Poetry of language. Language and its poetic function

POETIC LANGUAGE OF A. A. FETA'S LYRICS

How poor is our language! - I want and I can’t. - I can’t convey this to either friend or enemy, What is raging in my chest like a transparent wave. A. A. Fet The poetry of Afanasy Afanasyevich Fet is fresh and fragrant today, as at the time of its creation. The poet was able to notice such subtle transitions in the state of nature that one marvels at the vigilance and skill of the author. Moreover, nature in Fet’s lyrics does not exist on its own; it reflects the internal state of the author or his lyrical hero. Sometimes they are so close that it is difficult to understand whose voice is where. Very often poems sound dissonant, but it is the surrounding world that invades poetry. As soon as I meet your smile Or catch your joyful glance, “I sing a song of love in you, And in your beloved beauty. It seems that the poet is omnipotent, any “peaks- 1)1 and depths are available to him.” This is the ability of a genius to speak in the usual In the language. Nature itself, harmony and beauty sing with its soul. The night was shining. The garden was full of the moon. The rays lay at our feet in the living room without lights. The piano was all open, and the strings in it trembled, Just like our hearts for your song ". Starting from a concrete and real picture, the poet moves on to a lyrical symbol. Addressing the readers - “I>> brings his creation closer to millions of poetry lovers, forcing them to perceive the beauty and charm of natural poetry, which was so clearly revealed to the author. Poems Feta is natural, like all the surrounding nature. Sounded over a clear river, Rang in a darkened meadow, Rolled over a silent grove, Lighted up on the other bank. Poetry is eternal, because it makes our hearts and souls tremble, awakens the best feelings of a person, calls him to lofty goals. Only there does harmony and beauty exist, where falsehood and artificiality disappear. The poems of A. A. Fet show the beautiful and pure world of nature, its artless beauty and freshness. And it is not so important how they are conveyed, as long as it is true, it comes from the depths of the soul. The author teaches us to open our hearts to nature, to let it into our souls, to enrich ourselves spiritually, returning this beauty to those around us. Being able to appreciate all the diversity of the world, you become richer and purer - isn’t this the main value of communicating with the poetry of a great master. How the chest breathes freshly and capaciously - Words cannot express anyone! Like streams spinning loudly through the ravines at midday on the foam! In the air, the song trembles and melts, The rye turns green on the boulder - And a gentle voice sings: “You will survive another spring!” The poet shows the close relationship between man and nature,” this is the spring from which you can draw strength endlessly if you treat it with care and soul. But nature is surprisingly vulnerable, it is easy to destroy and cause irreparable damage. You acutely understand this when reading the beautiful poems of FeT. His poetic world is surprisingly diverse and fragile, and the subtle lyricist makes you understand the depth of the changes taking place. - She covered the path for me with her sleeve. Wind. In the forest alone, it’s creepy, and sad, and fun, - I don’t understand anything. Peter, everything around is humming and swaying, Leaves are spinning at your feet. There, in the distance, a thinly calling horn is suddenly heard. Nature in the poems of Afanasy Afanasyevich is not deserted, it is filled with the presence of man, his familiar world of sounds, smells, forms. You can really feel it, it “responds” to any touch: with a word, with a hand, with a thought... It is a great joy to communicate with the work of A. A. Fet.

A single national language arises as a result of long-term integration of not only class, but also territorial dialects, in a process, so to speak, directly opposite to the Babel pandemonium. A closed, subsistence economy isolates people, preserves their local words, linguistic clichés... Is it any wonder that residents of the same country have difficulty understanding their fellow countrymen and neighbors. Perhaps the most striking example of this kind was Germany in the 18th century, on whose territory there were approximately as many different principalities (each with its own dialect!) as there were days in the year. Dialectal stratification as a consequence of former feudal fragmentation is well known even in modern German. The formation of a single centralized state also contributes to the formation of a single national language.

Any National language- the systemic unity of its three main components, which partially coincide, approximately like the Olympic rings: spoken language, literary language and poetic language.

Language spoken exists on a dialect basis and serves for everyday, intimate, involuntary communication. Its main and only function is communication. This is a fundamentally unprocessed language, improvisational, allowing for liberties and roughness. The spoken language is free in the use of profanity: individual neologisms, dialectisms, provincialisms, professionalisms, jargon, colloquialisms and even in certain situations vulgarisms, uses risky phrases and loose syntactic constructions, is not distinguished by a consistent stylistic field, and is openly eclectic.

