her boss with a lawyer from their firm. It's funny, of course: they pretend that nothing is happening, but everyone knows about everything. And suddenly Ira says:
From the book Everyday Life in North Korea author Demik Barbara From the book Trampled Flowers of Evil [My Literary Theory] the author Klimova Marusya From the book On Loan Interest, Jurisdictional, Reckless. Reader contemporary problems"monetary civilization". author Katasonov Valentin YurievichChapter 3 Novel with English
From the book Riga. The Middle West, or Truth and Myths about Russian Europe author Evdokimov Alexey GennadievichCHAPTER 5 A Victorian Romance Gyeongsong House of Culture As a schoolgirl, Mi Ran noticed that the townspeople were going to the countryside in search of food. As she rode her bike to Chongjin, she noticed people walking like beggars with canvas bags towards the gardens,
From the book Secret Societies and Their Power in the 20th Century author Helsing Ian vanChapter Six A Man's Romance This, of course, has not been proven, but it always seemed to me that practically all the laws of the physical world are applicable to the spiritual world as well. Especially the law of action and reaction! As soon as a phenomenon is born, something immediately arises for it.
From the author's bookChapter 28 CORPORATISM AS A MODERN FORM OF "MONEY CIVILIZATION" Dictatorship of Monopolies B Soviet time, especially in the era of "mature socialism" and "stagnation", when Marxism-Leninism was seen as "the only true doctrine", objectivity and scientificity in relation to
From the author's book From the author's bookCHAPTER 51 The Current Situation The Illuminati, through the international bankers associated with the said elite societies and through the empires they created, keep the world firmly in check. They seek to further strengthen their possession of this planet. National
Option 2
Part 1
Read the text and complete tasks 1-3.
(1) On March 22, 1993, news agencies around the world broke the news that an unknown robotics engineer, Rudolf Gantenbrink, had made the most outstanding discovery of the decade. (2) Gantenbrink, who was hired by the German Archaeological Institute in Cairo to investigate the possibility of installing a ventilation system in the Great Pyramid, sent a remote-controlled robot he had created into the southern ventilation shaft of the burial chamber. (3) after walking sixty-five meters, which was about half the way, the robot sent a video image, which clearly showed a door with a very mysterious void behind it.
1. Indicate two sentences that correctly convey HOME information contained in the text. Write down the numbers of these sentences.
1) The German engineer Rudolf Gantenbrink created a special robot to explore the ventilation shafts in the Great Pyramid, and this invention glorified the scientist.
2) A robot created by engineer Gantenbrink, exploring the ventilation shaft in the Great Pyramid, discovered a mysterious door in this shaft, and this news shocked the whole world.
3) Robotics engineer Rudolf Gantenbrink, while exploring the ventilation shaft of the Great Pyramid with the help of a controlled robot, made an amazing discovery: there is a door in the shaft.
4) The robot of Rudolf Gantenbrink, having done half the way in one of the mines of Cairo, sent a clear video image to the operator.
5) In March 1993, the sensational news spread around the world that an unknown robotics engineer Rudolf Gantenbrink had created a radio-controlled robot.
2. Which of the following words or combinations of words should be in place of the gap in the third (3) sentence of the text? Write down this word (combination of words).
On the contrary, therefore, apparently, and probably
3. Read the fragment of the dictionary entry, which gives the meaning of the word WORK. Determine in what sense this word is used in the second (2) sentence of the text. Write down the number corresponding to this value in the given fragment of the dictionary entry.
JOB, -s, female
1) Being in action, the activity of something, the process of converting energy of one type into another. R. machines.
2) Occupation, work. Physical r.
3) Service, occupation on some n. enterprise, institution as a source of income. To get a job.
4) pl. Production activity for the creation, processing of something. Irrigation work.
5) Product of labor, ready product. Printed works.
4. In one of the words below, a mistake was made in setting the stress: the letter denoting the stressed vowel is highlighted INCORRECTLY. Write out this word.
FACILITATE AIRPORTS SEAL STARTED FROM THE BOTTOM
5. In one of the sentences below, the underlined word is WRONGLY used. Correct the mistake and write this word correctly.
On a difficult track, it was not the owners of the most powerful engines that gained the advantage, but the most TECHNICAL racers.
Kolosentsev immediately got up with a BUSINESS look.
She considered herself a backward, UNSUCCESSFUL creature, doomed to live a dull, hard life.
Wait! - he interrupted me excitedly. - You put me in a HIGHLIGHTING position.
ROMANTIC irony, a gothic degrading parody, a fighting street song, forms of small magazine-satirical (colloquial) genres, Shrovetide laughter are uniquely combined in Heine's wonderful poetic satire.
6. In one of the words highlighted below, a mistake was made in the formation of the word form. Correct the mistake and spell the word correctly.
aroma SHAMPOO in SEVENTO versts more LONG WET in the rain
several young ladies
7. Establish a correspondence between grammatical errors and sentences in which they are made: for each position of the first column, select the corresponding position from the second column.
| GRAMMATICAL ERRORS | OFFERS | ||
| A) incorrect use of the case form of a noun with a preposition B) violation of the connection between the subject and the predicate C) incorrect construction of a sentence with a participial turnover D) incorrect sentence construction with indirect speech D) violation in the construction of a sentence with homogeneous members | 1) It was completely dark in houses, squares, parks, it was deep night, from which something mysterious and mysterious blew. 2) Without thinking for a second, Fedya rushed across the path of a cyclist who was riding straight at little Dasha. 3) A small forest near the village, a tiny pond behind the garden, a small grandmother's house - all this seemed to Nikolenka a huge world full of adventures. 4) The father promised that upon arrival from a business trip he would certainly tell in all details what he had seen abroad. 5) All those who have found the strength in themselves to resist evil in relation to man will not allow cruelty in relation to nature either. 6) When everyone expressed their point of view, we, after weighing all the pros and cons, made a compromise decision. 7) D.S. Likhachev writes that "an intellectual can be recognized by the absence of aggressiveness, suspicion, his own inferiority complex, and gentleness of behavior in him." 8) Everyone who was on that memorable day at Anna Dmitrievna's evening was struck by the luxurious decoration of her house. 9) After thinking a little, the professor said that even I, being an experienced surgeon, was not ready to take on such a complex operation, and it became clear that I, a doctor just starting my practice, could not cope. |
8. Determine the word in which the unstressed alternating vowel of the root is missing. Write out this word by inserting the missing letter.
appr..speech see..forge (food) rested (fence) control..calculation..tanning
9. Find a row in which the same letter is missing in both words. Write these words out with the missing letter.
pr..follow, (c) pr..dacha
vz..small, ob..sk
be..tasty, ..shaved (beard)
pr .. raised, pr .. lay down
with .. voice, pr .. image
10. Write down the word in which the letter E is written in place of the gap.
oil pressure.
