UDC

81’42

DOI

10.37482/2227-6564-V004

Authors

Elena N. Luchinskaya
Kuban State University; ul. Stavropol’skaya 149, Krasnodar, 350040, Russian Federation;
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9554-1357 e-mail: bekketsam@yandex.ru

Abstract

This article deals with the representation of the language of culture in postmodern texts, abounding with cultural codes that summarize all cultural notions characteristic of the epoch under study. It is pointed out that the main forms of such representation are key words, symbolic words, precedent phenomena and names of different sciences, as well as arts, all making up the cultural memory of mankind. The analysis of contemporary postmodern texts showed that they are full of allusions and citations from the entire context of world classical literature stored in the cognitive system of the competent reader, who is ready to recognize the precedent texts and culture. Thus, the understanding of the text’s double meaning is accompanied by an exchange of knowledge with preceding generations. It is claimed here that some language units include the so-called national-cultural component of meaning. As a rule, these are key words, i.e. important symbolic signs of each given culture. The main idea of this article is that the relationship between text and culture, text and author, author and reader is built according to the rules of that cultural space in which the text was created and perceived by the reader. It is noted that the language of culture is represented in texts, but goes beyond their bounds and into the society. Further, the author outlined a range of questions connected with the understanding and interpretation of complex multilayer postmodern texts, both Russian and foreign. It is emphasized that postmodern fiction is saturated with signs from different cultures and that knowledge of the language of culture could help to interpret and understand postmodern texts. This approach opens up an opportunity to study the realization of the universal discourse within the framework of describing linguistic worldview.
For citation: Luchinskaya E.N. The Language of Culture in Postmodern Discourse. Vestnik Severnogo (Arkticheskogo) federal’nogo universiteta. Ser.: Gumanitarnye i sotsial’nye nauki, 2020, no. 2, pp. 34–42. DOI: 10.37482/2227-6564-V004

Keywords

postmodern discourse, interpretation, language of culture, precedent phenomenon, culture code

References

1. Krasavskiy N.A., Kirnosov I.M. Obraz zhenshchiny v poslovichno-pogovorochnom fonde nemetskogo yazyka [The Image of Woman in German Proverbs and Sayings]. Yazykovaya lichnost’: kul’turnye kontsepty [Linguistical Concepts]. Volgograd, 1996, pp. 48–54.
2. Pelevin V.O. Generation “P”. Moscow, 2005. 224 p. (in Russ.).
3. Tyutchev F.I. Polnoe sobranie sochineniy i pis’ma v shesti tomakh [Complete Works and Letters in Six Volumes]. Moscow, 2003.
4. Viktorova N.A. Angliyskaya literaturnaya skazka epokhi postmodernizma [English Literary Tale of the Postmodern Era: Diss. Abs.]. Kazan, 2011. 21 p.
5. Nazarenko E.V., Prikhod’ko N.A. Sovremennaya avtorskaya skazka kak primer postmodernistskogo diskursa [Modern Author’s Fairy Tale as an Example of Postmodernism Discourse]. Universum: Filologiya i iskusstvovedenie: elektronnyy nauchnyy zhurnal, 2013, no. 2. Available at: http://7universum.com/pdf/philology/2/Nazarenko1.pdf (accessed: 27 October 2019).
6. Sapir E. Izbrannye trudy po yazykoznaniyu i kul’turologii [Selected Works on Linguistics and Culturology]. Moscow, 1993. 655 p.
7. Kalugina T. Postmodernistskaya paradigma kak zashchitnyy mekhanizm kul’tury [Postmodern Paradigm as Culture’s Defence Mechanism]. Voprosy iskusstvoznaniya, 1996, no. 1, pp. 192–202.
8. Pokrovskaya E.A. Russkiy sintaksis v XX veke: lingvokul’turologicheskiy analiz [Russian Syntax in the 20th Century: A Linguocultural Analysis]. Rostov-on-Don, 2001.
9. Benevolenskaya N.P. Russkiy literaturnyy postmodernizm: psikhoideologicheskie osnovy, genezis, estetika [Russian Literary Postmodernism: Psycho-Ideological Foundations, Genesis, Aesthetics: Diss. Abs.]. St. Petersburg, 2010. 50 p.
10. Pelevin V.O. Shlem uzhasa. Kreatiff o Tesee i Minotavre [The Helmet of Horror: The Myth of Theseus and the Minotaur]. Moscow, 2015. 320 p.
11. Luhmann N. Die Gesellschaft der Gesellschaft. Suhrkamp, 1997 (Russ. ed.: Luman N. Obshchestvo obshchestva. Moscow, 2011. 640 p.).
12. Luchinskaya E.N. Neobkhodimost’ vyskazannoy refleksii postmodernistskogo mifa [The Necessity of the Articulated Reflection of the Postmodern Myth]. Kontinual’nost’ i diskretnost’ v yazyke i rechi [Continuity and Discreteness in Language and Speech]. Krasnodar, 2015, pp. 19–23.
13. Eco U. La struttura assente: Introduzione alla ricerca semiologica. Milan, 1968 (Russ. ed.: Eko U. Otsutstvuyushchaya struktura. Vvedenie v semiologiyu. St. Petersburg, 1998. 432 p.).
14. Bakhtin M.M. Chelovek v mire slova [The Word in the World]. Moscow, 1995. 139 p.
15. Lotman Yu.M. Kul’tura i vzryv [Culture and Explosion]. Moscow, 2018. 256 p.
16. Lotman Yu.M. Semiotika kul’tury i ponyatie teksta [The Semiotics of Culture and the Concept of a Text]. Lotman Yu.M. (ed.). Trudy po znakovym sistemam. 12: Struktura i semiotika khudozhestvennogo teksta [Sign Systems Studies. 12: The Structure and Semiotics of a Literary Text]. Tartu, 1981. Iss. 515, pp. 3–7.

Received: 7 October 2019
Accepted: 15 January 2020