Khrolenko, Alexander Timofeevich - History of Philology: textbook. Alexander Khrolenko “Introduction to Philology. Textbook Philology - a universal science

To narrow down the search results, you can refine your query by specifying the fields to search for. The list of fields is presented above. For example:

You can search in several fields at the same time:

Logical operators

The default operator is AND.
Operator AND means that the document must match all elements in the group:

research development

Operator OR means that the document must match one of the values ​​in the group:

study OR development

Operator NOT excludes documents containing this element:

study NOT development

Search type

When writing a query, you can specify the method in which the phrase will be searched. Four methods are supported: search with morphology, without morphology, prefix search, phrase search.
By default, the search is performed taking into account morphology.
To search without morphology, just put a “dollar” sign in front of the words in the phrase:

$ study $ development

To search for a prefix, you need to put an asterisk after the query:

study *

To search for a phrase, you need to enclose the query in double quotes:

" research and development "

Search by synonyms

To include synonyms of a word in the search results, you need to put a hash " # " before a word or before an expression in parentheses.
When applied to one word, up to three synonyms will be found for it.
When applied to a parenthetical expression, a synonym will be added to each word if one was found.
Not compatible with morphology-free search, prefix search, or phrase search.

# study

Grouping

In order to group search phrases you need to use brackets. This allows you to control the Boolean logic of the request.
For example, you need to make a request: find documents whose author is Ivanov or Petrov, and the title contains the words research or development:

Approximate word search

For an approximate search you need to put a tilde " ~ " at the end of a word from a phrase. For example:

bromine ~

When searching, words such as "bromine", "rum", "industrial", etc. will be found.
You can additionally specify the maximum number of possible edits: 0, 1 or 2. For example:

bromine ~1

By default, 2 edits are allowed.

Proximity criterion

To search by proximity criterion, you need to put a tilde " ~ " at the end of the phrase. For example, to find documents with the words research and development within 2 words, use the following query:

" research development "~2

Relevance of expressions

To change the relevance of individual expressions in the search, use the " sign ^ " at the end of the expression, followed by the level of relevance of this expression in relation to the others.
The higher the level, the more relevant the expression is.
For example, in this expression, the word “research” is four times more relevant than the word “development”:

study ^4 development

By default, the level is 1. Valid values ​​are a positive real number.

Search within an interval

To indicate the interval in which the value of a field should be located, you should indicate the boundary values ​​in parentheses, separated by the operator TO.
Lexicographic sorting will be performed.

Such a query will return results with an author starting from Ivanov and ending with Petrov, but Ivanov and Petrov will not be included in the result.
To include a value in a range, use square brackets. To exclude a value, use curly braces.

Introduction to Philology. Tutorial

(No ratings yet)

Title: Introduction to Philology. Tutorial

About the book Alexander Khrolenko “Introduction to Philology. Tutorial"

The textbook introduces the reader to the world of the science of words, introduces its basic concepts and terms, engages in discussion of theoretical issues of philology, and demonstrates its research tools.

For literature teachers and students of specialized classes, students of philological faculties, as well as for readers interested in studying the foundations of philological education at the present stage.

On our website about books lifeinbooks.net you can download for free without registration or read online the book Alexander Khrolenko “Introduction to Philology. Study Guide" in epub, fb2, txt, rtf, pdf formats for iPad, iPhone, Android and Kindle. The book will give you a lot of pleasant moments and real pleasure from reading. You can buy the full version from our partner. Also, here you will find the latest news from the literary world, learn the biography of your favorite authors. For beginning writers, there is a separate section with useful tips and tricks, interesting articles, thanks to which you yourself can try your hand at literary crafts.

Belgorod State National Research University, prof. VC. Kharchenko;

Doctor of Philosophy, Doctor of History sciences, head Department of Philosophy, Kursk State Medical University, Professor S.P. Shchavelev Khrolenko A.T.

Fundamentals of modern philology [Electronic resource]:

X textbook manual / scientific ed. O.V. Nikitin. – M.: FLINTA, 2013. – 344 p.

ISBN 978-5-9765-1418 The textbook was prepared in accordance with the requirements of the State educational standard in the direction of “Philology”. It examines the key problems of modern university theory and practice: the nature of humanitarian knowledge, the methodology of philology, the place and role of text in verbal sciences, philology in the sociocultural space.

The book contains a description of the structure of this discipline, discusses current issues of modern science: paralanguage of philology;

society – personality – linguistic globalization; ecology of culture and language, etc. Particular attention is paid to the methodology of philological research, the introduction and application of new technologies in the humanities.

For students and undergraduates of philological faculties of higher educational institutions, graduate students and doctoral students, a wide range of Slavists, historians, cultural studies and philology teachers, researchers, teachers of specialized classes in the humanities, as well as for readers interested in studying the foundations of philological education at the present stage.

UDC 80(075.8) BBK 80ya73 © Khrolenko A.T., 2013 ISBN 978-5-9765-1418-8 © FLINT Publishing House, 2013

INTRODUCTION.

Part I. THE NATURE OF PHILOLOGICAL KNOWLEDGE Specifics of humanitarian and philological knowledge. (20) What is philology? (20) Unresolved issues of philology (26). Features of humanitarian knowledge (27). Difficulties of philological knowledge (31). Understanding as the basis of philological knowledge (32). Meaning – dialogism – truth in philological research (34). Precision or intuition?

