Home → Releases → 2023, №1 (49) →

SEMIOTIC ELEMENTS AS A PARATOPY FACTOR IN REFLEXIVE DISCOURSE

Linguistic Theory. Cross-cultural Communication Theory , UDC: 81-112 DOI: 10.25688/2076-913X.2023.49.1.08

Authors

  • Rayskina Valeria Alexandrovna PhD (Philology)

Annotation

The paper presents the study of semiotic elements seen as constituents of the Renaissance reflexive discourse. The relevance of the research relates to the necessity of a complex analysis of the reflexive discourse construction. This type of discourse is defined as a means to verbalize someone`s cognition including cultural and axiological subjective systems. The study correlates with up-to-date conceptions of discursive, cognitive, and axiological bases of language practices. In this regard, the aim is to identify functions of specific linguistic signs — handwritten quotations left by Michel Montaigne on his private library joists. The leading research method is the conceptual-axiological analysis that allows to rebuild cognitive and communicative experience of the philosopher on the basis of recurrent concepts and values presented in his reflexive discourse. The author justifies that semiotic elements are diachronic precedent texts, that represent the library’s topos and play a key role in constructing reflexive discourse as well as in translating values. The material of the study includes 64 Latin and Greek handwritings, left on Montaigne ʼs library joists. It is substantiated that conciseness and lapidarity emerge as categories of precedent texts on joists because microtexts serve as mnemonic signs. Montaigneʼs text trace is crucial for the Renaissance reflexive discourse. As the result of conceptual-axiological analysis of semiotic signs the author reveals core concepts and values of precedent texts: wisdom, knowledge, life, death, God, human. Major axiological categories of Montaigne ʼs discourse are renunciation of judgment, moderation, self-sufficiency, natural course of events, anthropocentrism. The developed model of reflexive discourseʼs analysis contributes to discursive-cognitive studies and may be extrapolated on exploring other historical persons as well as conceptual and axiological elements building up their worldviews.
Tags:
Evaluation , Intertext , linguaxiology , Michel Montaigne. , Paratopy factor , precedent text , reflexive discourse