11. Write down the word in which the letter I is written in place of the gap.
rebuilt .. finished .. who was unacceptable .. my hope .. you cherish .. who
12. Identify the sentence in which NOT with the word is spelled CONTINUOUSLY. Open the brackets and write out this word.
This person, UNKNOWN to anyone, behaved as if he knew everyone well.
Money to our hero was constantly (NOT) ENOUGH, because they were spent quickly and stupidly.
Today's performance turned out to be (NOT) MORE INTERESTING than yesterday's.
(NOT) ABLE to speak in public, Demidov was very worried before the meeting.
I did not know how to start a conversation in such an (UN)USUAL environment.
13. Determine the sentence in which both underlined words are spelled ONE. Open the brackets and write out these two words.
Yegor sat alone for a long time in a (SEMI) DARK room, then he went out into the dining room, said something, but no one understood what he had (B) in mind.
Krygin TO (SAME) was a specialist in this field, (WITH) known.
My grandmother and I walked (IN) into the depths of the forest, but I didn’t worry at all, because I knew: my grandmother knows this forest well enough TO (Would) find the way back.
SO (SAME) the director talked about the plans of the enterprise for the next year, and everyone (FOR) FOR several hours listened attentively.
The children broke into columns (PO) TWO and (THAT) HOUR set off.
14. Indicate all the numbers in the place of which HH is written.
In mid-September it was windy(1)o; yellow and crimson (2) leaves, doomed (3) about obeying the gusts of wind, desperately (4) round dances circled the streets and squares and, mingling with silver (5) cobwebs, flew away somewhere into the distance.
15. Use punctuation marks. Choose two sentences in which you want to put ONE comma. Write down the numbers of these sentences.
1) I wanted to give my mother a box or a hat or a silk scarf for her birthday.
2) At night it froze and the stars dotted the sky.
3) At the Bird Market, you could both buy your favorite animal and just admire it.
4) Lightning flashed and the forest for a few moments lit up inexpressibly bright light filled with strange shadows.
5) Copernicus reflected on the Ptolemaic system of the world and was amazed at its complexity and artificiality, illogicality and confusion.
16. Put all the punctuation marks:
Nikolai Ivanovich (1) being naturally strong and a healthy person(2) suddenly felt unwell that day and (3) immediately interrupted the meeting (4) and (5) called a car (6) drove home.
17. Put in all the missing punctuation marks: indicate the number(s) that should be replaced by a comma(s) in the sentence.
- You (1) guys (2) from the middle
Start off. And I will say:
I am not the first shoes
I wear it here without a fix.
Here (3) you (4) arrived at the place,
Guns in hand - and fight.
And which (5) of you (6) knows
What is Sabantuy?
18. Put all the punctuation marks: indicate the number(s) that should be replaced by a comma(s) in the sentence.
A literary work was conceived by stylistics as a closed and self-sufficient whole (1) all elements (2) of which (3) constitute a closed system (4) and do not imply any other
statements.
19. Put all the punctuation marks: indicate the number(s) that should be replaced by a comma(s) in the sentence.
When Zhenya nevertheless decided to accept Alexander Semyonovich's proposal (1) and (2) a letter about this decision had already been sent to his Moscow address (3) she was about to go to say goodbye to her aunt (4) so that (5) despite the fact that (6 ) the relationship between them was very difficult (7) to receive a blessing from her.
20. Edit the sentence: correct the lexical error, excluding superfluous word. Write out this word.
The cold snow was packed into the wrinkles of the bark, and the thick, three-girth trunk seemed to be stitched with silver threads.
Read the text and complete tasks 21-26
(1) It was Christmas Eve...
(2) The caretaker of the resettlement barracks, a retired soldier, with a beard as gray as mouse hair, named Semyon Dmitrievich, or simply Mitrich, went up to his wife and said cheerfully:
- (3) Well, woman, what a thing I thought up! (4) I say, the holiday is coming ... (5) And for everyone it is a holiday, everyone rejoices in it ... (6) Everyone has their own: who has a new thing for the holiday, who will have feasts ... (7) Your room, for example, will be clean, I also have my own pleasure: I will buy sausages for myself! ..
- (8) So what? the old woman said indifferently.
- (9) And then, - Mitrich sighed again, - that everyone will have a holiday as a holiday, but, I say, it turns out for the kids, and there is no real holiday ... (10) I look at them - and my heart bleeds : oh, I think it’s wrong! .. (11) It’s known, orphans ... (12) Neither mother, nor father, nor relatives ... (13) It’s awkward! .. (14) So I thought of this: it’s necessary Amuse the kids! .. (15) I saw a lot of people ... and ours, and I saw everyone ... (16) I saw how they like to amuse children for the holiday. (17) They will bring a Christmas tree, remove it with candles and gifts, and their children just even jump for joy!
(19) Mitrich winked merrily, smacked his lips and went out into the yard.
(20) Around the yard, here and there, wooden houses were scattered, covered with snow, clogged with boards. (21) From early spring to late autumn, settlers passed through the city. (22) There were so many of them, and they were so poor that good people they built these houses for them, which were guarded by Mitrich. (23) By the fall, the houses were vacated, and by winter there was no one left except Mitrich and Agrafena, and even a few children, no one knows whose. (24) For these children, the parents either died or went to no one knows where. (25) Mitrich had eight such children this winter. (26) He settled them all together in one house, where he was going to arrange a holiday today.
(27) First of all, Mitrich went to the church warden to beg for stubs of church candles to decorate the Christmas tree. (28) Then he went to the resettlement official. (29) But the official was busy; without seeing Mitrich, he ordered me to say "thank you" to him and sent a fifty kopeck piece.
(30) Returning home, Mitrich did not say a word to his wife, but only laughed silently and, looking at the coin, figured out when and how to arrange everything.
(31) “Eight children,” Mitrich reasoned, bending his clumsy fingers on his hands, “so eight candies ...”
(32) ... It was a clear frosty afternoon. (33) With an ax in his belt, in a sheepskin coat and a hat, Mitrich returned from the forest, dragging a Christmas tree on his shoulder. (34) He had fun, although he was tired. (35) In the morning he went to the city to buy sweets for the children, and for himself and his wife - sausages, to which he was a passionate hunter, but he rarely bought it and ate only on holidays.
(36) Mitrich brought a Christmas tree, sharpened the end with an ax; then he adjusted it to stand, and when everything was ready, dragged it to the children in the barracks.
