Introduction

The intersection and at the same time non-identity of both text and discourse does not raise doubts among the most linguists. However, “text and discourse are conjugated” (Alefirenko et al., 2015: 158). At the conjugation of both text and discourse the issue of the correlation of both text and discourse worlds is actual thing.

In contemporary cognitive linguistics one of the relevant approaches to the interpretation of the literary conceptual domain’s architectonics is the theory of text worlds, substantiated in 1995 by P. Werth and published somewhat later (Werth, 1999). P. Werth interprets the text world as “conceptual scripts containing sufficient information to understand the related statements” (Werth, 1999: 7).

In this case, the content plan of the text knowledge format is presented as a conceptual space created by both the writer and the reader. According to E. Semino, the text world can also be defined as “a context, script or type of reality that arises in our minds at the text reading time” (Semino, 1997: 3). Obviously, in the process of text reading a model of this text appears in the reader’s mind in the form of an interpretative projection of the world created by the writer. According this point of view the actual fact is the model of the text world is an interpretative construct of indirect communication is a process of both reading and comprehending of the cognitive plot matrix of any literary text”.

Obviously, the world of a literary text is a partially or completely fictionalized authorial cognitive and narrative projection of the real or fictional world. The text world model can be interpreted as a unity of thematical models provided that “topic models have been widely used for text analysis” (Enpeng et al., 2014). So, the text world model is a literary model of the world. This text world model is a complex format of knowledge, i.e. “the literary world is the specific model of reality which is formed by individual-authorial interpretation” (Baghana et al., 2019: 1187). From this point of view, the types of linguistic interpretation and "cognitive models and schemas" are so important. (Boldyrev, 2020: 1).

Obviously, the discursive world is a dynamic, informative construct of knowledge having both linguistic and extralinguistic data which are significant, provided that the linguistic data are primary. These linguistic data are not independent, but they are associated with extralinguistic data. From this point of view, it is important that “discourse, text and derivative text worlds have different functional purposes, but show similarities in formal semantic terms” (Kushneruk, 2012: 100). So, the modeling of both text and discourse worlds reveals the degree of their similarity and difference.

Main Part

The purpose of the paper is to substantiate the algorithm for modeling both text and discourse worlds, provided that the architectonics of the textual world consists of three components such as:

(1) the literary conceptual domain as the informative, i.e., a projection of the writer’s conceptual domain,

(2) the readers’ conceptual domains,

(3) the interpretive field of the text world model.

The model of the discourse world is interpreted as a triad of components such as:

(1) the literary conceptual domain as a projection of the writer’s conceptual domain or the conceptual domain of the informative knowledge format as the informative,

(2) the conceptual domains of communicants discussing the text or the informative knowledge format,

(3) the communicative situation of the informative existing.

Material and methods of research

The material for the study and construction of the text world model is the novel “Brave New World” by O. Huxley. The material for the construction of the discourse world model is the sermons of St. John of Shanghai and San Francisco.

The following methods were used:

(1) the method of cognitive-hermeneutic modeling of the literary conceptual domain architectonics to interpret a novel as a unit of literary concepts,

(2) the method of quantitative analysis to identify the concepts-dominants in the literary conceptual domain architectonics by their prevailing nominees in nominative fields,

(3) the method of interpretive analysis to reveal the parameters of both text and discourse worlds models.

The totality of both interpretation and modeling methods of studying material confirms the idea that in contemporary linguistics there are prerequisites for the emergence of a new theory of “model study of lingual reality” in linguistics, namely, model linguistics, which develops on the basis of conjugation of two approaches such as activity approach and system one’s.

According to K. I. Belousov “the model linguistics is not just a system of both quantitative methods and techniques, but a system of views on the organisation of linguistic reality’s study, including methods for obtaining, storing data, and exchanging data, methods of statistical analysis and computer modeling, interpretation of results and the possibility of reproducing them” (Belousov, 2010: 96-97).

From this point of view, it is significant that both text and discourse worlds models provide complex data on conjugated, but not identical, dynamic format informative constructs.

