Integrative Textology: A Multi-level Analysis Model of Literary Works
https://doi.org/10.24224/2227-1295-2026-15-1-279-310
Abstract
This study aims to justify and demonstrate the five-axis model of a ‘philological tensor’ as a theoretically significant tool for philological analysis in response to contemporary methodological challenges. The research employs philosophical-methodological modeling techniques based on the synthesis of hermeneutic, structuralist, semiotic, and cultural approaches. An historical-typological analysis is applied to trace the evolution of literary forms along each axis identified within this framework. The scientific novelty lies in the development of an innovative concept of the ‘philological tensor,’ which serves as a unified model for comprehensive literary analysis by integrating fragmented methodologies into a cohesive whole. This paper presents findings that elucidate both the content and function of the five fundamental axes — Logos, Nomos, Eikon, Praxis, and Glossa — and their interconnectedness. It traces the evolution of literary forms across these dimensions from ancient synesthetic mythologies through modern multimedia narratives. Emphasis is placed on the practical value of this proposed model for analyzing texts spanning different eras comprehensively. The conclusion underscores its versatility and heuristic potential, suggesting applicability not only to classical works but also to current textual forms, thereby positioning it as a universal approach to philological inquiry.
About the Authors
M. E. Konurbaev
Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation
Россия
Россия
Marklen E. Konurbaev, Doctor of Philology, Professor, Department of English Linguistics
Moscow
S. M. Konurbaev
Institute of modern art
Россия
Россия
Salavat M. Konurbaev, post-graduate student, Department of English Linguistics
Moscow
References
1. Averintsev, S. S. (1969). The praiseworthy word of philology. Youth, 1: 98—102. (In Russ.).
2. Bakhtin, M. M. (1979). Aesthetics of literary creativity. Moscow: Iskusstvo Publ. 423 p. (In Russ.).
3. Baudrillard, J. (2015). Simulacra and simulation. Moscow: Publishing house “Postumus”. 238 p. ISBN 978-5-91478-023-1. (In Russ.).
4. Bogatyrev, P. G., Jacobson, R. O. (1929). Die Folklore als eine besondere Form des Schaffens “Folklore as a special form of creativity”. In: Donum natalicium Schrijnen. Verzameling van opstellen door oud-leerlingen en bevriende vakgenooten opgedragen aan Prof. Dr. Joseph Schrijnen bij gelegenheid van zijn zestigsten verjaardag, 3 Mei 1929. Nijmegen: N. V. Dekker & Van der Vegt. 900—913. (In Germ.).
5. Budagov, R. A. (1980). Philology and culture. Moscow: Publishing House of Moscow State University. 303 p. (In Russ.).
6. Derrida, J. (2000). About grammatology. Moscow: Ad Marginem. 511 p. ISBN 5-93321-011-0. (In Russ.).
7. Gadamer, H.-G. (1988). Truth and method: fundamentals of philosophical Hermeneutics. Moscow: Progress Publ. 699 p. ISBN 5-01-001035-6. (In Russ.).
8. Ivanova, I. N. (2015). The Northern text in modern Russian prose: Dmitry Novikov’s version. Modern problems of science and education, 1—2: P. 187. (In Russ.).
9. Jenkins, G. (2019). Convergent culture: The clash of old and new media. Moscow: Ripol Classic. 384 p. ISBN 978-5-386-13461-7. (In Russ.).
10. Likhachev, D. S. (1983). Textual criticism: based on the material of Russian literature of the X—XVII centuries. Leningrad: Nauka. 645 p. (In Russ.).
11. Losev, A. F. (1976). The problem of symbol and realistic art. Moscow: Iskusstvo Publ. 367 p. (In Russ.).
12. Lotman, Yu. M. (1970). The structure of a literary text. Moscow: Iskusstvo Publ. 387 p. (In Russ.).
13. Lukach, G. (1994). Theory of the novel: the experience of historical and philosophical research of the forms of great epic. New literary Review, 9: 19—78. (In Russ.).
14. Lyotard, J.-F. (1998). The state of postmodernity. Moscow: Institute of Experimental Sociology; St. Petersburg: Alethea. 159 p. ISBN 5-89329-107-7. (In Russ.).
15. Merleau-Ponty, M. (1999). Phenomenology of perception. Saint Petersburg: Juventus; Nauka Publ. 605 p. ISBN 5-02-026807-0. (In Russ.).
16. Polonsky, V. V. (2016). Philology vs philosophy? in search of a way out of the impasse of interpretations. Studia Litterarum, 1: 14—25. (In Russ.).
17. Pospelov, G. N. (1982). Holistic and systematic understanding of literary works. Questions of literature, 3: 139—155. (In Russ.).
18. Potebnya, A. A. (1862). Thought and language. Kharkov: [b. i.]. 300 p. (In Russ.).
19. Propp, V. Ya. (1928). Morphology of a fairy tale. Leningrad: Academia. 152 p. (In Russ.).
20. Riker, P. (2002). Conflict of Interpretations: Essays on hermeneutics. Moscow: CANON Press. 416 p. ISBN 5-85691-035-4. (In Russ.).
21. Rodionova, A. A. (2019). Textuality in the digital age: text and action. Digital Scientist: the Philosopher’s Laboratory, 2 (1): 88—99. (In Russ.).
22. Ryan, M.-L. (2015). Narrative as Virtual Reality 2: Revisiting Immersion and Interactivity in Literature and Electronic Media. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. 304 p. ISBN 9781421417974. (In Russ.).
23. Shatilova, L. M. (2015). Modern methods and approaches to the study of literary text. Philological sciences. Questions of theory and practice, 7 (2): 199—202. (In Russ.).
24. Shklovsky, V. B. (1917). Art as a technique. Collections on the theory of poetic language, II: 3—14. (In Russ.).
25. Shpet, G. G. (1927). The inner form of the word (studies and variations on Humboldt themes). Moscow: State Academy of Sciences. arts. Sciences. 219 p. (In Russ.).
26. Sukhoi, S. I. (2012). Methodology of literary criticism: complex and systematic methods of literature analysis. Bulletin of Nizhny Novgorod University named after N. I. Lobachevsky, 6 (1): 298—303. (In Russ.).
27. Tomashevsky, B. V. (1996). Theory of literature. Poetics. Moscow: Aspect Press. 240 p. (In Russ.).
28. Tynyanov, Yu. N. (1929). Archaists and innovators. Leningrad: Priboy Publ. 189 p. (In Russ.).
29. Veselovsky, A. N. (1940). Historical poetics. Leningrad: Goslitizdat. 648 p. (In Russ.).
30. Vinogradov, V. V. (1959). On the language of fiction. Moscow: Goslitizdat. 654 p. (In Russ.).
31. Vinokur, G. O. (1990). Philological research: linguistics and poetics. Moscow: Nauka Publ. 451 p. ISBN 5-02-011436-7. (In Russ.).
32. Yakobson, R. O. (1987). Works on poetics. Moscow: Progress Publ. 464 p. ISBN 978-5-0000-0000-0. (In Russ.).
Review
For citations:
Konurbaev M.E., Konurbaev S.M. Integrative Textology: A Multi-level Analysis Model of Literary Works. Nauchnyi dialog. 2026;15(1):279-310. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.24224/2227-1295-2026-15-1-279-310
Views:
90
JATS XML
Email this article 