CC BY
13
Original Paper
УДК 82-311.2/4 - Писемский
DOI: 10.29025/2079-6021-2019-2-144-151
Semantic Field "Freemasonry" in the Language of A. F. Pisemsky
Alexander A. ShuneykoCS]
Komsomolsk-on-Amur State University, Russian Federation ORCID ID: 0000-0001-5467-2214, e-mail: [email protected]
Olga V. Chibisova
Komsomolsk-on-Amur State University, Russian Federation ORCID ID: 0000-0002-2709-2465, e-mail: [email protected]
Received: 19.04.2019 /Accepted: 16.05.2019 /Publishedonline: 25.06.2019
Abstract: The subject of consideration in this article is the work of the famous Russian writer of the XIX century A.F. Pisemsky. It analyzes his novel "Masons", an uncommon phenomenon in the history of the artistic texts language. The depth of fixing the real state of society and its language is combined in this work with non-trivial attempts to understand important social issues. The purpose of the research is to determine how the theme of Freemasonry, that is relevant to the Russian culture of the last three centuries, is implemented in the novel. The authors use a number of interrelated formal and meaningful procedures, which include the advantages of semantic, contextual and functional analysis. This allows identifying the specific of A.F. Pisemsky's usage of vocabulary included in the semantic field "Freemasonry". It is found that the system relationships within the field are defined by two types of interaction: the relationship between the core and the periphery and the relationship between the thematic parts, consisting of vocabulary with a common component - a symbol, name, and gesture. The ways of including and interpreting the components of the semantic field in the novel are determined by Pisemsky's ideas about his readers as people uninitiated into the secrets of Freemasonry. Separate vocabulary and whole thematic complexes come into close interaction with the figurative, character and event plans of the novel, thus performing a nominative, indicative and aesthetic function. In addition, the speech of characters contains more different nominations and descriptions of objects associated with Freemasonry than the author's, which indicates his desire for an objective depiction of a reality segment related to the semantic field under analysis. At the same time, the language means of irony used by the author are not characteristic of Freemasonry itself, but of specific characters.
Keywords: A.F. Pisemsky, language of fiction, semantic field, freemasonry, novel, masons. For citation: Shuneyko A.A., Chibisova O.V. Semantic Field "Freemasonry" in the Language of A.F. Pisemsky. Current Issues in Philology and Pedagogical Linguistics. 2019; 2: 144-151. DOI: 10.29025/2079-6021-20192-144-151 (In Russ.).
Оригинальная статья
DOI: 10.29025/2079-6021-2019-2-144-151
Семантическое поле «Масонство» в языке А.Ф. Писемского
А.А. lllynt>iuat \
Комсомольский-на-Амуре государственный университет г. Комсомольск-на-Амуре, Россия ORCID ID: 0000-0001-5467-2214, e-mail: [email protected]
О.В. Чибисова
Комсомольский-на-Амуре государственный университет г. Комсомольск-на-Амуре, Россия ORCID ID: 0000-0002-2709-2465, e-mail: [email protected]
Получена: 19.04.2019 /Принята: 16.05.2019 /Опубликована онлайн: 25.06.2019
Резюме: Предметом рассмотрения в данной статье является творчество известного российского литератора XIX века А.Ф. Писемского. Анализу подвергается его роман «Масоны», нерядовое явление в истории языка художественных текстов. Глубина фиксации реального состояния общества и языка соединяется в данном произведении с нетривиальными попытками осмысления важных социальных вопросов. Цель исследования состоит в определении того, каким образом в романе реализуется актуальная для российской культуры последних трёх столетий тема масонства. Авторы используют ряд взаимосвязанных формальных и содержательных процедур, включающих в себя достоинства семантического, контекстного и функционального анализа. Это позволило выявить специфику использования А.Ф. Писемским лексики, входящей в семантическое поле «Масонство». Было установлено, что системные отношения внутри поля задаются двумя типами взаимодействия: отношениями между ядром и периферией и отношениями между тематическими частями, состоящими из лексики с общим компонентом - символ, имя, жест. Выбор способов включения в роман компонентов семантического поля и интерпретация последних определены представлениями Писемского о своих читателях как о людях, не посвященных в тайны масонства. Отдельная лексика и целые тематические комплексы вступают в тесное взаимодействие с образным, персонажным и событийным планами романа, выполняя номинативную, указательную и эстетическую функцию. Кроме того, в речи персонажей различных номинаций объектов, связанных с масонством, и их описаний больше, чем в авторской, что свидетельствует о стремлении автора к объективному изображению сегмента реальности, связанной с семантическим полем «масонство». При этом используемые автором языковые средства иронии являются характеристикой не самого масонства, а конкретных персонажей.
