/

St. Tikhon’s University Review . Series III: Philology

St. Tikhon’s University Review III :4 (39)

ARTICLES

Anashkin Anton

Genre Problems of Question-and-Answer Literature in Context of Late Byzantine Canonical Writing

Anashkin Anton (2014) "Genre Problems of Question-and-Answer Literature in Context of Late Byzantine Canonical Writing ", Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia III : Filologiia, 2014, Iss. 39, pp. 7-15 (in Russian).

DOI of the paper: 10.15382/sturIII201439.7-15
The paper examines a little-studied topic in the Byzantine philology. The object of the research is monuments of the late Byzantine (XI-XV cc.) canonical questionsand-replies’ literature. The main area of the research is the genre of these monuments of the Byzantine ecclesiastical thought. The aim of the paper is to attempt to determine the genre of the texts on the basis of its historical and philological analysis. The modern researches of the Byzantine erotapokrtical literature bring authors’ attention to the issue of the generic peculiarity of the works: are erotapokriseis either genre or literary form? Because of heterogeneousness of this corpus of the texts in its type and content, it is too diffi cult to find a solution. The present research is intended to describe the history and reasons of question-and-answer literature (canonical, in particular), paying attention not only to the ancient literary tradition of questions-and-answers, but the tradition of other cultures. The findings let the author conclude that canonical questions-andreplies’ literature, developed from the classical literary tradition, corresponds to the epistolary genre (rather the genre of the official ecclesiastical correspondence). The relevance of the research is determined by the lack of scholarly works on the analysis of genre of late Byzantine canonical questions-and-replies.
Questions and Replies, erotapokriseis, epistolary genre, Byzantine literature, canonical monuments, canon law