(37) When the tree warmed up, the room smelled of freshness and resin. (38) Children's faces, sad and thoughtful, suddenly cheered up ... (39) No one yet understood what the old man was doing, but everyone already foresaw pleasure, and Mitrich looked cheerfully at the eyes fixed on him from all sides.
(40) When the candles and sweets were already on the Christmas tree, Mitrich thought: the decoration was poor. (41) No matter how fond he was of his idea, however, he could not hang anything on the Christmas tree, except for eight sweets.
(42) Suddenly such an idea came to him that he even stopped. (43) Although he was very fond of sausage and valued every piece, but the desire to treat to fame overpowered all his considerations:
- (44) I will cut off a circle for everyone and hang it on a thread. (45) And slices of bread, and also on the Christmas tree.
(46) As soon as it got dark, the Christmas tree was lit. (47) It smelled of melted wax, resin and greens. (48) Always gloomy and thoughtful, the children screamed with joy, looking at the lights. (49) Their eyes brightened, their faces blushed. (50) Laughter, cries and talk revived for the first time this gloomy room, where from year to year only complaints and tears were heard. (51) Even Agrafena clasped her hands in surprise, and Mitrich, rejoicing from the bottom of her heart, clapped her hands. (52) Admiring the Christmas tree, the children having fun, he smiled. (53) And then he commanded:
- (54) The audience! (55)Come! (56) Taking a piece of bread and sausage from the Christmas tree, Mitrich dressed all the children, then took Agrafene for himself.
- (57) Look, the orphans are chewing! (58) Look, they're chewing! (59) Look! (60) Rejoice! he shouted. (61) And after that, Mitrich took the harmonica and, forgetting his old age, started dancing with the children. (62) The children jumped, squealed merrily and whirled, and Mitrich did not lag behind them. (63) His soul was filled with such joy that he did not remember if such a holiday had ever happened in his life.
- (64) The audience! he exclaimed at last. - (65) Candles burn out. (66) Take your own candy, and it's time to sleep!
(67) The children screamed with joy and rushed to the Christmas tree, and Mitrich, touched almost to tears, whispered to Agrafena:
- (68) Good! .. (69) You can directly say: right! ..
(according to N.D. Teleshov*)
*Nikolai Dmitrievich Teleshov (1867–1957)- Russian Soviet writer, poet, organizer of the well-known circle of Moscow writers "Wednesday" (1899-1916). The story "Yolka Mitrich" (1897) is included in the cycle "Settlers", dedicated to a large migration beyond the Urals, to Siberia, where the peasants were given allotments of land.
21. Read sentences 19–29. Specify the number of the sentence, after which the next fragment should be.
“The houses were all overcrowded, and meanwhile the settlers kept coming and coming. They had nowhere to go, and so they scattered huts in the field, where they hid with their families and children in cold and bad weather. Some lived here for a week, two, and others for more than a month, waiting in line on the ship.
22. Which of the following statements are faithful? Specify the answer numbers.
Enter the numbers in ascending order.
1) Sentences 10-13 present the narrative.
2) Sentence 19 presents the narrative.
3) Sentences 30-31 provide a description.
4) Proposition 47 indicates a consequence of what is said in sentence 46.
5) Sentences 61-62 present the narrative.
23. From sentences 42-51, write out phraseological units with the meaning "very good, excellent, excellent."
24. Among sentences 20-26, find the one(s) that is(-s) related to the previous one using the attributive pronoun, demonstrative pronoun and lexical repetition. Write the number(s) of this offer(s).
25. Read a fragment of a review based on the text that you analyzed in tasks 20-23.
“Telling the reader the story of the holiday organized by Mitrich, N.D. Teleshov generously uses the most diverse means of artistic expression. At the lexical level, it is worth noting the active use of (A) _____ (“theirs” in sentence 17, “fit” in sentence 36, “Mitrich”), as well as such a trope as (B) _____ (in sentence 2). Among other means of expressiveness, one can single out such a device as (C) _____ (for example, in sentences 15-16, 57-58), and such a syntactic means as (D) _____ (in sentences 3, 68, 69).
List of terms
1) synonyms 2) comparison 3) metonymy 4) litote
5) colloquial vocabulary 6) rows of homogeneous members
7) rhetorical exclamations 8) anaphora 9) rhetorical appeals
26. Write an essay based on the text you read.
Formulate one of the problems posed by the author of the text.
Comment on the formulated problem. Include in the comment two illustration examples from the read text that you think are important for understanding the problem in the source text (avoid over-quoting).
Formulate the position of the author (narrator). Write whether you agree or disagree with the point of view of the author of the read text. Explain why. Argue your opinion, relying primarily on the reader's experience, as well as on knowledge and life observations (the first two arguments are taken into account).
The volume of the essay is at least 150 words.
ANSWERS:
1. Answer: 23|32.
2. Answer: i.
3. Answer: 3.
4. Answer: started.
5. Answer: technical.
6. Answer: shampoo.
7. Answer: 45691
8. Answer: subtraction
9. Answer: consent prototype
10. Answer: imprint
11. Answer: finished
12. Answer: unusual
13. Answer: also
14. Answer: 34.
15 Answer: 35
16. Answer: 1236
17 Answer: 12
18. Answer: 1.
19. Answer: 3457.
20. Answer: cold.
21 Answer: 22
22. Answer: 245.
23. Answer: to glory
24 Answer: 25
25. Answer: 5287
Explanation.
| Approximate range of problems | |
| 1. The problem of the role of the holiday in human life. (What role does a holiday play in a person's life?) | 1. The holiday is very important for people. And this applies to both children and adults. Children can sincerely rejoice, have fun, this helps them forget about all the hardships and feel happy. And adults, thanks to the holiday, forget about age, about problems, plunge into childhood, happy and carefree. |
| 2. The problem of mercy. (What is mercy? How does it manifest itself? Does a person's financial ability affect the ability to be merciful?) | 2. Mercy is the ability to care for others. Organizing a holiday is also an act of mercy, as it is an attempt to give children a piece of happiness. A person, even alone, can do a truly good deed, show mercy, because this feeling comes from within, it does not require great financial costs, a person is driven only by the desire to help, to please, to make happy. |
| 3. Problem good deed, the role of an expensive act in a person's life. (What is the role of a good deed in our lives?) | 3. When a person does good, brings happiness to others, this also makes him happy. |
* To formulate the problem, the examinee may use vocabulary that differs from that presented in the table. The issue can also be cited from the source text or referenced using links.
The term "literary work" is one of the main terms in the terminological system of literary criticism, based on common definitions works of art (painting, musical work, sculpture, architectural work, theatrical performance, film, decoration, fresco, objects of applied art, etc.), then two aspects can be distinguished in them: an artifact (lat. - artificially made); an aesthetic object is something that has the potential for artistic reception and influence.
