Ethno-Specific Codes: Metaphor and Everyday Symbolization of Objectified Space in Anna Nerkagy’s Story “The White Moss”
https://doi.org/10.24224/2227-1295-2022-11-8-294-311
Abstract
The features of decoding ethnospecific codes of metaphorization in the literature of the peoples of the North are considered on the material of A. Nerkagy’s story “The White Moss”. This article is intended to reveal certain “algorithms of speech behavior” embedded in the language, the principles of mythologization and metaphorical objectification of the real world, to reveal more deeply the structure of understanding a literary text. The relevance of the study is due to the need to search for new tools to identify ethnospecific cultural models that determine the vision of the world of representatives of a particular national community, structuring the field of expressiveness of a literary text. Attention is paid to the formation mechanisms of figurative meanings, when the dynamics of the narrative, which is not bright at first glance, is compensated by a careful detailing of the description of a northerner life, which is achieved through the actualization of the sacred elements of the symbolic picture of the world. So, for A. Nerkagy’s creativity, mythological codes of imagery become ethnospecific: bird, wolf, stone, fire, time, water, man. The personification of objects of nature and the perception of the world through the prism of one’s own body are traced. Each of the listed semantic elements is an element of metaphor, metonymy. The symbolic image is indivisible; it is based not just on an associative component, but on a ritual, a myth.
About the Authors
D. E. Ertner
University of Tyumen
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Daria E. Ertner - PhD in Philology, associate professor.
Tyumen
O. B. Ulyanova
University of Tyumen
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Olga B. Ulyanova - PhD in Philology, associate professor.
Tyumen
S. B. Khabibullina
University of Tyumen
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Saida B. Khabibullina - senior lecturer.
Tyumen
References
1. Apresyan, Yu. D. (1995). The image of a person according to language data: an attempt at a system description. In: Questions of linguistics. Moscow: V. V. Vinogradov Institute of the Russian Language of the Russian Academy of Sciences. 37—67. (In Russ.).
2. Bakhtin, M. M. (1975). Forms of time and chronotope in the novel: essays on historical poet-ics. In: Literary and critical articles. Moscow: Fiction. 234—407. (In Russ.).
3. Eco, U. (1992). Interpretation and history. In: Interpretation and Overinterpretation. Cam-bridge: Cambridge University Press. 215 p. ISBN 9780511627408.
4. Kövecses, Z. (2009). Metaphorical meaning making: discourse, language, and culture. Quaderns de Filologia. Estudis lingüístics, 14: 135—151.
5. Kövecses, Z. (2017). Conceptual metaphor theory: Some New Proposals. LaMiCuS, 1: 16—32.
6. Kreidlin, G. E., Pereverzeva, S. I. (2013). The body and its parts in different languages and cultures (results of the scientific project). In: Computational linguistics and intellectual technologies. Materials of the annual International Conference “Dialog-2013”. Moscow: RSUH. 378—391. (In Russ.).
7. Lakoff, G., Johnson, M. (2003). Metaphors We Live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 256 p. ISBN 0-226-46801-1.
8. Leiderman, N. L. (2005). Text and image. The world of the Russian word, 3—4: 35—45. (In Russ.).
9. Likhachev, D. S. (1984). Literature — reality — literature. Leningrad: Soviet Writer. 271 p. (In Russ.).
10. Likhachev, D. S. (1997). Conceptosphere of the Russian language. In: Russian literature. From the theory of literature to the structure of the text. Anthology. Moscow: Academia. 147—165. (In Russ.).
11. Lotman, Yu. M. (1970). The structure of a literary text. Moscow: Iskusstvo. 387 p. (In Russ.).
12. Lotman, Yu. M. (1988). Art space in Gogol’s prose. In: In the school of the poetic word: Pushkin. Lermontov. Gogol. Moscow: Prosveshchenie. 251—292. (In Russ.).
13. Lotman, Yu. M. (2010). Semiosphere. Saint Petersburg: Art-SPB. 704 p. ISBN 5-210-01562-9. (In Russ.).
14. Lukina, O. G., Bychkov, Yu. A., Resh, O. V. (2019). Mythological images of birds and ornithomorphic symbolism in the traditional cultures of the peoples of the North. Bulletin of MGUKI, 5: 42—50. DOI: 10.24411/1997-0803-2019-10505. (In Russ.).
15. Meletinsky, E. M. (2000). Poetics of myth. Moscow: Oriental Literature. 331 p. ISBN 5-02-017878-0. (In Russ.).
16. Nekhvyadovich, L. I. (2010). Ethnic tradition in modern humanitarian knowledge: mono-graph. Barnaul: ASU Publishing House. 96 p. ISBN 978-5-7904-1104-5. (In Russ.).
17. Semino, E. (2008). Metaphor in Discourse. Lancaster: Lancaster University. 247 p. ISBN 9780521867306.
18. Toporov, V. N. (1983). Space and text. In: Text: semantics and structure. Moscow: Academy of Sciences of the USSR. 227—284. (In Russ.).
19. Toporov, V. N. (1995). Myth. The ritual. Symbol. Image: Research in the field of mythopoetic. Moscow: Progress. Culture. 624 p. ISBN 5-01-003942-7. (In Russ.).
20. Vezhbitskaya, A. (2001). Understanding cultures through the medium of keywords. Moscow: Languages of Slavic Culture. 288 p. ISBN 5-7859-0189-7. (In Russ.).
21. Uryson, E. V. (1995). Fundamental human abilities and naive “anatomy”. Questions of linguistics, 3: 3—16. (In Russ.).
Review
For citations:
Ertner D.E., Ulyanova O.B., Khabibullina S.B. Ethno-Specific Codes: Metaphor and Everyday Symbolization of Objectified Space in Anna Nerkagy’s Story “The White Moss”. Nauchnyi dialog. 2022;11(8):294-311. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.24224/2227-1295-2022-11-8-294-311
Views:
439
Email this article 