1. Almazov A. I. Kanonicheskie otvety Ioasafa, mitropolita Jefesskogo (maloizvestnyj pamjatnik prava Grecheskoj cerkvi XV veka) (Canonical Answers of Ioasaf, Metropolitan of Ephesus (Little Known Law Work of Greek Church of XV Century)), Odessa, 1903.
2. Almazov A. I. Neizdannye kanonicheskie otvety Konstantinopol'skogo patriarha Luki Hrizoverga i mitropolita Rodosskogo Nila (Non Edited Canonical Answers of Patriarch of Constantinople Lucas Chysoverg and Metropolitan of Rodos Nil), Odessa, 1903.
3. Anashkin A. V. 2013 “Kanonicheskie «Otvety» patriarha Konstantinopol'skogo Nikolaja III Grammatika (1084–1111): soderzhanie, istochniki, istorija teksta” (Canonical “Answers” of Patriarch of Constantinople Nicholas III the Grammarian (1084–1111): Content, Sources, Text History), in Vestnik PSTGU. Serija III: Filologija, 2013, vol. 2/32, pp. 87–113.
4. Anashkin A. V. 2013 “Osobennosti perevoda na russkij jazyk «Kanonicheskih otvetov» patriarha Konstantinopol'skogo Nikolaja III Grammatika (1084–1111)” (Features of Russian Translation of “Canonical Answers” of Patriarch of Constantinople Nicholas III the Grammarian (1084–1111)), in Tezisy i materialy Vtoroj mezhdunarodnoj konferencii po klassicheskoj, vizantijskoj i novogrecheskoj filologii pamjati I. I. Kovalevoj. MGU im. M. V. Lomonosova (15–17 aprelja 2013 g.), Moscow, 2013, pp. 4–6.
5. Bondach A. G. 2008 “Evstafij Romej”, in Pravoslavnaja jenciklopedija, Moscow, 2008, vol. 17, pp. 320–324.
6. Golovnina N. G. 2010 “Celostnost' zamysla «Voprosootvetov» Ioanna III Milostivogo: neobhodimost' ili sluchajnost'” (Integrity of Idea of “Erotapokriseis” of John III the Merciful: Necessity or Fortuity), in Vestnik PSTGU. Serija III: Filologija, 2010, vol. 4/22, pp. 22–31.
7. Zheltov Mihail, diak., Bernackij M. M. 2005 “Voprosootvety mitropolita Ilii Kritskogo: Svidetel'stvo ob osobennostjah sovershenija Bozhestvennoj liturgii v nach. XII veka” (Erotapokriseis of Metropolitan Elias of Crete: Evidence of Features of Liturgy Service in Begin of XII Century), in Vestnik PSTGU. Serija I: Bogoslovie. Filosofija, 2005, vol. 14, pp. 23–53.
8. Marru A.-I. Istorija vospitanija v antichnosti (History of Education in Antiquity), Moscow, 1998.
9. Miltenova A. Erotapokriseis. S‘chinenijata ot kratki v’prosi i otgovori v starob’lgarskata literature, Sofia, 2004.
10. Pavlov A. S. 1895 “Kanonicheskie otvety Nikity, mitropolita Iraklijskogo (XI–XII veka) v ih pervonachal'nom vide i v pozdnejshej pererabotke Matfeja Vlastarja (XIV v.): (Canonical Replies of Niceta, Metropolitan of Heraclea (XI–XII Centuries) in Their Original View and in Later Remaking of Mathew Vlastarius (XIV Cent.)), in Vizantijskij vremennik, Saint-Petersburg, 1895, vol. 2, pp. 160–176.
11. Pavlov A. S. 1895 “Kanonicheskie otvety Nikity, mitropolita Solunskogo (XII veka?)” (Canonical Replies of Niceta, Metropolitan of Thessaloniki (XII Century?)), in Vizantijskij vremennik, Saint-Petersburg, 1895, vol. 2, pp. 381–387.
12. Anashkin A. 2011 “The Canonical Replies of the Patriarch of Constantinople Nicholas III Grammatikos (1084–1111): Content, Sources, History of the Text”, in Proceedings of the 22nd International Congress of Byzantine Studies (Sofia, 22–27 August 2011), Sofia, 2011, vol. 2: Abstracts of Round Table Communications, p. 74.
13. Blair A. 1999 “The Problemata as a Natural Philosophical Genre”, in Grafton A., Sirasi N. (eds.) Natural Particulars: Nature and Disciplines in Renaissance Europe, Cambridge, 1999, pp. 171–204.
14. Burgmann L. 2005 “Zur diplomatischen Terminologie in der Peira“, in Hoffman L. M., Monchizadeh A. (eds.) Zwischen Polis, Provinz und Peripherie: Beiträge zur byzantinischen Geschichte und Kultur, Wiesbaden, 2005, pp. 457–467.
15. Ermilov P. 2013 “Towards a Classification of Sources in Byzantine Question-and-Answer Literature”, Rigo A., Ermilov P., Trizio M. (eds.) Theologica Minora. The Minor Genres of Byzantine Theological Literature, Turnhout, 2013, pp. 110–125.
16. Freehof S. B. The Responsa Literature, Philadelphia, 1995.
17. Jacob C. 2004 “Questions sur les questions: Archéology d’une pratique intellectuelle et d’une forme discursive”, in Annelie V., Zamagni C. (eds.) Erotapokriseis: Early Christian Question-and-Answer Literature in Context (Proceedings of the Utrecht Colloquium, 13–14 October 2003), Louvain, 2004, pp. 25–54.
18. Molenberg C. 1984 “An Eighth Century Manual Išo‛Bar Nun’s Questions and Answers on the Whole Text of Scripture as a Representative of a Genre”, in IV Symposium syriacum. Literary Genres in Syriac Literature (10–12 sept.), Groningen, Oosterhesselen, 1984, vol. 48, pp. 45–55.
19. Papadoyannakis Y. 2006 “Insruction by Question and Answer: The Case of Late Antique and Byzantine Erotapokriseis”, in Johnson S. F. (ed.) Greek Literature in Late Antiquity: Dynamism, Didactism, Classicism, Hampshire, 2006, pp. 91–105.
20. Schrader H. Porphyrii Quaestionum Homericarum ad Iliadem pertinentium reliquias, Leipzig, 1880.
21. The Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium, New York, Oxford, 1991.

Anashkin Anton

Valova Evdokiia

Syntactic properties of Russian enclitic particle ‘zhe

Valova Evdokiia (2014) "Syntactic properties of Russian enclitic particle ‘zhe ", Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia III : Filologiia, 2014, Iss. 39, pp. 16-33 (in Russian).

