UDC

[140.8:172.3]+[291.1:236]

Authors

Aleksandr M. Prilutskiy
The Herzen State Pedagogical University of Russia;
Russian Christian Academy for the Humanities;
nab. r. Moyki 48, korp. 20, St. Petersburg, 191186, Russian Federation;
e-mail: alpril@mail.ru

Abstract

Being insufficiently studied, eschatological discourses of contemporary marginal religiosity, which are based on the traditionalist Christian pattern, are of particular interest for semiotic research. Their semiotic specificity depends on a number of factors, including the types of modality of key statements. This paper singles out and analyses the following types of modality: prophetic, epistemic, debitive, and imperative. Prophetic modality is characterized by the reproduction of symbols and metaphors from the Book of Revelation in the context of “modern prophecy”, by productivity of war metaphors (which can grow to become allegories) and by two-directional semiotic drift. Epistemic modality is found in utterances which validate the statements developing prophetic modality and refute “false hermeneutics” of theological opponents, as well as reproduce assumptions that are considered as questionable. Epistemic modality is used to impart credibility to questionable, in canonical terms, sources: prophecies of pseudo-elders, God’s fools, etc. Debitive modality, which expresses the speaker’s attitude to the categories of obligation and necessity, is rather poorly presented in the discourses of marginal eschatology. It is inherent in most ascetic texts regulating a person’s attitude toward various “temptations of the present day”. Imperative modality is used primarily to enhance the perlocutionary effect of imperative statements, often by including them in eschatological discourses. The author comes to the conclusion that modal statements in the discourse under study are consistently used to increase the illocutionary force of the eschatological narrative. This feature should be taken into account when analysing the dynamics of the religious situation.

Keywords

eschatology, semiotics of religion, religious discourse, marginal religiosity, theory of semiotic drift

