UDC

811.111-26

DOI

10.37482/2687-1505-V384

Authors

Olga V. Tomberg

Dr. Sci. (Philol.), Head of the Germanic Philology Department, Prof. at the Department of Linguistics and Professional Communication in Foreign Languages, Director of the School of Linguistics, Ural Federal University named after the first President of Russia B.N. Yeltsin (address: ul. Lenina 51, Yekaterinburg, 644077, Russia).

e-mail: olgatomberg@yandex.ru, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4979-1782

Marina A. Ananyina

Cand. Sci. (Philol.), Assoc. Prof. at the Germanic Philology Department, Ural Federal University named after the first President of Russia B.N. Yeltsin (address: ul. Lenina 51, Yekaterinburg, 644077, Russia).

e-mail: AnaninaMA@yandex.ru*, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6233-5311

Abstract

Turning to John Fowles’ novel The Magus, this paper aims to describe the structure of the dynamic and classifying frames represented by the allusive anthroponym as a type of literary concept having national and cultural features. It is demonstrated that, in the cognitive aspect, allusive anthroponyms contain a reduced frame associated with a certain situation related to the referent; this frame is kept readily available in the cognitive space and can be actualized at the moment chosen by the author of the text. Verbalization of a classifying frame requires a certain structure that includes the frame’s name, setting, subject of the frame, relationship between the objects/ participants in the action, and characteristics of the action involving encyclopaedic information. Verbalization of a dynamic frame includes components such as names of characters, their roles, identification of the action, sequence of scenes and characterization of the action involving encyclopaedic information. The scientific novelty of this work lies in the identification of two types of frame structures of the allusive anthroponym as a means of literary concept representation and in the systematization of its frame structure. The allusive anthroponym has cultural markedness, whose model can be used to structure a textual frame. It is noted that the dynamic and classifying frames can be actualized on the basis of one allusive name or have a complicated structure based on two to four allusive anthroponyms. The complicated structure prevails in a dynamic frame since it has characters actively performing actions that take place in time. Frame interaction is mainly conceptualized on the basis of metaphtonymy, with metonymization being the primary process. The frame is always aimed at highlighting dominant conceptual features in a given context, and this highlighting is supported stylistically through amplification of various means of expression and stylistic devices.

Keywords

literary concept, allusive anthroponym, frame, script frame, situation frame, John Fowles, The Magus

