BSU bulletin. Philosophy
Bibliographic description:
FUNCTIONING OF DISCOURSE: FROM PRECENDENT CULTURAL TEXT TO SYNCHRONOUS DISCOURSE // BSU bulletin. Philosophy. - 2016. №5. Филология. Philology. - С. 58-67.
Title:
FUNCTIONING OF DISCOURSE: FROM PRECENDENT CULTURAL TEXT TO SYNCHRONOUS DISCOURSE
Financing:
Codes:
Annotation:
he article deals with the functioning of precendent cultural text and synchronous discourses. We suggest that precedent cultural text is based on reinterpretation of well-known cultural phenomena from the standpoint of modernity. This change means the development of diachronic discourse which has arised in historic space of culture. Diachronic discourses support the cultural identity of a person. Their functioning is associated with national models of thinking and perception of reali- ty. Synchronous discourses use pragmatic mechanisms of intertextuality, they do not affect the precendent text, but take it adventures to enhance their own status and influence. Often mechanisms of synchronous discourses development resem- ble precedent mechanisms. For example, texts of the national edition "Number One" are organized in a static model of messages to the mass audience. For the au- thors of publications this model is a kind of pattern reminiscent of precedent text.
Keywords:
discourse, precedent cultural text, synchronous discourse, diachronic discourse, cultural pattern.
List of references:
1. Vysotskaya I. V. Spornye voprosy teorii pretsedentnosti [Controversial Issues in Theory of Precedence]. Kritika i semiotika — Criticism and Semiotics. 2013. No. 1–18. Pp. 117–137.
2. Jorgensen M., Phillips L. J. Discourse Analysis as Theory and Method. Lon- don: SAGE Publications Ltd, 2002.
3. Inozemtseva N. V. Pretsedentnost' i intertekstual'nost' kak markery an- gloyazychnogo nauchno-metodicheskogo diskursa (na materiale angloyazychnykh statei po metodicheskoi problematike) [Precedence and Intertextuality as Markers of English Scientific and Methodological Discourse (on the material of English language articles on methodological problems)]. Izvestiya Samarskogo nauchnogo tsentra RAN — Proceedings of Samara Scientific Center RAS. 2010. V. 3–1. V. 12. Pp. 167–169.
4. Karaulov Yu. N. Russkii yazyk i yazykovaya lichnost' [Russian Language and Linguistic Identity]. Moscow: LKI Publ., 2010. 264 p.
5. Krasnykh V. V. Virtual'naya real'nost' ili real'naya virtual'nost'? (Chelovek. Soznanie. Kommunikatsiya) [Virtual Reality or Real Virtuality? (Human. Consciousness. Communication)]. Moscow: Dialog-MSU Publ., 1998. 352 p.
6. Kuz'mina N. A. Intertekstual'nost' i precedentnost' kak bazovye kognitivnye kategorii mediadiskursa [Intertextuality and Precendence as Basic Cognitive Categories of Media Discourse]. Mediaskop. 2011. No. 1. Available at: http://www.mediascope.ru/node/755 (accessed April 18, 2016).
7. Sibidanov B. B. Osobennosti stanovleniya i razvitiya obvinitel'nogo pechatnogo diskursa «Horinoev» v 2011 g. [The Features of Formation and Development of the Published Indictment Discourse "Khorinoev" in 2011]. Vestnik Buryatskogo gosu- darstvennogo universiteta. Filologiya — Bulletin of Buryat State University. Phililogy.2014. V. 10 (2). Pp. 133–140.
8. Slyshkin G. G. Ot teksta k simvolu: Lingvokul'turnye koncepty pretsedent- nykh tekstov v soznanii i diskurse [From Text to Symbol: Linguocultural Concepts of Precedent Texts in Consciousness and Discourse]. Moscow: Academia Publ., 2000. 288 p.
9. Yur'eva E. V. Pretsedentnye teksty v sovremennykh sloganakh [Precedent Texts in Modern Slogans]. Russkaya rech' — Russian Speech. 2012. No. 6. Pp. 62–67.
2. Jorgensen M., Phillips L. J. Discourse Analysis as Theory and Method. Lon- don: SAGE Publications Ltd, 2002.
3. Inozemtseva N. V. Pretsedentnost' i intertekstual'nost' kak markery an- gloyazychnogo nauchno-metodicheskogo diskursa (na materiale angloyazychnykh statei po metodicheskoi problematike) [Precedence and Intertextuality as Markers of English Scientific and Methodological Discourse (on the material of English language articles on methodological problems)]. Izvestiya Samarskogo nauchnogo tsentra RAN — Proceedings of Samara Scientific Center RAS. 2010. V. 3–1. V. 12. Pp. 167–169.
4. Karaulov Yu. N. Russkii yazyk i yazykovaya lichnost' [Russian Language and Linguistic Identity]. Moscow: LKI Publ., 2010. 264 p.
5. Krasnykh V. V. Virtual'naya real'nost' ili real'naya virtual'nost'? (Chelovek. Soznanie. Kommunikatsiya) [Virtual Reality or Real Virtuality? (Human. Consciousness. Communication)]. Moscow: Dialog-MSU Publ., 1998. 352 p.
6. Kuz'mina N. A. Intertekstual'nost' i precedentnost' kak bazovye kognitivnye kategorii mediadiskursa [Intertextuality and Precendence as Basic Cognitive Categories of Media Discourse]. Mediaskop. 2011. No. 1. Available at: http://www.mediascope.ru/node/755 (accessed April 18, 2016).
7. Sibidanov B. B. Osobennosti stanovleniya i razvitiya obvinitel'nogo pechatnogo diskursa «Horinoev» v 2011 g. [The Features of Formation and Development of the Published Indictment Discourse "Khorinoev" in 2011]. Vestnik Buryatskogo gosu- darstvennogo universiteta. Filologiya — Bulletin of Buryat State University. Phililogy.2014. V. 10 (2). Pp. 133–140.
8. Slyshkin G. G. Ot teksta k simvolu: Lingvokul'turnye koncepty pretsedent- nykh tekstov v soznanii i diskurse [From Text to Symbol: Linguocultural Concepts of Precedent Texts in Consciousness and Discourse]. Moscow: Academia Publ., 2000. 288 p.
9. Yur'eva E. V. Pretsedentnye teksty v sovremennykh sloganakh [Precedent Texts in Modern Slogans]. Russkaya rech' — Russian Speech. 2012. No. 6. Pp. 62–67.
Article.pdf