The artifact is associated with material design, material specifics; an aesthetic object is conceived as a product of the ideal, the spiritual. Both provide a dialectical unity in which a work of art arises.
A literary work is an ambiguous concept, it all depends on the point of view from which it is interpreted. From the point of view of phenomenology, it is an act of consciousness of the author. According to the German scientist Roman Ingarden (1893 - 1970), the work does not belong to real objects, since they are born at some point, live for some time, possibly changing in the course of their existence, and, finally, cease to exist.
The product, in turn, appearing in certain time, does not cease to exist even after the destruction of its existential basis (for example, a book). After all, it continues to exist in consciousness. And vice versa: having grown out of the acts of the author's consciousness, the work acquires a certain independence, autonomy. So, the recipient, not being able to access the consciousness, experiences of the author, is free to access the work as an independent subject. Thanks to this, the work turns into one of the forms of being - purely intentional. This means that a literary work is capable of evoking or provoking an aesthetic reaction of the recipient, who can adequately respond not only to the author's impulse (concept, intention, intention), but also to expand the semantic and semantic field of the perceived artistic world.
Structuralism considers a literary work as a structure, aesthetically organized into a complex hierarchy, which rests on the dominance of one of the components over the others. We are talking about the meaning of each element of the work, their aesthetic load and interaction. For structuralists, it is important to form artistic structure, which arises as a result of the imposition of phonological, lexical, syntactic levels. The external, material structure of a literary work as a verbal object, according to Jan Mukarzhovsky (1891-1975), a representative of the Prague linguistic school, is a symbol (sign) of its aesthetic essence.
With all the variety of views on a work of art as an aesthetic phenomenon that arises in verbal form, the understanding remains unchanged: a work is a significant unit of artistic communication in the "author-reader" system, which has a figurative nature that can be reproduced anew in the mind of the recipient.
A literary work is a complex semiotic structure, a combination of material signs (words, text) and figurative meaning, as a result of which a primary (in the imagination of the author) and secondary (in the imagination of the recipient) artistic world arises.
The ontological status of a literary work is caused by the individual needs of readers and the needs of society. German philosopher and the art critic Adorno (1903-1969) wrote about the adequacy of a work of art to society, and the Russian medievalist Dmitry Likhachev (1906-1999) saw in the monuments of ancient literature a reflection of the ideological, historical structure of feudal society.
In each time, a work of art is read differently, based on new aesthetic and psychological criteria. As a result, stereotypes can be broken even in classical works.
Artwork is not just literary fact, but, given its functioning in time, a process that is measured by past and present. French writer and the culturologist André Malraux (1901-1976) called it "double time", meaning that any work of art refers to the time of its creation, and the time in which it is perceived.
The functionality of a literary work does not depend on the writer, but is determined by the aesthetic needs of the reader, the current demands of society and the logic of the development of artistic consciousness. The work is able to overcome distances and time, to influence aesthetic tastes and public opinion, however, its organic purpose is to excite aesthetic experience.
While the main varieties of poetic genres develop in line with the unifying and centralizing, centripetal forces of verbal and ideological life, the novel and the artistic and prose genres gravitating towards it were historically formed in line with decentralizing, centrifugal forces. While poetry in the official socio-ideological elites solved the problem of cultural, national, political centralization of the verbal-ideological world, - in the lower classes, on the farce and fair stages, clownish heteroglossia sounded, mimicking all "languages" and dialects, the literature of fables and schwanks developed. , street songs, sayings, anecdotes, where there was no language center, where a live game was played with the “languages” of poets, scientists, monks, knights, etc., where all the “languages” were masks and there was no genuine and indisputable language person.
The heteroglossia organized in these low genres was not just heteroglossia in relation to the recognized literary language (in all its genre varieties), that is, in relation to the linguistic center of the verbal-ideological life of the nation and era, but was a conscious opposition to it. It was parodic and polemically pointed against the official languages of modernity. It was dialogized heteroglossia.
The philosophy of language, linguistics and stylistics, born and developing in line with the centralizing tendencies of linguistic life, ignored this dialogized heteroglossia, which embodied the centrifugal forces of linguistic life. Therefore, they could not have access to linguistic dialogicity, due to the struggle of socio-linguistic points of view, and not the intra-linguistic struggle of individual wills or logical opposites.
gossip. However, even the intralinguistic dialogue (dramatic, rhetorical, cognitive and everyday) has not been studied linguistically and stylistically until recently. It can be said directly that the dialogical moment of the word and all the phenomena associated with it remained until recently outside the purview of linguistics.
The style was completely deaf to dialogue. A literary work was conceived by stylistics as a closed and self-sufficient whole, the elements of which constitute a closed system that does not presuppose anything outside itself, no other statements. The system of the work was conceived by analogy with the system of the language, which cannot be in dialogical interaction with other languages. The work as a whole, whatever it may be, from the point of view of style, is a self-contained and closed author's monologue, suggesting beyond its limits only a passive listener. If we imagined a work as a replica of some dialogue, the style of which is determined by its relationship with other replicas of this dialogue (as a whole, conversation), then from the point of view of traditional stylistics there is no adequate approach to such a dialogized style. The most sharply and externally expressed phenomena of this kind - polemical style, parodic, ironic - are usually qualified as rhetorical, and not poetic phenomena. Stylistics locks each stylistic phenomenon into a monological context of a given self-sufficing and closed utterance, as if enclosing it in the dungeon of one context; it cannot resonate with other utterances, cannot realize its stylistic meaning in interaction with them, it must exhaust itself in its own closed context.
Serving the great centralizing tendencies of European verbal and ideological life, the philosophy of language, linguistics and stylistics sought, above all, unity in diversity. This exceptional "attitude towards unity" in the present and past of the life of languages focused the attention of philosophical and linguistic thought on the most stable, solid, little-changing and unambiguous moments of the word - phonetic, first of all, the moments - the most distant from the changeable social and semantic spheres of the word.
va. The real, ideologically filled "linguistic consciousness", involved in real heteroglossia and multilingualism, remained out of sight. The same orientation towards unity made it necessary to ignore all verbal genres (everyday, rhetorical, artistic and prose), which were carriers of the decentralizing tendencies of linguistic life or, in any case, were too significantly involved in heteroglossia. The expression of this heterogeneous and multilingual consciousness in specific forms and phenomena of verbal life remained without any definite influence on linguistic and stylistic thought.
That is why the specific sensation of language and word, which found its expression in stylizations, in skaz, in parodies, in various forms of verbal disguise, "not direct speaking" and in more complex artistic forms of organizing heteroglossia, orchestrating one's themes with languages, in all characteristic and deep samples of novel prose - in Grimmelshausen, Cervantes, Rabelais, Fielding, Smollett, Stern and others - could not find adequate theoretical understanding and coverage.