Findings and Discussion

1. Modeling as interpreting format of knowledge

Modeling of research constructs, including text cognitive constructs, is seen as a holistic research program of interpreting. This research program is a unit of methods and techniques which are aimed at a systematic representation of any subject area in order to obtain information about this subject that cannot be revealed in the case of a descriptive approach.

According to I. A. Shchirova, modeling is one of “the basic principles in the cognitive sciences” (Shchirova, 2013: 42). Consequently, the research constructs’ modeling expands the range of interpretative parameters that a researcher can operate with.

In linguistics, there are different approaches to defining a model. According to V. A. Shtof, “a model is understood as a mentally represented or materially realised system that, displaying or reproducing the object of study, is able to replace it in such a way that its study gives us new information about this object” (Shtof, 1966: 19).

Firstly, R. G. Piotrovsky in his studies emphasized the fact that models can serve, firstly, as a means of studying or describing the internal structure in the object under study. Such models are called “structural models”.

Secondly, the models can serve as a means of studying of the behavior of the object under study. Such models are called “functional models”.

Thirdly, the models can serve as a means of studying the development of the object under study. Such models are called “dynamic models” (Piotrovsky, 1998: 86-96).

Both V. A. Shtof and R. G. Piotrovsky outlined scientific points of view on the modeling idea in the second half of the 20th century.

In the 21st century, V. I. Karasik clarifies the previously expressed ideas and explains that the model “as a research construct of reality is a working tool for studying the essence of the phenomenon under consideration in its systemic and functional relationships with phenomena of a more general order” (Karasik, 2013: 6). Extrapolating the modeling principles to the text informative format of knowledge as a model of the real world, I. A. Shirova emphasises that “a literary text is generated by the author’s imagination. This text is unique in its nature. It is a unique means of objectifying the author’s world view as a conceptual system” (Shchirova, 2013: 43).

From this point of view, the advantage of modeling process in the text studying is that the entire body of the text of any author becomes visible and more accessible for perception and assimilation.

The constant scientific research of both language modeling and speech reality modeling had some success. There are some modeling types such as conceptual taxonomic modeling i.e. conceptual taxonomic analysis, cognitive matrix modeling i.e. cognitive matrix analysis.

There are also the following text modeling types: (1) syntactic text modeling, (2) causal-genetic text modeling, (3) linguo-socio-cultural text modeling, etc.

Syntactic text modeling means “the formation of a text frame as a form of practical implementation of communicative goals” (Shatalova, 2012).

Causal-genetic text modeling means “an approach that allows a comprehensive and holistic study of political texts from the standpoint of discourse analysis. Causal genetic modeling allows us to consider any text (oral or written) as a complex linguistic sign, the content of which is presented in four dimensions: structural, systemic, hierarchical, linear” (Zinchenko, 2009).

Linguo-socio-cultural text modeling in the educational sphere is aimed at the study of “socio-cultural representations in the text” (Maslakova, 2010).

The cognitive point of view on the consideration of the text as a set of literary concepts that form a conceptual domain, allowed to substantiate the existence of the following concepts of text modeling: firstly, the concept of cognitive-comparative modeling of literary conceptual domain; secondly, the concept of both modeling and interpreting of text cognitive scene; thirdly,  the concept of modeling of text cognitive scripts’ architectonics; finally, the concept of cross-cultural cognitive modeling of text constructs.

Cognitive-comparative modeling of literary conceptual domain is interpreted as “a schematic representation of the nominative field of language formations that verbalise cognitive structures as part of the literary conceptual domain” (Ogneva, 2009: 7-8). This type of cognitive modeling of the text is based on the data obtained by comparing both the content plan and the formal plan of nominants in the cognitive structures of the original and translated texts.

Modeling discursive constructions aims to consider the text in a communicative situation. The study of the conjugation degree of both linguistic and extralinguistic factors in the architectonics of the discourse model revealed the dominance of linguistic factors, as mentioned above, however, only the correlation between linguistic and extralinguistic factors creates an informative discourse model as a triad of the following conjugate components:

(1) the literary conceptual domain as a projection of the writer’s conceptual domain or the conceptual domain of the informative knowledge format as informative,

(2) the conceptual domains of communicants discussing the text or the informative knowledge format,

(3) the communicative situation of informative existing.

