NONE20260601035829626Immanuel Kant Baltic Federal Universityno-reply@journals.kantiana.ruImmanuel Kant Baltic Federal UniversitySlovo.ru: Baltic accent2225-53462686-898906012026104S. T.ZolyanG. L.Tulchinskii0601202611G. L.TulchinskiiThe conceptualization of the philosophy of the text requires a preliminary idea about the ways of the textual presentation of philosophy as such. At the same time, philosophical views per se are difficult to classify and systematize — at best, they are arranged by eras and cultural-ethnic factors. In this regard, it seems fruitful and justified not to build various rationalistic constructions but to take an open look at the very existence of philosophizing. From such perspectives, philosophy appears not so much a single, monolithic, and strictly ordered system as a ‘system of systems’ that are interrelated, interconnected, and reminiscent of Ludwig Wittgenstein's ‘family of language games’. Philosophy is a universal, ultimate understanding of the world, society, human beings, and their self-determination in this rea­lity. In this interpretation, being in itself appears as a text. Philosophizing as such is reali­zed in various forms of textualization, which are the focus of this article. Verbal textualization (sing­le words, paremia, aphoristics, parables, detailed plots, hermeneutic interpretations, con­ceptual systems) does not exclude visual, activity-driven textualizations and their mutual translations. Philosophy is capable of taking on diverse, dissimilar forms. It is as diversified as the paths of human self-determination, self-awareness, self-explanation, and self-justification. The­refore, the claims to exclusiveness and validity of any one way to textualize philosophizing do not seem justified.0601202611I. E.KlyukanovIn this article, I define the concept of text and briefly discuss the related concepts of speech and discourse. I demonstrate how the humanities treat texts and examine the structur­al-semiotic and the hermeneutic approach. Further, I identify both the differences between these approaches and the similarities in the ways they interpret texts. I argue that the philo­sophical approach seeks to go beyond the text as far as possible without leaving it altogether and stress that the divide between the humani­ties approach and the philosophical approach to the text lies in their methods. I emphasise that language has a synthesizing role within the philosophical approach to the text. Finally, I draw attention to the ‘science of communication’, within which the message as a whole is conceptualized.0601202611Avdeev, A., 2009. Zhitie prepodobnogo Paisiya Galichskogo [The life of Saint Paisii Galichski. Investigations and texts]. Moscow: PSTGU Publishing House (in Russ.).Alekseev, A., 2006. Filosofskii tekst: idei, argumentatsia, obrazy [Philosophical text: ideas, arguments, images]. Moscow: Progress-Traditsiya (in Russ.).Anisin, A., 2002. Philosophy of the text. Text dynamics. Topos. Literaturno-filosofskii zhurnal [Topos. A literary-philosophical journal]. Available at: http:// www.topos.ru/article/521 [Accessed 28 July 2019] (in Russ.).Bakhtin, M., 1979. Estetika slovesnogo tvorchestva [The aesthetics of verbal creation]. Moscow: Iskusstvo (in Russ.).Bakhtin, M., 1986. The problem of text in linguistics, philology and other human sciences. An attempt at philosophical analysis. In: M. Bakhtin, ed. Literaturno-kriticheskie stat’i [Literary critical articles]. Moscow: Khudozhestvennaya literaturа (in Russ.).Bakhtin, M., 1994. Art and responsibility; To the philosophy of action; Author and hero in aesthetic activity; The problem of content, material and form in verbal art. In: M. Bakhtin, ed. Estetika slovesnogo tvorchestva [The aesthetics of verbal creation]. Kiev: Next (in Russ.).Blaug, M., 2004. Metodologiya ekonomicheskoi nauki, ili kak ekonomisty ob’yasnyaut [The methodology of economics: Or, how economists explain]. Moscow, NP “Zhurnal Voprosy ekonomiki” (in Russ.).Gadamer, H.-G., 1991. What is truth? Logos. Filosofsko-literaturnyi zhurnal [Logos. A philosophic-literary journal], 1, pp. 30—37 (in Russ.).Gasparov, M., 2004. The history of literature as art and investigation: Bakhtin’s case. In: Kormilov S., ed. Materialy Mezhdunarodnoi nauchnoi konferentsii: Russkaya literatura XX—XXI vekov: problemy teorii i metodologii izucheniya [Materials of the International Scientific Conference: Russian Literature of the 20th—21st Centuries: Problems of Theory and Methodology of Study]. Moscow, 10—11 November 2004. Moscow: MGU. pp. 8—10 (in Russ.).Gumbol’dt, V., 1984. On the comparative study of language and its relation to the different periods of language development. In: V. Gumbol’dt, ed. Izbrannye trudy po yazykoznaniyu [Selected Works on Linguistics]. Moscow: Progress. pp. 307—323 (in Russ.).Delez, Zh., Gvattari, F., 1998. Chto takoe filosofiya? [What is philosophy?]