DOI of the paper: 10.15382/sturIII201439.16-33
The purpose of this paper is to describe syntactic properties of the Russian enclitic particle же. Clitics are defi ned as unaccented dependent words that cannot form full sentences and perform a single accentual unit with the lexical word. They also have no own stress and, according to Wakkernagel’s law, follow the fi rst lexical word (clitic-host) in a sentence. This rule operates in the Old Russian language, though in the modern Russian we fi nd exceptions. This paper is based on data from the Russian national corpus and takes a deeper view on the use of же in a diachronic aspect, on syntactic positions that this particle can take and on factors that aff ect the choice of its position. For our research, we have selected sentences with же and two types of noun phrase as a clitic-hosts, proper noun groups and groups that consist of an adjective and a noun. We argue that the particle can occupy the second and the third positions in such sentences: after the fi rst word or after the whole noun phrase. According to our data, же does not always follow Wakkernagel’s law and can go after a noun complex in its emphatic and adversative meaning. It usually follows two foreign proper nouns, titles of books or fi lms, place-names and fi xed expressions. In other cases, же mainly occupies the second position. Moreover, when the sentence contains a negation operator не, the enclitic же is usually placed in the second position after the fi rst word of a noun phrase. We can therefore suppose that in the modern Russian language the strict operation of Wakkernagel’s law is no more obligatory for this clitic and that its positions can vary.
clitics, particles, word order, Wackernagel’s law, Russian language, corpusbased study

1. Bonno K., Kodzasov S. V. 1998 “Semanticheskoe var'irovanie diskursivnyh slov i ego vlijanie na linearizaciju i intonirovanie (na primere chastic zhe i ved')” (Semantic Diversity of Discourse Words and Its Influence in Linearisation and Intoning (on Example of Particles zhe and ved’)), in Diskursivnye slova russkogo jazyka: opyt kontekstno-semanticheskogo opisanija, Moscow, 1998, pp. 382–446.
2. Valova E. A. “Sintaksicheskie svojstva jenkliticheskoj chasticy zhe v diahronicheskom aspekte: korpusnoe issledovanie” (Syntax Features of Enclitic Particle zhe in Diachronic Aspect: Corpus Study), in Nauchno-tehnicheskaja informacija (in print).
3. Dal' V. I. Tolkovyj slovar' zhivogo velikorusskogo jazyka (Explanatory Dictionary of Live Great Russian Language), Moscow, 1956.
4. Dobrushina E. R. 2014 “Videv i uvidja: zhizn' i smert' deeprichastij, obrazovannyh po neproduktivnym modeljam” (Videv and uvidja: Life and Death of Verbal Adverbs, Made from Non-Productive Models), in Korpusnye issledovanija po morfemnoj, grammaticheskoj, leksicheskoj semantike russkogo jazyka, Moscow, 2014, pp. 96–119.
5. Zaliznjak A. A. Drevnerusskie jenklitiki (Old Russian Enclitics), Moscow, 2008.
6. Ljashevskaja O. N., Sharov S. A., Chastotnyj slovar' sovremennogo russkogo jazyka (na materialah Nacional'nogo korpusa russkogo jazyka) (Frequency Dictionary of Modern Russian Language (on Materials of National Corpus of Russian Language)), Moscow, 2009.
8. Ozhegov S. I. Slovar' russkogo jazyka (Dictionary of Russian Language), Moscow, 1989.
9. Plungjan V. A. Obshhaja morfologija. Vvedenie v problematiku (General Morphology. Introduction in Problematic), Moscow, 2003.
10. Russkaja grammatika (Russian Grammar), in http://rusgram.narod.ru (Date: 12.01.2013).
11. Ushakov D. N. Tolkovyj slovar' russkogo jazyka (Explanatory Dictionary of Russian Language), Moscow, 1948.
12. Paducheva E. V. La particule ŽE: semantique, syntaxe et prosodie. Les particules énonciatives en Russe contemporain, 3, Paris, 1987, pp. 11–44.
13. Spencer A., Luis Ana R. Clitics: an Introduction, Cambridge, 2012.
14. Wackernagel J. 1892 “Über ein Gesetz der indogermanischen Wortstellung“, in Indogermanische Forschungen, Strassburg, 1892, vol. 1, pp. 333–434.

Valova Evdokiia

Vdovichenko Andrei

Literary character of the New Testament corpus. Discursive criteri

Vdovichenko Andrei (2014) "Literary character of the New Testament corpus. Discursive criteri ", Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia III : Filologiia, 2014, Iss. 39, pp. 34-45 (in Russian).