Modeling both the textual and the discursive world is a multi-step process.

2. Modeling of text world architectonics

Obviously, the text world architectonics correlated with the novel is a unit consisting of three components, such as:

(1) the literary conceptual domain as informative, i.e. a projection of the writer’s conceptual domain,

(2) the readers’ conceptual domains,

(3) the interpretive field of the text world model. The text world architectonics is a dynamic thing, since its parameters are determined by the specific features of the cultural experience of a particular person, that is, a particular reader creates the text world.

The study of text world architectonics is based on detailed research of the three components.

2.1. The literary conceptual domain as informative, i.e., as a projection of the writer’s conceptual domain

Consideration of the first component in the architectonics of the text world, i.e. consideration of the text as a projection of the individual conceptual field of the writer, is aimed at identifying both the features of the construction of the text and the implementation of textual information. The textual projection of the means of the writer's individual conceptual domain is informative. There are three types of information in the text: (1) factual information, (2) motivational information, and (3) instructive information. The factual information in the text reflects the development of textual reality. Motivational information is aimed at “arousing or maintaining the addressee’s interest in the factual information given” (Levchenko et al., 2013: 28). Instructional information directs the reader as the addressee using the text factual information according “mind style in narrative fiction” (Semino, 2000: 96).

The totality of three types of text information, i.e. factual information, motivational information and instructive information, is associated with a text parameter such as integrity under the following two conditions. Firstly, the integrity of the text lies in the possibility of text dividing into semantic parts, and secondly, text fragments consisting of various interphrasal units “provide the necessary integrity of the text” (Zhirova, 2020: 88). From this point of view the researchers use an iterative algorithm which “is proposed to calculate both the similarity between each pair of short text snippets and between each pair of words” (Wenyin et al., 2010).

It is the text integrity that ensures the functioning of the text conceptual domain as a unit of literary concepts.

Thus, it is evident, that the text conceptual domain’s functioning is due to the fact that whole complexes of semantic meanings are fixed in the concept. The integrity of both text and its conceptual domain is predetermined by the fact that the modeling of the writer’s text world is based on the principles of the text conceptual domain’s modeling which this writer created. Studies show that the semantic parts of the text as a unit of nominees in the nominative fields of literary concepts forming the text conceptual domain correspond to its “contexts of different quality” (Kurash, 2001: 5).

In this case, the parameters of different quality’s contexts are predetermined by the general parameters of the text cognitive-plot matrix. Thus, the study of the holistic architectonics in the text involves “the analysis of text as an object for decoding the information contained in it” (Fedotova, 2021: 28). The information decoding process is divided, as mentioned earlier, into factual information, motivational information, and instructive information. The decoding of textual information of the three types is based on the fact that in the text, along with the category of integrity, the implementation of the category of consciousness of the writer is significant.

The presence of integrity’s category is “the fundamental factor for structuring of the storyline and text filling with a certain semantic content” (Butakova, Myachin, 2020 86). The writer’s consciousness in this case is a tool for linguistic coding of the environment’s symbols into a text cognitive-plot matrix’s model as a projection of the writer’s conceptual domain.

Consequently, the first component of the text world i.e. the text as an informative forming as a projection of the writer’s conceptual domain is a complex research construct. The decoding of this research construct reveals some cognitive attractors. Namely, these cognitive attractors attract the reader’s attention and form a text world model.

2.2.The readers’ conceptual domains

Consideration of the second component in the text world architectonics, namely, the readers’ conceptual domains, is possible in two ways: (1) by questioning readers, i.e. direct identification of associates that arise in the readers’ mind at text reading, or (2) through both assumption and understanding of functions of readers’ conceptual domains. The first approach to the study of the reader’s conceptual domain remains outside of this article. In the way of the second approach to the study of the readers’ conceptual domains it is necessary to emphasise the fact that the readers manifest “a clear thematic relation with situational-personal clarifications” (Karasik, 2020: 272).