The problems of the novel's stylistics inevitably lead to the need to touch upon a number of fundamental questions of the philosophy of the word, related to those aspects of the life of the word that were almost not covered by linguistic and stylistic thought - with the life and behavior of the word in a heterogeneous and multilingual world.
CHAPTER II. WORD IN POETRY AND WORD IN NOVEL
Outside the scope of the philosophy of language, linguistics and the stylistics built on their basis, those specific phenomena in the word almost completely remained, which are determined by the dialogical orientation of the word among other people's statements within the same language (the original dialogicity of the word), among other "social languages" within that the same national language and, finally, among others national languages in pre-
affairs of the same culture, the same socio-ideological outlook 1 .
True, in recent decades these phenomena have already begun to attract the attention of the science of language and stylistics, but their fundamental and broad significance in all spheres of the life of the word is still far from being realized.
The dialogic orientation of the word among foreign words (of all degrees and qualities of alienation) creates new and essential artistic possibilities in the word, its special prose artistry, which has found its fullest and deepest expression in the novel.
On various forms and degrees of dialogical orientation of the word and the special artistic and prosaic possibilities associated with them, we will focus our attention.
The word of traditional stylistic thinking knows only itself (i.e., its context), its object, its direct expression, and its one and only language. It knows another word, lying outside its context, only as a neutral word of the language, as nobody's word, as a simple speech possibility. Straight word, as traditional stylistics understands it, in its focus on the object it encounters only the resistance of the object itself (its inexhaustibility in words, its inexpressibility), but it does not meet on its way to the object with a significant and diverse opposition of another's word. No one interferes with him, no one disputes him.
But anything living word does not equally oppose its object: between the word and the object, the word and speaking person there is an elastic, often difficult to penetrate environment of other people's words about the same subject, on the same topic. And the word can be stylistically individualized and formed precisely in the process of living interaction with this specific environment.
After all, any concrete word (statement) finds the object to which it is directed, always, so to speak, already stipulated, disputed, evaluated,
1 Linguistics knows only mechanical (socially unconscious) mutual influences and mixtures of languages, reflected in abstract linguistic elements (phonetic and morphological).
shrouded in a haze darkening him or, on the contrary, in the light of other people's words already said about him. It is entangled and permeated with common thoughts, points of view, other people's assessments, and accents. A word directed at its object enters this dialogically agitated and tense environment of other people's words, assessments and accents, is woven into their complex relationships, merges with some, repels others, intersects with others; and all this can essentially form a word, be deposited in all its semantic layers, complicate its expression, and influence the entire stylistic appearance.
A living utterance that meaningfully arose in a certain historic moment in a socially determined environment, cannot but touch the thousands of living dialogic threads woven around by the socio-ideological consciousness this subject statements, cannot but become an active participant in social dialogue. It arises out of it, out of this dialogue, as its continuation, as a replica, and not approaching the subject from somewhere else.
Conception by the word of one’s object is a complex act: every “specified” and “disputed” object, on the one hand, is illuminated, on the other hand, it is obscured by contradictory social opinion, someone else’s word about it 1 , and the word enters this complex play of chiaroscuro, is saturated with it, delimiting its own semantic and stylistic contours in it. Conception of an object by a word is complicated by dialogical interaction in the object with various aspects of its social-verbal awareness and collusion. And the artistic representation, the “image” of an object can be permeated with this dialogical play of verbal intentions that meet and intertwine in it, can not drown out, but, on the contrary, activate and organize them. If we imagine the intention, that is, the focus on the object, of such a word in the form of a ray, then the living and unique play of colors and light in the facets of the image it constructs is explained by the refraction of the ray-word not in the object itself (as the play of the image-path of a poetic
1 In this respect, the struggle against the collusion of the subject is very characteristic (the idea of returning to primary consciousness, primitive consciousness, to the object itself, to pure sensation, etc.) in Rousseauism, naturalism, impressionism, acmeism, Dadaism, surrealism and similar trends.
speech in the narrow sense, in the “detached word”), but by its refraction in that environment of other people’s words, assessments and accents through which the beam passes, heading towards the object: the social atmosphere of the word surrounding the object makes the facets of its image play.
The word, making its way to its meaning and to its expression through an alien-verbal, multi-accent environment, consonant and dissonant with its various moments, can shape its stylistic appearance and tone in this dialogized process.
Such is precisely the artistic prose image, and, in particular, such is the image of novel prose. The direct and immediate intention of the word in the atmosphere of the novel seems unacceptably naive and, in essence, impossible, because naivety itself in the conditions of a genuine novel inevitably acquires an internally polemical character and, consequently, is also dialogized (for example, among sentimentalists, Chateaubriand, Tolstoy). Such a dialogized image can take place (although without setting the tone) in all poetic genres, even in lyrics 1 . But such an image can unfold, achieve complexity and depth, and at the same time, artistic completeness only under the conditions of the novel genre.
In the poetic image in the narrow sense (in the image-path), all action - the dynamics of the image-word - is played out between the word (with all its moments) and the object (in all its moments). The word is immersed in the inexhaustible richness and contradictory diversity of the object itself, in its "virgin", still "ineffable" nature; therefore, it does not suggest anything outside of its context (except, of course, the treasures of the language itself). The word forgets the history of the contradictory verbal awareness of its object and the equally contradictory present of this awareness.
For the prose writer, on the contrary, the subject reveals, first of all, precisely this socially contradictory variety of its names, definitions and evaluations. Instead of the virgin fullness and inexhaustibility of the subject itself, the prose writer reveals the diversity of paths, roads and paths laid in it.
1 Horatian lyrics, Villon, Heine, Laforgue, Annensky, and no matter how heterogeneous these phenomena are.
social consciousness. Together with internal contradictions in the subject itself, the prose writer also reveals the social heteroglossia around it, that Babylonian confusion of languages that occurs around any subject; the dialectic of the subject is intertwined with the social dialogue around it. The subject for the prose writer is the concentration of contradictory voices, among which his voice should also sound; these voices create the necessary background for his voice, outside of which his artistic and prosaic shades are elusive, “do not sound”.
The prose writer-artist raises this social heterogeneity around the subject to a complete image, imbued with the fullness of dialogical echoes, artistically calculated resonances to all the essential voices and tones of this heteroglossia. But, as we said, any non-artistic prose word - everyday, rhetorical, scientific - cannot but orient itself in "already said", "known", in "general opinion", etc. The dialogical orientation of a word is a phenomenon inherent in of course, every word. This is the natural setting of every living word. On all its paths to the object, in all directions, the word meets another's word and cannot but enter into a lively intense interaction with it. Only the mythical Adam, who approached with the first word the yet unspecified virgin world, the solitary Adam, could really completely avoid this dialogical mutual orientation with another's word in the object. This is not given to the concrete historical human word: it can only conditionally and only to a certain extent abstract from this.