DOI of the paper: 10.15382/sturIII201439.34-45
In the article the author disagrees with the point of view according to which the language of the New Testament is considered less- or nonliterary. The main factor which maintains the literariness of the texts is that the NT corpus belongs to the tradition of Jewish prophetic literature. As well as in many other aspects of early Christianity, the Greek-speaking Jewish Diaspora becomes a key condition for a reconstruction communicative (cultural and religious, literary and linguistic) context in which the language and substantial features of the NT are adequately interpreted. To overcome A. Deissmann’s erroneous viewpoint (which ever caused the colloquial and nonliterary trend in NT researches) and to reconstruct the authentic communicative reality some historical, cultural and literary circumstances seem to be important. 1) the role of Writtings in the social, religious and literary activities in the Jewish Diaspora; 2) the linguistic situation in Diaspora and Palestinian communities; 3) Septuagint status as a sacred text and a sample for the prophetic texts in Diaspora; 4) relevance the discursive criteria for describing linguistic and cultural (including literary) realities: criterion of the relation to the literary facts of an author taking part in the tradition and implying the authentic concepts and oppositions; criterion of the audience to which the text is addressed; criterion of the language models used in the text at the level of macro- and micro rhetorical strategies, themes and frame structures of the communicative action organized in the text. If based on the criteria above, one may divide the literary production of the Greek-speaking Jewish Diaspora on prophetic and apologetic (secular) traditions which were inherited then by the Christian (including Judeo-Christian) authors.
linguistic interpretation of the NT corpus, literary and nonliterary character of the NT texts, discursive criteria of description, literary tradition of the Greek-speaking Jewish Diaspora of the Hellenistic period, Septuagint as a model text, prophetic

1. Matusova E. D. 2000 “Filon Aleksandrijskij — kommentator Vethogo Zaveta. Vstupitel'naja stat'ja” (Philon of Alexandria — Commentator of the Old Testament. Introduction), Filon Aleksandrijskij. Tolkovanija Vethogo Zaveta, Moscow, 2000, pp. 7–50.
2. Chang-Wook J. The Original Language of the Lukan Infancy Narrative, London, New York, 2004.
3. Deissmann A. The Philology of Greek Bible: Its Present and Future, London, 1908.
4. Deissmann A. Das Licht vom Osten, Tübingen, 1908.
5. Horsley G. H. R. 1989 “The Fiction of «Jewish Greek»”, in New Documents Illustrating Early Christianity, 1989, vol. 5, pp. 5–48.
6. Hengel M. The «Hellenization» of Judaea in the First Century After Christ, London, Philadelphia, 1989.
7. Jewish Literature Between the Bible and the Mishnah, London, 1981.
8. Nickelsburg G. W. E. The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, London, 1985.
9. Porter S. E. 1997 “The Greek Language of the New Testament”, in Metzger B. M., Ehrma B. D. (eds.) Handbook to Exegesis of the New Testament, Leiden, New York, Kohln, 1997, pp. 99–130.

Vdovichenko Andrei

Skliarov Oleg

"Мысль, описавшая круг" ("The Thought that has made a circle")by Lidiya Ginzburg as a literary and philosophical study

Skliarov Oleg (2014) ""Misly, opisavshaia krug" ("The Thought that has made a circle")by Lidiya Ginzburg as a literary and philosophical study ", Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia III : Filologiia, 2014, Iss. 39, pp. 46-66 (in Russian).