Such thematic correlation between text conceptual domain and writer’s conceptual domain contributes to “the formation of an optimal model for the perception of textual meanings by the recipient” (Tataru, 2008: 24). It is noteworthy that L. V. Tataru equates both recipient and reader, while in contemporary text theory there are two types of readers such as the reader-addressee and the reader-recipient, i.e. a non-addressee reader.

It is obvious that certain components of the reader-recipients’ conceptual domains are a priori “tuned” to perceive certain information that is embedded by the writer into the text conceptual domain sphere, while in the case of the reader-recipient’s interpretation of the text conceptual domain is realised “hypertext ideology, <...> and the recipient’s behavior strategy” (Koval, Kurash, Amatov, 2019: 6). Thus, there is no doubt that the two types of readers, both the reader-addressee and the reader-recipient, will have different strategies for reading and interpreting the text.

Писатель учитывает параметры концептуальной области читателя-адресата при формировании матрицы когнитивного сюжета текста, поэтому концептуальная область читателя-адресата более настроена на когнитивные аттракторы, чем концептуальная область читателя-реципиента. The dynamism degree of new attractive vectors forming between text conceptual domain and reader-recipient’s conceptual domain determines the possibility of status changing from the reader-recipient to the status of the reader-addressee.

Consequently, the reader’s conceptual domain is a complex research construct focused on obtaining information from the text planned for reading, that is, informative. It should be noted that the reader-recipient’s conceptual domain remains out of the nowadays researcher’s attention.

2.3.The interpretive field of the text world model

Consideration of the third component of the textual world, i.e. the interpretive field, shows that the information received in the process of interpretation goes beyond the information presented in linguistic form. Deep text information is involved, because it is associated with deep information of the reader’s conceptual domain. In this case, the parameters of the text world’s interpretive field appear as a kind of “superstructure” over both the text conceptual domain and the reader’s conceptual domain, taking into account the reader “creating an idea of the text, decodes the image of the author” (Bolotnova, 1992: 11).

Decoding the author’s image in the text, i.e. decoding their individual author’s conceptual domain projected in the text conceptual domain is aimed at the possibility of establishing personal characteristics that are significant for the text, taking into account the functional style.

Consequently, the interpretive field of the text world model conjugates two conceptual domains, i.e. both conceptual domain of the writer and conceptual domain of the reader. The interpretative field of the text world model as an informative construct is a derived component over two basic conceptual domains, i.e. both the text conceptual domain and the reader’s conceptual domain. It is noteworthy that this informative construct of the text world model is currently less studied compared to the two basic components of the text world model. This phenomenon provides broad prospects for further research.

3. Modeling of discourse world architectonics

Consideration of the architectonics of the world of discourse reveals the features of its model, consisting of a triad of such components as: (1) the literary conceptual domain as a projection of the writer’s conceptual domain or the conceptual domain of the informative knowledge format as informative, (2) the conceptual domains of communicants discussing the text or the informative knowledge format, (3) the communicative situation of informative existing.

The discursive components triad is formed as “an integral sphere of the study of language communication and involves not only taking into account the actual formal and functionally situational parameters, but also the possibility of level stratification” (Kushneruk, 2012: 93-94). This level of stratification requires detailed consideration within the framework of “discursive-pragmatic modeling” (Alefirenko et al., 2019: 142-149).

3.1. The literary conceptual domain as a projection of the writer’s conceptual domain or the conceptual domain of the informative knowledge format as informative thing

The study of models of both text and discourse worlds reveals the fact of the identity of one of the components in both models, that is, it reveals the presence of the literary conceptual domain as a projection of the writer’s conceptual domain or as informative thing in both text model and discourse model. In section 2.1. the parameters of construction and functioning of the writer’s conceptual domain were considered in detail, that is why it does not require a repeated statement of the fact. The informative knowledge format’s conceptual domain is determined according to the discourse world models.

