Signs of Everyday Life in Linguocultural Studies
https://doi.org/10.24224/2227-1295-2023-12-7-66-81
Abstract
The article is dedicated to the linguocultural analysis of the phenomenon of everyday life, which refers to the segment of ordinary culture that encompasses the present time. The sources of the study were V. V. Veresaev’s “Memories”, G. I. Uspensky’s essays “Customs of Rasteryaev Street”, S. A. Tolstoy’s diaries, Tula newspapers, and toponyms. The study was conducted using discourse, conceptual analysis, and linguocultural interpretation methods. Culturally marked signs of everyday life were identified, including determination by the present, orientation towards the usual and standard, and precedent character. It was found that everyday life is segmented depending on the interpreter’s qualities and properties. It reflects norms and prohibitions. It is shown that everyday life is ordinary, stable, and at the same time transient, reflects naive consciousness, and is filled with a large array of cultural attitudes, stereotypes, and scenarios. Everyday life forms the basis for evaluating which people follow based on the principles of “this is how it is done” and “this is how it should be”. The semiotic aspect is considered, represented by various human practices and sign sets that are familiar to them. Typical verbal texts expressing everyday life were identified, including memoirs, diaries, travel notes, and newspapers. It is concluded that everyday life is related to identity since it is perceived by the cultural subject as their own, understandable space.
Supporting agencies: The study “Symbolary of Regional Identity” was funded by a grant from the Russian Science Foundation № 22-28-20342 and the Government of the Tula Region (agreement № 6 dated April 19, 2022)
About the Author
G. V. Tokarev
Tula State Lev Tolstoy Pedagogical University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Grigory V. Tokarev, Doctor of Philology, Professor, Head of the Department of Documentation and Stylistics of the Russian Language
Tula
References
1. Afanasyev, A. N. (1994). Poetic views of the Slavs on nature: In 3 vols. Moscow: Indrik. (In Russ.).
2. Apresyan, Yu. D. (1995). The image of a person according to language data: an attempt at a system description. In: Selected works. Integral language description and system lexicography, 1. Moscow: Yaz. rus. Kultury. 348—388. (In Russ.).
3. Berezovaya, A. Yu. (2012). The formation of the term “everyday life”. Various approaches to the consideration of the term “Everyday life” by scientists. Culture. Spirituality. Society, 1: 244—252. (In Russ.).
4. Braudel, F. (1986). Material civilization, economy and capitalism, XV—XVIII centuries. Structures of everyday life: the Possible and the impossible, 1. Moscow: Progress. 624 p. (In Russ.).
5. Greimas, A. J., Courte, J. (1983). Semiotics: Explanatory dictionary of language theory. In: Semiotics. Moscow: Raduga. 483—550. (In Russ.).
6. Kalenova, N. A. (2020). Linguocreative potential of phraseology of everyday life. Proceedings of the Volgograd State Pedagogical University, 7 (150): 97—105. (In Russ.).
7. Kapkan, M. V. (2016). Culture of everyday life. Yekaterinburg: Ural Publishing House. Unita. 110 p. ISBN 978-5-7996-1852-0. (In Russ.).
8. Karlson, Yu. V. (2011). Everyday life as an object of socio-philosophical knowledge. In: Structures of everyday life: Social — philosophical analysis. Pyatigorsk: Pyatig. gos. lingv. un-t. 12—30. ISBN 978-5-4220-0271-9. (In Russ.).
9. Kirilenko, G. G. (2009). Worldview. The life world. Everyday life. Teacher of the XXI century, 4: 250—255. (In Russ.).
10. Leleko, V. D. (2002). The space of everyday life in European culture. St. Petersburg: St. Petersburg State University of Culture and Arts. 320 p. ISBN 5-94708-007-9. (In Russ.).
11. Lotman, Yu. M. (1994). Conversations about Russian culture. The life and traditions of the Russian nobility (XVIII — early XIX century). Saint Petersburg: “Art-SPb”. 412 p. ISBN 978-5-210-01631-7. (In Russ.).
12. Lotman, Yu. M. (2023). A. S. Pushkin’s novel “Eugene Onegin”. Comment. Moscow: Prospekt. 440 p. ISBN 978-5-392-36578-4. (In Russ.).
13. Makhlina, S. (2009). Semiotics of everyday life. In: Dictionary of semiotics of culture. St. Petersburg: Art-SPb. 525—535. ISBN 978-5-210-01591-4. (In Russ.).
14. Potebnya, A. A. (2000). Symbol and myth in folk culture. Moscow: Labyrinth. 480 p. ISBN 5-87604-191-2. (In Russ.).
15. Rinchinova, M. M. (2019). The concept of “everyday life” in scientific discourse. Culture and civilization, 9 (2A): 74—81. (In Russ.).
16. Schutz, A. (1988). The structure of everyday thinking. Sociological research, 2: 129—137. (In Russ.).
17. Schutz,A. (2003). On the multiplicity of realities. Sociological Review, 3 (2): 3—34. (In Russ.).
18. Slavic Antiquities. Ethnolinguistic dictionary: In 5 volumes. (1995). Moscow: International Relations. (In Russ.).
19. Stankevich, L. P., Polyakova, I. P. (2009). The phenomenon of everyday life: essence, content and integrity. In: Philosophy and Society, 2: 72—81. (In Russ.).
20. Telia, V. N. (1996). Russian phraseology: semantic-pragmatic and linguoculturological aspects. Moscow: Yaz. rus. Kultury. 284 p. (In Russ.).
21. Tokarev, G. V. (2023). Specifics of Brand as Linguocultural Unit (Tula Text of Culture). Nauchnyi dialog, 12 (4): 261—278. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24224/2227-1295-2023-12-4-261-278. (In Russ.).
22. Toporov, V. N. (1995). Myth. The ritual. Symbol. Image: Research in the field of mythopoetic: Favorites. Moscow: Progress; Culture. 624 p. ISBN 5-01-003942-7. (In Russ.).
23. Yastrebitskaya, A. L. (1991). Everyday life and material culture of the Middle Ages in Russian medieval studies. In: Odyssey: A Man in History. Moscow: Nauka. 412 p. (In Russ.).
Review
For citations:
Tokarev G.V. Signs of Everyday Life in Linguocultural Studies. Nauchnyi dialog. 2023;12(7):66-81. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.24224/2227-1295-2023-12-7-66-81
Views:
290
Email this article 