Literary language should not be confused with the language of fiction. It got its name due to the fact that written literature played a major role in its education, formation and development. Literary language is a standardized, correct language accepted in official circulation. This is the language of the press, radio, television, public speaking. He does not allow abnormal deviations in either style, syntax, or vocabulary. A literary language emerges at a certain stage of the historical development of the people representing it, as a rule, in the era of the elimination of feudal fragmentation, national consolidation and political unification based on the leadership of the most politically, economically and culturally advanced part of the country. For example, the Russian literary language was based on the Moscow dialect. The unification of language norms was initially achieved through trade, as well as the activities of traveling singers and actors. Later, with the advent of large cities and the establishment of capitals, the influence of universities, theaters, seminaries and schools and, of course, national fiction and journalism is felt. The final finishing of an exemplary literary language is undertaken by the media, although they often act in a destructive manner. Standardization of literary language is usually carried out in written form. Therefore, writing is rightly called the second form of existence of the literary language.

Poetic language- the language of fiction itself. Being the basis of the national literary language, it has its own specific characteristics. Along with the communicative function, which, as we could see, extends far beyond the boundaries of one generation, poetic language is endowed with an aesthetic function to an even greater extent. It resolutely opposes the average clichéd language in its colloquial and literary form as a unique expression of individual personality.

In linguistic and literary stylistics (linguopoetics) there is the concept of the so-called " individual style context" - a representative segment of the text by which one can establish its authorship. Thus, there are quite real and tangible “individual stylistic contexts”: “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign”, “Daniil Zatochnik”, “Archpriest Avvakum”, “Pushkin”, “ Lermontov", "Turgenev", "Dostoevsky", "Tolstoy", "Leskov", "Bunin", "Nabokov", "Solzhenitsyn" and so on ad infinitum. Sometimes two or three phrases are enough to reconstruct the individual characteristics of a particular person's handwriting masters

Let us take, for example, the individual stylistic context of “Andrei Platonov” in the form of an excerpt from the writer’s story “The Third Son”: “If a mother could, she would always live so that her sons would not waste their hearts mourning her. But the mother could not bear to live long.” Of course, only the author of “Chevengur” and “The Pit” could have written this way. An unexpected and strong word “could not bear” in relation to the ability to live, a painful expression of the very content, the very patience to live... The central word of the entire phrase bends under an excessive semantic load and behaves as actively as in poetry. Let us not forget that the remarkable prose writer began precisely in the poetic field, having published his first collection of poetry in the Voronezh Proletkult.

Leo Tolstoy's unfinished novel "The Decembrists" begins with a syntactic period of 698 words! This is not only a striking fundamental property of the writer’s artistic thinking, his stylistics, but also a characteristic feature of his, Tolstoy’s, vision of the world, which he imperiously imposes on the reader: we survey him together with Tolstoy with a long gaze, analyzing and evaluating at the same time.

So, each writer, willingly or unwillingly, develops his own unique version of poetic language, the relevant properties of which are represented by the individual stylistic context of his work, which, however, is also not homogeneous within itself. The language of even the same author changes like handwriting at different stages of his creative path, depending on the object of application of his creative energy, the generic, genre-specific, structural specificity of his works, etc.

There is a complex relationship between the particular and general contexts of poetic language, without which it is impossible to adequately assess not only the specificity of the idiostyle of a particular writer, but even the meaning of a particular word in his specific work. The dependence of the semantics of a word on its immersion in a particular artistic context is especially great in lyric poetry. The decisive aesthetic impact of the context, the intensity of semantic interactions are inherent in any type of verbal art, not to mention lyric poetry, where the interactions are especially dynamic...

Poetry is a special way of artistic cognition of things in their unique aspects, generalized and at the same time individual, thereby inaccessible to scientific and logical knowledge. This uniqueness, the singularity of the concept for the lyric poetry of modern times is even more mandatory than the emphasized individuality of the author or hero. That is why a poetic word is always a word transformed by context (the forms of this transformation are diverse), qualitatively different from its prosaic counterpart.”