3.2. The conceptual domains of communicants discussing the text or the informative knowledge format

Consideration of the second component of the discourse world, that is, consideration of the conceptual domains of communicants discussing the text or the informative knowledge format reveals the role of linguistic personalities in the creation of discourse models. The linguistic personalities of communicants have certain parameters, since if “one participant in the discourse world establishes a text world or a derivative world, other participants expect them to be responsible for the content that they a priori recognise as reliable and true” (Kushneruk, 2012: 100).

Some of the parameters of the linguistic personalities of communicants are paired in the process of communication, which becomes “the dominant principle of meaning construction in discourse” (Boldyrev, 2019: 85-104). It is significant that this segment of conjugation of communicants’ conceptual domains is attracted to cognitive attractors of text conceptual domain under discussion or the informative format of knowledge, that is, it is attracted to cognitive attractors of the informative thing.

It is noteworthy that the communicants at the discursive world forming can assume different statuses. The first type is a mixed discursive world model, i.e. communicant-addressee and communicant-recipient correlate with conceptual domain of the informative knowledge format. Thus, the discursive model of the world is unstable, because the conceptual domain of the communicant-addressee is contiguous with the conceptual domain of the informative knowledge format, and the conceptual domain of the communicant-recipient is contiguous with the conceptual domain of the informative knowledge format (Figure 1).

Secondly, type is a conjugated discursive world model, i.e. two and more communicant-addressee correlate with conceptual domain of the informative knowledge format. Thus, the discursive world model is a deeply stable thing, because the conceptual domains of communicants-addressees conjugate deeply with the conceptual domain of the informative knowledge format (Figure 2).

The third type is a touched discursive world model, i.e. two and more communicant-recipients correlate with conceptual domain of the informative knowledge format. Thus, the discursive world model is a deeply unstable thing, because the conceptual domains of communicants-addressees conjugate deeply with the conceptual domain of the informative knowledge format (Figure 3).

Figure 1. Mixed discursive world model

Figure 2. Conjugated discursive world model

Figure 3. Touched discursive world model

Consequently, the parameters of the linguistic personalities of the two types of communicants and the degree of their conjugation or touching with the cognitive attractors of the informative conceptual domain predetermine the property of the model of the created discursive world.

3.3. The communicative situation of informative existing

Consideration of the third component of the discourse world model, that is, consideration of the communicative situation informatively existing, shows that the communicative situation is a unit of extralinguistic factors or a unit of their linguomarkers, which presents the researcher with the difficult task of interpreting this component of the discourse model. In this case, the constructive elements to coordinate the worlds are “deictic means that indicate the participants, the situation, the temporal and spatial localisation of facts, objects and entities” (Kushneruk, 2012: 100-101).

It is noteworthy that the third component in the discourse world model has not been fully explored, despite its importance. Obviously, the communicative situation as a unit of extralinguistic factors becomes a more accessible object for researchers only in the case of verbalisation of the symbols according to this situation, as well as in the case of creolisation of this component of the discourse world model.

4. Modeling of literary text world in О. Huxley’s “Brave New World”

Consideration of the text world of any fiction, in this case, the O. Huxley’s “Brave New World” published in 1932. This novel about society in the 25th century is based on identifying the features of three components in a textual model of the world. First of all, the text conceptual domain’s architectonics of the studied novel consists of a significant number of literary concepts. Some of these literary concepts have the status of the concepts-dominants such as: the literary concept CASTE SOCIETY, the literary concept LENAINA CROWN, the literary concept BERNARD MAX, the literary concept SAVAGE JOHN. As the study showed, in the nominative fields of all literary concepts in the novel’s conceptual domain and, to a greater extent, in the nominative fields of concepts-dominants there are realities as nominees. It should be noted that the use of realities in a literary text “allows to emphasize the specificity and originality of life” (Epifantseva, 2018: 190). It is noteworthy that these realities of the future fictional world, that is, these are the constructs of the writer’s consciousness. These constructs are the writer’s idea of cognitive representation of the concept of the text world”.

The second feature of the novel is the correlation of the names of the characters of the novel, which takes place in the 26th century, with real historical figures who lived in the 19th and 20th centuries in different countries. The writer’s approach to the selection of names for the characters correlates with the thesis that “the semantic capacity of the anthroponym is specific to artistic speech” (Khvesko, Tretyakova, 2019: 523).