Ключевые слова: А.Ф. Писемский, язык художественной литературы, семантическое поле, масонство, роман, масоны.
Для цитирования: Шунейко А.А., Чибисова О.В. Семантическое поле «Масонство» в языке А.Ф. Писемского // Актуальные проблемы филологии и педагогической лингвистики. 2019; 2: 144-151. DOI: 10.29025/2079-6021-2019-2-144-151.
Introduction. The last novel of A.F. Pisemsky "Masons" (1880), written shortly before his death in January 1881, occupies an especial place among other works of the writer. On the one hand, it shares a "bitter fate" with his author, as R.E. Steussy figuratively put it, referring to the last eighteen years of the life of A.F. Pisemsky, which were "increasingly bitter" because Pisemsky couldn't "survive as a writer in the face of radical criticism" after "the generally bruited statement that his talent declined precipitously after 1862" [19, p. 170]. The pre-revolutionary literary criticism gave a negative evaluation of Pisemsky's works, describing as reactionary the period after 1963 and until the end of the writer's creative path. Because of this, R.H. Freeborn concluded that Alexey Pisemsky "has been eclipsed by so many illustrious contemporaries that it would be foolish to attempt to revive his reputation" [14, p. 125]. According to A.A. Roshal, the old prejudice still persisted at the beginning of the 1960s, and the writer's work dating from the 1960s to the 1980s was hardly explored [8]. Twenty years later, A.V. Timofeev almost completely repeats the same idea, arguing that "the later work of Pisemsky still remains the least studied part of the literary heritage of the writer" [12, p. 7]. The questions posed by N.N. Gruzinskaya "Is A.F. Pisemsky a classic? Is he deservedly forgotten?" and left without an answer are a constant refrain, closing the previous conclusions [2, p. 115].
Discussion. On the other hand, in linguistics there exists an idea of strong textual positions. It assumes that linguistic units of different levels and complexities, which appear in such a position within the framework of the whole adjacent to them, bear the greatest semantic, connotative, and emotional load. The entire writer's work can be perceived as a single, complexly organized text, in which the position of the absolute end is certainly strong. In this case, "Masons" is objectively in such a strong position and all the characteristics of this position can be extrapolated to the novel. Its main feature is that it captures the meticulous attention of both an ordinary reader and a critic, and for the latter such a close look can help identify quality flaws in the work. It did not happen to "Masons", which in itself is the confirmation of the profound internal validity of its high evaluation. The Russian literary critic P. V Annenkov spoke of it like this: "It was possible only for a big talent to turn personal memories of a living and rather strange person of his youth into a representative of the whole doctrine and, as such, to mix him with a strict intrigue of the novel" [1, p. 512]. However, they were not professional critics, but literary men, who penetrated into the artistic nature of Pisemsky most subtly and objectively. At the turn of the XIX-XX centuries, such writers as A.P. Chekhov, I.A. Bunin, M. Gorky, provided short, but insightful comments on it.
