TEXT, CONTEXT, INTERTEXT: SYNTHESIS OF SENSE GENERATION
The article considers theoretical and epistemological substantiations of the functioning of textual categories: text, context, and intertext. Traditional and modern interpretations of these concepts in linguistics are considered. A hypothesis is advanced about the central role of the meaning-generating synthesis of text, context, intertext in the channel of communicative attitudes of the author and recipient of the text product. Prospects for research of hypertext structures are outlined. Introduction and theoretical justification. Textual categories of text, context and intertext are described as multi-level phenomena of communicative meaning. The text chronotope formed both by the author of the text and by its consumer, realizes its meaningful potential, depending on the semiotic volume of the utterance from a single fragment, to a single whole text product. An epistemological basis for deciphering the mechanisms of meaningfulness is the structure of a linguistic sign, which is characterized by a dual nature. As an integrally designed construct, any text is a semiotic system, with permanently changing content parameters. Context format of the statement correlates with intertextual constructions, within which adequate semantic and semantic components can be isolated. Main part. It is shown that the synthesizing mechanisms of the sense formation at the level of author's intentions and meaningfulness at the level of the recipient of the text are based on the principles of polysemy and polysemy, and nominative mechanisms support the semantic configurations of the utterance-text. It is suggested to take into account the subject-pro-positional structures for analysis of compositional-speech fragments of the text space. The semantic paradigms of textual attribution, conditioned by both intralinguistic and extralinguistic factors: deicticism, prosody, interpenetration of parts of the text, implication and presupposition, as well as illocution and pragmatics are considered. The importance of a communicative event, as one of the most important aspects of the functioning of a text product, is put on the first place. The importance of the intertextual competence of the recipient of the text is underlined. Conclusion. Conclusions are drawn about the contextual and intertextual conditioning of the process of semiotic meaning creation. The central element and the main operational essence of the process under consideration is the format of synthesizing the meaning on the basis of multilevel approaches to textual content. It is argued that the ideal object and subject of meaning-generating mechanisms is artistic discourse, which provides a wide field for interpreting the semantics of linguistic units. In line with the hypothesis put forward, vectors of future research are projected in the mainstream of the textual significance of hypertext structures that will expand the epistemological range of analytical linguistics.
While nobody left any comments to this publication.
You can be first.
1. Аmosova, N. N. (1963), Osnovy angliyskoy frazeologii [Fundamentals of English phraseology], Prosveshhenie, Leningrad, USSR. [in Russian].
2. Vinogradov, V. V. (1981), Problemy russkoy stilistiki [Problems of Russian Stylistics], Moscow, USSR. [in Russian].
3. Gak, V. G. (1998), Yazykovye preobrazovaniya [Language Transformations], Shkola «Yazyki russkoy kultury», Moscow, Russia. [in Russian].
4. Dekhnich, O. V. and Galtsev, O. V. (2015), Translating metaphors in literary discourse // Nauchnyj rezultat. Seriya: Voprosy teoreticheskoj i prikladnoy lingvistiki, 1, 57-62. [in Russian].
5. Dolinin, K. А. (2010), Interpretatsiya teksta. Frantsuzskiy yazyk: uchebnoe posobie [Interpreting the text. The French language: a tutorial], KomKniga, Moscow, Russia. [in Russian].
6. Kolshanskiy, G. V. (1959), O prirode konteksta [About the nature of the context], Voprosy yazykoznaniya, 4, Moscow, USSR. [in Russian].
7. Komarova, Z. I. (2012), Metodologiya, metod, metodika i tekhnologiya nauchnykh issledovaniy v lingvistike: uchebnoe posobie [Methodology, method, technique and technology of scientific research in linguistics: a tutorial], Izd-vo UrFU, Ekaterinburg, Russia. [in Russian].
8. Larin, B. А. (1973), Estetika slova i yazyk pisatelya [Aesthetics of the word and language of the writer], KHud. lit., Moscow, USSR. [in Russian].
9. Referovskaya, E. А. (1983), Lingvisticheskie issledovaniya struktury teksta [Linguistic research of text structure], Nauka, Leningrad, USSR. [in Russian].
10. Sedykh, A. P. (1998), Kontext. Znak. Obraz [Context. Sign. Form], BGU, Belgorod, Russia. [in Russian].
11. Sedykh, А. P. (2011), Kommunikativniy portret Nikolya Sarkozi [Communicative portrait of Nicolas Sarkozy], Politicheskaya lingvistika, GOU VPO «Ural. gos. ped. un-t», № 2, Ekaterinburg, Russia, 49-53. [in Russian].