It is all the more striking that the philosophy of the word and linguistics focused primarily on this artificial conditional state of the word withdrawn from the dialogue, taking it for normal (although the primacy of dialogue over monologue is often declared). Dialogue was studied only as a compositional form of constructing speech, but the internal dialogic nature of the word (both in a replica and in a monologue), penetrating its entire structure, all its semantic and expressive layers, was almost completely ignored. But it is precisely this inner dialogicity of the word, which does not take externally compositional dialogic forms, which is not separated into an independent act from the concept itself.
feasting on the word of his subject - has an enormous style-forming power. The internal dialogism of the word finds its expression in a number of features of semantics, syntax and composition, which have not yet been studied by linguistics and stylistics at all (as, by the way, even the features of semantics in ordinary dialogue have not been studied).
The word is born in dialogue, as its living replica, is formed in dialogic interaction with someone else's word in the subject. The word's conception of its subject is dialogic.
But this does not exhaust the inner dialogism of the word. Not only in the subject does it meet with someone else's word. Every word is directed toward a response and cannot escape the profound influence of the anticipated response word.
living colloquial word directly and roughly set on the future word-response: it provokes a response, anticipates it and is built in the direction of it. Being formed in the atmosphere of what has already been said, the word is at the same time determined by the not yet spoken, but compelled and already anticipated response word. So - in any living dialogue.
All rhetorical forms, monologues in their own way compositional construction, are set on the listener and on its response. Usually even this attitude towards the listener is considered to be the main constitutive feature of the rhetorical word. It is indeed characteristic of rhetoric that the relation to a particular listener, the consideration of this listener, is introduced into the most external construction of a rhetorical word. Here, the attitude to the answer is open, naked and concrete.
This open attitude towards the listener and the response in everyday dialogue and in rhetorical forms attracted the attention of linguists. But here, too, linguists mainly dwelled only on the compositional forms of accounting for the listener and did not look for his influence in the deep layers of meaning and style. Only those aspects of style that are determined by the requirements of style were taken into account.
1 See V. Vinogradov's book "On Fiction" - chapter "Rhetoric and Poetics", p. 75 et seq., for definitions from old rhetoric.
intelligibility and clarity, that is, just those that are devoid of internal dialogism, which take into account the listener only as a passive understanding, and not as an actively responding and objecting.
Everyday dialogue and rhetoric is inherent in an open and compositionally expressed consideration of the listener and his answer, but any other word is set for a reciprocal understanding, only this setting is not isolated into an independent act and is not marked compositionally. Reciprocal understanding is an essential force involved in the formation of the word, moreover, active understanding, felt by the word as resistance or support, enriching the word.
Philosophy of the word and linguistics know only a passive understanding of the word, moreover, mainly in terms of a common language, that is, an understanding of the neutral meaning of the statement, and not its actual meaning.
The linguistic meaning of this statement is understood against the background of the language, its actual meaning - against the background of other specific statements on the same topic, against the background of conflicting opinions, points of view and assessments, that is, just against the background of what, as we see, complicates the path any word to its subject. But only now this heterogeneous environment of other people's words is given to the speaker not in the subject, but in the soul of the listener, as his apperceptive background, fraught with answers and objections. And on this apperceptive background of understanding - not linguistic, but object-expressive - any statement is established. There is a new meeting of the utterance with a foreign word, which exerts a new peculiar influence on its style.
Passive understanding of linguistic meaning is not understanding at all, it is only an abstract moment of it, but a more concrete passive understanding of the meaning of the statement, the speaker’s intention, remaining purely passive, purely receptive, does not introduce anything new into the understood word, it only duplicates it, striving, as to the highest limit, to the complete reproduction of what is already given in the understood word; it does not go beyond its context and does not enrich what is understood. Therefore, taking into account such a passive understanding by the speaker cannot bring anything new into his word, no new substantive and expressive moments.
After all, such purely negative demands, which could only come from passive understanding, such as - greater clarity, persuasiveness, visibility, etc. - leave the speaker in his own context, his own horizons, do not take him beyond his limits, they are completely immanent to him. word and do not open its semantic and expressive self-sufficiency.
In real speech life, any concrete understanding is active: it attaches what is understood to its subject-expressive outlook and is inextricably merged with an answer, with a motivated objection - consent. In a certain sense, the primacy belongs precisely to the answer, as to the active principle: it creates the ground for understanding, an active and interested preparation for it. Understanding matures only in response. Understanding and response are dialectically merged and mutually condition each other, one without the other is impossible.
Active understanding, thus, introducing the understood to the new outlook of the understander, establishes a number of complex relationships, consonances and disagreements with the understood, enriches it with new moments. This understanding is also taken into account by the speaker. Therefore, his orientation towards the listener is an orientation towards a special outlook, a special world of the listener, it introduces completely new moments into his word: after all, in this case, there is an interaction of different contexts, different points of view, different horizons, different expressive accent systems, different social "languages". The speaker strives to orient his word with his own horizon that determines it in the horizon of someone else who understands and enters into dialogical relations with the moments of this horizon. The speaker breaks into the listener's foreign horizons, builds his statement on foreign territory, on his, the listener's, apperceptive background.
This new kind of internal dialogism of the word differs from that which was determined by the encounter with another's word in the object itself: here it is not the object that serves as the arena of the meeting, but the subjective outlook of the listener. Therefore, this dialogue is more subjective-psychological and - often - random, sometimes crudely opportunistic, sometimes defiantly polemical. Very often, especially in rhetorical forms, this attitude towards the listener and the internal dialogism of the word associated with it can simply obscure
subject: the persuasion of a particular listener becomes a self-sufficient task and tears the word from creative work over the subject.
The dialogical relation to the foreign word in the object and to the foreign word in the anticipated response of the listener, being essentially different and giving rise to various stylistic effects in the word, can nevertheless be very closely intertwined, becoming almost indistinguishable for stylistic analysis.
