Search
Submit an article RU
Slovo.ru: Baltic accent

2024 Vol. 15 №4

Back to the list Download the article
ENG
Сохранить XML для: JATS (вып.)
RUS
Сохранить XML для: JATS (вып.)
Plungian V.A.

Georgy Shengeli as a verse master and as a verse explorer

DOI
10.5922/2225-5346-2024-4-11
Pages
158-168
Shengeli theory of verse non-classical verse leimic verse Russian method

Abstract

The present stage of verse studies is marked by a rekindling of interest in the theoretical approaches of the 1920s and 1930s that emerged in the milieu close to the Russian ‘formal school’. In this respect, one of the most significant figures is Georgii Shengeli (1894—1956), who is known primarily as one of the most insightful researchers of verse theory and Russian non-classical metrics. Less attention has been paid to Shengeli’s own poetic experiments, which have remained in the shadow of his work in verse theory, translation and publishing. This study analyses, against the backdrop of Shengeli’s concept of ‘leimic verse’, his experi­ments in the domain of tonic metrics, including numerous examples of classical dolnik, deriv­atives of antique logaoedic verse, and rarer types of dolnik on disyllabic base. Shengeli’s cor­pus of tonic verse demonstrates an affinity for the classical and slightly loosened dolnik: most of his ‘leimic’ texts have lines of regular three-syllable meters, variable anacrusa is not un­common, and there are isolated extensions. This repertoire is close both to the metrics of the younger Acmeists (especially Georgy Ivanov and Georgy Adamovich) and to the metrics of the poets of the Maximilian Voloshin circle (primarily Sofia Parnok).

Reference

Gasparov, M. L., 1968. Russian dolnik with three ictuses in the 20th century. In: V. E. Kholshevnikov, ed. Teoriya stikha [Theory of verse]. Leningrad, pp. 59—106 (in Russ.).

Gasparov, M. L., 2001. Russkii stikh nachala XX veka v kommentariyakh [Russian verse of the early 20th century with commentaries]. Moscow (in Russ.).

Itkin, I. B., 2018. “The old doctor in a decrepit toga...”: оn an “unfinished” poem of Georgy Shengeli. Rhema — Rema, 3, pp. 9—14, https://doi.org/10.31862/2500-2953-2018-3-9-14 (in Russ.).

Ivanov, V. V., 2004. Intervals with no accents in Brodsky’s verse. In: Izbrannye trudy po semiotike i istorii kul'tury [Collected works on semiotics and culture history]. Vol. 3. Moscow, pp. 732—746 (in Russ.).

Korchagin, K. M., 2017. Metric systems typology and metric status of dolnik based on binary meter. Zbornik Matitse Srpske za slavistiku [Matica Srpska Journal of Slavic Studies], 92, pp. 707—729 (in Russ.).

Molodyakov, V., 2017. Georgy Shengeli: sketch of a biography. In: G. A. Shengeli. Stikhotvoreniya i poemy [Collected poems]. Vol. 2. Moscow, pp. 607—621 (in Russ.).

Pilshchikov, I. A., 2022. “The Dolnik and Beyond”: Unstressed Ictuses and Extra-Schematic Stresses in Russian Accentual Verse. Kritika i semiotika [Critique and Semi­otics], 1, pp. 273—318, https://doi.org/10.25205/2307-1737-2022-1-273-318 (in Russ.).

Plungian, V. A., 2011. «Mne s kazhdym utrom protivney zauchennyy, mertvyy stikh»: to a number of peculiarities of Mikhail Kuzmin’s tonic verse. In: L. Panova and S. Pratt, eds. The Many Facets of Mikhail Kuzmin: A Miscellany. Bloomington, pp. 43—57 (in Russ.).

Plungian, V. A., 2008. Did Esenin write by means of “Esenin’s dolnik”? In: A. V. Ar­khipov and O. V. Fedorova, eds. Fonetika i nefonetika [Phonetics and beyond]. Mos­cow, pp. 766—776 (in Russ.).

Semenov, V. V., 2011. To the problem of ambiguity in Russian non-classic verse. Voprosy Jazykoznanija [Topics in the study of language], 2, pp. 97—110 (in Russ.).

Shengeli, G. A., 1960. Tekhnika stikha [Technics of the verse]. Moscow (in Russ.).

Tarkovsky, A., 1991. My Shengeli [1958]. In: Sobranie sochineniy [Collected works]. Vol. 2. Moscow, pp. 183—189 (in Russ.).