(36) What unites the natural sciences and humanities? (37) Scientific knowledge (39). Philological periphery (41). Extrascientific knowledge (42). Everyday practical knowledge (42). Naive linguistics (43). Study of naive forms of knowledge (46). Naive literary criticism (47). Naive philology (48). The place of tacit knowledge in philological analysis (48). The relationship between scientific and extra-scientific knowledge (50). Pseudo-scientific knowledge (50) The structure of philology as scientific knowledge. (57) The initial unity of Russian philology (57). The beginning of differentiation of philology (58). General scientific prerequisites for the differentiation of philology (59). Disciplinary structure of science (59). Pattern of differentiation (60). Definitions of literary criticism and linguistics (63). The originality of the subject of literary criticism (64). The place of linguistics in the structure of scientific philology (67). The dominance of linguistics (68). The basic nature of linguistics (69). Limitations of linguistics (72). Foundations for the unity of philology (73). In search of the unity of philology as scientific knowledge (78).

Centripetal trends in philology (84). Text as a stimulus for the integration of philology (84). Discourse analysis and its role in the convergence of philological disciplines (85).

The emergence of new intraphilological sciences (86).

Linguoculturology (86). Linguistic folkloristics (87).

Cross-cultural linguistics and folkloristics (88). The formation of a new literature (88). Theoretical understanding of general philological issues (89) Text in philology. (91) M.M. Bakhtin on the place of text in the humanities (91). What is text (92). Meaning as the basis of the text (94). Non-single-layer text (95). Text and Discourse (99).

Difficult issues in textual criticism (100). The unconscious in the structure of cognition and creativity (101). The language system and the unconscious (102).

The process of communication and the unconscious (107) Paralanguage in a literary text. (110) Two-channel speech. Paralanguage (110). Parakinesics (111). Paraphonics (111). Information capacity of paralanguage (112). Theoretical aspect of paralanguage learning (113). The bodily nature of consciousness (115). The pragmatic aspect of learning paralanguage (118). Paralinguistics (paraphilology) (119). Artistic and creative aspect of paralanguage (119). L.N. Tolstoy about paralanguage (121). Paralanguage in literary text (122). Searches for building units of paralanguage (124). Conceptual and terminological apparatus of paralinguistics (125). Paralanguage and inner speech (129). Paralanguage in prose E.I. Nosova (132). Comparative analysis of paralanguage in literary texts (133) Philology in the system of sciences. On the issue of classification of sciences (136). Humanities (137). The increasing role of language (141).

Philology among the humanities. History (143). Philology and cultural sciences: cultural studies and linguoculturology (145).

Ethnography and ethnolinguistics (146). Philology and socio-economic sciences: sociology and sociolinguistics (148). Philology and political science (151). Jurisprudence and legal linguistics (153). Philology and sciences of the psychological and pedagogical cycle: psychology and psycholinguistics (155). Cooperation of philology with the sciences of the mathematical and natural science cycle (157). Philology and mathematics (157). Philology and computer science (160). Biology and linguistics (164). Philology and genetics (165). Anthroponymy and genetics (168). Philology and geography (177). Neurophysiology and neurolinguistics (177)

Part II. METHODOLOGY OF PHILOLOGY

Specificity and methodology of philological research.

(182) The concept of scientific research (182). Stages of scientific research (182). Specific features of philological research (183). Philological research and the world of the unconscious (190). Intuition in Science (190). Methodology of philological sciences (193). Scientific method (196). The limitations of any scientific method (197). Hermeneutics as the beginning of philological methodology (199). The need to revise philological tools (201). Discipline “Philological text analysis” and problems of methodology (203). Compositional analysis (204). Motive analysis (205). A method close to experiment (205). Biographical method (205). Semioesthetic method (206). Intertextual analysis (206). Discourse analysis (209).

Narrative method (213). The concept of narrative (213). Narrative as a tool of scientific knowledge (216). Narrative in philology (219). Content analysis (221). Megatext as an empirical basis of philology (226). Frequency dictionaries of megatexts as a philological tool. Dominant analysis (229). Methodology of “concrete literary criticism” (234) Exact methods in philology. (238) Interest of philology in mathematics (238). “Accurate literary criticism” (239). Linguistics and mathematics (248). Frequency dictionaries (249). Study of the author's idiostyle (252). Limitations of quantitative methods (261) Methodology of linguistic experiment (263).

Part III. PHILOLOGY IN THE SOCIO-CULTURAL SPACE

Philology and linguistic globalization (268). The concept of globalization (global studies) (268). The concept of linguistic globalization (269).

Linguistic globalization in Europe (273). Linguistic globalization in Germany (275). Linguistic globalization and science (the example of Germany) (276). Linguistic globalization and scientific thinking (277).

Globalization and the Humanities (279). Linguistic globalization, regionalism and nationalism (280). Status of English (282). The cultural value of multilingualism (282). Linguistic globalization in Japan (285). Linguistic globalization in Russia (285) Philology and its environmental aspects (288). Concept of ecology (288). Ecolinguistic ideas of I.V. Goethe (289). The emergence of ecolinguistics (290). Saving the Word (291). Why save your word (291). Native speaker as an object of ecological therapy (296). What does the protection of speech consist of (297). Who should take care of preserving the word (298). The role of the family in preserving the word (298). School as a stronghold of culture (299). The peasantry is the creator and custodian of special organic forms of culture (299).

