Search results

As a language phenomenon, literature resists being described in terms of linguistic units and structures. Of key importance is the aesthetic experience of language and its uses in context. The experience is particularly dependent on the changing formats of communication, the development of the technologies of production and distribution of texts. This dependency, in turn, creates fresh stimuli for creative experimental work with word and letter. The nature of these processes being largely pre-reflexive invites and presupposes the effort of reflection. The potential for 'self-problematization' contained in a literary text is a crucially important but yet largely unexplored aspect of its meaning and form. It invites a philologist to try out new analytic techniques. Perspectives of present day developments in cognitive literary studies are closely related to the so called 'material turn' and 'experiential turn' in the humanities. The means of poetic expressivity are transformed in the changing media field providing for the increasingly multisensorial experience of writing and reading. The alliance of literary scholarship with cognitive research in embodied and situated knowledge is promising of new fruit.

Once the EU's AI Act becomes law, the EU faces a long journey to successfully implementing it. We have a message for the artificial intelligence office that will likely be created to help along the way, as well as for others involved in the implementation process.

The article analyzes the role of the unpronounceable (silent) consonant 'h' and the image of the mute letter in Herman Melville's poetics, especially in Moby-Dick, or The Whale. The paper discusses the indistinction of textual objects (the word 'whale', the title of the novel The Whale) and images (white sperm whale Moby Dick, pale characters in Melville's short stories), which is key for characterizing Melville's works as autometatexts. The common characteristics that unite both layers - the graphic, auditory existence of the text and the fictional world of the novel - are 'silence' and 'visibility'. The article examines the structure-forming role of these concepts for the system of the images and motifs and their conceptualization within the framework of Melville's philosophy of creativity and the paradox of the genius who is able to tell the Truth in fiction. The act of creating and reading a text is identified with the process of drawing and seeing a silent letter; the novel then is a transformation field for both the writer and the reader into an architect and a stonemason on the way to comprehending the secret knowledge through the matter of language. The article takes into account the interpretations of the role of the letter 'h' in the novel that are classical in Anglophone Melville studies; the methodology of the French philosophers, who wrote about Melville's work; and modern interpretations from Russian literary criticism.

The article explores the role of letters in the zaum text LidantYu Faram by Ilya Zdanevich. The meaning and significance of zaum text requires special methods of interpretation. The text of this Avant-Garde author is based on visual experiments, which follow the practices of the Futurists and the visual design of street signs and advertisements of the early 20th century. The way letters are written in the drama plays an important role in creating the image and atmosphere of the work, emphasizing its meaning and emotional color. The suggestive impact of the zaum text on the reader is achieved through the special design of words and letter formations used by the author. The zaum language of the drama consists of elementswords, typed according to the specially developed rules. For these formations, we introduce the concept of 'typoem' - a word enriched with font play. In such a word, the letters are typed in fonts that differ in width and height, as well as in style (thin, italic, bold, wide, narrow). Zdanevich creates occasional rules for the relationship between uppercase and lowercase letters. The typography of the drama breaks the integrity of the text, making it difficult for the reader-spectator to perceive the work, and requiring active participation from the reader. Certain letters of the Russian alphabet are not used by the author throughout the work, but additional symbols are invented, which form the visual composition of the text. A careful study of the text allows us to conclude that the drama is a lipogram. The visual appearance of the author's text becomes one of the ways to make the zaum text look conventional. In the drama, the graphic peculiarity of the text is complemented by important markers: decorative symbolism, letters from other languages (Latin, Greek), nontrivial arrangement of text units on the page - diagonal, in a column, etc. The font in the work serves a characterological function. The use of different font sets affects the perception of the meaning of the artistic work and creates the impression that it also forms the meaning of the text.

