UDC 316:303.446.2:130.2
Ihor Yudkin
Institute for Cultural Research of the National Academy of Arts of Ukraine, Kyiv.
ORCID 0000-0002-4616-302X
DOI: https://doi.org/10.37627/2311-9489-14-2018-2.19-29
Keywords: diegesis, anagnosis, modus, dictum, infinitive aspect, anti-emphasis, self-referential text.
Abstract. It is drama where the powers of entirety of a text as an ideal object reveal themselves most fully because the events are conceived in the manner of diegesis being mediated with the inner world of subjects, so that the text is built up as “the communication about communication”, that is as a message about the messages of the dramatis personae. Communication as the representation of purposefulness entails the transformation of deeds into messages that bear the intentional conflicts. In its turn, intentionality generalizes modal and aspectual parameters of a text where the particular place is occupied with the infinitive mode as the representation of the places of indefiniteness to be reconsidered and interpreted. The state of indefiniteness (anti-emphasis) of the actual subjective-predicative relations determines the opportunities of the hermeneutic and heuristic interpretation as the source for idioms’ formation. In particular the differences in ascribing predicative or subjective values to the same locution become the source of its idiomatic transition within the dramatis personae’s cues. Drama is a kind of the self-referential text that is closed within the circle of the communication’s participants and is developed as the procedure of solving the riddles that if directed towards the point of the elucidation of circumstances (anagnosis).
Author Biography.
Ihor Yudkin, dr. hab. of art criticism, corresponding member of the National Academy of Arts of Ukraine, Institute for Cultural Research of the National Academy of Arts of Ukraine, Kyiv.
dr.iyudkin@gmail.com
References:
Aranovskij, M.G. (1972). Rechevaja situacija v dramaturgii opery «Semen Kotko». S.S. Prokof’ev. Stat’i i issledovanija. Moscow: Muzyka, pp. 59 – 95. (in Russian)
Birman, S. G. (1962). Put’ aktrisy. Edition 2. Moscow: Vserossijskoe teatral’noe obshhestvo. (in Russian)
Bondarko, A.V. (1987). Soderzhanie i tipy aspektual’nyh otnoshenij. Teorija funkcional’noj grammatiki. Aspektual’nost’. Vremennaja lokalizovannost’. Taksis. Leningrad: Nauka, pp. 40– 46. (in Russian)
Bondarko, A.V. (2002). Teorija znachenija v sisteme funkcional’noj grammatiki. Moscow: Jazyki slavjanskoj kul’tury. (in Russian)
Brusencov, N.P. (1985). Mikrokomp’jutery. Moscow: Nauka. (in Russian)
Vdovichenko, A.V. (2006). Samoznachnyj jazyk i paradoks lzheca. Vestnik PSTGU. 3. Filologija, (3.2), pp. 183–190. (in Russian)
Vilde, Iryna. (1964). Sestry Richynski. Kyiv: Radianskyi pysmennyk. Vol. 1. (in Ukrainian)
Gasparov, M. L. (1986). Istoricheskaja pojetika i sravnitel’noe stihovedenie. (Problema sravnitel’noj metriki). Istoricheskaja pojetika. Itogi i perspektivy izuchenija. Moscow: Nauka, pp. 188– 209. (in Russian)
Golovashhenko, Ju. A. (1947). Rezhisserskoe iskusstvo Tairova. Moscow, Leningrad: Iskusstvo. (in Russian)
Gorskij, V.S. (1981). Istoriko-filosofskoe istolkovanie teksta. Kyiv: Naukova dumka. (in Russian)
Hreimas, A. Iu. (2018). Pro bohiv ta liudei. Translation from Lithuanian by V. Prostsevichusa. Kyiv: Kyievo-Mohylianska akademiia. (in Ukrainian)
Dziuba, I. (2014). Taras Shevchenko. Istoriia ukrainskoi literatury in 12 vol. Vol. 4. Kyiv: Naukova dumka. (in Ukrainian)