Externally, poetic language operates with the same units of speech as spoken and literary languages. Therefore, he is not at all protected from profanation, from an interpretation that is obviously inadequate to the poetic intent.

Poetic language, in contrast to its related colloquial and literary languages, Yu.M. Lotman defined it as an artificial language or, in his structural terminology, as a “secondary modeling system”, which has incomparably greater complexity and information density compared to natural languages. This formulation of the question warns against a simplified view of a poetic text, actualizes the conditional, playful nature of the speech elements functioning in its system, and reveals their purposeful figurative meaning.

As noted above, language in a broad sense is a figurative form of reflection of reality, which does not exist outside the actual verbal and speech form of embodiment of the entire system of images that make up the artistic cosmos. Of course, figurative means are used to a certain extent both in colloquial speech and in general literary standardized language, but, of course, not in the consistency and condensation that is characteristic of artistic speech itself. Poetic language actively exploits, and sometimes deliberately imitates, in pursuit of certain artistic goals, the characteristic forms of spoken and literary language.

The language of literary works is the subject of study of both linguistics and literary criticism. However, both friendly philological disciplines view it from a specific angle. If a linguist is mainly interested in the general patterns of the functioning of the national language under the pen of outstanding masters, their ordering, normalizing significance in the formation of a literary language (it is no coincidence that dictation texts, exercises and examples in school and university grammars are selected from the works of Russian classics!), then the literary critic concentrates his attention mainly to the specific use of language for the artistic depiction of reality, man and society in certain literary works, idiostyles of certain writers, schools, movements and trends.

However, the interests of linguists and literary critics naturally, “peacefully” intersect if they turn to a related field of application of their knowledge - linguopoetics.

Well said about N.M. Yazykov Ksenophon Polevoy: “Few of the Russian poets knew how to so happily use the wealth of expressions and unexpected turns of our mighty language.”

For N.M. Yazykov has no difficulties: as with genre canons, he does not take into account the generally accepted norms of poetic language. If he lacks a word, he simply invents one. And the very themes of his poems created the greatest opportunities for creating an original poetic language. Yazykov easily introduces Slavicisms and archaisms into poetic speech (usta, dennitsa, fingers, brow, brasno - a very traditional vocabulary for the poetry of that time) and boldly creates a contrasting combination of “Olympus the Young Chashnitsa” (one of his favorite poetic devices).

Lively colloquial speech, folklore motifs, and vernacular are widely used in Yazykov’s poems: “Once upon a time there was a poet,” “a daring blizzard,” “valiant chest” - and right there: “a business bastard.”

Languages ​​boldly includes colloquial expressions in poems of different genres - this is the so-called “student” vocabulary (student jargon): revelry, feast, soul “student-jabbering”, “bubbly youth” (completely new phrases), and life realities: road, money, finance, profit, wine sales, etc.

Yazykov is a “poet of expression” (Ks. Polevoy). He handles the word in a unique way, strives to use it not in its usual meaning, to combine incompatible concepts in one image: “barefoot horse”, “slender, faithful steps”, “I will remember the financial illness // And I close my eyes languidly”, “I’m already flying to cart I”, “the depths of the forest sounds”, “The president of the night sky, // The golden moon shines”, “the mosquito does not block his ears and cheeks”. Yazykov creates bold, original, unexpected epithets and comparisons: “bright laughter”, “disembodied dream”, “inexperienced blood”, “frank wine”. And this boldness and unexpectedness of phrases seemed to allow Yazykov to create new words, which he boldly includes in his poetic language: “water run”, “Kolovratno”, “snegovertshinny”, “perepryg”, “krutoyar”, etc.

Yazykov, selecting definitions and epithets, creates paradoxical combinations: “uninteresting persecution”, “honey of expectations”, “unmarked love”, “slender harp”, “tall hope” (the combinations are truly unusual). He is not afraid of tautologies: “I am sick with a headache,” “The blows are louder than thunder,” “to magnify with greatness.” Typical for Yazykov is the use of a pair of words that are similar in sound: “speeches pressure and rebuff”, “drink and sing”, “kings of leprosy and orders”, “and nothing and no one”. The rhyming words are also curious: “daring feast” - “kind old lady”, “possibly - traveler”. Sometimes the aphoristic ending of linguistic poems is also surprising: “...fate // There are no liberals; everyone is equal". In general, Yazykov’s poetry is characterized by an abundance of epithets and definitions; lush periphrases: “young pet of Areyan sciences,” “pupil of the forest Diana,” “my stone’s obedient son.” Comparisons are sometimes redundant:

Brave as freedom
And fast, like Perun.
You are built like nature
Like the sky, forever young.