12. Sedykh, А. P. (2012), Ideologicheskie ehlementy frazeologii politicheskogo rukovoditelya (na materiale diskursa V.V. Putina i А. Merkel) [The ideological elements of the phraseology of the political leader (based on the discourse of VV Putin and A. Merkel)], Politicheskaya lingvistika, GOU VPO «Ural. gos. ped. un-t», Vyp. 1(39), Ekaterinburg, Russia, 57-68. [in Russian].
13. Ufimtseva, А. А. (1968), Slovo v leksiko-semanticheskoy sisteme yazyka [The word in the lexical-semantic system of language], Nauka, Moscow, USSR. [in Russian].
14. Adam, J-M. (2011), La linguistique textuelle, A. Colin, Paris, France. [in French].
15. Audet, R. (2015), Écrire numérique: du texte littéraire entendu comme processus // Itinéraires [En ligne], mis en ligne le 04 février 2015, consulté le 10 septembre 2018, available at: http://journals.openedition.org/itineraires/2267 (accessed 15 August 2018). [in French].
16. Biasi, (de) P-M. (2018), Le Manuscrit cannibale. Biographie, intertextualité, genèse // La question de l'intime. Génétique et biographie, Daniel Delas, PULIM, collection «L'un et l'autre en français», Paris, France. [in French].
17. Cooper, D. E. (1973), Philosophy and the nature of language, London, UK. [in English].
18. Delphine, D. (2013), Philologie et sciences des textes. Le paradigme historique // La littérarité des belles-lettres. Un défi pour les sciences du texte. Classiques Garnier, Paris, France, 255-267. [in French].
19. Eco, U. (2006), Dire presque la même chose, Grasset et Fasquelle, Paris, France. [in French].
20. Firth, J. R. (1957), A synopsis of linguistic theory. Studies in linguistic analysis, Oxford, UK. [in English].
21. Guillaume, G. (2005), Leçons de linguistique de –. 1941-1942, Série B. Théorie du mot et typologie linguistique. Limitation et construction du mot à travers les langues, 17, Les Presses de l’Université Laval, Québec, Canada. [in French].
22. Kleiber, G. (1994), Contexte, interprétation et mémoire: approche standard vs approche cognitive, Langue française, Paris, France, 9-22. [in French].
23. Kristeva, J. (1969), Narration et transformation, Semiotica. № 4, The Hague, 422-448. [in French].
24. Kristeva, J. (2000), Le Temps sensible. Proust et l'expérience littéraire, Folio Essais, Paris, France. [in French].
25. Maingueneau, D. (2012), Les phrases sans texte, A. Colin, Paris, France. [in French].
26. Mayaffre, D. (2002), Les corpus réflexifs : entre architextualité et hypertextualité, Corpus n° 1, novembre 2002, en ligne [http://corpus.revues.org/document11.html], consulté le 10 septembre 2018. [in French].
27. Nielsen, J. (1995), Multimedia and Hypertext: The Internet and Beyond, Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco, USA. [in English].
28. Plassard, F. (2010), Intertextualité et technologies de l’information et de la communication: principe et mise en œuvre, Les Cahiers du GEPE, Approche critique et traductologique, Presses universitaires de Strasbourg, Strasbourg. [in French].
29. Rastier, F. (2001a), Arts et sciences du texte, PUF, Paris, France.
30. Rastier, F. (2009), Sémantique interprétative, Presses Universitaires de France, Paris, France. [in French].
31. Sedykh, A. P. and Pruvost, J. (2016), Lexiculture et dictionnaires: décalages culturels, Leksikografija i kommunikacija – 2016: materialy II Mezhdunar. nauch. konf. (g. Belgorod, 21–22 aprelja 2016 g.) / pod red. A.P. Sedykh. – ID «Belgorod» NIU «BelGU», Belgorod, Russia, 8-12. [in French].
32. Todorov, Tz. (1978), Les genres du discours, Seuil, Paris, France. [in French].
33. Todorov, Tz. (1981), Mikhaïl Bakhtine. Le principe dialogique, Seuil, Paris, France. [in French].
34. Wagner, F. (2006), Intertextualité et théorie // Cahiers de Narratologie [En ligne], 13 | 2006, mis en ligne le 01 septembre 2006, consulté le 10 septembre 2018. URL: http://journals.openedition.org/narratologie/364 [in French].
35. Wittgenstein, L. (2001), Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, Routledge Classics, London, UK. [in English].