Thus, the word in Tolstoy is distinguished by a sharp internal dialogicity, and it is dialogized both in the subject and in the reader's horizons, semantic and expressive features which Tolstoy is keenly aware of. These two lines of dialogization (in most cases polemically colored) are very closely intertwined in his style: Tolstoy's word, even in the most "lyrical" expressions and in the most "epic" descriptions, will resonate and dissonate (dissonate more) with various moments of contradictory socio-verbal consciousness entangling the subject, and at the same time polemically intrudes into the subject and value horizons of the reader, trying to strike and destroy the apperceptive background of his active understanding. In this respect, Tolstoy is the heir of the 18th century, especially Rousseau. Hence sometimes comes the narrowing of that contradictory social consciousness with which Tolstoy argues, to the consciousness of the closest contemporary, a contemporary of the day, and not of the era, and as a result, the extreme concretization of dialogue (almost always polemics). That is why the dialogism that we hear so clearly in the expressive image of his style sometimes needs a special historical and literary commentary: we do not know with what exactly a given tone is discordant or consonant, but meanwhile this dissonance or consonance is included in the task of style 1. True, such extreme concreteness (sometimes almost feuilleton) is inherent only in secondary moments, overtones of the internal dialogism of Tolstoy's word.
In the phenomena we have analyzed of the internal dialogicity of the word (internal - in contrast to the external
1 See the book: B. M. Eikhenbaum. Leo Tolstoy, book 1, L., Surf, 1928, where there is a lot of relevant material; for example, the topical context of "Family Happiness" is revealed.
positional dialogue) the attitude to someone else's word, to someone else's statement is included in the task of style. Style organically includes indications to the outside, the correlation of its elements with elements of a foreign context. The internal style policy (combination of elements) is determined by its foreign policy(relationship to someone else's word). The word, as it were, lives on the border of its own and someone else's context.
Such dual life the replica of any real dialogue also leads: it is built and comprehended in the context of the whole dialogue, which consists of one's own (from the point of view of the speaker) and others' statements (partner). From this mixed context of one's own and other people's words, the remark cannot be removed without losing its meaning and its tone. It is an organic part of a heterogeneous whole.
The phenomenon of internal dialogicity, as we have said, is present to a greater or lesser extent in all areas of the life of the word. But if in non-fictional prose (everyday, rhetorical, scientific) dialogicity is usually isolated into a special independent act and unfolds into a direct dialogue or into other distinct forms of demarcation and polemic with another person’s word, then in fiction, especially in a novel, it permeates from within the very conception of the word of its object and its expression, transforming the semantics and syntactic structure of the word. Dialogical mutual orientation here becomes, as it were, an event of the word itself, enlivening and dramatizing the word from within in all its moments.
In most poetic genres (in the narrow sense of the word), as we have already said, the inner dialogic nature of the word is not artistically used, it is not included in the "aesthetic object" of the work, it is conditionally extinguished in poetic word. In the novel, however, inner dialogicity becomes one of the most essential moments of the prose style and is subjected here to a specific artistic treatment.
But internal dialogicity can become such an essential form-creating force only where individual disagreements and contradictions are fertilized by social heteroglossia, where dialogic echoes make noise not in the semantic peaks of the word (as in rhetorical genres), but penetrate into the deep layers of the word, dialogize the language itself, the linguistic worldview.
(the internal form of the word), where the dialogue of voices directly arises from the social dialogue of “languages”, where someone else’s statement begins to sound like a socially alien language, where the orientation of the word among other people’s statements turns into its orientation among socially alien languages within the same national language.
In poetic genres in the narrow sense, the natural dialogism of the word is not artistically used, the word is self-sufficient and does not imply other people's statements beyond its limits. The poetic style is conditionally estranged from any interaction with someone else's word, from any looking back at someone else's word.
Just as alien to poetic style is any consideration of foreign languages, of the possibility of a different vocabulary, of a different semantics, of other syntactic forms, etc., of the possibility of other linguistic points of view. Consequently, the poetic style is also alien to the feeling of limitation, historicity, social certainty and specificity of one's language, and therefore also a critical, reservational attitude towards one's language, as one of the many languages of heteroglossia, and the incomplete surrender of oneself, all one's meaning associated with this attitude. , given language.
Of course, not a single historically existing poet, as a person surrounded by living heteroglossia and multilingualism, could have been alien to this feeling and this attitude towards his language (to a greater or lesser extent); but it could not find a place in the poetic style of his work without destroying this style, without translating it into a prose mode and without turning the poet into a prose writer.
In poetic genres, artistic consciousness - in the sense of the unity of all the semantic and expressive intentions of the author - completely realizes itself in its language, is completely immanent to it, expresses itself in it directly and immediately, without reservations and without distance. The language of the poet is his language, he is in it to the end and inseparably, using every form, every word, every expression for their intended purpose (so to speak, “without quotes”), that is, as a pure and direct expression of his intention. Whatever “torments of the word” the poet experienced in the process of creativity, in the created work
the language is an obedient organ, completely adequate to the author's intention.
Language in a poetic work realizes itself as undoubted, indisputable and all-encompassing. Everything that the poet sees, understands and thinks, he sees, understands and thinks through the eyes of a given language, in its internal forms, and there is nothing that would cause the need for the help of another, foreign language for its expression. The language of the poetic genre is the single and only Ptolemaic world, outside of which there is nothing and nothing is needed. The idea of plurality language worlds, equally meaningful and expressive, is organically inaccessible to poetic style.
The world of poetry, no matter how many contradictions and hopeless conflicts a poet reveals in it, is always illuminated by a single and indisputable word. Contradictions, conflicts and doubts remain in the subject, in thoughts, in experiences, in a word - in the material, but do not pass into the language. In poetry, the word about doubts should be like the word undoubted.
Equal and direct responsibility for the language of the entire work as one's own language, complete solidarity with its every moment, tone, nuance is an essential requirement of poetic style, it dominates one language and one linguistic consciousness. The poet cannot oppose his poetic consciousness, his ideas to the language he uses, because he is all in it and therefore cannot make it, within the limits of style, an object of awareness, reflection, relationship. Language is given to him only from within, in his intentional work, and not from without, in his objective specificity and limitations. Direct unconditional intentionality, fullness of language and at the same time its objective display (as a socially and historically limited linguistic reality) are incompatible within the poetic style. The unity and uniqueness of language are necessary conditions for the implementation of direct intentional (and not object-characteristic) individuality of poetic style and its monological consistency.
This does not mean, of course, that heteroglossia or even foreign language cannot at all enter into a poetic work. True, these possibilities are limited: there is a certain scope for heteroglossia only in "low" poetry.
The term "literary work" is central in the science of literature (from the Latin Shvga - written in letters). There are many theoretical points of view that reveal its meaning, however, the following conclusion can act as a defining one for this paragraph: a literary work is a product of non-mechanical human activity; an object created with the participation of creative effort (V.
E. Khalizev).
A literary work is a statement, fixed as a sequence of linguistic signs, or a text (from Latin 1vkhY$ - fabric, plexus). Revealing the meaning of the terminological apparatus, we note that the symbolic supports "text" and "work" are not identical to each other.
