Article

Name: On the question of the boundaries of philosophical and aesthetic discourses (S. Kierkegaard, F. Dostoevsky, Tolstoy)

Authors: A. E. Kozlov

Novosibirsk State Pedagogical University

Abstract: The article is devoted to comparison of different types of discourse (as aesthetic and philosophic types). In our mind, it’s important problem of the theory of literature and history of philosophy (includes here theory of interpretation). On the one one hand, in the every-day communication we could find a words “philosophy of the text”, “philosophy essays”, on the other hand, in the system of genre of the New Time we could find too “philosophic novel” or “philosophic poem” and other. But, however, this designation and semantic often have a conditional character. The paper investigates a polyvalent semantic of the aesthetic discourse on the material of the philosophic essays of Søren Aabye Kierkegaard and Fedor Dostoevsky novels. This “polyvalent-semantic” is compared with term “discourse isotopic” (by Paul Ricceur) and “polyphony” (by Mikhail Bakhtin). Created model is matched with plot and architectonic of the Leo Tolstoy “War and Peace” (“Vojna I mir”), there discourse borders are recreated. Experience of the discourse analysis presents regular connection between aesthetic as fictional and philosophic discourses, in the strict sense. In our opinion, it paves the different ways of interpretation of liminal texts and various types of academic commentaries.

Keywords: discourse, narrative, plot and story, Kierkegaard, Dostoevsky, Tolstoy

Bibliography:

Barthes R. Izbrannye raboty. Semiotika. Pojetika / Per. s fr. G. K. Kosikova. M.: Progress, 1989. 616 s.

Bahtin M. M. Problema rechevyh zhanrov // Bahtin M. M. Sobr. soch.: V 7 t. M.: Russkie slovari, 1996. T. 5: Raboty 1940–1960 gg. S. 159–206.

Bahtin M. M. Problemy pojetiki Dostoevskogo // Bahtin M. M. Sobr. soch.: V 7 t. M.: Russkie slovari, 2002. T. 6. 800 c.

Val'ger S. A., Fedorova N. N. Primenenie algoritma adaptacii raschetnoj setki k resheniju uravnenij Jejlera // Vychislitel'nye tehnologii. 2012. T. 17, № 3. S. 24–33.

Kozlov A. E. Paradoksalizacija diskursa v filosofskom jesse S. K'er-kegora «Strah i trepet» // Vestn. Tom. gos. un-ta. 2014. № 388. C. 76–80.

Kierkegaard S. Strah i trepet: dialekticheskaja lirika Iohannesa de Silencio /Per. s dat. N. Isaevoj, S. Isaeva. M.: Akademicheskij proekt, 2011. 153 s.

Lotman Ju. M. Vnutri mysljashhih mirov. M.: Jazyki russkoj kul'tury, 1996.

Novoe v zarubezhnoj lingvistike. M., 1986. Vyp. 17: Teorija rechevyh aktov. Ricoeur P. Konflikt interpretacij / Per. s fr. I. S. Vdovinoj. M.: Akademicheskij proekt, 2008. 695 s.

Rudnev V. P. Pojetika depersonalizacii (L. N. Tolstoj i V. B. Shklovskij) // Logos. 1999. № 11 (12). S. 55–63.

Stepanov Ju. S. V mire semiotiki // Semiotika. M.: Raduga, 1983.

Tolstoj L. N. Vojna i mir. Tom tretij // Tolstoj L. N. Sobr. soch.: V 90 t. M.: GIHL, 1940a. T. 11. 466 s.

Tolstoj L. N. Vojna i mir. Tom chetvertyj // Tolstoj L. N. Sobr. soch.: V 90 t. M.: GIHL, 1940b. T. 12. 426 s.

Tolstoj L. N. Vojna i mir. Chernovye redakcii i varianty // Tolstoj L. N. Poln. sobr. soch.: V 90 t. M.: GIHL, 1949. T. 13. 873 s.

Tolstoj L. N. Neskol'ko slov po povodu knigi «Vojna i mir» // Tolstoj L. N. Poln. sobr. soch.: V 90 t. M.: GIHL, 1955. T. 16. 514 s.