From the first decade of the 21st century, there emerges a new phase of comprehending Pisemsky's literary career in general and his novel "Masons" in particular. The researchers thoroughly study certain aspects of the writer's work. S.V Zvyagina [4] analyses the novels of A.F. Pisemsky in the context of the chief subjects of Russian literature. In her opinion, Pisemsky forms the main idea of contemporary reality, which consists in the impossibility of symbiosis of the desirable and real, the collapse of illusions and the destructive power of the ideal. O.V. Timashova [17] studies the genre-composition system of the prose of A.F. Pisemsky written in the 1850s. She believes that it helps to understand the laws not only of the individual creative evolution of the writer, but also of the Russian literature of this period. A.V. Korchinsky [5] explores the work of A.F. Pisemsky as one of the authors of the Russian novel of the 1860s, focused on the literary processing of news reports on the most resonant incidents. He believes that the general vector of these works is the creation of larger-scale narratives about current modernity. O.N. Skrynnik and I.V. Udovenko [10] demonstrate an example of a scientific study of chronotope on the drama of A.F. Pisemsky. The scientists claim that historical time in dramas is transmitted with the help of interior remarks, in costumes of characters, traditions and customs embodied in the behavior of the characters.
L.N. Sinyakova [9] considers the philosophy of the spirit and the pragmatics of Pisemsky's main characters in the works, chronologically embracing his entire creative path. The scientist deduces Pisemsky's artistic formula, which is a classically realistic concept of personality in a fictionalized context. E.L. Zaitseva [3] studies the system of forms, means and methods by which A.F. Pisemsky recreates the inner world of his characters, ordinary people living in daily worries. She concludes that the writer, first of all, is trying to reflect the "truth of life", making objectivity the corner-stone. O.V. Timashova [11] examines the problem of the writer's journal evolution by analyzing the characters of "A Thousand Souls" (1858), in which contemporaries recognized the real journalists with whom the writer collaborated. The researcher concludes that Pisemsky decided on a literary experiment, embodying the covenants of V.G. Belinsky on the tasks of modern literature.
Results. An analytical review of the literature on Pisemsky leads to the conclusion that the writer's views on Freemasonry have not been well covered, despite their evidence or because of it. After all, the character of writing the novel indicates that it was extremely important for the author to become impregnated with the materials about the Russian masons kept in the book depositories [7, p. 398]. According to A.A. Roshal [8, p. 182], the subject of his persistent empirical research was reputable works on the history of Russian Freemasonry by S.V Eshevsky, M.N. Longinov, A.N. Pypin, with a general reference list including more than 60 titles. The strong evidence-based platform contributed to the re-creation of the "historical" characters of the novel: the characteristic features of their portrait, clothing, speech; scenes and events that took place in their lives [8, p. 183]. All of the above, together with the writer's commitment to an objective view of life, points to the important informative function of the novel, named by A.V. Timofeev a naturalistic historical novel, perhaps the only one in Russian literature [12].
The purpose of this study is to reveal the content of the semantic field "Freemasonry" in the language of A.F. Pisemsky changing the emphasis towards those sides of the material being sampled that have so far remained outside researchers' attention.
The dominant thematic narrative plan is realized through the active and diverse use of the semantic field "Freemasonry". In the study the term semantic field "Freemasonry" refers to a hierarchically organized set
of vocabulary united by the meaning "one way or another associated with Freemasonry", which is a criterion for entry into this group. Accordingly, external permeable boundaries are associated with the absence of this meaning. System relationships inside the field are defined by two types of interaction: (1) relations between the core (abstract vocabulary of spiritual content) and periphery (specified vocabulary) and (2) relations between thematic parts consisting of a vocabulary which besides the above meaning has another common component - a symbol, name, gesture, etc. The inclusion of symbolism in the semantic field of the novel is of particular importance, since the "Freemasons view the world as a 'forest of symbols' hidden in plain sight and awaiting interpretation" [15, p. 425].
The narrative repeatedly mentions full and abbreviated names of Masonic lodges; Masonic pseudonyms and terms of the Masonic hierarchy; names of objects connected with the nature of the work of the Masonic lodges. It cites the types of coordination of Masons with the outside world; signs, words and touches that Masons use to identify each other among the uninitiated. In the novel one can find the names of the spiritual beings of the religions of the world, the notions about which are included in the framework of the Masonic concept; the records of various confessional cultures and their attributes with which Freemasonry is associated; the realities of Masonic mythology itself; denotations of Masonic ideas of human life. There are names of symbolic personalities, whose activities have significantly influenced Freemasonry; the allusions to spiritual concepts and qualities that are somehow relevant to the characteristics of the masons; the moral categories that are part of the Masons in the sphere of active reflection; the denotations of various types and manifestations of spiritual work carried out by Masons.