Intelligentsia and culture (300). The role of linguistic personality in preserving words (302). State, state ideology and ecology of speech (305). Points of mass cultural support (309).

Contacts of languages ​​and cultures - good or bad? (309) An instructive experience of saving words (312) CONCLUSION

Abbreviations

Literature

Internet resources

PHILOLOGY - GENERAL HUMAN SCIENCE

Foreword by the scientific editor

The concept of the textbook “Fundamentals of Modern Philology” allows us to consider a wide range of important problems of vocabulary in the context of humanities education. The book is aimed primarily at a university audience - students and undergraduates, whose curriculum has introduced new disciplines designed to expand and deepen knowledge in current issues of modern science, understand its “intent,” and evaluate the most promising and controversial fragments of the philological picture of the world. Its creator - the scientist - largely depends on the conjuncture of science and is not able to “digest” all of its cultural constants, but he is obliged to know and feel the paralanguage of philology, understand the scale of values ​​of the educational environment, see and preach the creative power of verbal art. In this regard, this textbook will be extremely useful for future philological specialists who have not yet formed scientific priorities and stereotypes. Here, in our opinion, it is important to look beyond the boundaries of officiality and show the place of philology in our days.

This course can be used in the training system for undergraduates of state institutions of higher professional education in the direction of “Philology”. Within its framework, it is planned to study the history and methodology of this science in a wide multicultural space, both from the position of diachronic understanding of the emergence and functioning of the main stages of the development of philology, and in the current state.

philological research, its specificity; exact methods in philology; methodology of philological research as a set of initial principles and a set of methods;

specific technologies of philological research; the contribution of outstanding scientists to the development of this science; the nature of philological knowledge; structure of philology; the place and role of text in the humanities; concept of paralanguage; linguistic globalization; ecology of culture and language; and etc.

We especially note that in modern conditions, a master of philology must have fundamental training in the chosen specialty and borderline, related disciplines, be able to isolate, formulate and resolve a scientific problem, conduct competent communication in the relevant branch of philological science, possess professional and practical skills and language teaching skills or literature at a university (and other types of educational institutions), speak two foreign languages ​​and generally understand the architecture and tools of humanities knowledge.

Focusing on the state of modern philological science, pedagogy, psychology, linguodidactics, cultural studies and their latest achievements in the implementation of various types of activities, a master of philology should be able to evaluate communication as a phenomenon, the state and factors of the development of literary and linguistic processes and their research; put forward, justify and prove scientific hypotheses using modern methods of philology, actively using the achievements of information culture of the 21st century; work in a scientific team, understand and know the organization of educational and research processes; have excellent command of modern technologies and teaching aids in higher education and new types of secondary educational institutions.

The preparation of a Master of Philology ends with the writing and defense of a final qualifying work (master's thesis), which is the final stage of higher professional education and will ensure not only the consolidation of the acquired knowledge and skills of scientific work culture, but also the necessary set of methodological ideas and methodological skills in the chosen field of professional activity , as well as the real possibility of using them in further work.

8 *** New book by Professor A.T. Khrolenko meets the proposed standards and is devoted to the current issues of modern university education, including traditional areas of philological science and new achievements of domestic scientists in the development and application of more advanced methodology, which helps to increase the accuracy of humanities research.

The first part of the textbook is designed to reveal the content of the nature of philological knowledge. The author asks a seemingly ordinary question for a specialist: “What is philology?” And it becomes clear that the boundaries of this science are not fully defined. Cited by A.T. Khrolenko’s generalizations indicate that not only eras, but different cultures and schools put forward their own understanding of this substance, which even now remains among the most controversial and “explosive” sciences.

In this part, the author also examines issues of scientific, extra-scientific and pseudo-scientific philology, gives interesting examples and comparisons that allow the reader to understand for himself the authenticity of certain statements, learn to understand the core of our science and distinguish it from the philological periphery.

Another problem highlighted by the scientist is the heterogeneity of the structure of philology, which by the end of the 19th century. is divided into linguistics and literary criticism, which over time acquire their own terms and a system of specific methods.

Here, not only the views of the luminaries of science of the past deserve attention - I.A. Baudouin de Courtenay, E.D. Polivanov and others, but also the opinions of modern philologists reflecting on this topic (see, for example, the subtle observations of R.A. Budagov, Yu.M. Lotman, M.L. Gasparov, V.M. Alpatov, etc.) . Paradoxically, perhaps, I. Brodsky, an expert in poetic intuition, sounds in this vein, as if he was throwing his “philological consciousness” into another world, into the sphere of personal communication and philosophy. His judgments about Dostoevsky, given in the book, it seems, will more than once return us to the awareness of the internal inconsistency, instability of “small philologies” in the structure of the Babel tower of this science: “Dostoevsky understood: in order to explore infinity, be it religious infinity or the infinity of the human soul, there is no weapon more far-reaching than his highly inflected, spiraling turns of syntax, his native language.”