DOI of the paper: 10.15382/sturIII201439.46-66
The paper deals with problems and semantic structure of a specimen of the «interim» prose by Lidiya Yakovlevna Ginzburg, who is better-known to the reading audience as a philologist and a specialist in the history of literature. The author proceeds polemically from the established notion of the writer as a bearer of a sceptical worldview and a relentless unmasker of cultural myths. The author thinks that such a notion may lead to significant misinterpretations as it only pays close attention to one side of a complex and multifaceted phenomenon. The paper looks at the narrative «Мысль, описавшая круг» («The Thought that has made a circle») and traces a complex of motifs that are opposed in their substance to the motifs of philosophical distrust, scepsis and relativism. The author of the paper examines the balance and interrelationship between the meditative (philosophical and axiological) discourse and literary aspects of the work in question. This is conditioned by the fact that a prominent feature of the text is an original combination of traits of an essay and some traits typical of literary narration. The object of the study is a complex relationship of meditative and narrational strategies, philosophical refl ection and literary imagery. Attention is paid to the fact that the position of the subject-speculator is embraced by the whole, being transformed from the key position to one of the many factors of aesthetic impression. The narrator functions simultaneously as a subject of meditation (reflecting «author»), as a story-teller and as a character in the narration. Special attention is focused in the paper on how the theoretical thought of the character immerses itself in poetic contemplation, loses the element of total distrust and acquires the positive and uplifting element. The main generalisation and conclusion is that the narrators’ thought moves from the critical (and, in fact, demythologising) analysis of sacral and metaphysical precepts of the consciousness to the affi rming and apology of the totally metaphysical nature of cultural being.
Lidiya Ginzburg, «interim literature», narration, «self-exclusion», inductive thinking, symbol, symbolisation, death, value, sense, absolute.

1. Brojtman S. N. 2004 “Istoricheskaja pojetika“ (Historical Poetics), in Tamarchenko N. D. (ed.) Teorija literatury, Moscow, 2004, vol. 2.
2. Van Baskirk Je. 2006 “«Samootstranenie» kak jeticheskij i jesteticheskij princip v proze L. Ja. Ginzburg” (“Self-Removal” as Ethical and Esthetical Principe in Prose of L. Ja. Ginzburg), in NLO, 2006, vol. 81, pp. 261–281.
3. Zorin A. L. 2005 “Proza L. Ja. Ginzburg i gumanitarnaja mysl' XX veka“ (Prose of L. Ja. Ginzburg and Humanitarian Thought of XX Century), in NLO, 2005, vol. 76, pp. 45–68.
4. Teslja A. 2012 “Besposhhadno zrjachaja: [Rec. na kn.: Ginzburg L. Ja. Prohodjashhie haraktery. M., 2011]“ (Pitiless Sighted: [Review on: Ginzburg L. Ja. Prohodjashhie haraktery, Moscow, 2011]), in NLO, 2012, vol. 114, pp. 354—362.
5. Literatura i mental'nost' (Literature and Mentality), Moscow, 2008.

Skliarov Oleg

Litvintseva Kristina

Features of functioning of expressions with word 'of God' is in the religious and secular texts

Litvintseva Kristina (2014) "Features of functioning of expressions with word 'of God' is in the religious and secular texts ", Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia III : Filologiia, 2014, Iss. 39, pp. 67-81 (in Russian).

DOI of the paper: 10.15382/sturIII201439.67-81
The paper gives a comparative analysis of semantics and of the linguistic status of polysemantic expressions мир Божий ‘Divine peace’, свет Божий ‘Divine light’ and страх Божий ‘awe of God’, as they occur in religious and secular texts. In the modern Russian language, when it is used in the religious sphere, there is an urgent need to update the internal form of some frequently used expressions. For example, analyzing such expression as свет Божий , it becomes clear that for the author of a religious-oriented text ‘light’ is an attribute of God, as comes from Him; the word Божий is therefore essential. By contrast, for the authors of texts with another thematic focus, the meaning of свет Божий is assigned to the token ‘the Earth’. Moreover, the idea of ‘God’ is almost absent in this case; this token can therefore be taken out of this expression easily and without any semantic changes. The language of sermons demonstrates semantically motivated use of expressions as opposed to semantically unmotivated use of the same expressions in texts of other kinds. Consequently, the use of a special type of multiple meaning, semantic syncretism, seems to be typical of sermons almost to the same extent as of poetry.
modern Russian language, phraseology, corpus linguistics, religious discourse, the genre of the sermon, set expression, idiom, collocation.

