Thе sonnet as a text

Abstract

In the proposed article, the sonnet is considered as a linguistic and literary phenomenon that manifests a certain textual continuum, regardless of its presentation in written or oral form. The multidimensional nature of the text has largely influenced different approaches to understanding and analysing its phenomenon, and hence numerous definitions and categorical characteristics. The problem of textual categories, or categorical features, is the subject of considerable philological literature, but due to the synthetic-analytical status of the text with its hierarchy of categorical features, researchers have not yet been able to determine a proper differential description of the latter. Although almost everyone considers coherence and integrity to be the dominant categorical features. The understanding of the sonnet as a textual structure based on such features led to the description of the means of expressing coherence and integrity against the broad background of the works of Ukrainian authors of the 19th – 21st centuries. The different types of figurative and semantic parallelism are described, particularly in its dynamic development based on syntactic parallelism. The means of coherence based on syntactic figures of the period are analysed, which are distinguished by the expressiveness of the theme and the ability to convey different modalities in the organisation of the integral textual structure of the sonnet poem. It is noted that lexical, lexical-grammatical, in particular, root repetitions (even though the repeated word is traditionally tabooed by the canon) are widely cultivated in the studied sonnet texts, act as important factors of semantic and structural coherence, provide step-by-step development of the theme in its dynamic, aesthetic expression, and determine the integrity of artistic perception. Thus, coherence and integrity as the main categorical representatives of any text in their hierarchy are indispensable categorical features of the sonnet text.

Information about the author:

Anatolii Moisiienko – Dr Hab, Prof. of the Department of the Ukrainian Language and Applied Linguistics; Educational and Scientific Institute of Philology; Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv (Ukraine).