"My Solitude", 1823

Yazykov generally likes to include comparisons (one or more) in the final part of the poem, as if drawing a parallel with the idea expressed earlier:

You, rejoicing in your soul, will hear the song of freedom
In the living harmony of poetry,
How the son of nature listens from a mountain height
The victorious cry of the eagles.

“V.M. Knyazhevigchu", 1823

The poet masterfully used sound writing: “The white-headed VOLGA VAL”, “the gardens of LEMONS and OLIVES”, “The white-headed WAVE rose”, “where Capricorns gallop along the mountain steeps”, “My playful muse”, “The boiling key rolled”.

In one of Yazykov’s last works, “Limes” (1845) (essentially a small poem with some genre features of a poetic feuilleton; its hero is a “little man”), the author’s poetic language is more reminiscent of “rhymed prose”; it is demonstratively anti-poetic:

...But the family world
Mistresses: here is her mother, Christina
Egorovna; dad, pharmacist Shmir,
Ivan Ivanovich; Uncle Karl Ivanovich...

And this was already something new for Yazykov’s poetry.

All these stylistic features of N.M.’s poetic speech. Yazykov and created his unique, special poetic language. And this power of Yazykov over the word was appreciated by his contemporaries: “...This poet surprises us with the fire and power of language. No one has mastered verse and period more than he, wrote A.S. in 1830. Pushkin in his review of Nevsky Almanac. “It seems that there is no subject whose poetic side he could not comprehend and express with the liveliness characteristic of him.”

It is no coincidence that at the beginning of the 20th century those young poets who sought to break out of the canons of symbolist poetics were drawn to Yazykov. S. Bobrov (poet of early futurism) and V. Shershenevich (future imagist) became researchers and apologists for Yazykov. The broad spirit of Yazykov’s poetry, according to Bobrov, “pushed, broke, scattered” the framework of modern poetry. He contrasts Yazykov with Karolina Pavlova, whose cult was introduced by Valery Bryusov (who highly valued Yazykov’s skill). Yazykov also influenced the young Nikolai Aseev. “Incomparable placers of diamonds,” wrote S. Bobrov in 1914 about the poetry of N.M. Yazykova.

Poetry N.M. Yazykova is very personal. “Yazykov’s life is not rich in external events, and yet it is rare to find another poet whose every poem would be the fruit of an experienced moment, like Yazykov, in whom the person and the poet would be so closely connected,” wrote the poet’s close friend S .P. Shevyrev. He is primarily a singer of Russia - a high and pure love for the Motherland permeates all his poems.

In the early 1830s. He and his brothers are undertaking a tremendous amount of work - collecting oral folk art. “Collection of the Languages” became the basis of the famous collection of Russian songs by Pyotr Kireyevsky. In his poetry, he remains faithful to his former favorite theme - the theme of understanding the national unique ideal, Russia and its role in history. The feeling of national pride has always been a powerful source of creative inspiration for Yazykov. He was proud of the history of his country, the great role of the Russian people in the historical destinies of Europe.

Patriotic and freedom-loving motives of N.M.’s lyrics. Yazykov, this “poetry of spiritual scope”, which he expressed with such strength, skill and energy in his work, his “youthful enthusiasm”, which made an indelible impression on his contemporaries - all this provided Yazykov with one of the important places in Russian poetry of the 1820s. 1840s

Poetry N.M. Yazykova is strong because she is amazingly original.

I am reminded of Pushkin’s lines: “The works of true poets remain fresh and forever young.” These are the best poems of the talented Russian poet Nikolai Mikhailovich Yazykov.