But still, a rigid division into linguistics and non-linguistics by the end of the 20th century. stopped. In modern philology, centripetal trends have intensified, as they once did, declaring the beginning of a new period in the development of this science.

To them A.T. Khrolenko rightly attributed the processes of integration in many areas of linguistics and literary criticism, interest in discourse analysis of text, the emergence of philological discussions in the scientific press, and finally, the development of problems in the theory and practice of teaching philological disciplines at school and university. All these facts eloquently indicate that verbal science in our time receives a new creative impulse and is actively involved in the development of other areas of humanities, seeks and finds application of its methodology and rich historical experience in the system of sciences of the 21st century.

A special place in this is occupied by the text as an integration phenomenon of culture, connecting its components into a single framework.

The author’s thoughts about what a text is, what it consists of and how it is organized will help the reader understand this verbal phenomenon more broadly than it is usually interpreted in university textbooks - from linguo-philosophical, cultural and aesthetic positions.

At the same time, A.T. Khrolenko, in interpreting the literary text, largely relies on the brilliant instinct of M.M. Bakhtin, who raised it to the top of the verbal iceberg and dismantled the finest threads and interweavings of this substance. It’s no coincidence that M.M. Bakhtin believed that “the life event of a text, that is, its true essence, always develops at the boundary of two consciousnesses, two subjects.” There can be no text without meaning.

We also found interesting other observations by A.T. Khrolenko, which we would call hermeneutic approaches to revealing the eternal problem, because meaning - and in this we fully agree with the author of the book - is the key word of philology. Of the questions posed by scientists in this section, we will note with a dotted line those that, as we see it, are included in the mainstream of the foundations of philological science: text and language system; multiple layers of text; the unconscious in the structure of cognition and in creativity. These questions still have to be resolved by future generations of philologists, philosophers, and cultural scientists.

Related to the consideration of text problems is the question of the paralanguage of philology, which can be interpreted more broadly: what is the linguistic space of Homo sapiens, what mechanisms influence his consciousness. It is significant that the author introduces the conceptual and terminological apparatus of paralinguistics (kinema, intonema, paralexeme, parasememe, etc.), which also indicates that this branch of science is at an active stage of formation and is already distinguished by a number of indicators as an independent unit of humanitarian knowledge. Paralanguage includes such aspects of the study of reality as parakinesics and paraphonics, the language of emotions and the languages ​​of intuition, paralanguage in a literary text, paralanguage and inner speech, etc. We agree that these are very difficult phenomena not only for observation and description, but also for research. In fact, they may constitute the science of the future. But here, too, the author appropriately returns the reader to the past, where paralanguages ​​are scattered in grains:

Let us remember the “ladders of words” by A. Bely, the “poetic hum” of V. Mayakovsky. These are the special flows of information that make up the arsenal of paralinguistic means that are now so vividly and figuratively manifested in cinema, literature and in general in any form of creativity. It is not for nothing that V. Nabokov introduced the term carpalistics, which scientists understand as the science of facial expressions, the language of gestures and movements... This part of the book ends with the author’s reasoning about the place of philology in the system of sciences. The reader will find here colorful examples of the use of language facts and a presentation of methods of philological research in non-traditional areas, both connected with our science by one core of humanitarian knowledge (cultural studies, ethnography, sociology, political science, psychology, etc.), and those that are, at first glance, , at a considerable distance from verbal creativity (mathematics, computer science, biology, genetics). Everywhere, as we see, the spirit of the Logos is present, which leads us through the human labyrinths of science.

The second part of the textbook discusses the specifics and methodology of philology. The author explains the essence of such important concepts as scientific research and its stages, intuition in science, hermeneutics as the beginning of philological methodology, etc. Modern linguistic and literary methods are characterized in detail, and the concept of megatext is introduced. The scientist pays special attention to precise methods in philology, which have received current application in recent decades. Therefore, the judgments of A.T. are very informative and useful. Khrolenko about the connection between verbal sciences and mathematics, about the development and use of frequency dictionaries, about the limitations of quantitative methods.

Whatever structural model we apply to philology, one of the central methods is experiment, which always involves including an element of creativity and imagination in the “mathematics” of our consciousness. That is why, probably, the most memorable, paradoxical works in science are not linear, but spontaneous, unconscious. And A.T. talks about such a difficult problem. Khrolenko.

The assessments of our scientists of the second half of the 20th century, paradoxically, still often dominate new ideas. A.T. Khrolenko shows in his book where to look for the sources of genuine philology, what names and facts need to be guided by now, in the age of pseudoscience. But world philology, history and philosophy also found a worthy place in the system of “verbal coordinates” of A.T. Khrolenko, who constantly extracts and analyzes the most revealing subjects: be it studies on the poetry of K.F. Taranovsky, or P. Feyerabend’s ideas on the methodology of science, or reflections “From Dream to Discovery”

G. Selye, or the problems of structural anthropology of C. LeviStrauss... All this significantly complements and expands the level of humanitarian competence of masters of philology.

The third part of the book reveals the world of our science in the sociocultural space and concerns such interesting, controversial and still poorly developed issues, which the author subtitles such as “Philology and linguistic globalization” and “Philology and its environmental aspects.”

We will not analyze the above theses in detail.