It allows the author to create a multidimensional picture of the phenomenon, to characterize it both genetically and synchronously, conceptually and hierarchically at the same time. Furthermore, it is fundamentally important that the elements of the semantic field within the artistic whole perform not only an informative, but also an aesthetic function. The bearers of the latter are mostly symbols that come into close interaction with the figurative, character and event plans of the novel.
It seems that the choice of ways to use the components of the semantic field "Freemasonry" is largely determined by the Pisemsky's opinion about his readers. Noting that at present there are no Masons in Russia, but in his childhood and even adolescence, he personally knew many of them [7, p. 398], the author indirectly describes the intended recipients of his text, who for the most part know little about Masons. Consequently, an effective communication with them requires reporting the fullest possible information about the subject. It is precisely this narrative strategy that Pisemsky chooses. Unlike most national authors touching upon Masonic problems, he does not present it in a hidden form, understandable only to initiates. On the contrary, he seeks to reproduce in detail the information he knows from archival sources and his own memories. Pisemsky's manner of speaking can be described as a frank conversation with an uninitiated reader. It is within the framework that Pisemky chooses the style of a writer on matters of everyday life, whose exposition should be accessible to a wide circle of readers. The addressee's informational lacunae is filled by inserting Masonic texts proper or supplying most of the Masonic symbols and terms with compressed or expanded commentary while the meaning of the rest becomes clear from the context which eliminates the existing ambiguity of the semantics of a word.
The text repeatedly reproduces entire segments of the semantic field "Freemasonry" with special references to the previous mention of duplicated realities. These include: a description of the masonic emblems in the bedroom of Krapchik and in the supplying most of the Masonic symbols and terms with compressed or expanded commentary church of the Archangel Gabriel; three expositions of the structure of the initiation ceremony; the reflections on the nature of the relationship and typological community between the Freemasons and the Khlysts, the presentation of three types of prayers, a description of clever doing. It can easily be noted that the repeating segments fix the notional complexes most significant for the conceptual space of the narration. There can be distinguished two main types of such repetitions interacting with each other: contrast matching and expansion, each of which has its own dominant function.
The first type of repetition is illustrated by the description of the Masonic decoration of the character's bedroom which is carried out by means of a number of homogeneous syntactic structures, including denotations for Masonic realities. Along with it, there is an inclusion with a list of items lying on a huge work desk: cash books, bags with seeds of rye, barley, oats, plans to be undertaken in land, elevations of buildings, over which "hung a well-engraved portrait of a quasi-knighf' [6]. The syntactic parallelism emphasizes the opposition of two semantic fields: lofty Masonic (sacral) and lower agrarian-everyday, and their contact unification demonstrates the ironic assessment of the character. When re-mentioned, the denotations of the same Masonic
realities are not accompanied by context inclusions of this kind. Due to the contrasting juxtaposition, the reader is faced with two different descriptions of the same object which fix a varied pattern of characters' attitudes towards Freemasonry.
In the second type, the repetition is used for the gradual expansion of the conceptual content of a term in the absence of its express assessment or its constant neutrality. For example, the elaboration of clever doing mechanism proceeds from the general characteristic at the first mention to the further detailed description of the procedure itself. It should be noted that the extension is also present in the first type of repetitions. There it is carried out not only by increasing the volume of the appraisal space, but also due to the fact that the semantic field "Freemasonry" can be represented more or less in its entirety. Thanks to these repetitions in the language plan, Pisemsky realizes one of the methods of author's distancing from a direct evaluation of the describable object. The image of the author acquires the features of a detached observer.