The research features letters written by soldiers of the Great Patriotic War. It focuses on the written speech skills of military letter-writers and their written speech personalities. The study involved the method of scientific description and the comparative analysis. The article introduces such terms as natural written speech, linguistic personality, written speech personality, and text. War correspondence is an example of natural written speech. Based on N. B. Lebedeva's authentic typology of the written-speech personality, the authors defined five types of linguistic personalities and arranged them according to the inclusion of the letter-writer in the written code. The scale ranges from letter-writers with a poor command of the written language and those who easily switched from oral to written speech. The latter were eager to use the written channel of communication as a means of self-expression. ; Объект исследования – авторы армейских писем. Предмет – способность авторов фронтовых писем к письменно-речевой деятельности. Цель – выявить типы письменно-речевых личностей авторов военных писем. В качестве методов исследования были использованы метод научного описания и сопоставительный метод. Определяетсятерминологический аппарат исследования (рассматриваются понятия естественная письменная речь, языковая личность, письменно-языковая личность, текст); анализируются оригинальные фронтовые письма рядовых носителей языка, прошедших войну. Новизна исследования заключается в том, что в научный оборот введен новый материал: описаны фронтовые письма, представляющие собой особый объект лингвистики – естественную письменную речь. В результате на основании разработанной Н. Б. Лебедевой типологии письменно-речевой личности рядовых носителей языка выявлено и охарактеризовано пять типов языковых личностей. С учетом полученных результатов выстраивается шкала включенности авторов армейских писем в письменный код. На одном полюсе находятся авторы, являющиеся далекими от письменной культуры людьми, слабо владеющими нормами ...

The article is dedicated to E. Pound's poem The River Merchant Wife:
a Letter, which is included in the poet's book of Chinese translations Cathay.
According to Pound's beliefs, the translation does not have to copy the original, so
Pound makes his own adjustments to Li Po's poem, which he takes as a basis. The
author of the article compares Li Po's poem with the Pound's variation, analyzes the
features of a Browninguesque dramatic monologue in the latter. The inclusion of
new meanings in the River Merchant Wife: a Letter is also realized due to the fact
that Pound reduces some images he does not need or does not understand. The article
deals with the theories of sign by Pound — Fenollosa, the poem is analyzed as Imagist
(the language acquires materiality, which is emphasized by the abundance of nouns)
and as Vorticist (images are not fixed, but are constantly pulsating, moving towards
each other; a poetic impulse is born with the help of their interaction). The image
of the whirling eddy, which repeats in Pound's poem, suggests that the poet
deliberately offers us a new reading of the Chinese story about a woman waiting for
her husband. The River Merchant Wife: a Letter can be read as the 'river', i.e.
considering a linear sequence of actions, one can also read it as a 'whirlpool', 'vortex',
using the 'ideogrammic method' and perceiving each stanza of the text as part of a
hieroglyph. The latter option becomes another step towards the creation of a new
poetic language for Pound.

Nikita Sungatov's poetry is often categorized as postconceptualism-2 or the engaged-conceptualist pole of the [Translit] magazine community. However, it is worth considering that his poetic language is formed at the intersection of various influences, including the analytical poetics of Arkady Dragomoshchenko, the Prize named after whom Sungatov curated and before that was shortlisted for in 2015. Sungatov can consistently reproduce any style of contemporary poetry in his texts, coupled with their problematic analysis thanks to the intertwining of conceptualist metaposition and Dragomoshchenko's linguistic analysis. We can see this in the most famous texts of The Young Poet's Debut Book as well as in the current texts, Imitation of Vl. Khodasevich and [a modern poem]. The author of this article focuses on this latter poem. The role of the letter and its transformation can already be seen in the first part, which is stylized as zaum and alienated language. Here the intertwining of letters, phonetic signs, and pseudo-grammatical categories appeals to the historical avantgarde and its sound poetry. Another role for the letter in the poem is the indefinite article 'a', whose semantics make Sungatov's poem a statement about 'contemporary poetry in general', which, together with the stylization of various poetic languages from the historical avantgarde above to contemporary techniques of direct, neoclassical and opaque statement, turns the poem into a metahistory of contemporary poetry. And if Hayden White's Metahistory was a discursive analysis of historical narratives, then [a modern poem] becomes a discursive analysis of both recent poetry and its languages, and its collision with discourses of violence and big history. To all this corresponds an indeterminate subject, following the letter and the article, 'it', which nomadizes between languages, narratives, and the elusive modernity.