. St. Petersburg: Aleteia (in Russ.).Durilov, A., 2019. Philosophy as text. In: II Vserossiiskaya nauchnaya konferentsiya: Sapogovskie shtudii. Aktual'nye voprosy gumanitarnogo znaniya [II All-Russian Scientific Conference: Sapogovsky Studies. Actual issues of humanitarian knowledge]. Kostroma, 2 March 2019. Kostroma. Available at: http://m.kostromka.ru/philosophy/ durilov/17.php [Accessed 2 May 2019].Zolyan, S., 2016. Lotman on text: Ideas, problems, perspectives. Novoe Literaurnoe Obozrenie [New Literary Review], 3, pp. 63—96 (in Russ.).Kant, I., 1980. Traktaty i pis’ma [Treatises and letters]. Moscow: Nauka (in Russ.).Kasavin, I., 2008. Tekst. Diskurs. Kontekst. Vvedenie v sotsial’nuyu epistemologiyu yazyka [Text. Discourse. Context. An introduction to the social epistemology of language]. Moscow: Kanon+, ROOI “Rehabilitation” (in Russ.).Kachai, I., 2017. Neklassicheskaya i sovremennaya filosofiya. Istoriya uchenii v konspektivnom izlozhenii [Nonclassical and modern philosophy. A synoptic history of teachnings]. Ridero (in Russ.).Klyukanov, I., 2018. Soobchenie i zabytie [Message and forgetting]. Moscow; St. Petersburg: The Center of the Humanities Initiatives (in Russ.).Kudryashev, I., 2018. “Poleznoe”: V topku Rassela. S chego nachat’ samostoyatel’noe izuchenie filosofii? [“The useful”: in Russel’s furnace. Where to begin unaided study of philosophy?]. Available at: https://concepture.club/post/infopoloz/how-to-start-studying-philosophy [Accessed 28 July 2019] (in Russ.).Lotman, Yu., 1992. Kul’tura i vzryv [Culture and explosion]. M.; Gnozis (in Russ.).Lotman, Yu., 1994. Lectures on structural poetics. In: A. Koshelev, ed. Yu. M. Lotman i tartusko-moskovskaya semioticheskaya shkola [Yu. M. Lotman and the Tartu-Moscow semiotic school]. Moscow: Gnozis. pp. 17—263 (in Russ.).Mamardashvili, M., 1997. Psikhologicheskaya topologiya puti (M. Prust ‘V poiskakh utrachennogo vremeni’) [The psychological topology of the way (M. Proust’s ‘The remembrance of things past’)]. St. Petersburg: RKHGI Publishing house (in Russ.).Manakov, N., Moskal’chuk, G., 1999. Text as an natural object. Pedagog: Nauka, tekhnologiya, praktika [Pedagogue: Science, technology, practice], 2 (7), pp. 58—62 (in Russ.).Moskal’chuk, G., Manakov, N., 2014. Forma teksta kak mnogourovnevyi konstrukt [The form of text as a multi-level construct]. In: Znanie. Ponimanie. Umenie [Knowledge. Understanding. Skill]. № 4. pp. 291—302. Available at: http://www.zpu-jour nal.ru/zpu/contents/2014/4/Moskalchuk_Manakov_Multilayer-Construction/ [Accessed 2 May 2019].Merlo-Ponti, M., 1999. Fenomenologiya vospriyatiya [The phenomenology of perception]. St. Petersburg: Yuventa, Nauka (in Russ.).Mikeshina, L., 2017. Time. In: Summa culturologiae. Entsiklopediya [Summa culturologiae. An encyclopedia]. Vol. 1. St. Petersburg: The Center of the Humanities Initiatives. pp. 398—404 (in Russ.).Plungyan, V., 2018. Linguistics in the XXth century: Problems, perspectives, points of growth. Slovo.ru: the Baltic accent, 9(1), pp. 7—12 (in Russ.).Popova, I., 2004. On the boundaries of literary study and philosophy in the works of M. M. Bakhtin. In: Zenkin S., ed. Materialy 10-kh Lotmanovskikh chtenii: Russkaya teoriya 1920—1930-e gody [Materials of the 10th Lotman readings: Russian theory 1920—1930s]. Moscow: RGGU. pp. 103—114 (in Russ.).Popova, I., 2005. The book of M. M. Bakhtin about Rabelais in the context of the ideas of the Fossler school (to the statement of the problem). Novyi filologichekii vestnik [New Philological Bulletin], 1. Available at: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/kni ga-m-m-bahtina-o-rable-v-kontekste-idey-shkoly-fosslera-k-postanovke-problemy [Accessed 09 August 2019] (in Russ.).Poselyagin, N., 2012. An anthropological turn in the Russian humanities. Novoe Literaturnoe Obozrenie [New Literary Review], 113, pp. 27—36 (in Russ.).Potebnya, A., 1999. Mysl’ i yazyk [Thought and language]. Moscow: Labyrinth (in Russ.).Pyatigorskii, A., 1996a. Izbrannye trudy [Selected works]. Moscow: Yazyki russkoi kul’tury (in Russ.).Pyatigorskii, A., 1996b. Mifologicheskie razmyshleniya. Lektsiya po fenomenologii mifa [Mythological meditations. Lectures on the phenomenology of myth]. Moscow: Yazyki russkoi kul’tury (in Russ.).Rudnev, V., 1997. Slovar’ kul’tury XX veka [A dictionary of the XX century culture]. M.: Agraf (in Russ.).Skribekk, G., Gil’e, N., 2000. Istoriya filosofii [A history of philosophy]. Moscow, Vlados (in Russ.).Sobolevskaya, E., 2004. Pratext and text (Philosophic aspects of art). Doksa, 6, pp. 260—267. Available at: http://dspace.onu.edu.ua:8080/handle/123456789/1347 [Accessed 09 May 2019] (in Russ.).Sossyur, F., 1933. Kurs obchei lingvistiki [A course in general linguistics]. Moscow: Sotsekgiz (in Russ.).Stepanov, Yu., 1997. Philology. In: Russkii yazyk. Entsiklopediya [Russian language. An encyclopedia]. Moscow: Bol’shaya russkaya entsiklopediya, Drofa (in Russ.).Tul’chinskii, G., 2010. A shift in the humanities paradigm, a transcendal subject and posthuman personology. Metodologiya i istoriya psikhologii [Methodology and history of psychology], 5 (1), pp. 35—51 (in Russ.).Shelkovnikov, A., 2012. Yu. M. Lotman — a philosopher. Prepodavatel’ ХХI vek [Teacher ХХI century], 3, pp. 16—20 (in Russ.).Shredinger, E., 1976. Izbrannye trudy po kvantovoi mekhanike [Selected works in quantum mechanics]. Moscow: Nauka (in Russ.).Shyults, A., 2004. Izbrannoe: Mir, svetyachiisya smyslom [Selected works: The world lit by meaning]. Moscow: ROSSPEN (in Russ.).Eco, U., 1998. Otsutstvyuchaya struktura. Vvedenie v semiologiyu [The absent structure. An introduction into semiology]. Moscow: Petropolis (in Russ.).Epstein, M., 2017. Proektivnyi slovar’ gumanitarnykh nauk [A projective dictionary of the human sciences]. Moscow: NLO (in Russ.).Fuko, M., 2004. Ispol’zovanie udovol’stvii. Istroiya seksual’nosti [The use of pleasure. The history of sexuality]. Vol. 2. St. Petersburg: Akademicheskii proekt (in Russ.).Eco, U., 2011. Six Walks in the Fictional Woods. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Groys, B., 2012. Introduction to Antiphilosophy. New York: Verso Books.Harré, R., 2000. One Thousand Years of Philosophy. Oxford, Blackwell.Jaroszynski, P., 2007. Science in Culture. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Lewis, S., 1996. News and Society in the Greek Polis. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press.Mackonis, A., 2011. Inference to the Best Explanation: The Limits of Truth — conduciveness. PhD. Vilnius.McKeon, R., 1994. On Knowing — the Natural Sciences. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Peirce, Ch. S., 1958. Collected Papers. Cambridge, MA; Harvard University Press.Peters, J., 1999. Speaking into the Air: A History of the Idea of Communication. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.Petersen, A., 1985. The Philosophy of Niels Bohr. In: A. P. French, P. J. Kennedy, eds. Niels Bohr: A Centenary Volume. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Smith, J., 2006. Who's Afraid of Postmodernism? Taking Derrida, Lyotard, and Foucault to Church. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic.Wheeler, H., 1999. Francis Bacon‘s ‘Verulamium‘: The Common Law Template of the Modern in English Science and Culture. Angelaki, 4 (1), pp. 7—26.8-33V. Kh.GilmanovIn this article, I consider the philosophy of the Book in the context of reflections on her­meneutics in the works of the 18th-century Königsbergian thinker Johann Georg Hamann. Hamann’s bibliocentric hermeneutics treats the ‘philosophy of the Book’ as the question as to whether the experience of truth as such is possible. In the light of his hermeneutics, the fate of ontology is a function of the quality of reading since its dialogical nature directly determines a person’s special hermeneutic responsibility towards all that exists. In being the Book of Life, all that exists communicates with the human being as if it were the Book. It does so within the complex dialectics of objectivation in the epistemological linguisticality of a prophet, a scien­tist, or a poet and, through them, reaches out to countless generations of the Reader, who is voluntarily or involuntarily involved in the existential fate of the ontological dialogue. The ‘death of the Book’, or the transformation of the Book into a simulacrum, may confirm the diagnosis given by many modern philosophers: the world of culture is turning into an autoch­thonous flicker of hybrid quotations ruins.0601202611Gilmanov, V., 2003. Germenevtika «obraza» I. G. Gamana i Prosveshchenie Kaliningrad [Hermeneutics of Image by J. G. Hamann and Enlightenment]. Kaliningrad (in Russ.).Gilmanov, V., 2005. Crusades of J. G. Hamann against Enlightenment. Vestnik MGU. Ser.: Filosofia [Bulletin of Moscow State University. Ser.: Philosophy], 3, pp. 14—26 (in Russ.).Gilmanov, V., 2013. J. G. Gaman i I. Kant: bitva za chistyi razum [J. G. Hamann and I. Kant: Struggle for Pure Reason]. Kaliningrad (in Russ).Kant, I., 1994. The Answer for the Question: What is Enlightenment? In: I. Kant. Sobranie sochinenii [Collected Works]. Vol. 8. Moscow: Choro. pp. 29—37 (in Russ.).Eco, U., 1987. The limits of Interpretations. Munich, Vienna: Carl Hanser Verlag.Hamann, J., 1949—1957. Collected Works. Vienna: Thomas Morus Presse im Verlag Herder Wien.Hamann, J., 1965. Correspondence. Vol. 5. Wiesbaden: Insel.Ricoeur, P., 1974. Philosophische und theologische Hermeneutik. In: P. Ricoeur, E. Juengel. Metapher. Zur Hermeneutik religiöser Sprache. Munich: Kaiser.Ricoeur, P., 1974. Metapher. To the Hermeneutics of religious language. Munich: Kaiser.M. Yu.LotmanIn this article, I discuss problems associated with the emergence and development of the concept of text, which is central to the Tartu-Moscow Semiotic School (TMS). The first prob­lem is the interrelation between statics and dynamics. From the perspective of classical struc­turalism, the language system is a static entity. The generation of a text, however, is a dy­namic process. Therefore, language should contain the possibility of dynamics. The TMS of­fered a twofold solution to this dilemma. Firstly, the text was assumed to have a polysemiotic nature: the verbal text is encoded not by one, but by several sign systems. Secondly, there was an idea of the activity, memory, and responsibility of the text. The two major lines of research within the TMS developed accordingly. The first one focused on polysemiotic systems and mechanisms: the theory of poetic