References

1. Belozerova E.A. Funktsionirovanie imen sobstvennykh v khudozhestvennom tekste i diskurse (na materiale sovremennoy britanskoy literatury) [Functioning of Proper Names in Fiction and Discourse (Based on Contemporary British Literature): Diss.]. Moscow, 2008. 209 p.
2. Bogdanova K.V. Lingvo-kognitivnye aspekty allyuzivnosti (na primere intertekstual’nykh vklyucheniy v angloyazychnoy massovoy kul’ture) [Linguocognitive Aspects of Allusiveness (Based on Intertextual Inclusions in English-Language Mass Culture): Diss.]. St. Petersburg, 2020. 200 p.
3. Naumova T.M. Allyuzivnye antroponimy v britanskoy kontseptosfere [Allusive Anthroponyms in the British Conceptual Sphere: Diss.]. Nizhny Novgorod, 2011. 172 p.
4. Steshenko M.A. Kognitivnye modeli predstavleniya antroponimicheskikh kontseptov v Biblii i v russkoy poezii XVIII–XX vekov [Cognitive Models of Representing Anthroponymic Concepts in the Bible and in the Russian Poetry of the 18th – 20th Centuries: Diss.]. Kaliningrad, 2020. 177 p.
5. Robustova V.V. The Spiral Development Conception of a Proper Name Meaning. Moscow State Univ. Bull. Ser. 19. Linguist. Intercult. Commun., 2022, no. 1, pp. 47–57 (in Russ.).
6. Grunina L.P., Dolbina I.A. Khudozhestvennyy kontsept kak osobaya esteticheskaya kategoriya [Literary Concept as a Special Aesthetic Category]. Vestnik Kuzbasskogo gosudarstvennogo tekhnicheskogo universiteta, 2005, no. 4.1, pp. 132–135.
7. Tuktangulova E.V. Klyuchevoe slovo – slovoobraz – khudozhestvennyy kontsept kak universal’nye tekstoobrazuyushchie konstanty khudozhestvennogo teksta [Keyword – Word Image – Literary Concept as Universal Text-Forming Constants of a Fictional Text]. Vestnik Chelyabinskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta, 2007, no. 8, pp. 105–109.
8. Bespalova O.E. O sootnoshenii khudozhestvennogo i kul’turnogo kontseptov (na materiale poezii N. Gumileva) [On the Relationship Between Literary and Cultural Concepts (Based on N. Gumilyov’s Poetry)]. Slovo. Semantika. Tekst [Word. Semantics. Text]. St. Petersburg, 2002, pp. 89–95.
9. Lotman Yu.M. Semiosfera [Semiosphere]. St. Petersburg, 2000. 704 p.
10. Kubryakova E.S. Yazyk i znanie: Na puti polucheniya znaniy o yazyke: Chasti rechi s kognitivnoy tochki zreniya. Rol’ yazyka v poznanii mira [Language and Knowledge: Towards Knowledge About Language: Parts of Speech from a Cognitive Point of View. The Role of Language in World Cognition]. Moscow, 2004. 555 p.
11. Babushkin A.P., Sternin I.A. Kognitivnaya lingvistika i semasiologiya [Cognitive Linguistics and Semasiology]. Voronezh, 2018. 229 p.
12. Minsky M. Freymy dlya predstavleniya znaniy [A Framework for Representing Knowledge]. Moscow, 2010. Available at: https://librusec.org/ru/book/marvin-minskij/frejmi-dlya-predstavleniya-znanij/reading (accessed: 7 March 2024).
13. Boldyrev N.N. Kontsept i znachenie slova [Concept and Word Meaning]. Sternin I.A. (ed.). Metodologicheskie problemy kognitivnoy lingvistiki [Methodological Problems of Cognitive Linguistics]. Voronezh, 2001, pp. 25–36.
14. Fillmore C.J. An Alternative to Checklist Theories of Meaning. Proceedings of the First Annual Meeting of the Berkley Linguistics Society. Berkley, 1975. Vol. I, pp. 123–131. https://doi.org/10.3765/bls.v1i0.2315
15. Fillmore C.J., Atkins B.T. Toward a Frame-Based Lexicon: The Semantics of RISK and Its Neighbors. Lehrer A., Kittay E. (eds.). Frames, Fields, and Contrasts: New Essays in Semantic and Lexical Organization. Hillsdale, 1992, pp. 75–102.
16. Belyaevskaya E.G. Metody analiza leksicheskoy semantiki v kognitivnoy lingvistike [Cognitive Methods of Analysing Lexical Semantics]. Vestnik Moskovskogo gosudarstvennogo lingvisticheskogo universiteta, 2014, no. 20, pp. 9–21.
17. Malneva E.Y. Cognitive Poetics and Cognitive Stylistics: Variation and Incorporation of the Terms. The Onset of Cognitive Poetics and Its Modification at the Turn of the Millennia. Philol. Theory Pract., 2022, vol. 12, no. 8, pp. 2503–2509 (in Russ.). https://doi.org/10.30853/phil20220462
18. Kasevich V.B. Kognitivnaya lingvistika: V poiskakh identichnosti [Cognitive Linguistics: In Search of Identity]. Moscow, 2013. 185 p.
19. Popova Z.D., Sternin I.A. Kognitivnaya lingvistika [Cognitive Linguistics]. Moscow, 2007. 226 p.
20. Nakhimova E.A. Pretsedentnye imena v massovoy kommunikatsii [Precedent Names in Mass Communication]. Yekaterinburg, 2007. 207 p.
21. Gudkov D.B. Teoriya i praktika mezhkul’turnoy kommunikatsii [Theory and Practice of Intercultural Communication]. Moscow, 2022. 200 p.
22. Patieva M.M. Lingvokognitivnye osobennosti realizatsii vtorichnoy yazykovoy lichnosti pisatelya-bilingva [Linguocognitive Features of the Realization of Secondary Linguistic Personality of a Bilingual Writer: Diss.]. Maykop, 2019. 174 p.
23. Tomberg O.V., Ananyina M.A. Frame Structure of Allusive Anthroponym as a Literary Concept (on the Material of Donna Tartt’s Novel “The Secret History”). Philol. Theory Pract., 2024, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 564–572 (in Russ.). https://doi.org/10.30853/phil20240081
24. Artemova O.E. Lingvokul’turnaya spetsifika tekstov pretsedentnogo zhanra limerik (na materiale angliyskogo yazyka) [Linguocultural Features of the Precedent Genre of Limerick (Based on the English Language): Diss.]. Ufa, 2004. 257 p.
25. Klyoster A.M., Shnyakina N.Ju. Dynamic Frame as a Structure for Scientific Knowledge Representation. Curr. Iss. Philol. Pedagog. Linguist., 2019, no. 4, pp. 12–19 (in Russ.). https://doi.org/10.29025/2079-6021-2019-4-12-19
26. Baranov A.N., Dobrovol’skiy D.O. Aspekty teorii frazeologii [Aspects of the Theory of Phraseology]. Moscow, 2008. 656 p.