The article contains a critical assessment of two alternative interpretations of the birchbark letter No. 724, proposed by Valentin L. Yanin and Andrei A. Zalizniak (editors of the birchbark collection No. 10, in 2000) and by Pavel V. Petrukhin (2009). According to the former, the document, in which the author describes the difficulties of collecting tribute in the north-eastern periphery of the Novgorod Land, was written between 1161 and 1167, a date based on the identification of the names Zakharia and Andrei mentioned in the text with the Novgorod posadnik Zakharia (1161–1167) and Prince Andrei Bogoliubsky of Suzdal. However, as Petrukhin has shown convincingly, the editors' treatment of the conflict does not conform to the political circumstances of this period as they are known from the chronicles. According to Petrukhin, the document was written half a century later and reflects a routine conflict between local administrators rather than a political confrontation between Novgorod and Suzdal. I argue that the editors' interpretation can be modified in light of Petrukhin's criticism; such a reinterpretation does not presuppose a re-dating of the document and retains the identification of Zakharia and Andrei with historical figures of the 1160s as well as the linguistic analysis proposed by Zalizniak. ; Статья содержит критический разбор альтернативных трактовок берестяной грамоты № 724, предложенных В. Л. Яниным и А. А. Зализняком (1995, 1996, 2004) и П. В. Петрухиным (2009). Автор показывает, что интерпретация издателей может быть скорректирована в свете критики П. В. Петрухина, с сохранением датировки грамоты 1161–1167 гг. и отождествления упоминаемых в ней Захарии и Андрея с новгородским посадником Захарией и суздальским князем Андреем Боголюбским.

An analysis of the manuscript legacy of V.S. Solovyov is of the greatest importance for the study of his views, creativity, and biography, especially in connection with the ongoing pro-ject of publishing a complete collection of his works and letters. Even well-known and al-ready published texts, including those that appeared in newspapers and journals, need careful comparison with the manuscripts that have come down to us. This is particularly true of Solovyov's correspondence that at the time were carefully selected and, in some cases, edited before publication. This is demonstrated by the example of one of the philosopher's letters that was intentionally published in a noticeably shortened form. The letter to his friend F.B. Getz was written in the summer of 1891 and reflects a dramatic episode in the lives of both and led to a break between Solovyov and the editorial board of the Petersburg newspaper Novosti. The article also presents a short story about Faivel Getz (1853–1932), a journalist, social activist, and the addressee of the letter with whom Solovyov engaged on the Jewish issue. This article also analyzes at length the events of 1891, which led to a small scandal that served as the reason for writing this letter. V.S. Solovyov could be suspected of cheating and self-promotion as a result of a misunderstanding that arose from the fact that two different authors published in the same newspaper at that time under the same pseudonym. The appendix contains the full text of Solovyov's letter to Getz with the necessary commentary.