1. Arutjunova N. D. 1990 “Diskurs” (Discourse), in Lingvisticheskij jenciklopedicheskij slovar', Moscow, 1990.
2. Baranov A. N., Dobrovol'skij D. O. Aspekty teorii frazeologii (Aspects of Phraseology Theory), Moscow, 2008.
3. Baranov A. N., Voznesenskaja M. M., Dobrovol'skij D. O., Kiseleva K. L., Kozerenko A. D. Frazeologicheskij ob’jasnitel'nyj slovar' russkogo jazyka (Phraseological Explanatory Dictionary of Russian Language), Moscow, 2009.
4. Vinogradov V. V. Russkij jazyk (Russian Language), Moscow, 1972.
5. Dobrushina E. R. 2014 “Ozhivlenie vnutrennej formy pristavochnyh leksem v religioznyh tekstah” (Revival of Inner Form of Prefix Lexemes in Religious Texts), in Korpusnye issledovanija po morfemnoj, grammaticheskoj i leksicheskoj semantike russkogo jazyka, Moscow, 2014, pp. 91–95.
6. Dobrushina E. R. 2012 “Slovar' hristianskoj leksiki: sostav slovnika” (Dictionary of Christian Vocabulary), in Vestnik PSTGU. Serija III: Filologija, 2012, vol. 3/29, pp. 105–113.
7. Dobrushina E. R., Poljakov A. E. 2013 “Korpus cerkovnoslavjanskogo jazyka: vozmozhnosti, metody sozdanija, perspektivy” (Corpus of Church-Slavonic Language: Possibility, Methods of Creating, Perspectives), in Vestnik PSTGU. Serija III: Filologija, 2013, vol. 1/31, pp. 32–44.
8. Dobrushina E. R., svjashh. Pol'skov K. O., Litvinceva K. V., Hangireev I. A. 2011 “Ot «abbata» do «analoja»: fragment Lingvo-jenciklopedicheskogo slovarja russkoj hristianskoj leksiki” (From “Abbot” to “Analogion”: Fragment of Linvo-Encyclopaedic Dictionary of Russian Christian Vocabulary), in Vestnik PSTGU. Serija III: Filologija, 2011, vol. 3/25, pp. 119–146.
9. Efremova T. F. Novyj slovar' russkogo jazyka. Tolkovo-slovoobrazovatel'nyj (New Dictionary of Russian Language. Explanatory-Word-Forming), Moscow, 2000.
10. Zhukov V. P. et al. Slovar' frazeologicheskih sinonimov russkogo jazyka: Okolo 730 sinonim. rjadov (Dictionary of Phraseological Synonyms of Russian Language: Nearly 730 Synonymic Lines), Moscow, 1987.
11. Krysin L. P. 1996 “Religiozno-propovednicheskij stil' i ego mesto v funkcional'no-stilisticheskoj paradigme sovremennogo russkogo literaturnogo jazyka” (Religious-Preacher Style and Its Place in Functional-Stylistic Paradigm of Modern Russian Literary Language), in Pojetika. Stilistika. Jazyk i kul'tura, Moscow, 1996, pp. 135–138.
12. Kusmaul' S. M. 2014 “Knizhnaja sprava 40-h godov XVII veka” (Book Correction of 40-s Years of XVII Centuries), in Slověne = Slovene, 2014, vol. 3/1, pp. 72–101.
13. Kustova G. I. Slovar' russkoj idiomatiki. Sochetanija slov so znacheniem vysokoj stepeni (Dictionary of Russian Idiomatic. Word-Combinations with Meaning of High Degree), in http://dict.ruslang.ru/magn.php.
14. Litvinceva K. V. 2012 “Leksicheskaja vyrazitel'nost' v tekstah propovedej” (Lexical Significance in Sermon Texts), in Problemy jazyka: Sbornik nauchnyh statej po materialam Pervoj konferencii-shkoly «Problemy jazyka: vzgljad molodyh uchjonyh», Moscow, 2012, pp. 140–147.
15. Loginova Ju. A. 2012 “Ad’ektivnye i imennye varianty prilagatel'nogo bozhij v sovremennom russkom jazyke” (Adjective and Name Variants of Adjective bozhij in Modern Russian Language), in Vestnik PSTGU. Serija III: Filologija, 2012, vol. 4/30, pp. 26–40.
16. Arutjunova N. D. (ed.) Logicheskij analiz jazyka. Adresacija diskursa (Logical Analysis of Language. Addressing of Discourse), Moscow, 2012.
17. Ljudogovskij F., svjashh. Tema sveta v cerkovnoslavjanskih akafistah (Light Theme in Church-Slavonic Akathistos), in http://www.bogoslov.ru/text/486196.html (Date: 15.10.2009)
18. Mokienko V. M., Nikitina T. G. Bol'shoj slovar' russkih pogovorok (Big Dictionary of Russian Sayings), Moscow, 2007.
19. Percov N. V. 2000 “Neodnoznachnost' v pojeticheskom jazyke” (Ambiguity in Poetic Language), in Voprosy jazykoznanija, 2000, vol. 3, pp. 55–82.
20. Evgen'eva A. P. (ed.) Slovar' russkogo jazyka (Dictionary of Russian Language), Moscow, 1999, vol. 2.
21. Telija V. N. Russkaja frazeologija. Semanticheskij, pragmaticheskij i lingvokul'turologicheskij aspekty. M., 1996.
22. Telija V. N. Bol'shoj frazeologicheskij slovar' russkogo jazyka (Big Phraseological Dictionary of Russian Language), Moscow, 2006.
23. Fjodorov A. I. Frazeologicheskij slovar' russkogo literaturnogo jazyka (Phraseological Dictionary of Russian Literary Language), Moscow, 2008.
24. Molotkov A. I. (ed.) Frazeologicheskij slovar' russkogo jazyka (Phraseological Dictionary of Russian Language), Moscow, 1968.
25. Fedosov I. V., Lapickij A. N. Frazeologicheskij slovar' russkogo jazyka (Phraseological Dictionary of Russian Language), Moscow, 2003.
26. Vvedenie v lingvistiku (Introduction to Linguistic), Moscow, 2005.