language, translation theory, and intersemiotic interactions in various fields of biosemiotics. The second one explored interactions between the text and the discourse, the semiotics of history, ideology, etc.0601202611Baevskii, V. S. 1994. Kommentarii. In: A. Koshelov, ed. Yu. M. Lotman i tartusko—moskovskaya semioticheskaya shkola [Yu. M. Lotman and the Tartu — Moscow semiotic school]. Moscow: Gnozis (in Russ.).Bart, R., 1989. Izbrannye raboty: Semiotika: Poetika [Selected works: Semiotics: Poetics]. Moscow: Progress (in Russ.).Benvenist, E., 1974a. Levels of linguistic analysis. In: E. Benvenist, ed. Obshchaya lingvistika [General linguistics]. Moscow: Progress (in Russ.).Benvenist, E., 1974b. The formal apparatus of utterance. In: E. Benvenist, ed. Obshchaya lingvistika [General linguistics]. Moscow: Progress (in Russ.).Gasparov, B. M., 1975a. The principles of syntagmatic description of the level of sentences. In: B. Gasparov, ed. Trudy po russkoi i slavyanskoi filologii XXIII. Seriya lingvisticheskaya [Proceedings of Russian and Slavic Philology XXIII. A series of linguistic.]. Tartu: TGU. pp. 3—29 (in Russ.).Gasparov, B. M., 1975b. The structure of the formal connection of sentences in modern Russian. In: B. Gasparov, ed. Trudy po russkoi i slavyanskoi filologii XXIII. Seriya lingvisticheskaya [Proceedings of Russian and Slavic Philology XXIII. A series of linguistic.]. Tartu: TGU. pp. 30—63 (in Russ.).Zolyan, S. T., 2016. Yuri Lotman on the text: Ideas, problems, prospects. Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie [New Literary Review], 3(139), pp. 63—96 (in Russ.).Zolyan, S. T., Chernov, I. A., 1977. On the structure of the language of the description of behavior. Trudy po znakovym sistemam [Transactionses on Sign Systems], 8, pp. 151—163 (in Russ.).Levin, Yu. I., Segal, D. M., Timenchik, R. D., Toporov, V. N., Tsiv'yan, T. V., 1974. Russian semantic poetics as a potential cultural paradigm. Russian Literature, 7(8), pp. 47—82 (in Russ.).Levi-Stross, K., 1985. Structural analysis in linguistics and anthropology. In: K. Levi-Stross, ed. Strukturnaya antropologiya [Structural Anthropology]. Moscow: Glavnaya redaktsiya vostochnoi literatury (in Russ.).Leuta, O. N., 2009. Yu. M. Lotman on the three functions of the text. In: V. Kantor, ed. Yurii Mikhailovich Lotman [Yuri Mikhailovich Lotman]. Moscow: ROSSPEN. pp. 294—309 (in Russ.).Lotman, M. Yu., 1984. The semantics of context and subtext in the poetry of Mandelstam. International Journal of Slavic Linguistic and Poetics, 19, pp. 133—142 (in Russ.).Lotman, M. Yu., 1988. Semanticheskaya struktura svyaznogo teksta i problemy ee predstavleniya v AIPS [The semantic structure of a coherent text and the problems of its presentation in AIPS]. Tallinn: Eesti Informatsiooni Instituut (in Russ.).Lotman, M. Yu., 1995. Behind the text: notes on the philosophical background of Tartu semiotics. In: Lotmanovskii sbornik [Lotman collection]. Vol. 1. Moscow: Its-Garant (in Russ.).Lotman, Yu. M., 1964. Lectures on structural poetics. I Introduction. Theory of verse. Trudy po znakovym sistemam [Transactionses on Sign Systems], 1 (in Russ.).Lotman, Yu. M., 1972. Struktura khudozhestvennogo teksta [The structure of the literary text]. Moscow: Iskusstvo (in Russ.).Lotman, Yu. M., 1973a. About two models of communication in the cultural system. Trudy po znakovym sistemam [Transactionses on Sign Systems], 6, pp. 227—243 (in Russ.).Lotman, Yu. M., 1973b. Theater and theatricality in the culture of the early 19th century. In: Semiotyka i struktura tekstu: studia poświęcone VII. Międzynarodowemu Kongresowi Slawistów. Warszawa — Wrocław: Ossolineum. pp. 337—355 (in Russ.).Lotman, Yu. M., 1975. Decembrist in everyday life. In: V. G. Bazanov, V. Vatsuro, eds. Literaturnoe nasledie dekabristov: (Sbornik statei) [The literary heritage of the Decembrists: (Collection of articles)]. Leningrad: Nauka. pp. 25—74 (in Russ.).Lotman, Yu. M., 1977a. Poetics of everyday behavior in Russian culture of the XVIII century. Trudy po znakovym sistemam [Transactionses on Sign Systems], 8, pp. 65—89 (in Russ.).Lotman, Yu. M., 1977b. Text and audience structure. Trudy po znakovym sistemam [Transactionses on Sign Systems], 9, pp. 51—61 (in Russ.).Lotman, Yu. M., 1981. The brain — text — culture — artificial intelligence. Semiotika i informatika [Semiotics and Computer Science], 1, pp. 13—17 (in Russ.).Lotman, Yu. M., 1993. Death as a plot issue. In: Studies in Slavic Literature and Poetics. Vol. XX: Literary Tradition and Practice in Russian Culture: Papers from an International Conference on the Occasion of the Seventieth Birthday of Yu. M. Lotman. Amsterdam: Rodopi. pp. 1—15 (in Russ.).Lotman, Yu. M., 1996. Vnutri myslyashchikh mirov [Inside the thinking worlds]. Moscow: Languages of Russian Culture (in Russ.).Lotman, Yu. M., Pyatigorskii, A. M., 1968. Text and function. In: III Letnyaya shkola po vtorichnym modeliruyushchim sistemam [III Summer School on Secondary Modeling Systems]. Kääriku, 10—20 May 1968. Tartu: TSU. pp. 74—88 (in Russ.).Mints, Z. G., 1973. The function of reminiscences in the poetics of A. Blok. Trudy