The subject of the research is the categories "the spirit of the law" and "the letter of the law" in their regulatory sense.The purpose of the research is to confirm or disprove hypothesis that the concept of "the spirit of the law" fundamentally impacts the methodology of legal research, legal con-sciousness and the mechanism of legal regulation.The methodology for researching the spirit of the law presupposes an adequate selection of means of knowledge. It is impossible to study the spirit of the law with the tools of ma-terialism or economic determinism. The spiritual-moral, axiological, metaphysical, systemic methods and the method of synthesis are preferred for the study of the spirit of the law. The legal system of society ceases to meet the elementary requirements of the formation of a person's legal consciousness, his improvement and spiritual health when the spirit of the law is denied. It is generally impossible to understand how law functions and achieves a regulatory effect using the dogmatic, positivist approach to law as a dominant method of cognition.The main results, scope of application. The problem of the operation of the spirit of the law is one of the ignored problems of legal practice. If the legal act is at odds with the spirit of the law, the law enforcer faces a difficult choice: either morality or law. This dilemma is fraught with serious conflicts both in the mental, psychological sphere of the law enforce-ment officer himself, and between all participants in the legal process. Every person has an internal imbalance if he makes decisions and performs actions that are contrary to his con-science. Jurisprudence, which adequately perceives the subordination between the spirit of the law and the letter of the law, warns against the temptation to consider law as a sphere independent of spiritual absolutes. The current law is not exactly what is set out in the texts of regulatory acts. Distinguishing between the spirit of the law and the letter of the law, therefore, requires special types of interpretation of texts (broad, restrictive), as well as analogies of legislation and analogies of law. ; Категории «дух права» и «буква закона» исследуются в их нормативном значении. Обосновывается фундаментальность понятия «дух права» для методологии правовых исследований, правосознания и механизма правового регулирования. Отмечается, что дуализм духа права и буквы закона заключается в несовпадении их природы. Дух права выражает идеи, принципы, символы и ценности, способные быть регулятивными, тогда как буква закона есть совокупность документально выраженных норм, которые обладают конститутивной сущностью. Дух права составляет коренную основу правового сознания общества. В праве, как и в искусстве, воздействующем на сознание и поведение человека, главное – его дух, смысл и образ: только тогда форма права приобретает полноту и целостность своих функциональных характеристик.

This article contains two sources concerning the history of Russia and Cyprus: an unknown and previously unpublished letter of King Hugh IV of Lusignan of Cyprus to Giovanna, Queen of Naples, and a work of an unknown Russian author of the seventeenth century about the victory of the Cypriot Christian army over the Turks. A textual and comparative analysis of both sources carried out in the article proves a borrowing of information by the Russian author from the letter of the Cypriot king. The work of the anonymous author is an almost liberal literary translation of Hugh's letter. At the same time, the Russian translator did not borrow the plot of the letter directly, but most likely through later Cypriot literature, in which the story told by the Cypriot king was probably extremely popular. The events of the history of Cyprus of different times intertwine in the Russian text in order to show the heroic past of Cyprus. The Russian author dates his story to 552 and connects it with Emperor Justinian I, the most revered and heroic Byzantine ruler. He cannot separate the history of Cyprus from the history of Byzantium, just as the Cypriot and Greek-Byzantine authors of the fourteenth and sixteenth centuries could not do it. However, both texts speak of Latin Crusaders, who are fighting against the Turks under the leadership of the King of Cyprus. The Russian author remains faithful to the Orthodox tradition of rejection of the idea of crusades and replaces the idea of martyrdom of a crusader in the name of the Lord with heroic battle scenes traditional for Russian literature. He acknowledges that warriors are fighting for the Christian faith and for the church but denies the idea of guaranteed salvation and eternal life for military feats. At the end of the article, the full text of the letter of Hugh IV of Lusignan based on a manuscript of the fifteenth century kept in the manuscript department of the Bavarian State Library is published. ; В работе представлены два источника, касающиеся русской и кипрской истории: неопубликованное письмо короля Кипра Гуго IV Лузиньяна королеве Неаполя Джованне и сочинение неизвестного русского автора XVII в. о победе кипрского христианского войска над турками. В статье проводится текстологический и сравнительный анализ обоих источников и доказывается заимствование русским автором информации из письма кипрского короля. Сочинение анонимного автора является практически свободным художественным переводом письма Гуго IV. В исследовании отмечается, что русский автор-переводчик позаимствовал сюжет письма не прямо, а скорее всего через кипрскую литературу более позднего времени, в которой история, рассказанная кипрским королем, была, по всей вероятности, чрезвычайно популярна. В русском тексте переплетаются события кипрской истории разных времен с целью показать героическое прошлое Кипра. Русский автор датирует свою историю 552 г. и связывает ее с императором Юстинианом I, наиболее почитаемым и героическим византийским правителем. Он не отделяет историю Кипра от истории Византии, как не могли это сделать кипрские и греко-византийские авторы XIV–XVI вв. Однако в обоих текстах речь идет о крестоносцах-латинянах, которые ведут сражение против турок под руководством кипрского короля. Русский автор остается верен православной традиции неприятия крестоносной идеи и заменяет идею мученичества крестоносца во имя Господа на традиционную для русской литературы героизацию воинов. Он признает, что воины сражаются за христианскую веру и церковь, но отрицает идею гарантированного спасения и вечной жизни за военный подвиг. В статье публикуется полный текст письма Гуго IV Лузиньяна по рукописи XV в., хранящейся в отделе рукописей Баварской государственной библиотеки.