The third feature of the novel’s conceptual domain is a high frequency of temporal markers that describe in detail the temporal-semantic side in the cognitive-discursive contour of the text.

The fourth feature of the conceptual domain’s architectonics is the dynamics of the events’ development in the novel and a high frequency of dynamic proxemes. Highlighting this parameter in the conceptual domain is characteristic of the process of considering the textual world. Such text world is formed on the basis of any text, since the format of the created world as a research construct can be static or dynamic.

The fifth feature of the conceptual domain is a high frequency of communicative scenes. Thus, the thesis that communicative fragments serve as a kind of sociatives is significant.

The readers’ conceptual domains of the studied novel are notable for the fact that the readers are residents of various countries. These readers interpret the novel both in the original language and in the languages of various countries. The studied book was published in 1932 and immediately gained popularity among readers.

Consequently, the conceptospheres of readers from different countries with different nationalities, as the history of the popularity of the work showed, were "tuned" to the perception of concept dominants in the conceptosphere of "Brave New World" by O. Huxley, because there was a conjunction of "evaluative semantic compression" (Golovanova, Kovaleva 2017: 32).  The interpretive field of the textual world is formed on the basis of conjugation of the compression of evaluative meaning in the novel, conceptual field and in the conceptual field of readers. The so-called "conscious mental formations" (Kushneruk, 2017: 270) are dynamically realized in the interpretive field of the textual world of the novel. These interpretative mental formations «represent any quantitative and qualitative parameters of static and dynamic linguacultural cognitive structures» (Ogneva et al., 2015: 1103).

Thus, firstly, the identified specific features can be discovered through the cognitive-hermeneutic analysis of the conceptual domain of “Brave New World”;

secondly, comprehending the fact that the parameters of the reader’s conceptual domain is predetermined by their belonging to different countries and nationalities;

thirdly, determining the dynamism in the deployment of the interpretive field in the novel’s text world – all these three facts are the unit of cognitive parameters of modeling the world.

The literary text world model in
О. Huxley’s “Brave New World” is presented in the graphic model (Figure 4).

Figure 4. Literary text world model in О. Huxley’s “Brave New World”

Obviously, the literary text world model in О. Huxley’s “Brave New World” is a complex informative model.

5. Modeling of discourse worldof St. John of Shanghai and San Francisco

There are various discursive worlds that can be classified according to the types of discourse. Depending on the discourse type, the components of the discursive world model acquire certain specific features.

Thus, the consideration of the religious discursive world model created by the sermons of St. John of Shanghai and San Francisco shows the presence of some concepts-dominants, such as the concept-dominant GOD, the concept-dominant FAITH, the concept-dominant REPENTANCE, the concept-dominant TRANFIGURATION, and the concept-dominant SYNERGY OF HEAVEN AND EARTH.

The nominative fields of both concepts-dominants and simple concepts forming the discourse of St. John of Shanghai and San Francisco are a combination of the Old Testament and the New Testament religious realities in the interpretation of the preacher’s pastoral personality’s parameters. A high frequency of cognitive attractors in the conceptual domain of St. John’s discourse should be noted.

The peculiarity of preaching a discursive model of the world depends on the fact that the preacher relies on two roles simultaneously, he is the author of the text, that is, the author of the informative thing, and he is the communicator, whose linguistic personality predetermines the construction of the conceptual domain of discourse.

The second feature of the model under consideration is the predominance of communicants with the status of the listener-addressee. It is noteworthy that the religious discursive world model is a God-centered model in which the temporal aspect is always prolonged in time, so the third feature of this model is a special role of chronemes in the model functioning aimed at eternity.

The extralinguistic component of communicative situation in the religious discourse model is multi-component and multi-vector. It consists of some components such as the liturgical life of believers, festive traditions, the churches’ decorations, the architectural diversity in churches. The list of the components of the liturgical life of believers is not complete. Each extralinguistic component appears as a complex research construct.

Figure 5. Religious discourse world model