Within the artistic whole, the semantic field "Freemasonry" determines the character space of the novel, that is, the conceptual apparatus of the first constantly interacting with the second acts as a transmitter of fundamental features, which way of interacting with specific characters breaks the latter into specific groups. This is done in various ways: through the peculiarities of characters' speech and the anthroponymy of the novel. The characters' speech serves as a differential indication. The characters are contrasted with each other according to the amount of the words from the semantic field "freemasonry" in their speech: some make the most out of them, others use them sporadically, and others do not resort to them at all. The division of these groups in general terms corresponds to the division into masons, seekers and profanes. At the same time, the speech of the first is endowed with not only lexical, but also syntactic characteristics: it is similar to a bookish way of speaking, includes complex syntactic constructions and rhetorical techniques, and sometimes it directly replicates social writing, as it happens in reproducing Masonic texts.
The anthroponymy of the novel also closely correlates with the semantic field "Freemasonry". The surname of the protagonist Marfin is perceived as a patronymic attractant of the name Louis Claude de Saint-Martin [20]. The nonrandom coincidence of phonetic components is emphasized by the context, where the name of Saint-Martin is repeatedly mentioned in Marfin's speech and in the author's speech about this character: "I also send you a book, in Russian, Saint-Martin, about truth and error. <...> began to compile an extract from the book of Saint-Martin" [6]. The eventual outline of the novel, in which Marfin acts as a Martinist, reinforces the significance and symbolism of the phonetic connection: "I call Russian Martinists <... > those who, being Orthodox, profess mysticism; near Bordeaux <...> where the Martinist Lodge once originated, Egor Egorych died' [6]. Thanks to paronymy, the name Marfin is semanticized, acquires a new internal form and begins to be perceived as akin to the name Saint-Martin. It, in turn, comes into conflict with the usual lower associative field of this name (Marfin from Marfa), which gives the personage a concise testimonial, fixes his diametrically opposite features and adds the elements of the comic in the character's drawing.
The names Susanna Marfina and Martyn Stepanych are also phonetically interconnected with the name Saint-Martin. In the latter case, where it is a question of using the name of a real person, it is emphasized by the contact usage which actualizes the patronymic relationship: "Haggai Nikitich, not wanting to interrupt Martyn Stepanych, pretended that he knows who Saint-Martin is" [6]. The means of phonetics referring the names of the three mentioned characters to the symbolic person's name constituent of the semantic field "Freemasonry" link them as closely as their destinies and values are connected in the event plan. All this suggests that the functions of the components of the semantic field "Freemasonry" in the novel are not reduced to nominative and indicative, as one would expect from a work the language of which is subject to the rules of classical realism. These components also perform aesthetic functions proper: they are used as constructive elements of the artistic space; they organize it and condition its features.
Some of the prevailing symbols also function aesthetically in the text of the novel. The symbol of acacia functions as a character's characteristic, which involves both connotative meanings accompanying this word within the framework of the Masonic tradition and meanings from the general cultural background. Acacia is a plant symbolizing immortality. Acacia appeared over the grave of Osiris. It was the plant that "caught fire but did not burn" when the angel turned to Moses [13, p. 21]. In Freemasonry, acacia is the emblem of initiation, immortality, and innocence [16, p. 13]. In the narrative structure acacia becomes the mark of one of the main characters - Susanna Nikolaevna. It is firstly used when the heroine, who is at that moment a seeker, tells the legend of Adoniram: "<...> they planted a loose acacia upon the place to remember the location". Its second use occurs when describing the scene of Susanna's dedication to masons: "On the lectern there was a skull,
tibiae, a tin sprig of acacia and an open Bible." And the third one is while describing her outfit when she is already a Mason: "<...> a hat made of dark crepe, decorated with acacia" [6]. This selective and purposeful use of words creates a whole range of artistic increments in meaning.