References

1. Lebedev V.Yu., Prilutskiy A.M. Semiozis i semiodinamika teologicheskikh i mifologicheskikh znakovykh sistem [Semiosis and Semiodynamics of Theological and Mythological Sign Systems]. Moscow, 2010. 400 p. 
2. Davydov I.P. Semiotika religii i funktsional’nyy analiz teksta Yulii Kristevoy v svete religiovedcheskoy problematiki [Semiotics of Religion and Functional Analysis of the Text by Julia Kristeva in the Light of Religious Studies]. Science, Technology and Life – 2016: Proc. 3rd Int. Sci. Conf. Karlovy Vary, Moscow, 24–25 December 2016. Karlovy Vary, Kirov, 2016, pp. 221–230. 
3. Rakhmanin A.Yu. Semioticheskie aspekty protsedury opredeleniya (na primere opredeleniy religii) [Semiotic Aspects of Definition (the Case of Defining Religion)]. Vestnik Russkoy khristianskoy gumanitarnoy akademii, 2014, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 200–211. 
4. Ione V.I. Semiotika “smerti boga” kak vyrazhenie ideologii samoobozhestvleniya v tekstakh predstaviteley tserkvey “novogo myshleniya” [Semiotics of the “Death of God” as an Expression of the Ideology of Self-Deification in the Writings of Representatives of the Churches of “New Thought”]. Vestnik Polotskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Ser. E: Pedagogicheskie nauki, 2016, no. 7, pp. 40–46. 
5. Lebedev V.Yu., Prilutskiy A.M. (comps.). Religiya kak znakovaya sistema: znak, ritual, kommunikatsiya [Religion as a Sign System: Sign, Ritual, Communication]. Tver, 2011. 153 p. 
6. Antonov D.I., Mayzul’s M.R. Demony i greshniki v drevnerusskoy ikonografii: semiotika obraza [Demons and Sinners in the Old Russian Iconography: Image Semiotics]. Moscow, 2011. 384 p. 
7. Lebedev V.Yu. K voprosu o verifitsiruemykh zakonomernostyakh transformatsii semantiki religioznogo rituala [On the Issue of Verifiable Regularities of Transformation in Religious Ritual Semantics]. Vestnik Tverskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Ser.: Filologiya, 2009, vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 85–94. 
8. Prilutskiy A.M. Metaforika religioznogo ritual’nogo diskursa [Metaphorics of Religious Ritual Discourse]. Religiya. Tserkov’. Obshchestvo [Religion. Church. Society]. 2013. Iss. 2, pp. 21–38. 
9. Vol’nikova E.A., Semenova S.R. O tekstoobrazuyushchey roli modal’nosti v tekstakh razlichnykh stiley [About Textbuilding Importance of Modality in Texts of Different Styles]. XXI vek: itogi proshlogo i problemy nastoyashchego plyus, 2015, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 183–187. 
10. Pocheptsov S.S. Religioznye subkul’tury: problema vzaimosvyazi s subkul’turnymi religiyami [Religious Subculture: Problem of the Relationship with Subcultural Religions]. Nauchnye vedomosti Belgordskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Ser.: Filosofiya. Sotsiologiya. Pravo, 2011, no. 8, pp. 104–109. 
11. Rimskaya O.N. Subkul’tury i subkul’turnye religii v postsekulyarnuyu epokhu [Subcultures and Subcultural Religion in a Post-Secular Era]. Nauka. Iskusstvo. Kul’tura, 2016, no. 2, pp. 76–83. 
12. Saynakov N.A. Marginal’nost’ kak ponyatie. Metodologicheskie perspektivy v istoricheskom issledovanii [Definition of Marginality. Methodological Perspectives in Historical Studies]. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta, 2013, no. 375, pp. 97–101. 
13. Pogasiy A.K. Konkurentnye religioznye diskursy v sotsial’no-istoricheskoy evolyutsii russkogo pravoslaviya: avtoref. dis. … d-ra filos. nauk [Competitive Religious Discourses in the Socio-Historical Evolution of Russian Orthodoxy: Dr. Philos. Sci. Diss. Abs.]. St. Petersburg, 2013. 45 p. 
14. Davis E. Techgnosis: Myth, Magic, and Mysticism in the Age of Information. New York, 1998 (Russ. ed.: Devis E. Tekhnognozis: mif, magiya i mistitsizm v informatsionnuyu epokhu. Yekaterinburg, 2007. 480 p.). 
15. Filatov M.V. Eskhatologicheskie traditsii russkogo naroda [Eschatological Traditions of the Russian People]. Vestnik Moskovskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta lesa – Lesnoy vestnik, 1999, no. 3, pp. 31–38. 
16. Pocheptsov G.G. Narrativnyy instrumentariy vozdeystviya [Narrative Impact Tools]. Verkhnevolzhskiy filologicheskiy vestnik, 2015, no. 3, pp. 69–74. 
17. Golovushkin D.A. Religioznyy fundamentalizm/religioznyy modernizm: kontseptual’nye protivniki ili ambivalentnye fenomeny? [Religious Fundamentalism / Religious Modernism: Conceptual Adversaries or Ambivalent Phenomena?]. Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Svyato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Ser. 1: Bogoslovie. Filosofiya, 2015, no. 1, pp. 87–97. 
18. Eres’ko M.N. Yazyk religii: filosofsko-kognitivnyy analiz: avtoref. dis. … d-ra filos. nauk [Language of Religion: A Philosophical-Cognitive Analysis: Dr. Philos. Sci. Diss. Abs.]. Moscow, 2008. 42 p. 
19. Lipatova A.P. K voprosu o zhanrovoy prirode eskhatologicheskogo rasskaza [On the Genre Nature of the Eschatological Story]. Traditsionnaya kul’tura, 2011, no. 4, pp. 115–125. 
20. Smurova O.V. Stepen’ uverennosti i obosnovannost’ kak komponenty znacheniya epistemicheskikh modal’nykh operatorov [The Degree of Certainty and Validity as Semantic Components of Epistemic Modal Operators]. Vestnik Moskovskogo gosudarstvennogo lingvisticheskogo universiteta. Ser.: Gumanitarnye nauki, 2011, no. 633, pp. 67–78.