po znakovym sistemam [Transactionses on Sign Systems], 6, pp. 387—417 (in Russ.).Mints, Z. G., 1992. “Forgotten Quote” in the poetics of Russian post—symbolism. Trudy po znakovym sistemam [Transactionses on Sign Systems], 25, pp. 123—136 (in Russ.).Paperno, I. A., 1979. The structure of spoken language and problems of modeling behavior. In: Semiotika ustnoi rechi: Lingvisticheskaya semantika i semiotika [Semiotics of oral speech: Linguistic semantics and semiotics]. Vol. 481. Tartu: TGU. pp. 143—163 (in Russ.).Pyatigorskii, A. M., 1962. Nekotorye obshchie zamechaniya otnositel'no rassmotreniya teksta kak raznovidnosti signala. Strukturno tipologicheskie issledovaniya [Some general remarks regarding the consideration of the text as a kind of signal. Structural typological studies]. Moscow: Publishing House of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR. pp. 144—154 (in Russ.).Ronen, O., 1973. Lexical repetition, subtext and meaning in the poetics of Osip Mandelstam. In: R. Jakobson, C. H. van Schooneveld, D. S. Worth, eds. Slavic Poetics: Essays in Honor of Kiril Taranovsky. The Hague — Paris: Walter de Gruyter. pp. 367—388 (in Russ.).Taranovskii, K. F., 1973. About the closed and open interpretation of the poetic text. In: American Contributions to the Seventh International Congress of Slavists, I: Linguistics and Poetics. Warsaw, 21—27August 1973. The Hague: De Gruyter Mouton. pp. 333—360 (in Russ.).Fuko, M., 1996. The Order of Discourse. Inaugural lecture at the College de France delivered on December 2, 1970. In: M. Fuko, ed. Volya k istine: po tu storonu znaniya, vlasti i seksual'nosti [The will to truth: beyond knowledge, power and sexuality]. Moscow: Castal. pp. 47—95 (in Russ.).Bühler, K., 1999. Sprachtheorie. Die Darstellungsfunktion der Sprache. Stuttgart: Fischer.Eco, U., 1979. Lector in fabula. La cooperazione interpretativa nei testi narrative. Milano: Bompiani.Harris, Z. S., 1952. Discourse Analysis. Language, 28(1), pp. 1—30.Jakobson, R., 1960. Linguistics and Poetics. In: T. Sebeok, ed. Style in Language. Cambridge (MA): MIT Press. pp. 3590—377.Kull, K., 1998. Organism as a self—reading text: anticipation and semiosis. International Journal of Computing Anticipatory Systems, 1, pp. 93—104.Kull, K., Lotman, M., 2012. Semiotica Tartuensis: Jakob von Uexküll and Juri Lotman. Chinese Semiotic Studies, 6, pp. 312—323.Lachmann, R., 1987. Value Aspects in Jurij Lotman’s Semiotics of Culture/Semiotics of Text. Dispositio, 7(30—32), pp. 13—33.Lotman, M., 2011. Linguistics and Poetics Revisited. In: M. Lotman, M.-K. Lotman, eds. Frontiers in Comparative Prosody. Bern, Berlin etc.: Peter Lang Verlag. pp. 15—53.Lotman, M., 2012a. Verse as a semiotic system. Sign Systems Studies, 40 (1/2), pp. 18—49.Lotman, M., 2012b. Sissejuhatuseks. In: M. Lotman, ed. Struktuur ja vabadus I: semiootika vaatevinklist. 1.1. Tartu-Moskva koolkond: tekstist semiosfäärini. Tallinn: TLU kirjastus. pp. 15—46.Taranovsky, K., 1976. Essays on Mandel'štam. Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press.M. N.EpsteinDigital philology studies texts and textuality in electronic networks and the ways of their reading, writing and transformation. Electronic texts are much more fluid and transformable than paper texts and oral utterances. Textonics is a combination of theoretical and practical work with digital texts, the use of the Internet and all the capabilities of computer technology to create new sign ensembles, to develop new genres of intellectual creativity, and to rethink and reorganize existing textual formations. This article introduces a number of theoretical concepts, denoting different configurations of digital texts: megatext — a collection of texts that are perceived and studied as a single thematic or semantic whole; unitext — the totality of all megatexts; supratext — the text of a higher order in relation to the given one; syntexts united by a common supratext and functioning as synonyms with respect to each other; peritext — a list of syntexts, a table of contents as presented by a search engine. Each author and researcher of electronic texts has to interact with the entire Web: each word has to be properly placed not only within its immediate context, but also in the supratexts of its usage by other authors throughout the history of writing. As a result, the main philological proce­dure is shifting: interpretation, as a deep-semantic reading of a text, is increasingly supersed­ed by its retextualization, transformation, expansion or narrowing of its sign frameworks. The internet makes it easy to synthesize new texts that integrate or disperse the initial, ana­lysed text via quotes or hyperlinks. Thus, coherent, linear reading and writing give way to the paradigmatic, cross-cutting approach. With the proliferation of automatic translation pro­grams and the multilingual competence of readers, the interaction among languages also changes: translation as a search for equivalence gives way to an interlation, a constructive metamorphosis that plays on the inequivalence of different languages.0601202611Bakhtin, M., 1979. From the records