Litvintseva Kristina

Shelkovich Mikhail

The Function of Homeric and Dantean Allusions in T. S. Eliot’s "The Love Song of Alfred J. Prufrock"

Shelkovich Mikhail (2014) "The Function of Homeric and Dantean Allusions in T. S. Eliot’s "The Love Song of Alfred J. Prufrock" ", Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia III : Filologiia, 2014, Iss. 39, pp. 82-95 (in Russian).

DOI of the paper: 10.15382/sturIII201439.82-95
The article concerns Homeric and Dantean allusions in one the most important early pieces of work by T. S. Eliot «The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock», the title poem of the collection «Prufrock and Other Observations» (publ. 1915), so far preserving the reputation of an obscure and fragmentary one. The analysis of these allusions shows correlation between certain details of the lyrical structure and throws light upon some obscure passages in the poem. The comparison of the Homeric and Dantean reminiscences at the beginning and the end of the poem reveals a circular structure, which is confi rmed by the strophic structure as well. Comparing the the number of lines in «Prufrock» to that in Canto XXVII (from which the epigraph to the poem is taken) of Dante’s «Hell» and in the passage (which is paraphrased in the last line of «Prufrock») from Book XI of «Odyssey», shows that the poem follows the pattern of them both and is framed by the allusions to these works. Moreover, these allusions form a continuum spanning from the Trojan war to the World War I. The biographical material related to the time of creation of the poem, i.e., the circumstances of the friendship between young T. S. Eliot and Jean Verdenal, the adressee of the collection «Prufrock and Other Observations», during the poet’s stay in Paris in 1910–11, elucidates anew the relationship of «you and I» in the fi rst line of the poem. The analysis of the Dantean intertext unearthes the importance of Guido da Montefeltro, cited in the epigraph of the poem, and Ulysses, with whom he shares the same circle of Dante’s hell, for understanding this passage. The dichotomy of these characters is compared to the relationship between the speaking voice of the poem («I») and the auditor («you»). The analysis of the Homeric allusions suggests that the image of Tiresias, usually associated with Eliot’s poem «The Waste Land» (1922), was a part of the poet’s image system as early as «Prufrock».
T.S. Eliot, Prufrock, Dante, Homer, Verdenal, Tiresias, circular structure, «you and I»

1. Bochkarjova I. (ed.) Zapadnoevropejskaja literatura XX veka (West European Literature of XX Century), Moscow, 1977.
2. Cairns F. Virgil’s Augustan Epic, Cambridge, 1989.
3. Childs Donald J. From Philosophy to Poetry, London, 2001.
4. Cousineau T. Three-Part Inventions. The Novels of Thomas Bernhard, Newark, 2008.
5. Cuddy L. T. S. Eliot and the Poetics of Evolution, Lewisburg, 2000.
6. Locke F. W. 1963 “Dante and Eliot’s «Prufrock»”, in Modern Language Notes, 1963, vol. 78, pp. 51–59.
7. McLeod I., Freedman T. A. Dictionary of First Names, Ware, 1995.
8. Miller James E. T. S. Eliot’s Personal Waste Land: Exorcism of the Demons, Philadelphia, 1977.
9. Perloff M. Differentials: Poetry, Poetics, Pedagogy, Alabama, 2004.
10. Sigg E. The American T. S. Eliot, Cambridge, 1989.
11. Smith Grover C. T. S. Eliot’s Poetry and Plays, Chicago, 1956.