Let's just say that each of them is now at the forefront of science, which is going through difficult times and is subject to persecution, if not political, but spiritual. Philology (and the author clearly shows this) is capable of resisting cultural trade, the expansion of someone else’s way of life, and the introduction of artificial signs of “civilization.” That is why the thoughts of A.T. are extremely relevant in this context. Khrolenko on linguistic globalization and problems of ecology of creativity and culture in general. But the author does not act here as a retrograde, so to speak, as an armchair scientist defending the stereotypes of the past.

In every phenomenon, he sees another side, allowing him to hope that a person will be nourished by the harmony of the universe; not destructive, but humanistic motives should prevail in him. That is why, for example, the notorious globalization for A.T. Khrolenko is not only the Americanization of language and culture (we dare to hope that these are external, shallow signs of a new era), but also the search for a universal language of the future civilization, which the best minds have dreamed of since the time of Aristotle. This means that the problem of global language dominance is much more complex and subtle than a simple change in the attributes of culture.

The author also touches on such an extremely important component of our existence as the ecology of language. He outlines ways to study this problem from Goethe to emigrant writers and modern thinkers. The author also addresses the everyday side of the question: why save the word? who should do this? What is the role of the family in maintaining this phenomenon? How does government policy influence the “ideology” of a word? What are the functions of the linguistic personality in preserving the word? All these are by no means idle questions for the author, which should be the subject of discussion in any thinking audience.

The book uses interesting electronic and library resources that allow you to independently study the stated issues in more depth and open new horizons of philological knowledge. Insertions in the text under the heading “Bookshelf” draw the attention of readers and course participants to the most significant, in the author’s opinion, articles and works that solve key problems of philological education.

Professor A.T. Khrolenko is not only a scientist of high scientific culture, who went through the rich linguistic school of the 20th century. (among his teachers are such figures as Prof. P.G. Bogatyrev, Prof. E.B. Artemenko, Prof. A.P. Evgenieva, Academician N.I. Tolstoy), but also a thoughtful practitioner working in a modern classroom and invariably contributing to the formation of a true personality (both philological and human in general), which cannot be achieved without penetration into verbal matter, without understanding the spirit and values ​​of any science. And in such a craft A.T. Khrolenko is a real scientist, “by God’s inspiration.” He is not just a teacher in love with science, but a deep, original author with his own, so to speak, philology of life and the rare intuition of a scientist capable of pushing the boundaries of official science and penetrating into its very nature.

Let us say in conclusion that individual chapters of this book were discussed and improved by us in joint discussions and disputes that do not stop to this day, because philology is not an archaic subject, but a science of the future, or, in the words of the legendary I.A. Baudouin de Courtenay, general human science. It is into this “universal” philology that the author tries to look, calling readers to equal communication, polemics and, if you like, to verbal confession.

No wonder it is said: “Language is the confession of the people...”

–  –  –

Serious philological training is inconceivable without thorough methodological equipment in the form of textbooks, the central place among which should be taken by a book on the fundamentals of philology.

In accordance with the requirements of the State Standard, a master of philological education must have an idea of ​​the content and place of philology among the disciplines of the humanities, the state and development of modern scientific studies, and the problems of integration and differentiation in the field of philological sciences.

The master must know the structure, forms and methods of scientific knowledge, their evolution and dynamics, the general principles of constructing philological theory, the main tasks of philological science, see the problems and prospects of modern philology, its main directions.

A master's degree graduate must be able to summarize the results of scientific knowledge and use them as a means of increasing new knowledge, conduct experiments and use introspection as an empirical basis in the field of philology, correctly formulate the concept of scientific research, the purpose and objectives of the research, use the most effective methods, techniques and techniques of research, work professionally in the Internet system, competently use the conceptual and methodological apparatus of related sciences.

During the training, the master must develop the skills of systems thinking, innovative-cognitive, initiative, independent creative activity, the use of new information technologies and elements of computer linguistics, and be competent in the application of general scientific methodology and the conceptual apparatus of philological sciences in his research and teaching activities.

*** Despite the fact that philology has a venerable, centuries-old tradition behind it, this area of ​​knowledge cannot boast of an abundance of books on the basics of the science of words.

Philology in the modern sense of the term began with a general course by the outstanding university teacher August Böck (1785–1868) “Encyclopedia and methodology of philological sciences”; the course was published posthumously in 1877.

The first attempt by G.O. dates back to 1925. Vinokura to teach philology as an academic subject. This experience in the 40s was summarized by him in the text “Introduction to the Study of Philological Sciences.” The first issue of “Problems of Philology” was published in 1981 by V.P. Grigoriev in the collection of scientific works “Problems of structural linguistics 1978” [Vinokur 1981]. It outlined a program consisting of four sections:

1) what should be understood by philology;

2) volume and sections of philology; principles for identifying its departments;

3) methods of philology;

4) samples of philological study of texts.

The first three sections precisely comprised the content of the “Introduction to the Study of Philological Sciences.” There is no strict definition of philology in this work, but G.O.’s remark is characteristic. Vinokur, which the publishers of the “Introduction” found in the scientist’s archive: “I look at myself, as the author of this work, not as a literary historian and not as a linguist, but first of all as a philologist ( our detente - A.Kh.) in the specific meaning of this term. Both of these sciences are sisters of the work, an equally oriented consciousness that sets itself the task of interpreting the text.”