of 1970—71. In: M. Bakhtin, ed. Estetika slovesnogo tvorchestva [Aesthetics of verbal creativity]. Moscow: Iskusstvo (in Russ.).Bakhtin, M., 2002. Working notes of the 1960s — early 70s. In: M. Bakhtin. Sobranie sochinenii [Collected Works]. Vol. 6. Moscow: Russkie slovari (in Russ.).Losev, L., 2006. Iosif Brodskii: opyt literaturnoi biografii [Joseph Brodsky: the experience of literary biography]. Moscow: Mol. gvardiya (in Russ.).Nabokov, V., 2003. Other shores. Preface to the Russian edition. In: V. Nabokov. Mashen'ka. Zashchita Luzhina. Soglyadatai. Drugie berega [Mashenka. Luzhin’s defense. Spy. Other shores]. Moscow: OLMA-PRESS Obrazovanie (in Russ.).Nabokov, V., 1964. Speak, Memory. London: Weidenfield and Nicolson.Ekkerman, I.P., 1934. Razgovory s Gete [Conversations with Goethe]. Moscow; L.: Academia (in Russ.).S. T.ZolyanIn this article, I explore the content-related and formal aspects of describing the multidi­mensional semantic organization of a text, particularly, I focus on the possibility of using the apparatus of modal semantics to identify the relationship between sentential complexes. To those ends, I employ the concepts of model, model structure, and centred world. The latter is a system of functions that correlate language expressions, the language expressions of a text, states of affairs (possible worlds) described by language expressions, and the contexts in which a text occurs. Existence in the worlds of the text correlates with the possibility of description. Presumably, the text is a twofold notion: it refers to a linear sequence of segments and a mul­tidimensional semantic structure. In this work, I demonstrate the possibilities of integrating both approaches. I consider the correlation between the mechanisms of text coherence, on the one hand, and the relationships of transworld accessibility and of the identification of de­scribed individuals across possible worlds, on the other. Probably, the variety of cohesion mechanisms does not make it possible to use a single identification mechanism and requires taking into account various competing approaches. I illustrate the above conclusions, using Pushkin’s draft ‘If I were Tsar…’0601202611Bondi, S., 1952. Original text and political content of “Imaginary Conversation with Alexander I”. In: A. M. Egolin, ed. Pushkin. Lermontov. Gogol' [Pushkin. Lermontov. Gogol]. Moscow: AN SSSR Publ. pp. 167—194 (in Russ.).Gindin, S. I., 1982. Some lessons and possible perspectives of contacts between logic and the linguistic theory of the text. In: Logicheskii analiz estestvennogo yazyka [Logical analysis of natural language]. Vil'nyus. pp. 111—115 (in Russ.).Zolyan, S. T., 2013. “Endless labyrinth of linkages”: text semantics as a multidimensional structure. Kritika i semiotika [Criticism and semiotics], 1 (18), pp. 18—44 (in Russ.).Zolyan, S. T., 2014. Semantika i struktura poeticheskogo teksta [The semantics and structure of the poetic text]. Moscow: URSS (in Russ.).Lotman, M. Yu., 1988. Semanticheskaya struktura svyaznogo teksta i problemy ee predstavleniya v AIPS [The semantic structure of a coherent text and the problems of its presentation in AIPS]. Tallinn: Eesti Informatsiooni Instituut (in Russ.).Lotman, Yu. M., 1981. Text in the text. Uchen. zap. Tartuskogo gos. un-ta [Scientific notes of Tartu State University], 567, pp. 3—18 (in Russ.).Cresswell, M. J., 1973. Logics and Languages. London: Methuen.Cresswell, M., 1994 Language in the World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Hintikka, J., 1972. The Semantics of Modal Notions and the Indeterminacy of Ontology. In: D. Davidson, G. Harman, eds. Semantics of Natural Language. Synthese. Vol. 40. Springer: Dordrecht.Kripke, S., 1980. Naming and Necessity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Kripke., S., 1963. Semantical Analysis of Modal Logic I: Normal Modal Propositional Calculi». Zeitschrift für Mathematische Logik und Grundlagen der Mathematik, 9, pp. 67—96.Lewis, D., 1968. "Counterpart Theory and Quantified Modal Logic", Journal of Philosophy, 65, pp. 113—26.Lewis, D., 1978. Truth in fiction. American Philosophical Quarterly, 15 (1).Lewis, D., 1979. Attitudes De Dicto and De Se. Philosophical Review, 88, pp. 513—543.N. M.AzarovaTexts of different eras relate to varying degrees to the question of generating and present­ing novelty. Recent poetry has been undergoing visible changes in poets’ attitudes to demon­strating linguistic novelty in texts. Young poets write texts that do not use the established algorithms of presenting and perceiving the new but disguise or surreptitiously reveal appar­ent novelty. One must explore the current practices of hedging against the new in the light of the philosophy of the text and in the context of the need to reconsider methods for studying the language of poetry. The possibility to decipher a poetic text is not embedded in it as an algo­rithm. The linguistic strategy of resisting the contemporary despotism of creativity results in the growing idiomaticity of both individual fragments of a poetic text and a text as a whole.0601202611Azarova, N. M., 2015. Fernando Pessoa‘s poetic bilingualism. Kritika i semiotika [Criticism and semiotics], 1, pp. 254—267 (in Russ.).Azarova, N. M., 2019. The language of Christian mysticism in a cognitive perspective (San Juan de la Cruz). Kognitivnye issledovaniya yazyka [Cognitive studies of language], 36 (in Russ.).Afonin, A., 2019. Jules and Jim. Vozdukh [Air], 38, pp. 44—45 (in Russ.).Bad‘yu, A., 2016. Vek [Age]. Translated by M. Titova, N. Azarova. Moscow: Gnozis (in Russ.).Grigor‘ev, V. P., 2006. Velimir Khlebnikov v chetyrekhmernom prostranstve yazyka: Izbrannye raboty. 