For the first time, Susanna hears about a symbol as some abstract, alien category; the second time the symbol becomes a visible object; and for the third time, the signifier of the symbolic content (a cluster of flowers) is a thing belonging to her. The types of the symbol signifiers and the symbol-character correlation become the phased representation of the heroine's Masonic path. Acacia in this case is not only the symbol of the Masonic notion, but also the symbol of the heroine, which defines her place, role and character in the novel action. The association "Susanna - acacia" within the framework of Freemasonry is also supported by a general cultural metaphor, suggesting a number of sustainable denotations such as "a woman or a girl - one or another flower". This entire semantic complex is juxtaposed and opposed to another complex dominated by another symbol. It is fundamentally important that the author uses Masonic symbolism as the basis for constructing these linguistic pictorial techniques, thereby achieving unity of conceptual, linguistic and eventual planes of the narrative.
While adhering to a generally neutral, non-judgmental manner of narration in the author's speech, Pisemsky, however, in some cases (for example, when describing the Masonic decoration of Krapchik's bedroom) resorts to irony. A similar example is present in the author's remarks to the speech of Yegor Egorych in Susanna's dedication scene: "My dear friend," exclaimed Yegor Egorych relinquishing the role of the great master, "get a respite and calm down!"; "My dear friend," said Yegor Egorych not being able to withstand his role again, "approach me!" [6]. Here the combination of words which are contrasting in their thematic attribution "the great master", "the role", "relinquishing" creates a soft irony, the use of which is subordinated to the task to reproduce the psychological state of the character, his inner division into two subjects (a loving husband and an impartial boss) whose external manifestations suggest opposite actions. That is, in this case (as well as in describing Krapchik's bedroom or the author's transfer of Chentsov's stories about dedication), the language means of irony used by the author are not characteristic of Freemasonry itself, but of specific characters.
As for the general explicit direct author's assessment of the reality segment associated with the semantic field "Freemasonry", it is practically absent in the text of the novel. Its lack does not mean abolishing an implicit, indirect evaluation which manifests itself through opposed groupings of the characters. At this, the very nature of the opposition has the features of linguistic fixation: paronymic parallels between the names, the use of realionims, the features of characters' speech, and the presence of symbols describing the characters. Thus, the implicit assessment is still present in the novel and it gravitates towards the first point on the "positive -negative" scale which is manifested in the close interaction of narrative and linguistic markers.
Masonic symbolism in the author's and characters' speech is represented unevenly in quantitative terms. The characters' speech contains more denotations of various objects related to Freemasonry and their descriptions than the author's one. The structure of the narrative is constructed in such a way that the author mainly makes an event-trigger outline, and the characters, as a rule, recount the conceptual essence of Freemasonry. In addition, in some cases, the author's speech includes zero signs with different semantics of the "Freemasonry" field which transmit information without a verbal carrier [18]. Thus, Pisemsky establishes a certain distance between himself (the artist) and the main object of the representation (Freemasonry). Even taking into account the possible presence of Pisemsky's internal censor, conditioned presumably by the government ban on the work of Masonic lodges in Russia at the time when the novel was written, it cannot be denied that in the novel "Masons" the semantic field "Freemasonry" is realized through a wide set of its components, the vast majority of which are used in direct meanings, duplicating the Masonic tradition.
Conclusion. The existence of modern researches proves that the creation of Pisemsky is still interesting. The analysis of the writer's heritage today provides an opportunity to take a fresh look at the artistic world of his works. The answer to the questions of N.N. Gruzinskaya is given by time itself, which with impartial definiteness and irrefutable clarity indicates that the writer has not been forgotten and his artistic quest allows numbering his best texts among the classical ones.
Список литературы
1. АнненковП.В. Литературные воспоминания. М., 1983. 714 с.
2. Грузинская Н.Н. Об изучении мировоззрения и метода А.Ф. Писемского в советском литературоведении // Ученые записки ТГУ 1964. № 48. С. 106-115.
3. Зайцева Е.Л. Поэтика психологизма в романах А.Ф. Писемского: дис. ... канд. филол. наук. Москва, 2008. 180 с.
4. Звягина С.В. Художественный мир А.Ф. Писемского в контексте магистральных сюжетов русской литературы: дис. ... канд. филол. наук. Нижний Новгород, 2016. 209 с.