In modern educational practice, there is a need to continue work in this direction. Thus, we know the program “Fundamentals of Philology”, compiled by Doctor of Philology, Professor A.A. Chuvakin at the Department of Russian Language, Stylistics and Rhetoric of Altai State University and supported by the Presidium of the Council on Philology of the UMO for classical university education in 2003 (published in 2006). It is focused on the “philologization” of university education and takes into account the fact that modern philology has a wider range of professions that lie at the crossroads of literary studies, linguistics and folkloristics. These sciences are closely related to borderline and interdisciplinary fields of activity.

The program defines the objectives of the course:

1) present a picture of the emergence and main stages of development of philology;

2) familiarize students with the main objects of philology;

3) characterize the problem of the philological method;

4) outline the place of philological sciences in modern society;

5) consider the features of scientific research in the field of philology.

If until now the training of philologists at a university has somehow managed without a propaedeutic book on philology, then it is difficult to imagine deepening and expanding the content of philological education at the master’s level without a textbook on the fundamentals of philology.

The proposed book consists of three parts: I) “The Nature of Philological Knowledge”; II) “Methodology of Philology”;

III) “Philology in the sociocultural space.”

The concept and content of the book were formed in the process of developing and teaching two courses in the master’s curriculum at Kursk State University: “History and methodology of philology and philological education” and “Current problems of philology and philological education.” The book was intended as a generalization of the practice of academic cooperation with undergraduates of the first graduations, whom the lecturer considers his co-authors. We thank those of them who, with their interested attention, contributed to the appearance of the book. Our special gratitude goes to graduates N. Dyachkov, V. Goncharova, A. Salov, T. Demidova, V. Selivanova, N. Dorenskaya, Yu. Khalina.

The author expresses his heartfelt gratitude to Doctor of Philology, Professor of Moscow State Regional University Oleg Viktorovich Nikitin, who took the trouble to oversee how the book was put together, for his critical, benevolent and highly constructive analysis of almost every chapter.

It should be noted that the book about philology was written by a linguist, and this may lead to some “linguistic bias”. We hope that literary scholars and folklorists will help overcome this “tilt” with their constructive criticism. The result should be a course that introduces the future specialist to the world of philology and provides him with a productive and comfortable scientific stay in this world.

–  –  –

What is philology? “I know what it is until I am asked what it is,” these words of the Christian thinker of the Middle Ages Augustine the Blessed, which he said about the category of time, are quite applicable in thinking about philology.

On the one hand, this science is one of the most developed. It has a specific subject, precise methods for studying it, a system of theoretical conclusions and accumulated knowledge, and a wide scope of application to social practice [Volkov 2007: 23]. On the other hand, philology remains a science of unsolved problems, which are pointed out by everyone who comes into contact with it.

The question of the essence of philology as a science and academic discipline is being updated in connection with the restructuring of the system of domestic higher education, the emergence of bachelor's and master's degrees in the direction of “Philological education.” In secondary school, philological classes appear. There is an urgent need for appropriate programs and educational books.

S.I. Gindin rightly notes that the lack of philological programs for schools is explained by the fact that, despite its prevalence, the definition of “philological” remains vague [Gindin 1998: 83].

The concept of “philological competence”, which is relevant in modern domestic pedagogy, requires disciplinary support, since the boundaries of philology and its origins still remain debatable [Makhmuryan 2008: 202]. Therefore, the question “What is philology?” - not at all idle.

Encyclopedias, dictionaries and reference books differ significantly in their definitions of the concept of “philology”.

In the “Dictionary of the Russian Academy” there is no word philology, but there are three cognate words - philologist, philological, philological. If a philologist is interpreted in it as a ‘lovers’ [SAR: 6:

488], then the potential word philology would mean ‘philosophy’.

One of the first definitions of the term philology was given by

N.M. Yanovsky in his “New Interpreter of Words...” (1806):

"PHILOLOGY, Gr. Love and learning languages ​​and literature;

a science that contains rules and notes that serve to the general knowledge of languages, their criticism, the meaning of both their own and the transferred ones of their words and sayings, and finally everything that has to do with the expression in different dialects of peoples, both ancient and modern. ... Philology includes various branches of human knowledge, except for the high sciences of mathematics and physics” [Yanovsky 1806: III: 987–988].

IN AND. Dahl also did not ignore the science of words in his famous dictionary. “Philology, linguistics, science or the study of ancient, dead languages; studying living languages" [Dal 1980: 4: 534].

If V.I. Dahl, extremely narrowing the understanding of philology, reduces it to linguistics, then most subsequent authors expand the understanding of philology, including the cultural aspect.

I.N. Berezin two articles are devoted to the term philology: “Comparative Philology” and “Philology”. The first is interpreted by him in the spirit of comparative studies - the leading direction in science of those years, the second - linguistics - is a brief outline of the content of this concept from antiquity, where oratory reached the heights of verbal mastery, to the second half of the 19th century, when it was divided into two branches: “the science of the language and literature of the people” and the science of the people. In the first case, the focus remains on the problems of grammar, criticism and hermeneutics, and in the second - ethnology and cultural studies (see: [Berezin 1878: 215]). For that time, such an understanding of philology was a noticeable step forward.