Shelkovich Mikhail

PUBLICATIONS

Borisova Ol'ga

Vocabulary and phraseology of Kuban’ dialects: Materials for the dictionary

Borisova Ol'ga (2014) "Vocabulary and phraseology of Kuban’ dialects: Materials for the dictionary ", Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia III : Filologiia, 2014, Iss. 39, pp. 99-116 (in Russian).

PDF

Borisova Ol'ga

Kaluzhnina Nadezhda

"Dictionary of locutions from liturgical books" by protopriest Alexander Nevostruev

Kaluzhnina Nadezhda, Davydenkova Mariia, Strievskaya Ol'ga, Mazurina Natal'ia, , , (2014) ""Dictionary of locutions from liturgical books" by protopriest Alexander Nevostruev ", Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia III : Filologiia, 2014, Iss. 39, pp. 117-125 (in Russian).

DOI of the paper: 10.15382/sturIII201439.117-125
The publication contains the second part of entries beginning in the letter «З» (Russian «З»). Characteristic features of the edition of the Dictionary, lists of sources, abbreviations as well as explanatory notes were set out in detail in the preceding issues.

Kaluzhnina Nadezhda

Man'kov Aleksandr

The Dialect of Gammalsvenskby: compiling a dictionary of an endangered language (brist-nōḷ — diŋe-vāvar)

Man'kov Aleksandr (2014) "The Dialect of Gammalsvenskby: compiling a dictionary of an endangered language (brist-nōḷ — diŋe-vāvar) ", Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia III : Filologiia, 2014, Iss. 39, pp. 126-148 (in Russian).

DOI of the paper: 10.15382/sturIII201439.126-148
In this paper we continue to publish materials for the dictionary of the present-day dialect of Staroshvedkoye (Gammalsvenskby), which is the only surviving Scandinavian dialect in the territory of the former Soviet Union. The present-day state of this dialect has not been described in linguistic literature. In connection with this, the only source of the factual material is oral interviews with speakers of the dialect recorded by the author during his trips to the village. The main objective of this work is to present material recorded in the interviews in the most complete way and to show the current state of the vocabulary and inflection of the dialect. The entries include the following information: type of inflection; translation; phrases, sentences or short texts illustrating the usage (with initials of the informants). In many cases full paradigms are given as well. They include all phonetic and morphological forms that have occurred in the interviews.
language documentation, documentary linguistics, field linguistics, endangered language, present-day Swedish dialects, Swedish dialects of Estonia, Gammalsvenskby, dictionary of a dialect.

Man'kov Aleksandr

Iatsenko Mariia

On the Old English poem ≪Exodus≫.The Old English poem ≪Exodus≫. Ch.VIII.(тransl.by M.Yatsenko)

Iatsenko Mariia (2014) "On the Old English poem ≪Exodus≫.The Old English poem ≪Exodus≫. Ch.VIII.(transl.by M.Yatsenko) ", Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia III : Filologiia, 2014, Iss. 39, pp. 149-163 (in Russian).

PDF

Iatsenko Mariia

CHRONICLE

Man'kov Aleksandr

International summer school in language documentation and linguistic diversity (Stockholm University, 23 June ‒ 4 July); 10th Scandinavian dialectological conference (Mariehamn, Aland Islands, 20‒23 August) (A. E. Mankov)

Man'kov Aleksandr (2014) "International summer school in language documentation and linguistic diversity (Stockholm University, 23 June ‒ 4 July); 10th Scandinavian dialectological conference (Mariehamn, Aland Islands, 20‒23 August) (A. E. Mankov) ", Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia III : Filologiia, 2014, Iss. 39, pp. 167-172 (in Russian).

PDF

Man'kov Aleksandr