5. Корчинский А.В. «Новостной» роман 1860-х гг.: эскалация и преодоление опасностей // Новый филологический вестник. 2017. №3 (42). С. 81-89.
6. Писемский А.Ф. Масоны [Электронный ресурс]. URL: http://thelib.ru/ books/pisemskiy_aleksey/ masoni.html (дата обращения: 27.12.2018).
7. Писемский А.Ф. Письма. М.-Л., 1936. 925 с.
8. Рошаль А.А. Из наблюдений над творческой историей романа А.Ф. Писемского «Масоны» // Русская литература. 1963. № 1. С. 180-184.
9. Синякова Л.Н. Проза А.Ф. Писемского в контексте развития русской литературы 1840-1870-х гг.: проблемы художественной антропологии: дис. ... д-ра филол. наук. Новосибирск, 2009. 396 с.
10. Скрынник Н.А., Удовенко И.В. Аспекты гуманитарной подготовки студентов вуза: к вопросу научного изучения хронотопа на примере драматургии А.Ф. Писемского // Экономическая стратегия и перспективы развития сферы торговли и услуг. 2017. № 2. C. 377-386. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.1109734.
11. Тимашова О.В. «Литературные» эпизоды романа А. Ф. Писемского «Тысяча душ» и журнальная биография писателя // Вестник Санкт-Петербургского университета, Язык и литература. 2018. № 3. С. 367-375. DOI: 10.21638/spbu09.2018.304.
12. Тимофеев А.В. Романы «Мещане» и «Масоны» в творческой эволюции А.Ф. Писемского: дис. ... канд. филол. наук. Москва, 1984. 225 с.
13. Эмблемы и символы. Москва: Интрада, 1995. 368 с.
14. Freeborn R.H. The Rise of the Russian Novel: Studies in the Russian Novel from Eugene Onegin to War and Peace. Cambridge University Press, 2010. 296 p.
15. Lilith M. "The world is a forest of symbols": Italian Freemasonry and the practice of discretion. American Ethnologist. 2012. № 2 (39). Pp. 425-438. DOI: 10.1111/j.1548-1425.2012.01373.x.
16. Mackenzie K. R. H. The Royal Masonic Cyclopedia of History, Rites, Symbolism, and Bibliography. Cambridge University Press, 2012. 795 p.
17. Тmashova О.У. Problems of Genre and Composition of A.F. Pisemsky's Early Works, Published in Мoskvityamn // Tomsk State University Journal of Philology. 2015. № 2 (34). Pp. 166-173. DOI: 10.17223/19986645/34/13.
18. Shuneyko A.A., Chibisova O.V Transmitting information without an individual material carrier // Science Journal of VolSU. Linguistics. 2017. Vol. 16, № 3. Pp. 248-256. DOI: 10.15688/jvolsu2.2017.3.26.
19. Steussy R.E. The Bitter Fate of A.F. Pisemsky // The Russian Review. 1966. Vol. 25, № 2, Pp. 170-183.
20. Waite A.E. Saint-Martin, the French Mystic, and the Story of Modern Martinism. Read Books Ltd, 2016. 84 p.
References
1. Annenkov, P.V (1983). Literary memories, Moscow, 714 p.
2. Georgian, N.N. (1964). On the study of the worldview and the method of AF Pisemsky in Soviet Literary Studies, Tomsk State University Scientific Notes, no 48, pp. 106-115.
3. Zaitseva, E.L. (2008). The poetics of psychology in the novels of A.F. Pisemsky: Dis. ... Cand. Philol. Sci., Moscow, 180 p.
4. Zvyagina, S.V. (2016). Art world A.F. Pisemsky in the context of the main stories of Russian literature: Dis. ... Cand. Pilol. Sci., Nizhny Novgorod, 209 p.
5. Korchinsky, A.V. (2017). "News" novel of the 1860s: escalation and overcoming of dangers, New Philological Bulletin, 2017, no 3 (42), pp. 81-89.