In the “Encyclopedic Dictionary” of Brockhaus and Efron, philology is conceived as part of a single historical and philological science and is defined as “a science that has as its content the study of the creations of the human spirit, i.e. in their development" (see

reprint: [Zelinsky 1993: 811]).

The “Encyclopedic Dictionary” of the Russian Bibliographical Institute Granat defines philology as follows: “love of the word, the study of word-thought” [Ritter 1926: 511]; “the side of historical and philological science facing monuments”

[ibid: 512].

For E.D. Polivanov's philology is a set of disciplines of social sciences that study cultural phenomena reflected in the monuments of the word, i.e. in language and in literary sources, and also (since other arts, in turn, are closely related to literature) and in monuments of other arts.

In compiled by E.D. Polivanov’s “Explanatory Terminological Dictionary of Linguistics” (1935–1937) contains a dictionary article “Philology”, which states that the history of literature (namely, the history of culture in literary monuments) and the history of art are included in the concept of philology, while “linguistics” (= the science of language) is included here only partially"

[Polivanov 1991: 444].

S.S. Averintsev in the “Brief Literary Encyclopedia”

He defined philology as “a community of humanities that study history and clarify the essence of the spiritual culture of humanity through linguistic and stylistic analysis of written texts.” True, in this article below there is a remarkable phrase: “It is more correct to see in F. a broad, but internally unified and self-legitimate form of knowledge, which is determined not so much by the boundaries of its subject as by a specific approach to it” [Averintsev 1972: 974].

R.A. Budagov called philology a set of sciences that study the culture of different peoples, primarily in the form in which it is expressed in language, in writing, in fiction [Budagov 1976: 14].

The results of the 1979 discussion “Philology: problems, methods, tasks” on the pages of the journal “Literary Review” are indicative. Speeches by famous literary scholars, linguists and philosophers Y. Bilinkis, M. Gasparov, M. Girshman, V. Grigoriev, V. Kozhinov, D. Likhachev, Y. Lotman, A. Markov, V. Fedorov on various aspects of philology did not lead to the emergence of a unified concept of the basic foundations of this field of humanities.

Almost twenty years later, S.I. Gindin stated that there is no single definition of philology even in the works of G.O. specifically devoted to this topic. Vinokura.

The definition can be reconstructed thanks to the statements of G.O. Vinokura on the essence of philological work. For example, “a philologist is not a “literary reader” or a “grave digger,” but simply the best of readers: the best commentator and critic.

The main duty of a philologist is precisely to understand absolutely everything” (quoted from: [Gindin 1998: 5]). Note that G.O. Vinokur defined philology not directly, but through the structure of the text and reasoning like “... there is no doubt that reading is an art that must be learned... a master of reading is the person we call a philologist. The art of reading itself, in the sense assumed here, will rightly be designated in this case by the word “philology”” [Vinokur 1981: 38–39]. If for G.O. Vinokur philology is the art of reading, then for S.S. Averintsev philology is the study of the human world, organized around a text and seen through the text [Averintsev 1972: 975].

The search for an adequate definition of the essence of philology is also necessary because without it it is difficult, if not impossible, to determine the boundaries of its constituent parts (sciences, disciplines).

Modern encyclopedias and dictionaries answer the question of what philology is too generally, and therefore approximately the same. For example:

“Philology is the name of a group of disciplines (linguistics, literary criticism, textual criticism, etc.) that study human culture through text.”

“Philology... a set of methods and techniques for studying written monuments from the point of view of language, style, historical and ethnic affiliation” [BE 2006: 54: 476–477].

So, in definitions, the status of philology is defined in different ways:

2) name of the group of disciplines;

3) area of ​​knowledge;

4) a set of methods and techniques for studying written monuments.

It is discouraging that the very concept and term “philology” is absent from reference books of a philological nature, for example, in the “Literary Encyclopedia of Terms and Concepts”

(M., 2001), although the philological method is indicated.

The compilers of foreign encyclopedias were faced with the same scientific problem. The French linguist J. Maruso interprets the term “philology” as follows: “This word usually means the study of literature in general, but in a more specific way (with the exception of the historical disciplines themselves - history, the science of antiquities) - the study of written monuments and the form of language with which they we are introduced to, and in an even more special sense, the study of texts and their transmission, with the exception of the study of language, which is the subject of linguistics” [Maruso 1960: 326].

The famous encyclopedia Britannica limited itself to a few lines: “Philology, a term now rarely used but once applied to the study of language and literature. Nowadays a distinction is usually made between literary and linguistic scholarship, and the term philology? Where used, means the study of language - i.e., linguistics (q.v.). It survives in the titles of a few learned journals that date to the 19th century. Comparative philology was a former name for what is now called comparative linguistics (q.v.). . It is clear from the dictionary entry that the term “philology” itself is rarely used and refers to the field of linguistic and literary studies. Most often it means the study of language, and therefore comparative philology is gradually becoming comparative linguistics. In the 19th century The word philology, according to the dictionary entry, was included in the names of some educational and methodological journals. Thus, philology, in the interpretation of British lexicographers, appears as something escheat.