Questions about the work of N.M. Yazykova

1. What genre forms especially attracted N.M. Yazykova?
2. What new does Yazykov bring to the canonical genre of elegy?
3. What are the main themes of Yazykov’s poetry?
4. What do Yazykov and the Decembrist poets have in common in the interpretation of national historical themes?
5. Than N.M. Was Yazykov (like the Decembrist poets) attracted to folk literature (fairy tales and song folklore)?
6. How does Yazykov’s freedom-loving lyrics differ from the poetry of the Decembrist poets?
7. What, according to Yazykov, was the main thing in the image of the Poet he created?
8. What brings Yazykov’s songs and Denis Davydov’s “hussar” poems together?
9. What motifs are similar between Lermontov’s “Sail” and the linguistic “Swimmer” (1829)?
10. How does nature in Yazykov’s poems differ from the landscape sketches of his predecessors?
11. What impressed contemporaries with the poetic language of N.M. Yazykova?
12. What is unique about this poetic language? What especially demonstrated the innovation of N.M. Yazykov, his ideological and artistic achievements?
13. What poems by N.M. Yazykov were set to music?
14. How was the originality of N.M.’s poetry expressed? Yazykova?

Poetic language, or the language of fiction, is one of the most important languages ​​of spiritual culture, along with the language of religion (cult) and the language of science. In the system of human culture, poetic language as the language of verbal art, first of all, opposes the standard literary language as the language of official life. The functioning and actual linguistic difference between these languages ​​is rooted in the difference between the spheres of culture: everyday life, on the one hand, and material and spiritual culture, on the other.

Official communication between spiritual culture, material culture and everyday life is carried out exclusively by means of the literary language.

Poetic language is open: it is focused on change, on the search for new expressive possibilities, and in other cases - on originality. In spiritual culture, language is an object of constant reflection.

The languages ​​of spiritual culture and literary language to some extent share the two most important functions of human speech: expression of meaning (explication) and its transmission (communication). Literary language is more dialogical: for it the moment of universality, all-accessibility, all-intelligibility is more important; The goal of wide dissemination of content is paramount here. On the contrary, the languages ​​of spiritual culture are more monological.

The language of official life is potentially addressed to all members of a given society without exception. The most important quality of a literary language is its universality, associated with its claim to convey and popularize almost any content. The languages ​​of spiritual culture lack this ability.

Literary language, by virtue of its readiness to convey any message, turns out to be indifferent, neutral in relation to the meanings expressed. The languages ​​of spiritual culture oppose the language of official life as semantically marked - semantically neutral. The main function of these languages ​​is nomination.

The fundamental difference between the languages ​​of spiritual culture also lies in the field of semantics. The language of fiction is usually called “figurative language.”

Specialized languages ​​of spiritual culture are organically connected with the content, carry it within themselves, and directly contain it. We have the right to talk about the unity of their content and form, if not complete, then, in any case, partial.

In poetic language, figurative significance can be acquired not only by those forms that are many, but also by those that are few, not only by those that exist, but also by those that are not.

As a result of the targeted ordering and semantization of external form, a new level appears in poetic language: taken from the point of view of form, it should be defined as compositional, and taken from the point of view of content - as conceptual. In a literary language, the composition of a text is determined, first of all, by pragmatics, and in languages ​​of spiritual culture - by semantics: changes in composition directly affect the content.

The content of the compositional level of the language of fiction consists of semantic structures realized in segments of speech larger than a phrase. This is, for example, the plot: it as a whole or its individual links can be to one degree or another universal, common to a number of works, authors, literary eras, etc., i.e. belonging not to the text, but to the language. In poetic language, the most characteristic unit of the compositional level is the stanza. A stanza can emphasize and enhance the semantics of other linguistic forms or even impart to the text its own semantics associated with the history of its use.

The proper semantics of compositional forms turns out to be relatively stable and independent of the semantics of other levels of language. Two options are possible: in some cases, compositional forms accompany general semantics, in other cases, they form it themselves, without the participation of linguistic forms of other levels.

The uniqueness of the languages ​​of spiritual culture is determined not only by their structural and semantic, but also by their actual linguistic differences from the language of official life. Linguistic differences between literary language and the language of fiction can be recorded at all levels without exception.

The originality of poetic syntax may lie in the use of various kinds of non-literary constructions: foreign, archaic or colloquial.