In the theory of literature, text is understood as the material carrier of images. It turns into a work when the reader shows a characteristic interest in the text. Within the framework of the dialogical concept of art, this addressee of the work is the invisible personality of the writer's creative process. As an important interpreter of the created work, the reader is valuable for a personal, different look in the perception of the entire work.
Reading is a co-creative step of literary skill. V. F. Asmus comes to the same conclusion in his work “Reading as labor and creativity”: “The perception of a work also requires the work of imagination, memory, binding, thanks to which what is read does not crumble in the mind into a bunch of separate independent, immediately forgotten frames and impressions , But
is firmly soldered into organic and complete picture life".
The core of any work of art is formed by an artifact (from Latin аНв/акШт - artificially made) and an aesthetic object. An artifact is an external material work, consisting of colors and lines, or sounds and words. An aesthetic object is the totality of what is the essence of an artistic creation, is fixed materially and has the potential to have an artistic impact on the viewer, listener, reader.
The external material work and the depths of spiritual search, fastened into unity, act as an artistic whole. The integrity of the work is a category of aesthetics that characterizes ontological issues word art. If the Universe, the universe and nature have a certain integrity, then the model of any world order, in this case, is a work and contained in it artistic reality- also have the desired integrity. To the description of the indivisibility of a work of art, let us add M. M. Girshman’s statement about a literary work as an integrity, which is important in literary thought: “The category of integrity refers not only to the whole aesthetic organism, but also to each of its significant particles. The work is not simply divided into separate interconnected parts, layers or levels, but in it each - both macro- and micro - element bears a special imprint of that integral artistic world, of which it is a particle.
The consistency of the whole and the parts in a work was discovered in ancient times. Plato and Aristotle associated the concept of beauty with integrity. Having invested their understanding in the formula of the “single completeness of the whole”, they clarified the harmonious coherence of all parts of a work of art, since “fullness” can turn out to be redundant, “overflowing”, and then the “whole” ceases to be “one” in itself and loses its integrity.
In the theoretical and literary field of knowledge, in addition to the ontological approach to the unity of a literary work, there is also an axiological approach, well known among critics, editors, and philologists. Here the reader determines how the author managed to harmonize the parts and the whole, to motivate this or that detail in the work; and also whether the picture of life created by the artist is accurate - the aesthetic reality, and the figurative world, and whether it retains the illusion of authenticity; the frame of the work is expressive or inexpressive: a heading complex, author's notes, an afterword, internal titles that make up the table of contents, designation of the place and time of the creation of the work, remarks, etc. - creating in the reader an attitude towards the aesthetic perception of the work; whether the chosen genre corresponds to the style of presentation, and other questions.
World artistic creativity not continuous (not continuous and not common), but discrete (discontinuous). According to M. M. Bakhtin, art breaks up into separate, "self-sufficient individual wholes" - works, each of which "occupies an independent position in relation to reality."
The formation of the point of view of a language teacher, critic, editor, philologist, culturologist on a work is complicated by the fact that not only the boundaries between works of art are blurred, but the works themselves have an extensive system of characters, several storylines, complex composition.
The integrity of a work is even more difficult to assess when the writer creates a literary cycle (from Latin kyklos - circle, wheel) or a fragment.
A literary cycle is usually understood as a group of works compiled and united by the author himself on the basis of ideological and thematic similarity, common genre, place or time of action, characters, form of narration, style, representing an artistic whole. The literary cycle is widespread in folklore and in all kinds of verbal and artistic creativity: in lyrics (“Thracian Elegies” by V. Teplyakov, “TsgY y OgY” by V. Bryusov), in epic (“Notes of a Hunter” by I. Turgenev, “Smoke of the Fatherland” I. Savina), in the drama (“Three Pieces for Puritans” by B. Shaw, “The Theater of the Revolution” by R. Rolland).
Historically, the literary cycle is one of the main forms of artistic cyclization, i.e., the unification of works, along with its other forms: a collection, an anthology, a book of poems, stories, and so on. blocks. In particular, the autobiographical stories of L. Tolstoy “Childhood”, “Boyhood”, “Youth” and M. Gorky “Childhood”, “In People”, “My Universities” form trilogies; and the historical plays of W. Shakespeare in literary criticism are usually considered as two tetralogy: “Henry VI (part 1, 2, 3) and Richard III”, as well as “Richard II”, “Henry IV (part 1, 2) and “Henry V".
If in a single work, the subordination of the part to the whole is important for the researcher, then in the cycle, the connection of the parts and their sequence, as well as the birth of a new qualitative meaning, come to the fore. Let us turn to S. M. Eisenstein's apt conclusion about the internal organization of the cycle, which he understands as a montage composition. In their scientific essays he pointed out that any two pieces placed side by side inevitably combine into a new representation that arises from this juxtaposition as a new quality. The juxtaposition of two montage pieces, according to the theorist, "is more like not their sum, but a product."
Thus, the structure of the cycle should resemble a montage composition. The meaning of the cycle always tends to exceed the sum of the meanings of the groups of the work, united into an artistic whole.
The set of individual lyrical works in the cycle has the meaning not of folding, but of unification. Lyrical cycles were widely used even in the works of the ancient Roman poets Catullus, Ovid, Propertius, who gave the world wonderful elegies.
During the Renaissance, sonnet cycles gained notable popularity.
Since literary development in the XVIII century. required strict adherence to genres, then the main units of the poetry books that appeared were genre-thematic: odes, songs, messages, etc. Accordingly, each type of poetry collection of the 18th century had its own compositional principles, and the poetic material inside the volumes was not located in chronological order, but in accordance with the scheme: to God - to the king - to man - to himself. In the books of that time, the most prominent parts were the beginning and the end.
At the turn of the XVIII-XIX centuries. in connection with the individualization of artistic consciousness, the aesthetics of the accidental and the intentional were formed. Development artistic thinking era depended on the initiative of a creative person and her desire to embody all the richness of the human individuality, her sincere biography. The first Russian lyrical cycle in this capacity, according to scientists, was the cycle of A. S. Pushkin "Imitation of the Koran", in which the single poetic personality of the artist was revealed in various facets. internal logic the development of the writer's creative thought, as well as the unity of the form and content of the work, linked all imitations into an integral poetic ensemble.
A special study by M. N. Darwin and V. I. Tyupa sheds light on the peculiarities of the literary thinking of the era, as well as on the problem of studying cyclization in Pushkin’s work.
The literary experiments of the 19th century in many respects anticipated the heyday of the Russian cycle in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. in the work of symbolist poets
V. Bryusov, A. Bely, A. Blok, Vyach. Ivanova.
