Baltic accent

2023 Vol. 14 №4

Back to the list Download the article

‘Definition of poetry’: Frege vs. Jakobson



This article presents a comparative analysis of two approaches to describing the reference within poetic statements: the pragmasemantic approach, which builds upon Gottlob Frege's ideas of the poetic sign as "a sign with meaning but without reference," and aesthetic-functional theories of poetic language linked to Roman Jacobson's concept of the poetic func­tion. The pragmasemantic interpretation of the referential capabilities of a poetic sign explores questions regarding the principles of its verification and examines its relationship with ex­tralinguistic objects. From this perspective, the artistic expression's ability to establish objec­tive references is either entirely denied (by Frege) or associated with the actions of "aesthetic operators" (Linsky), specific illocutionary attitudes (Searle), or the recipient's standpoint (Zolyan). On the other hand, the theory of the poetic function of language, as presented in formalism and structuralism, posits that the reference of the poetic sign does not extend to the world of objects but rather to the linguistic environment inherent within the sign. It under­scores the "auto-referentiality" (Faryno) of an artistic statement. Pragmase­man­tics and aes­thetic-functional concepts of poetic reference both contribute to a reduction, albeit from oppo­site angles: pragmasemantics locates the referents of the poetic sign within ‘possible’ (artistic) worlds but somewhat overlooks the unique characteristics of poetic language. In contrast, functionalism sidelines the question of a sign's objective references, steering artistic discourse entirely toward linguistic elements. A potential resolution to this polarity in analytical ap­proaches involves viewing the poetic sign as a bi-referential phenomenon, simultaneously engaging along two axes — extralinguistic and linguistic. This approach enables the consid­eration of an artistic statement not as deficient but, conversely, as abundant in its referential connections. It helps reveal the common semiotic mechanisms at play in any work of art, which motivate the ‘definition of poetry’ as a distinct statement about a unique world.


Aristotle, 2000. Ritorika. Poetika [Rhetoric. Poetics]. Moscow (in Russ.).

Castaneda, G.-N., 1999. Fiction and reality: their fundamental connections: Es­says on the ontology of cumulative experience. Logos, 3 (13), pp. 69—102 (in Russ.).

Faryno, J., 2004. Vvedenie v literaturovedenie [Introduction to literary criticism]. St. Petersburg (in Russ.).

Faryno, J., 1975. Semiotyczne aspekty poezji o sztuce: Na przykładzie wierszy Wisławy Szymborskiej. Pamiętnik Literacki, 4, pp. 123—145.

Frege, G., 2000. On sense and denotation. In: B. V. Biryukov and Z. A. Kuzicheva, eds. Gottlob Frege. Logika i logicheskaya semantika [Gottlob Frege. Logic and logical se­mantics]. Moscow, pp. 230—246 (in Russ.).

Jakobson, R., 1975. Linguistics and poetics. In: Strukturalizm: «za» i «protiv»: sbornik statei [Structuralism: “pro” and “contra”: a collection of articles]. Moscow, pp. 193—230 (in Russ.)

Jakobson, R., 1987. Newest Russian poetry. First sketch: Approaches to Khlebni­kov. In: R. Jakobson, ed. Raboty po poetike [Works on poetics]. Moscow, pp. 272—316 (in Russ.).

Jakobson, R., 1996. What is poetry? In: R. Jakobson, ed. Yazyk i bessoznatel'noe [Language and the unconscious]. Moscow, pp. 97—105 (in Russ.).

Linsky, L., 1982. Reference and referents. In: Novoe v zarubezhnoi lingvistike [New in foreign linguistics], XIII. Moscow, pp. 161—178 (in Russ.).

Lotman, Yu. M., 1998. The structure of a literary text. In: Yu. Lotman, ed. Ob is­kusstve [About art]. St. Petersburg, pp. 14—285 (in Russ.).

Morris, Ch. W., 2001. Foundations of the theory of signs. In: Semiotika: antologiya [Semiotics: Anthology]. Moscow, pp. 45—97 (in Russ.).

Mukařovský, J., 1996. Two studies on poetic naming. I: Poetic naming and aes­thetic function of language. In: J. Mukařovský, ed. Struktural'naya poetika [Structural poetics]. Moscow, pp. 132—139 (in Russ.).

Paducheva, Ye., 2010. Semanticheskie issledovaniya: Semantika vremeni i vida v russ­kom yazyke; Semantika narrativa [Semantic studies: Semantics of time and aspect in the Russian language; Semantics of narrative]. Moscow (in Russ.).

Rudnev, V., 2000. Proch' ot real'nosti: Issledovaniya po filosofii teksta [Away from reality: Studies in the philosophy of text]. Moscow (in Russ.).

Searle, J. R., 1999. Logical status of artistic discourse. Logos, 3 (13), pp. 34—47 (in Russ.).

Shklovsky, V., 1990. Art as a technique. In: V. Shklovsky, ed. Gamburgskii schet [Hamburg account]. Moscow, pp. 58—72 (in Russ.).

Sławiński, J., 1975. On the theory of poetic language. In: Strukturalizm: «za» i «protiv»: sbornik statei [Structuralism: “pro” and “contra”: a collection of articles]. Moscow, pp. 256—276 (in Russ.).

Stepanov, Yu., 2001. In the world of semiotics. In: Semiotika: antologiya [Semiotics: Anthology]. Moscow, pp. 5—42 (in Russ.).

Theses of the Prague Linguistic Circle, 1965. In: Prazhskii lingvisticheskii kruzhok: sbornik statei [Prague Linguistic Circle: collection of articles]. Moscow, pp. 17—41 (in Russ.).

Todorov, Ts., 2001. The concept of literature. In: Semiotika: antologiya [Semiotics: Anthology]. Moscow, pp. 376—391 (in Russ.).

Zolyan, S. T., 2014. Semantika i struktura poeticheskogo teksta [Semantics and struc­ture of poetic text]. Moscow (in Russ.).