The area of ​​poetic syntax also includes deviations from standard language norms, expressed in the absence of grammatical connection or its violation (solecism). A special case of solecism is the omission of prepositions. A completely special category of cases consists of violations of the normal word order, i.e. inversions not motivated by the actual division of the sentence. Sometimes the poetic order is so loose that it obscures the meaning of the sentence.

Poetic morphology is all types of violation of standard inflection.

1. Changing unchangeable words.

2. Transition of a word to another grammatical category:

1. 1) change of gender;
2. 2) change of declination;
3. 3) singular and plural for nouns;
4. 4) change in the category of adjectives (transition of relative adjectives into qualitative ones);
5. 5) reflexivity of non-reflexive verbs and vice versa;
6. 6) transitivity of intransitive verbs and vice versa;
7. 7) present tense for perfective verbs and simple future for imperfective verbs.

Poetic morphology allows colloquial, dialectal and archaic inflection.

Along with poetic form-creation there is poetic word-creation. If the writer’s word-creation sets into motion models that are unproductive or completely unproductive outside of fiction, then we are dealing with poetic word-formation.

Perhaps the most noticeable and constant differences between poetic language and the language of official life are concentrated in the area of ​​vocabulary.

Apart from creative deviations from the norms of literary language, poets often exercise their right to make an accidental, unintentional mistake. Of course, poetic errors are not limited to spelling - they appear from time to time at all levels of language: syntactic, morphological, phonetic, lexical-semantic (“author’s deafness”).

The language of fiction allows any distortion of speech. The language of art easily accepts foreign language inserts into its system, appearing with any frequency and almost any length.

Situations are possible when a work of national literature is created entirely in a “foreign language,” living or dead. In poetry, it is possible to create an artificial language, in particular the so-called “absortive” one, unlike any other literary language in the world.

The linguistic and functional-semantic difference between the language of fiction both from the literary language and from other languages ​​of spiritual culture allows us to characterize the current linguistic situation as multilingualism.

a special way of existence of natural language ( cm. LANGUAGES OF THE WORLD), characterized by the fact that in it an element of any level of organization of the language system strives to become semantically motivated and can be assessed from the point of view of its performance of an aesthetic, or, in the terminology of R. Jacobson, poetic function. V.P. Grigoriev in the book Poetics of the word defines poetic language as “a language with a focus on creativity, and since all creativity is subject to aesthetic evaluation, it is a language with a focus on aesthetically significant creativity.”

Poetic language can also be understood as one or another natural language, as it appears in a certain poetic work or a set of such works. In a broad sense, the term refers to the language of both poetry and literary prose.

The distinction between ordinary and poetic languages, based on the dominance of communicative or poetic functions in them, respectively, was proposed at the beginning of the 20th century. Russian scientists who were members of the Society for the Study of Poetic Language (OPOYAZ). It was later developed by representatives of the Prague Linguistic Circle. J. Mukarzhovsky wrote that the only constant feature of poetic language is its “aesthetic” or “poetic” function, which he, following R. Jacobson, defined as “the direction of poetic expression towards itself,” although poetic language does not deny the ability to perform communicative function, i.e. convey some message about the world external to the text. The peculiarity of poetic language is that it can impart meaning to any language structures (phonetic, word-formation, grammatical, rhythmic), thereby becoming a kind of material for the construction of new aesthetically significant linguistic objects. Therefore, in contrast to natural language, poetic language is a “secondary modeling system” (in the understanding of Yu.M. Lotman), in which the sign itself models its content. Poetic language, as it were, flaunts its form, inviting the addressee of the poetic message to realize or intuitively sense the causes and consequences of choosing exactly this (sometimes unusual or at least unexpected), and not any other way of expression; Moreover, the external ordinariness of poetic language, which sometimes occurs, is itself perceived against the background of expectations of unusual form as a special aesthetic device.

