|
Title of the article: |
HISTORY OF LITERARY INSTITUTIONS OF THE 1920S–1930S. NEW RESEARCH |
|
Author(s): |
Vagif N. Guseynov |
|
Information about the author/authors |
Vagif N. Guseynov — PhD in Linguistics, Associate Professor, Moscow State Stroganov Academy of Design and Applied Arts, Volokolamskoe hwy 9, 125080 Moscow, Russia. E-mail: vagifng2007@yandex.ru |
|
Section |
Scientific life |
|
Year |
2019 |
|
Volume |
Vol. 53 |
|
Pages |
pp. 302–307 |
|
Received |
June 29, 2019 |
|
Date of publication |
September 28, 2019 |
|
Index UDK |
821.161.1 |
|
Index BBK |
83.3(2Рос=Рус) |
|
Abstract |
On June 25, 2019 the Institute of world literature of the RAS held a round table discussion “The History of literary institutions of the 1920s–1930s. New research”. The relevance of the stated topic is determined by the urgent need for theoretical understanding of a significant amount of new knowledge about the literary process of the first post-revolutionary years, accumulated after the archival revolution of the 1990s facts: writer's biographies, creative stories of texts, literary and intra-literary struggle. The existing conceptual generalizations characterize important aspects of the literary process, but they do not bring much closer to understanding the mechanisms of transformation of the “external” noise of life into the “inner voice” of the creator, reflected in his word, in his language. Modern linguistics has not yet learned to study the language except by dissecting, decomposing its living body into dead “dictionary” and “grammar”. The way out is seen in return to the ideas of Bakhtin, who called to listen to the dialogue in writer's word. The very idea of the word as a dialogical unity implies the need to study the author's word in comparison with the word of his interlocutors — writers, critics, members of literary groups, readers, authorities. Modern sociology helps to differentiate social functions and to find their embodiment in literary practices of writer's unions. The study of the language of literary institutions and the language of writers should become socio-linguistic: the center of research attention should be put to the writer’s word came from the socio-political languages and ideologically marked languages of generations. |
|
Keywords |
the history of Soviet literature, historical and literary process, literary Association, literature-related life, institutionality, dialogized word, M. M. Bakhtin, A. M. Selishchev, V. M. Zhivov, IWL RAS. |
|
References |
|
|
PDF-file |
|
|
Illustrations |
|