Поступила в редакцию: 29.06.2020. Принята к печати: 25.03.2021. ; Submitted: 29.06.2020. Accepted: 25.03.2021. ; В работе представлены два источника, касающиеся русской и кипрской истории: неопубликованное письмо короля Кипра Гуго IV Лузиньяна королеве Неаполя Джованне и сочинение неизвестного русского автора XVII в. о победе кипрского христианского войска над турками. В статье проводится текстологический и сравнительный анализ обоих источников и доказывается заимствование русским автором информации из письма кипрского короля. Сочинение анонимного автора является практически свободным художественным переводом письма Гуго IV. В исследовании отмечается, что русский автор-переводчик позаимствовал сюжет письма не прямо, а скорее всего через кипрскую литературу более позднего времени, в которой история, рассказанная кипрским королем, была, по всей вероятности, чрезвычайно популярна. В русском тексте переплетаются события кипрской истории разных времен с целью показать героическое прошлое Кипра. Русский автор датирует свою историю 552 г. и связывает ее с императором Юстинианом I, наиболее почитаемым и героическим византийским правителем. Он не отделяет историю Кипра от истории Византии, как не могли это сделать кипрские и греко-византийские авторы XIV–XVI вв. Однако в обоих текстах речь идет о крестоносцах-латинянах, которые ведут сражение против турок под руководством кипрского короля. Русский автор остается верен православной традиции неприятия крестоносной идеи и заменяет идею мученичества крестоносца во имя Господа на традиционную для русской литературы героизацию воинов. Он признает, что воины сражаются за христианскую веру и церковь, но отрицает идею гарантированного спасения и вечной жизни за военный подвиг. В статье публикуется полный текст письма Гуго IV Лузиньяна по рукописи XV в., хранящейся в отделе рукописей Баварской государственной библиотеки. ; This article contains two sources concerning the history of Russia and Cyprus: an unknown and previously unpublished letter of King Hugh IV of Lusignan of Cyprus to Giovanna, Queen of Naples, and a work of an unknown Russian author of the seventeenth century about the victory of the Cypriot Christian army over the Turks. A textual and comparative analysis of both sources carried out in the article proves a borrowing of information by the Russian author from the letter of the Cypriot king. The work of the anonymous author is an almost liberal literary translation of Hugh's letter. At the same time, the Russian translator did not borrow the plot of the letter directly, but most likely through later Cypriot literature, in which the story told by the Cypriot king was probably extremely popular. The events of the history of Cyprus of different times intertwine in the Russian text in order to show the heroic past of Cyprus. The Russian author dates his story to 552 and connects it with Emperor Justinian I, the most revered and heroic Byzantine ruler. He cannot separate the history of Cyprus from the history of Byzantium, just as the Cypriot and Greek-Byzantine authors of the fourteenth and sixteenth centuries could not do it. However, both texts speak of Latin Crusaders, who are fighting against the Turks under the leadership of the King of Cyprus. The Russian author remains faithful to the Orthodox tradition of rejection of the idea of crusades and replaces the idea of martyrdom of a crusader in the name of the Lord with heroic battle scenes traditional for Russian literature. He acknowledges that warriors are fighting for the Christian faith and for the church but denies the idea of guaranteed salvation and eternal life for military feats. At the end of the article, the full text of the letter of Hugh IV of Lusignan based on a manuscript of the fifteenth century kept in the manuscript department of the Bavarian State Library is published.

