Professional Discourse & Communication

Advanced search

Literary Discourse as a Cognitive Dialogue About «Language as the House of Spirit»

Full Text:


The article is focused on the diversity of literary discourse which is viewed through the prism of “the internal life of the text” and is considered as a dialogue within “the life and power” of the language. As an object of interdisciplinary scientific research literary discourse is perceived as a complex metalinguistic phenomenon, which is inherently dialogic in its character and able to generate certain reality in which modern human beings live and act. In the triad “discourse – language – language personality” the median marker is viewed as “the house of being” (M. Heidegger), “the spirit of the nation” (W. Humboldt), which allows for the understanding of flickering ideas standing behind the creativity of a modern poet.
This paper provides the interpretation of the linguistic dynamics of textual space as one of the possible methods of understanding “the life and power” of the text, which helps to objectively represent the notion of “language as the house of spirit” and the spirituality of modern poetry.
The purpose of the article is to study the discourse of a literary work of art as a cognitive dialogue about “language as the house of spirit” and reveal the dynamics of “the spirit” within “the soul of the text”. It should be underlined that the multidimensional character of literary discourse provides for several levels in studying a literary text:
Level 1: “the text and the reality”;
Level 2: “the text and the language”;
Level 3: “the author and the text”;
Level 4: “the reader and the text”.
The research is based on the analysis of the poetic essays by Tamara Sokolskaya – “The Honesuckle” and “Poetic Ariozo. G#HF#E”.
The methods employed in the paper include modeling and interpretation of the linguistic dynamics of the textual space, contrastive and synergetic analysis of the “life and power” of the text and the method of conceptual analysis.
The findings of the research comprise the following the results:
1. Literary discourse is specific in its multidimensional character and the variety of expressed ideas, which sets it apart from other types of discourse;
2. This multidimensional character of literary discourse reveals the complexity of the spiritual life of the author of the text.
3. The synergy in the dynamics of textual units demonstrates spiritual content of modern poetry which exists at different levels of consciousness.
4. Literary discourse serves as the material realization of the spiritual energy of a person.
5. Literary discourse should be viewed as a cognitive dialogue about “language as the house of spirit” which reveals “the dialectic of the spirit” of the author and the dynamics of “the life and power” of the text as a multicultural language code representing the spiritual energy of the nation.

About the Authors

Yu. V. Mironova
Lipetsk State Technical University
Russian Federation

Yuliya V. Mironova, Cand. Sci. (Philology), Associate Professor 


T. I. Sokolskaya
Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, Lipetsk branch
Russian Federation

Tamara I. Sokolskaya is Cand. Sci. (Biology), Associate Professor 



1. Arutyunova, N. D. (1990). Metafora i diskurs [Metaphor and discourse]. In N. D. Arutyunova and M. A. Zhurinskaya (Eds.). Teorija metafory [Theory of Metaphor] (5-33), Moscow: Progress (in Russian).

2. Benveniste, E. (1974) Obshchaya lingvistica [General linguistics]. Мoscow: Progress (in Russian).

3. Buber, M. (1998). Problema cheloveka [The Problem of Man]. Kiev: Nika-Centre (in Russian).

4. Gumbolt, V. (1985). Yazyk i filosofija kultury [Language and culture philosophy]. Мoscow: Progress (in Russian).

5. Kolesov, V. V. (1999). Zhizn proishodit ot slova [Life stems from words]. St. Petersburg: Zlatoust (in Russian).

6. Maslova, V. A. (2017). Lingvokulturologiya [Linguistic and Culture Studies]. Мoscow: Publishing centre “Academy” (in Russian).

7. Myshkina, N. L. (2018). Vnutrennyaya zhizn texta: mehanizmy, formy, harakteristiki [Internal life of the text: mechanisms, forms, characteristics]. Perm: Perm University (in Russian).

8. Revzina, O. G. (2019). Metody analiza khudozhestvennogo texta [Methods of Analysing Literary Text]. In O. G. Revzina Structura i semantica khudozhestvennogo texta [Structure and semantics of literary texts]: 7th international conference, Moscow: proceedings (pp. 301-316). Moscow (in Russian).

9. Romanova, Т.V. (2017). Chelovek i vremia. Yazyk. Diskurs. Yazykovaya lichnost [Man and Time. Language. Discourse. Linguistic Identity]. Nizhniy Novgorod: NGLU of N. A. Dobrolyubov (in Russian).

10. Sokolskaya, T. I. (2015). Zhimolost. S.t.i.hi [Honeysuckle]. Lipetsk: Gravis (in Russian).

11. Sokolskaya, T. I. (2017). Poeticheskoe arioso. G#HF#E. S.t.i.hi [Poetic arioso. G#HF#E]. Lipetsk: Gravis (in Russian).

12. Troitskiy, V.Y. (2020). Duhovnost slova [Spirituality of words]. Мoscow: ITRK (in Russian).

13. Heidegger, M. Bytije i vremia [Life and time]. Мoscow: the Academic Project (in Russian).

14. Yurchenko V. S. Filosofiya yazyka i filosophiya yazykoznanija: lingvofilosofskiye ocherki [Philosophy of Language and Philosophy of Linguistics: Linguistic and Philosophical Sketches]. Мoscow: KomBook (in Russian).


For citations:

Mironova Yu.V., Sokolskaya T.I. Literary Discourse as a Cognitive Dialogue About «Language as the House of Spirit». Professional Discourse & Communication. 2021;3(2):33-42. (In Russ.)

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

ISSN 2687-0126 (Online)