E-mail: anmoj@ukr.net

__________

REFERENCES

1. Amirova, Zh.G. (2012). Problema opredeleniya lingvisticheskogo statusa teksta v rusistike. Cuadernos de Rusística Española, 8, 15–32 (in Russian).
2. Slyusareva, N. A. (ed.) (1982). Aspekty obshchey i chastnoy lingvisticheskoy teorii teksta. Moskva: Nauka (in Russian).
3. Babenko, L. G. & Kazarin, Yu. V. (2004) Filologicheskiy analiz teksta. Moskva : Akademicheskiy proekt; Ekaterinburg : Delovaya kniga (inRussian).
4. Batsevych, F. (2019). Narysy z teorii tekstu. Lviv : LNU im. I. Franka (inUkrainian).
5. Batsevych, F. S. (2004). Osnovy komunikatyvnoi linhvistyky. Kyiv : Vyd. tsentr “Akademiia” (inUkrainian).
6. Belyanin, V. P. (2016). Psycholinguistics. Moskva : FLINTA (inRussian).
7. Bekher, I.R. (1965). Filosofiya soneta. ili maloye nastavleniye po sonetu. Lyubov moya, poeziya. O literature i iskusstve. Moskva : Izd-vo khudozh. lit., рр. 436–462 (in Russian).
8. Valgina, N.S. (2004). Teoriya teksta. Moskva : Logos (in Russian).
9. Vorobeva, O.P. (1993). Tekstovyie kategorii i faktor adresata. Kyiv : Vyshcha shkola (in Russian).
10. Galperin, I. R. (1981). Tekst kak ob’ekt lingvisticheskogo issledovaniya. Moskva : Nauka (inRussian).
11. Holianych, M. et al. (2012). Linhvistychnyi analiz tekstu : slovnyk terminiv. Ivano-Frankivsk : Simyk (inUkrainian).
12. Yeshchenko, T. A. (2009). Linhvistychnyi analiz tekstu. Kyiv : Aka-demiia (inUkrainian).
13. Zahnitko, A. (2007). Linhvistyka tekstu: Teoriia i praktykum. Donetsk : TOV “Iuho-Vostok, LTD” (inUkrainian).
14. Kachurovskyi, I. (2008). Korol-sonet. Sonet, yoho istoriia i teoriia. Generyka i arkhitektonika, bookII, Kyiv : Vyd. dim “Kyievo-Mohylianska akademiia”, pp. 130‒150 (in Ukrainian).
15. Kovalevska, Ye. H. (1976). Analiz tekstiv khudozhnikh tvoriv. Lviv, 1976 (inUkrainian).
16. Kovalyk, I. I. (1984). Predmet i zavdannia kursu. Metodyka linhvistychnoho analizu tekstu, Kovalyk I. I. et al. Kyiv : Vyshcha shkola, pp. 3‒20 (inUkrainian).
17. Kozhevnikova, K. (1979). Ob aspektah svyaznosti v tekste kak tselom. Sintaksis teksta, G.A. Zolotova (ed.). Moskva : Nauka, pp. 49–67 (in Russian).
18. Kozhina, M. N. (1987). O funktsionalnyih semantiko-stilisticheskih kategoriyah teksta. Filologicheskie nauki, 2, 35–41 (inRussian).
19. Kravets, L. V. (2016). Linhvistyka tekstu. Entsyklopediia suchasnoi Ukrainy, vol. 17, Kyiv : Instytut entsyklopedychnykh doslidzhen NAN Ukrainy, pp. 387‒388 (inUkrainian).
20. Kubryakova,E. S. & Aleksandrova, O. V. (1997). Vidyi pro-stranstv teksta i diskursa. Kategorizatsiya mira: prostranstvo i vremya : Proceedings of the scientific conference. Moskva : Dialog-MGU, pp. 15–25 (in Russian).
21. Kutina, N. (1980). Strukturno-smyislovoy analiz hudozhestvennogo teksta. Sverdlovsk (inRussian).
22. Lietskin, M.O. (2010). Proitysia po lezu chasu (Zhytomyrshchyna v pysmennytskomu vymiri). Zhytomyr : Vyd-vo Zhytomyrskoho derzh. un-tu im. Ivana Franka (in Ukrainian).
23. Loseva,L. M. (1980). Kak stroitsya tekst. Moskva : Prosveschenie (in Russian).
24. Lukianova, T. V. (1990). Pro rozmezhuvannia pidkhodiv do vyvchennia tekstu z pozytsii linhvistyky tekstu ta interpretatsii tekstu. Movoznavstvo, 3, 52–61 (inUkrainian).
25. Lyubimov, N. M. (1982). Perevod ‒ iskusstvo. Moskva : Sov. Rossiya (inRussian).
26. Mamalyha, A. I. (2006). Systemno-funktsionalne vyokremlennia odynyts tekstu. Slovo. Simvol. Tekst: sb. nauch. trudov, posvyaschennyih 80-letiyu prof. M. A. Karpenko, Kiev : KNU im. Tarasa Shevchenko, pp. 115‒123 (in Ukrainian).
27. Moisiienko,A. (2023). Povtoriuvanyi komponent v orhanizatsii tsilisnoi struktury sonetnoho tekstu. Linhvistychni studii / Linguistic Studies, 45, 90‒104 (in Ukrainian).
28. Morohovskiy, A. N. (1989). K probleme teksta i ego kategoriy. Tekst i ego kategorialnyie priznaki: sb. nauch. trudov. Kiev : KGPIIYa, pp. 3–13 (inRussian).
29. Nefedova, L. A. (2008). Vospriyatie teksta kak aktivnyiy kognitivnyiy protsess. Slovo, vyiskazyivanie, tekst v kommunikativnom, pragma-ticheskom i kulturologicheskom aspektah. Chelyabinsk : Izd-vo “REKPOL”, pp. 172–176 (inRussian).
30. Nikolaeva, T. M. (1978). Lingvistika teksta. Sovremennoe sosto-yanie i perspektivyi. Novoe v zarubezhnoy lingvistike, 8, 5–39 (inRussian).
31. Nikolaeva, T. M. (1990). Tekst. Lingvisticheskiy entsiklopedicheskiy slovar, V. N. Yartseva (ed.). Moskva : Sov. entsiklopediya, p. 507 (inRussian).
32. Onhayzer, I. (1990). Nominatsiya v tekstah raznyih funktsionalnyih stiley. Nominativnyie sredstva v tekstah raznyih funktsionalnyih stiley. Kazan: KGU, pp. 5–13 (in Russian).
33. Radziievska, T. V. (1998). Tekst yak zasib komunikatsii. Kyiv : Nauk. dumka (in Ukrainian).
34. Riabova, K.O. (2020). Cohesion and coherence as fundamental text categories. Vcheni zapysky Tavriiskoho nats. un-tu im. V. I. Vernadskoho, vol. 31(70), № 4, part. 2, рp. 173‒176, https://doi.org/10.32838/2663-6069/2020.4-2/31 (in Ukrainian).
35. Selivanova,E. A. (2002). Osnovyi lingvisticheskoy teorii teksta i kommunikatsii. Kiev : TsUL, “Fitosotsiotsentr” (in Russian).
36. Selivanova, O. O. (2008). Suchasna linhvistyka: napriamy ta problemy. Poltava : Dovkillia-K (inUkrainian).
37. Sorokin, Yu.A. (1985). Psiholingvisticheskie aspektyi izucheniya teksta. Moskva : Nauka (in Russian).
38. Susov,I. P. (2007). Vvedenie v yazyikovedenie. Moskva : AST: Vostok-Zapad (in Russian).
39. Turaeva,Z. Ya. (1986). Lingvistika teksta. Moskva : Prosveschenie (in Russian).
40. Florenskiy,P. A. (1998). Imena : Sochineniya. Moskva : Eksmo-Press; Harkov: Folio (in Russian).
41. Chernyavskaya, V. E. (2009). Lingvistika teksta: Polikodovost, inter-tekstualnost, interdiskursivnost. Moskva : LIBROKOM (inRussian).
42. Shulzhuk, K. F. (2004). Syntaksys ukrainskoi movy. Kyiv : VTs “Akademiia” (inUkrainian).
43. Yakobson, R. & Levi-StrossK. (1975). “Koshki” Sharlya Bodlera. Strukturalizm: “za” i “protiv”. Moskva : Progress, pp. 231–255 (in Russian).
44. Beaugrande, R.-A., Dressler, W.U. (1981). Einführung in die Textlinguistik. Tübingen : Niemeyer (in German).
45. Dobrzyńska, T. (2010). Tekst. Współczesny język polski, J.Bartmiński (ed.). Lublin : Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej, рр. 293‒331 (in Polish).
46. Halliday, M.A. К. (1974). Linguistic function and literary style. Explorations in the functions of language. London : Arnold, рр. 103–140 (in English).
47. Klemm, M. (2009). Punkt wyjścia: czy każdy ma mieć swoje pojęcie tekstu? Różne definicje tekstu i ich porównanie. Lingwistyka tekstu w Niemczech. Pojęcia, problemy, perspektywy (Antologia tłumaczeń). Wrocław, рр.13‒26 (in Polish).
48. Skalička, V. (1961). Text. Kontext. Subtext. Slavica Pragensia III. Praha, рр. 73–78 (in Czech).