1958—2000-e gody [Velimir Khlebnikov in the four-dimensional space of the language: Selected works. 1958—2000s]. Moscow: Languages of Slavic cultures (in Russ.).Dremov, M., 2019. Enemy. Vozdukh [Air], 38, pp. 102—105 (in Russ.).Zubova, L. V., 2000. Sovremennaya russkaya poeziya v kontekste istorii yazyka [Contemporary Russian poetry in the context of the history of language]. Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie (in Russ.).Koblov, K., 2019. «A beautiful day in the garden...». Vozdukh [Air], 38, p. 135 (in Russ.).Meiyasu, K., 2015. Posle konechnosti: Esse o neobkhodimosti kontingentnosti [After finiteness: Essay on the need for contingency]. Translated by L. Medvedeva. Ekaterinburg, Moscow: Cabinet Scientist (in Russ.).Revzina, O. G., 2009. Bezmernaya Tsvetaeva. Opyt sistemnogo opisaniya poeticheskogo idiolekta [Immeasurable Tsvetaeva. The experience of a systematic description of a poetic idiolect]. Moscow: House-Museum of Marina Tsvetaeva (in Russ.).Revzina, O. G., 2002. Riddles of the poetic text. In: N. K. Onipenko, ed. Kommunikativno—smyslovye parametry grammatiki i teksta. Sbornik statei, posvyashchennyi yubileyu G. A. Zolotovoi [Communicative-semantic parameters of grammar and text. Collection of articles dedicated to the anniversary of G. A. Zolotova]. Moscow: Editorial URSS. pp. 418—433 (in Russ.).Fateeva N. A., 2013. Grammatical deviations in the verb sphere as the basis for the reversibility of roles in lyrical communication. In: V. A. Plungyan, L. L. Shestakova, eds. Korpusnyi analiz russkogo stikha. Sb. nauchnykh statei [Corpus analysis of Russian verse. Sat scientific articles]. Moscow: Publishing Center “Alphabet”. pp. 142—157 (in Russ.).Fateeva, N. A., 2016. Language deviations in the aspect of creativity (based on the material of modern Russian poetry). Verkhnevolzhskii filologicheskii vestnik [Verkhnevolzhsky Philological Bulletin], 4, pp. 44—48 (in Russ.).Khanpira, E. I., 1972. Occasional elements in modern speech. In: V. D. Levin, ed. Stilisticheskie issledovaniya: na materiale sovremennogo russkogo yazyka [Stylistic studies: on the material of the modern Russian language]. Moscow: Nauka. pp. 245—317 (in Russ.).Mould, O., 2018. Against creativity. London, New York: Verso.Ritchie, W. C., Bhatia, T. K., 2006. Social and Psychological Factors in Language Mixing. In: T. K. Bhatia and W. C. Ritchie, eds. The Handbook of Bilingualism. Cornwall: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.T. V.TsvigunA. N.ChernyakovIn this article, we discuss the methodological prospects of using the term ‘pattern’ in the analysis of a literary text. We identify the semantic and categorial field of the term, propose a definition of ‘pattern’ as projected on language material, and correlate the terms ‘pattern’, ‘repetition’, ‘recurrence’, and others. The linguistic ontology of the pattern as a text-generating mechanism is determined by the fact that the pattern problematizes the relation­ship between repetition and variation, singular and plural, a norm and a deviation. A text has a pattern nature if its basic pattern does not coincide with its textual realizations, provided the latter are very similar at the prototype or model level. Therefore, the relationship between the pattern and a resultant text is isomorphic to the relationship between language and speech. Our analysis of poetic texts by Andrey Monastyrsky and Dmitri Prigov demonstrates the possibilities of studying a text as the realization of a pattern from the perspective of vari­ous literary strategies adopted by authors.0601202611Zholkovskii, A. K., Shcheglov, Yu. K., 1996. Raboty po poetike vyrazitel'nosti: Invarianty — Tema — Priemy — Tekst [Works on the poetics of expressiveness: Invariants — Theme — Receptions — Text]. Moscow: Progress (in Russ.).Il‘in, M. V., 2018. Image, appearance, eidos, figure, pattern. How do words help to recognize images, feel them, understand meanings and meanings? Slovo.ru: the Baltic accent, 9(2), pp. 6—20 (in Russ.).Kovalev, O. A., Negreeva, A. D., 2013. The plot and rhythm in the lyrics of Brodsky: to the question of the relationship between semantics and the rhythmic structure of the lyric text. Filologiya i chelovek [Philology and Man], 3, pp. 60—66 (in Russ.).Kovtunova, I. I., 2005. Syntax of poetic text. Poeticheskaya grammatika [Poetic grammar], 1, pp. 239—297 (in Russ.).Leonov, I. V., 2011. The evolution of the term “pattern” in culturological knowledge: from a concept to a scientific category. In: Aktual'nye voprosy sovremennoi nauki: sb. nauchnykh trudov [Actual