Elements that are purely formal in everyday language can acquire a semantic character in poetic language, thereby receiving additional meanings. Thus, for a poetic word its sound side is very important, therefore phonemes, which in the linguistic structure are only structural means of distinguishing elements of a higher level, morphemes, in a poetic language can become independent aesthetic signs. For example, in the line of the modern poet Boniface Lukomnikov

light from the branches -« ts» – color of flower branches

What is significant is the change of the phoneme “s” to the phoneme “ts”, as a result of which both of these phonemes in the poetic space of the verse are morphologized and begin to be perceived as significant elements, peculiar “prefixes” to the root vet-(which they are not from the point of view of the structure of the Russian language). In poetic language, therefore, the concept of “internal form of the word” becomes important in the understanding that was introduced by A.A. Potebnya and developed by G.O. Vinokur: it is assumed that some content may not have its own separate sound form, and therefore, in a literary text, its secondary motivation and etymologization occurs (which can be layered on top of the primary one, if present). So, in the given line the words light, color And flower acquire a peculiar “poetic etymology”: a quasi-root is isolated in them vet- with the meaning “source of the natural, divine” (cf. the meaning of “branch” in the Bible: I am the vine, and you are the branches; He who abides in Me, and I in him, bears much fruit(John 15:6)). The word has a “split reference” (R. Jacobson): the process of ordinary reference (i.e., the routine correlation of the word with the entities it denotes) is suspended, and, in the words of P. Ricoeur, an addressing occurs to “deeply rooted possibilities of reality to the extent , in which they are separated from the real circumstances with which we deal in everyday life."

In poetic language, the unambiguous connection between the sign and the object disappears, since here the image strives precisely for novelty, disposability, in which case formations may arise that have no correspondence in reality. So, A. Akhmatova was surprised where in the poem Tsarskoye Selo O. Mandelstam ( Let's go to Tsarskoye Selo!/ Free, windy and drunk, / There the lancers are smiling...) “Uhlans” appear, which “did not exist in Tsarskoye, but there were cuirassiers and a convoy.” And they appear solely thanks to sound repetition ( St. there are st ana), which takes us into a wide area of ​​the unconscious, which has no similarity in ordinary language.

Thus, in the poetic language, certain new linguistic structures are created, in which, following the metaphor of I. Brodsky, “the voice / tries to keep the words, squealing, within the limits / of meaning” (From Albert Einstein), and linguistic signs in poetic language reveal iconicity (cf. I. Brodsky and the street in the distance narrows to the letter« U"), which allows us to clarify the process of secondary motivation. In poetic structures, orderliness arise that are not implied by the structure of natural language, which allow, in the words of Yu.M. Lotman, “to identify in certain respects intratextual segments and consider a set of these segments as one or more paradigms.”

The reality of such newly generated paradigmatic relations is proven primarily by those extreme cases when, during the perception of a text, a certain potential linguistic form, specially removed by the author, is restored. We see something similar, for example, in the text by A. Voznesensky, in which, based on analogies, the sequence is reconstructed Sol-, removed from the text and by the very fact of such removal uniting the word into one poetic semantic paradigm sun, Solzhenitsyn, soldiers, nightingale, which in natural language are not paradigmatically connected (and the line with the word “sun” refers, in turn, to the whole paradigm of O. Mandelstam’s “black suns”). Wed:

The black tse was carried on a stretcher.

Did you read " In the first circle» Zhenitsyna?

<...>

The dates were marching.

Sang: " owey, owey, birdie!»

If in everyday language the polysemy of a word is resolved in speech in certain contexts (cf. the classic example of Yu.D. Apresyan: A good pastry chef does not fry brushwood on a gas stove, in which the ambiguity of almost all the words included in it is removed by harmonizing their semantic features, see also SEMA;), then in a poetic language the polysemy of words and grammatical forms forms the basis for overcoming the “common meaning” and generating a new one, revealing the “super-semantic essence” (D.S. Likhachev) linguistic units of different levels. So, for example, in the lines of B. Pasternak from the book My sister is life

The city tram tracks stopped here.<...>

Tearing off branches

The clearing will run away, sliding through the grass.

noun branch appears simultaneously in both of its main meanings: (1) “a small lateral shoot, shoot of a tree, shrub or herbaceous plant”; (2) “a separate line in a railway system that deviates away from the main track,” and there is a kind of oscillation between these two meanings in the text. Accordingly, the verb syntactically associated with this word tear off also begins to be understood in several semantic planes (“to separate with a jerk” and “to separate”), and a new meaning is born thanks to “predicative assimilation” (P. Ricoeur), which eliminates the conflict between semantic consistency and inconsistency. The split into “divine” and “ordinary” meaning of “branch-branch” is found in Pasternak even in one sentence, and therefore in the very vertical structure of the verse its own paradigm of this word-concept is built and the word is anagrammed light(for anagram see SOUND ORGANIZATION OF TEXT):

You're in the wind branch trying

Isn't it time for the birds to sing?