Zhelnov, M.V. (1981). Predmet filosofii v istorii filosofii. Moscow: Izd. Moskovskogo universiteta. (in Russian)
Karpenko, D. S. (2007). Logiki Lukasevicha i prostye chisla. Moscow: URSS (LKI). (in Russian)
Kozarzhevskij, A. Ch. Uchebnik drevnegrecheskogo jazyka. Moscow: Izd. Moskovskogo univeriteta. (in Russian)
Kolomiiets, V.T. (1982). Baidyky. Etymolohichnyi slovnyk ukrainskoi movy. Vol. 1. Kyiv: Naukova dumka, p. 116. (in Ukrainian)
Koonen, A. G. (1975). Stranicy zhizni. Moscow: Iskusstvo. (in Russian)
Kopystianska, N. (2003). Funktsiia chuzhoho prostoru v poetytsi romanu H. Flobera «Madam Bovari». Inozemna filolohiia, (114), pp. 107–118. (in Ukrainian)
Lifshic, M. A. (1978). Kriticheskie zametki k sovremennoj teorii mifa. Part 2. Voprosy filosofii, (10), pp. 138–152. (in Russian)
Lifshic, M. A. (1979). Mifologija drevnjaja i sovremennaja. Moscow: Iskusstvo. (in Russian)
Lukasevich, Ja. (1959). Aristotelevskaja sillogistika s tochki zrenija sovremennoj formal’noj logiki. Translation from English by N. I. Stjazhkina & A.L. Subbotina. P.S. Popova (Ed.). Moscow: Inostrannaja literatura. (in Russian)
Matjushkin, A. V. (2007). Problemy interpretacii literaturnogo hudozhestvennogo teksta. Petrozavodsk: Izd. KGPU. (in Russian)
Nikolaeva, T. M. (2012). O chem na samom dele napisal Marsel’ Prust? Moscow: Jazyki slavjanskoj kul’tury. (in Russian)
Radishheva, O. A., & Shingareva E. A. (1978). Letopis’ tvorcheskoj zhizni A. K. Tarasovoj. Alla Konstantinovna Tarasova. Dokumenty i vospominanija. Moscow: Iskusstvo, pp. 31–138. (in Russian)
Razumovskij, A. (1968). Pirs Uajt. Zvezdy nemogo kino. Moscow: Iskusstvo, pp. 114–132. (in Russian)
Rajhert, K. V. (2015). Konceptualizacija i tropologija. Pervyj nezavisimyj nauchnyj vestnik, (1), pp. 40–43. (in Russian)
Sodomora, A. (1985). Spivets odvichnykh perevtilen. Ovidii. Metamorfozy. Kyiv: Dnipro, pp. 5–14. (in Ukrainian)
Steblin-Kamenskij, M. I. (1976). Mif. Leningrad: Nauka. (in Russian)
Holodov, E.G. (1978). Jazyk dramy. Jekskurs v tvorcheskuju laboratoriju A. N. Ostrovskogo. Moscow: Iskusstvo. (in Russian)
Homa, O. I. (1997). Provincialii i kul’tura Novogo Vremeni: k probleme dissidentstva Paskalja. Primechanija. Paskal’ B. Pis’ma k provincialu. Kyiv: Port Royal, pp. 501–557. (in Russian)
Chukovskij, K. I. (2011). Dnevnik 1901–1921. E. Chukovskaya (Ed.). Moscow: PROZAIK. (in Russian)
Yudkin, I. (2017). Hermeneutics, heuristics, morphology: the construction of metatext as the prerequisite for interpretation. The Culturology Ideas, 12 (2), pp. 20–29.
Iudkin, I. M. (2017, June 1–2). Intertekstualne yak interpersonalne: do morfolohii vykonavstva. Kultura-tekst-osobystist: ukrainski perspektyvy. Tezy dopovidei vseukrainskoi naukovo-teoretychnoi konferentsii. Kyiv: Instytut kulturolohii NAM Ukrainy, pp. 178–181. (in Ukrainian)
Iudkin, I. M. (2018). Lohika morfolohichnoho analizu tekstu v praktytsi interpretatsii. The Culturology Ideas, 13 (1), pp. 14–23. (in Ukrainian)
Iudkin, I. M. (2018). Osoblyvosti ukrainskoi dramaturhii pershoi polovyny XIX stolittia. Istoriia ukrainskoho teatru. Vol.1: Vid vytokiv do 2014 roku. Kyiv: IMFE, pp. 183–199. (in Ukrainian)
Iatsenko, M. T. (1977). Na rubezhi literaturnykh epokh. «Eneida» Kotliarevskoho i khudozhnii prohres v ukrainskii literaturi. Kyiv: Naukova dumka. (in Ukrainian)
Published: November 22, 2018.
Section: THEORY AND HISTORY OF CULTURE.