This article examines the evolution of electoral qualifications in Russia and European countries in the first third of the 20th century. The analysis of restrictions on voting in pre-revolutionary and Soviet Russia, as well as other countries, is made with reference to a wide range of sources: legislative acts, official statistics, and unpublished archival documents kept in the central and regional Russian archives. The author analyses typical documents (administrative documents, minutes and resolutions, reports, memoranda, information documents) from the funds of the People's Commissariat of Internal Affairs, the All-Russian Central Executive Committee, and the Central Committee of the Party, which helps her determine the number of persons subject to the deprivation of rights, the functions of qualifications in the Soviet electoral system, and the features of their application. Additionally, the author compares Russian and foreign voting qualifications, which clarifies the similarities and peculiar features of their respective electoral systems. It is demonstrated that the voting qualifications of pre-revolutionary Russia, though having certain characteristics of their own, were otherwise consistent with the main trends in the development of the electoral systems of the European states of the early 20th century, while Soviet voting qualifications were among the most original ones in the world and considerably differed from electoral systems elsewhere. Soviet voting qualifications did not comply with the established principles of suffrage limitations around the world. The Bolsheviks radically democratised and abolished the generally accepted qualifications and, simultaneously, introduced restrictions untypical of other electoral systems (employment restrictions making it impossible for the unemployed to vote). Voter eligibility requirements were not only different from the global ones in their content but functionally too. The body responsible for imposing electoral restrictions in Soviet Russia performed a number of functions that were not characteristic of an electoral system in general. Instead of preventing the institutionally disaffected groups from taking part in voting, it was used an instrument of social and political pressure on the economically active part of society, becoming a significant part of the discrimination policy of the state. This conditioned the connection of suffrage with limitations of a social and economic nature. ; Предметом исследования является эволюция избирательных цензов в России и европейских странах в первой трети XX в. Ограничения избирательных прав в дореволюционной и советской России, а также в зарубежных странах изучаются на основе широкого круга источников: законодательных актов, материалов официальной статистики, неопубликованных документов из центральных и региональных российских архивов. Анализ традиционных для делопроизводства государственной и партийной власти документов из различных фондов (распорядительных, протокольно-резолютивных, отчетных, докладных, информационных) позволяет определить численность лиц, подлежавших лишению прав, функции цензов в советской избирательной системе, особенности их применения. Компаративистский анализ российских и зарубежных цензов конкретизирует их общие и специфические черты, роль в избирательных системах. Показано, что избирательные цензы дореволюционной России, обладая рядом особенностей, соответствовали европейским электоральным практикам начала XX в. и выборным традициям России. Советские избирательные цензы разрывали сложившиеся принципы установления ограничений избирательных прав в мире. Большевики радикально демократизировали и отменили общепринятые в электоральной практике цензы, одновременно ввели ограничения прав, не свойственные другим избирательным системам (трудовой ценз). Избирательные цензы, помимо содержательных, имели значимые функциональные различия с мировой электоральной практикой. Институт лишения избирательных прав в Советской России выполнял не свойственные избирательной системе функции: вместо превентивного отстранения от участия в выборах нелояльных власти групп он использовался как способ социально-экономического давления на хозяйственно активные слои населения, став важной частью дискриминационной политики государства. Это обусловило взаимосвязь избирательных прав с ограничениями социально-экономического характера.

The communication practices in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania are examined in the article using one draft letter as an example. This draft, which can be described as absolutely anti-Moscow by the meaning, was written in 1526 in the court of a Lithuanian nobleman Jerzy Radziwiłł († 1541) (Lithuanian: Jurgis Radvila; Belarusian: Юрый Радзівіл; Russian: Юрий Радзивилл). In the draft, Jerzy Radziwiłł expresses his opinion to Sigismund I the Old, the Grand Duke of Lithuania, regarding the reasons why the coronation of Grand Prince of Moscow by the hands of Pope Clement VII must be prevented. The research has revealed the contribution of the nobleman and his private scribes to the preparation and sending of the final version of the letter to the addressee.