6. Pisemsky, A.F. Freemasons [Electronic resource]. URL: http://thelib.ru/books/pisemskiy_aleksey/ma-soni.html (access date: 12/27/2018).
7. Pisemsky, A.F. (1936). Letters, Moscow-Leningrad, 925 p.
8. Roshal, A.A. (1963). From observations of the creative history of the novel A.F. Pisemsky "Masons", Russian literature, no 1, pp. 180-184.
9. Sinyakova, L.N. (2009). Prose A.F. Pisemsky in the context of the development of Russian literature of the 1840-1870s: problems of artistic anthropology: Dis. ... Dr. Phil. Sci., Novosibirsk, 396 p.
10. Skrynnik, N.A., Udovenko, I.V. (2017). Aspects of humanitarian training of university students: on the issue of the scientific study of the chronotope on the example of drama-touring A.F. Pisemsky, Economic Strategy and Development Prospects for the Trade and Services Sphere, no 2, pp. 377-386. DOI: 10.5281 / zenodo.1109734.
11. Timashova O.V (2018). "Literary" episodes of the novel "A Thousand Souls" by A.F. Pisemsky and the writer's journal biography, Bulletin of St. Petersburg University, Language and Literature, no 3, pp. 367-375. DOI: 10.21638 / spbu09.2018.304.
12. TimofeevA.V. (1984). The novels "Philistines" and "Masons" in the creative evolution of A.F. Pisemsky: Dis. ... Cand. Philol. Sci., Moscow, 225 p.
13. (1995). Emblems and symbols, Moscow: Intrada, 368 p.
14. Freeborn R.H. (2010). The Rise of Russian Novel: Studies in the Russian Novel: Onegin to War and Peace, Cambridge University Press, 296 p.
15. Lilith M. (2012). "The world of forest symbols": Italian Freemasonry and the practice of discretion. American Ethnologist, no 2 (39), pp. 425-438. DOI: 10.1111 / j.1548-1425.2012.01373.x.
16. Mackenzie K. R. H. (2012). The Royal Masonic Cyclopedia of History, Rites, Symbolism, and Bibliography, Cambridge University Press, 795 p.
17. Timashova O.V. (2015). Problems of Genre and Composition of A.F. Pisemsky's Early Works, Published in Moscow, Tomsk State University Journal of Philology, no 2 (34), pp. 166-173. DOI: 10.17223 / 19986645/34/13.
18. ShuneykoA.A., Chibisova O.V. (2017). Transmitting information without an in-dividual material carrier, Science Journal of VolSU. Linguistics, vol. 16, no 3, pp. 248-256. DOI: 10.15688 / jvolsu2.2017.3.26.
19. SteussyR.E. (1966). The Bitter Fate of A.F. Pisemsky, The Russian Review, vol. 25, no 2, pp. 170-183.
20. Waite A.E. (2016). Saint-Martin, the French Mystic, and the Story of Modern Martinism. Read Books Ltd, 84 p.
Шунейко Александр А., доктор филологических наук, доцент, Комсомольский-на-Амуре государственный университет, профессор кафедры лингвистики и межкультурной коммуникации; 681013, г. Комсомольск-на-Амуре, Российская Федерация, пр. Ленина, 27.
Alexander A. Shuneyko, Doctor of Philology, Professor of Linguistics and Intercultural Communication Department of Komsomolsk-on-Amur State University; 27 Lenin Avenue, 681013, Komsomolsk-on-Amur, Russia; e-mail: [email protected].
Чибисова Ольга В., кандидат культурологии, доцент, Комсомольский-на-Амуре государственный университет, доцент кафедры лингвистики и межкультурной коммуникации; 681013, г. Комсомольск-на-Амуре, Российская Федерация, пр. Ленина, 27.
Olga V. Chibisova, PhD in Cultural Studies, Associate Professor of Linguistics and Intercultural Communication Department of Komsomolsk-on-Amur State University; 27 Lenin Avenue, 681013, Komsomolsk-on-Amur, Russia; e-mail: [email protected].