problems of modern science: collection of scientific works]. Vol. 20. Novosibirsk. pp. 41—48 (in Russ.).Lotman, Yu. M., 1998. The structure of the literary text. In: Yu. M. Lotman, ed. Ob iskusstve [About art]. St. Petersburg: Iskusstvo — SPb. pp. 14—285 (in Russ.).Maslinskii, K. A., 2010. On the status of variability models in corpus linguistics. Vestnik SPbGU [Bulletin of St. Petersburg State University], 3, pp. 158—165 (in Russ.).Monastyrskii, A., 2007. Poeticheskii mir [Poetic world]. Moscow: NLO (in Russ.).Prigov, D. A., 1963—1974. Sobranie stikhov [Collection of poems]. Vol. 1. Wien (in Russ.).Smirnov, I. P., 2001. On the way to the theory of literature. In: I. P. Smirnov, ed. Smysl kak takovoi [The meaning as such]. St. Petersburg: Akademicheskii projekt. pp. 225—328 (in Russ.).Suchkova, G. M., 2010. Communication pattern as a type of emotional communication. Vestnik VGU. Seriya: Lingvistika i mezhkul'turnaya kommunikatsiya [Bulletin of Voronezh State University. Series: Linguistics and Intercultural Communication], 2, pp. 149—154 (in Russ.).M. A.KrongauzIn this article, I analyse the vehicles of humour in two short forms of Internet poetry that developed in the 2000s: the pirozhok (literary, a ‘stuffed bun’) and the poroshok (‘powder’). Poems of these genres are quatrains written in iambic tetrameter. Pirozhoks have no rhyme scheme, whereas, in poroshoks, the fourth line truncated to two syllables rhymes with the second line. The poroshok as a genre is a descendant of the pirozhok. Just as in jokes and several other genres, a punchline plays an important role in pirozhoks and poroshoks. In Russian, the punchline is termed puant, which is a borrowing from French (la pointe). The truncation of the final line in a poroshok puts it in a special position. The truncated line, independently or together with the third line, comprises the punchline of a poroshok. The punchline is practically mandatory and may be presented in greater detail inasmuch as it does not simply violate the reader’s expectations but enters into conflict with the beginning of the verse and forces the reader to reinterpret it. Reinterpretation manes that readers change their perception of the situation or carry out a ‘transformation’, that is, substitute the character or the entire situation. I identify common transformations, namely: thing → person, person → thing, person → animal, etc. Most frequent is the reciprocal transformation of men and cats. The transformation motif binds objects in the manner of a metaphor.0601202611Dymarskii, M. Ya., 2012. Between genre and creativity, or Toward the formation of a pie-like thinking of a linguistic personality. In: Zhanry rechi: Sbornik nauchnykh statei. Pamyati K. F. Sedova [Speech Genres: Collection of scientific articles. In memory of K. F. Sedov]. Vol. 8. Saratov, Moscow. pp. 385—390 (in Russ.).Kvyatkovskii, A. P., 1966. Poeticheskii slovar’ [Dictionary of poetic]. Moscow (in Russ.).Krongauz, M. A., 2020 (in press). Novye poeticheskie zhanry v internete: mekhanizmy yumora [New poetic genres on the Internet: mechanisms of humor]. In: A. Birikh, ed. The language of Russian poetry of the late XX — early XXI century. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang (in Russ.).Kurganov, E., 2014. Anekdot kak zhanr russkoi slovesnosti [Anecdote as a genre of Russian literature]. Moscow (in Russ.).Lendvai, E., 2001. Pragmalingvisticheskie mekhanizmy sovremennogo russkogo anekdota [Pragmalinguistic mechanisms of a modern Russian joke]. PhD thesis. Moscow (in Russ.).Neklyudov, S. Yu., 1995. After folklore. Zhivaya starina [Living Antiquity], 1, pp. 2—4 (in Russ.).Petrenko, S. N., 2014a. Pies and powders: network poetry between folklore and literature. Izvestiya VGPU, 2, pp. 129—134 (in Russ.).Petrenko, S. N., 2014b. On the specifics of the generation of new genres of Internet folklore: poems — powders. Izvestiya VGPU, 2, pp. 193—197 (in Russ.).Petrenko, S. N., 2017. Zhanrovye modeli postfol'klora v russkoi postmodernistskoi literature poslednei chetverti XX — nachala XXI veka [Genre models of post-folklore in Russian post-modern literature of the last quarter of the 20th — beginning of the 21st centuries]. PhD thesis. Volgograd (in Russ.).Sakhanenko, V., 2009. Nepoeziya: izbrannye pirozhki [Neo-Poetry: selected pies]. Minsk: Logvonov I. P. (in Russ.).Chemezova, I. A., 2019. Fatal craving for creativity, or precedent language game in Internet communities (on the example of the community "Powders"). Ural'skii filologicheskii vestnik. Seriya «Yazyk. Sistema. Lichnost': Lingvistika kreativa» [Ural Philological Bulletin. Series “Language. System. Person: Creative Linguistics“], 2 (28), pp. 151—161 (in Russ.).Shchukina, K. A., 2015. Case Studies in Pies and Powders — New Genres of Modern Internet Poetry. Mir russkogo slova [World of Russian Word], 4, pp. 49—54 (in Russ.).Shchurina, Yu. V., 2014. Classification of comic speech genres of the communicative space of the Internet. Izvestiya VGPU, 2 (87), pp. 39—43 (in Russ.).Lakoff, G., Johnson, M., 1980. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago, London.D.Vesselinov0601202611