Wet sparrow

WITH Irenaya vet wow!

Similar transformations occur in the field of word formation and grammar. In poetic language, it becomes possible to shift or, more precisely, combine time plans, cf. at I. Brodsky's Yesterday came tomorrow at three o'clock in the afternoon(From Albert Einstein), which the poet himself explains in his early poems: And we play again from time to time / in large amphitheaters of solitude.<...>We live in the past as if it were the present, / unlike the future tense. In parallel, new words appear in the “paradigms” of the poetic text, the motivation of which is born in the syntagmatics of the text:

It’s getting dark outside, or rather, it’s turning blue, or rather, it’s turning black.

Trees in the window cancels, sofa gets stiff.

(I. Brodsky)

Obviously, such motivation can also be “split”: for example, the verb gets stiff can be considered derived from the word com(“becomes like a lump”), and from the word room(“takes on the outline of a room”).

The formation of new words in a poetic language can be associated not only with the processes of word-formation motivation, but also, in parallel, with the processes of combining grammatical categories. For example, in other lines of I. Brodsky

And the statues are freezing, although there is no cold in the yard,

the Decembrist was then executed, and January came.

in linguistic form Besstuzhev the categories of “signature” and “objectivity”, “animation” and “inanimateness” overlap each other; it can be perceived as a proper name (with a slightly distorted spelling), and as a common noun, and as a short adjective. At the same time, there is a superposition of the time plans of the present, the past and the “long past” (plusquaperfect).

A foreign word can also become a motivated sign in a poetic language, especially among bilingual poets, such as I. Brodsky:

Man survives like fish on the sand, she

crawls into the bushes and...

In this case English. fish "fish", transliterated in Cyrillic, receives a grammatical design similar to its Russian equivalent, which forms part of the Russian phraseological unit like a fish on the sand. However, non-verbal signs (mathematical and graphic) can also participate in the formation of poetic meaning, which are often pronounced as words in the structure of the text: cf. from the same Brodsky:

the call ultimately generates a creaky« please

please" :

in the hallway you are surrounded by two old numbers " 8 » .

Grammatical connections in poetic language can become undifferentiated, amorphous, which is facilitated by the graphics of the verse - its vertical row and division into lines (with a pause at the end), as well as freedom in the placement of punctuation marks. The organizing dominant in this case is the sound-letter organization of the beginnings and ends of lines and vertical rows, which we see in the symmetrically reflected acrostic dedication to the poet G. Aigi (“yot” is a common name for the sound denoted in Russian by the letter “and short”):

Ave sung A

Yotom palatal arch

Glossoy gold drag

True will of the path

(S. Biryukov)

Consequently, words and grammatical forms acquire dynamism in poetic language both from the point of view of the plane of expression and from the point of view of the plane of content, and at the same time reflect the entire sum of structural relations that have found linguistic and, more broadly, symbolic expression. Thanks to the compression of linguistic meaning, they acquire the ability to “express the inexpressible,” due to which the amount of information they transmit increases and this information acquires an aesthetic status.

Vinokur G.O. Selected works on the Russian language. M., 1959
Tynyanov Yu.N. The problem of poetic language. Articles. M., 1965
Mukarzhovsky Ya. Literary language and poetic language. – In: Prague Linguistic Circle. Digest of articles. M., 1967
Jacobson R. Linguistics and poetics. – In: Structuralism: pros and cons. M., 1975
Peter M. On issues of semantics of poetic language. – In the collection: Structure and semantics of a literary text. Budapest, 1977
Grigoriev V.P. Poetics of the word. Based on Russian Soviet poetry. M., 1979
Zolyan S.T. Semantic structure of words in poetic speech. – Izv. Academy of Sciences of the USSR. Ser. literature and language, vol. 40, 1980, no. 6
Saporta S. Application of linguistics in the study of poetic language. – New in foreign linguistics, vol. 9. Linguistics. M., 1980
Novikov L.A. The art of words. M., 1992
Lotman Yu.M. Analysis of poetic text. – In the collection: About poets and poetry. St. Petersburg, 1996