How to link insert

Rayskina, V. A. (2023). SEMIOTIC ELEMENTS AS A PARATOPY FACTOR IN REFLEXIVE DISCOURSE Bulletin of the Moscow City Pedagogical University. Series "Pedagogy and Psychology", 2023, №1 (49), 96. https://doi.org/10.25688/2076-913X.2023.49.1.08
References
1. 1. Sulejmanova, O. A., Fomina, M. A., & Tiv’jaeva, I. V. (2020). Principles and methods of linguistic research. Jazyki Narodov Mira. (In Russ.).
2. 2. Kudinova, N. A. (2015). Reflexive discourse as a way of development of thinking. Innovation and multi-competency in teaching and learning foreign languages. N. M. Mekeko. (General eds.) RUDN, 478–486. (In Russ.).
3. 3. Lefevr, V. A. (2003). Reflexion. Kogito-center. (In Russ.).
4. 4. Morozkina, T. V. (2014). From text understanding to interpretation in reflexive-discursive dimension. Philological sciences. Issues of theory and practice, 8–2(38), 96–99. (In Russ.).
5. 5. Morozkina, T. V., & Vryganova, K. A. (2014). To the question of reflection in intercultural communication. Low and education, 9, 86–91. (In Russ.).
6. 6. Dubnyakova, O. A., & Kashina, T. A. (2017). Communicative and pragmatic particularities of personal diary. MCU Journal of Philology. Theory of Linguistics. Linguistic Education, 1(25), 42–49. (In Russ.).
7. 7. Kanafeva, A. V. (2020). Structural and semantic organization of rhetorical statements in the speech act of subjective reflection. Russian in Slavic Intercultural Communication: collection of scientific papers. Diona, 137–143. (In Russ.).
8. 8. Kasavin, I. T. (2006). Discourse and chaos: the problem of the titular councillor Golyadkin. Psychology, 1, 3–18. (In Russ.).
9. 9. Mihajlova, E. N. (2017). Renaissance system of linguistic knowledge: from dialogue of cultures to culture of dialogue. Dialogue of cultures. Culture of dialogue: human and new socio-humanistic values. L. G. Vikulova, E. G. Tareva (General eds.) NEOLIT, 345–367. (In Russ.).
10. 10. Vikulova, L. G., Tareva, E. G., Serebrennikova, E. F., Gerasimova, S. A., & Rayskina, V. A. (2020). Retrospective semiometrics of the sign Valeur. XLinguae, 13(1), 169–183. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18355/XL.2020.13.01.13
11. 11. Discourse as a universal matrix of verbal interaction. (2018). О. А. Sulejmanova (General eds.) URSS: Lenand. (In Russ.).
12. 12. MONLOE: MONtaigne à L’OEuvre. Programme ANR CORPUS 2012 (ANR-12-CORP-0003-01). https://montaigne.univ-tours.fr/
13. 13. Legros, А. (2003). Peintures et inscriptions chez Montaigne. Klincksieck.
14. 14. Mihajlova, S. V. (2011). The XVII century literature salon as a paratopie factor. MCU Journal of Philology. Theory of Linguistics. Linguistic Education, 1(7), 108–113. (In Russ.).
15. 15. Maingueneau, D. (1993). Le contexte de l’oeuvre litteraire. Enonciation, ecrivain, societe. Dunod.
16. 16. Borbotko, L. A., & Korolenko, O. I. (2016). Communicative norms of formal scientific communication: oration in the academic discourse of the XVII–XVIII centuries. Scientific Newsletter Modern linguistic and methodical-and-didactic research, 3(31), 95–103. (In Russ.).
17. 17. Vikulova, L. G. (2012). The problem of cultural migration of the XVIIth century French literature fairy tale: from oral being to salon entertainment. Bulletin of Krasnojarsk State Pedagogical University, 4, 34–39. (In Russ.).
18. 18. Vikulova, L. G. (2005). The role of the writer in the cultural migration of literary genres: a literary tale of the XVIIth century. Psychosystematics in Russia and abroad (to the Memory of L. M. Skrelina). RSPU, 10–12. (In Russ.).
19. 19. Vikulova, L. G. (2012). The publishing discourse in communication system «author – publisher – reader». Bulletin of Irkutsk State Linguistic University, 2s(18), 63–69. (In Russ.).
20. 20. Jakubczuk, R. (2021). Étude retrotopique d’un texte théâtral. Le cas de la dramaturgie de Wajdi Mouawad, 37–47.
21. 21. The Montaigne Project. https://www.lib.uchicago.edu/efts/ARTFL/projects/montaigne 22. Vikulova, L. G. (2016). The writer in the French society of the 17th century: encyclopedic domination, language competence, communicative leadership. Ancient and Modern Romania, 17, 266–278. (In Russ.).
22. 23. Tcherkashina, Ye. I. (2009). Еhe teacher of a foreign language in a non-philological university. MCU Journal of Philology. Theory of Linguistics. Linguistic Еducation, 2(4), 81–87. (In Russ.).
23. 24. Tivyaeva, I. V. (2020). Structural organization of memory narrative. Siberian Philological Journal, 1, 303–315. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17223/18137083/70/24 (In Russ.).
24. 25. Chupryna, O. G. (2014). Сulture references in British teen books (linguocultural approach). MCU Journal of Philology. Theory of Linguistics. Linguistic Еducation, 3(15), 71–79. (In Russ.).
25. 26. Chupryna, O. G., Baranova, K. M., & Merculova, M. G. (2018). Fate as a concept in language and culture. Questions of cognitive linguistics, 3(56), 120–125. DOI: https://doi.org/10.20916/1812-3228-2018-3-120-125 (In Russ.).
26. 27. Gagnebin, C. (2009). La figure de Socrate dans les essais de Montaigne. Revue de theologie et de philosophie, 141, 237–242.
27. 28. Yanzina, E. V., & Korneev, O. V. (2015). Some comments on the role of grammar in creation of the language of ancient Greek philosophy. Indo-European linguistics and classical philology, 19, 1034–1050. (In Russ.).
28. 29. Gerasimova, S. A. (2011). An anthropocentric approach to language. MCU Journal of Philology. Theory of Linguistics. Linguistic Еducation, 2(8), 96–100. (In Russ.).
29.
Download file .pdf 552.6 kb