The understanding of the object, subject, purpose and objectives among philologists varies greatly. The literary critic is convinced that philology as a discipline that is more general than linguistics and literary criticism, uniting them at a level, the object is the word, and the subject is the peculiarities of word usage that are common to linguistics and literary criticism, as well as the particular laws of word usage in related arts [Markov 1979: 50] . For a cultural scientist, the goal of philology is to explain the meaning and functions of a particular text in the general cultural context. The center of philological efforts is literary verbal texts as the most complex types of texts in organization. Deciphering different levels of meaning in works of verbal art, linguistics and literary criticism, more or less clearly differentiated in the field of theory, are so closely fused in a specific analysis that their separation becomes very difficult, and this obliges the philologist to clearly navigate the methodology of these sciences [Lotman 1979: 47]. A specialist in the field of classical philology believes that the goal of a philologist is to reach the thoughts and feelings of another person through the study of words. The word as a great instrument of thought and communication between people and at the same time as a means of knowing someone else’s thought is the main material for the philologist and the starting point for all his research [Radzig 1965: 85]. It is obvious to a linguist that the goal of structural philology can be considered to be the discovery in each word of an independent cultural value and a system of aesthetically significant meanings [Grigoriev 1979: 28].

Our understanding of philology is close to the definitions of Yu.S. Stepanov (“the area of ​​humanitarian knowledge, which has as its immediate object the main embodiment of the human word and spirit - the text” [Stepanov 1998: 592]) and M.I. Shapira (“The main subject of philology is the text and its meaning. Only philology is interested in “the text as a whole... that is, the unique, inimitable unity of meaning in its entirety and in any subtleties of its material embodiment in a sensually perceived form” [Shapira 2002: 57]). The object of philology is text.

The subject is the meanings and related implicit patterns of the text.

Unresolved issues of philology. As soon as a conversation begins about the structure of philological knowledge, the complex of philological sciences and disciplines, many theoretical questions arise for which there are no clear answers yet: what is a text and what are its boundaries; philology is an approach to text, a research method, a complex of sciences or a single multidisciplinary science; why E.D. Polivanov and some other philologists take linguistics beyond the boundaries of philology; why linguistics, capable of analyzing any literary and non-fiction text, which has the richest research tools among the humanities, cannot replace literary criticism; what is philology and why ancient Russian and folklore texts are more easily amenable to philological analysis than other literary texts; If the understanding on which philological knowledge is based is polyvariant in nature, then what about the truth, without which the scientific nature of knowledge cannot be imagined.

It seems that the problem of identifying philology is a consequence of the uncertainty of the boundaries of all humanities knowledge and, more broadly, the lack of development of the taxonomy of social sciences in general. So, it is advisable to approach understanding the essence of philology from the side of scientific taxonomy - to determine the place of philology among other areas of knowledge.

The specifics of philological knowledge should be considered from the perspective of the characteristics of humanitarian knowledge.

Features of humanitarian knowledge. The difference between the natural sciences and the humanities is due to the nature of the object of study.

In the natural sciences, the researcher deals with a real object that is external to the researcher, since nature exists outside of man. For this reason, there is a single fixed point of view of scientists on the nature of the object being studied and the possibility of using theoretical knowledge.

The goal of natural scientists is to describe and explain natural phenomena in such a way as to develop engineering practice on this basis and create controllable technical products [Rozin 2005: 68, 75–76].

Natural sciences create a technical culture, which is based on the assertion that the world is subject to natural laws that can be known in order to serve man.

Objects of humanitarian knowledge are not given directly and directly to the researcher, but are created by him. In humanitarian scientific knowledge, the object under study is highlighted, problematized and explained from the point of view of the personality and values ​​of the researcher himself [Rozin 2005: 67].

The objects that make up the subject of the humanities are of an uncertain nature. These objects are a product of a person's inner world. They enter this world or are significantly determined by the inner world [Pertsov 2009:

123]. The subject of humanities is the spiritual inner world of man, his intellect, psyche, as well as the products of this inner world. In the object being studied, what is found in the knowing subject itself is revealed. In the context of personal life, scientific knowledge acts as humanitarian knowledge [Rozin 2005: 72]. For humanities, it is not the natural properties of an object that are important, but its connections with the inner world of man and the spiritual culture of society [Pertsov 2009: 102]. The cultural information being studied is always immersed in the context of research interest1.

Academician N.N. Moiseev considered the fundamental indivisibility of the object of research and the subject studying this object to be a sign of the humanities. Even knowledge, even that “picture of the world” that is born in the minds of thinkers and scientists, influences the nature of the evolution of the world around us in which we live.

The information received by a person about the properties of the system, Moiseev believed, is the basis for influencing it [Moiseev 19 By observing his inner world and its products, a person, during the observation itself, can influence them to a much greater extent than external objects of nature;

a person’s inner world is inseparable from him [Pertsov 2009: 120].

It is important not only what humanities knowledge says, but also where it leads.

The humanist, by the very fact of studying, influences his object - promotes culture, spirituality, expands a person’s capabilities, prevents what destroys or reduces a person’s cultural or spiritual potential. In fact, in the humanities, the researcher deals not with a phenomenon, but with manifestations of the phenomenon being studied, which he considers as texts. The main theme of humanitarian knowledge is the study of the interaction of the inner worlds of people entering into all possible relationships. Humanitarian knowledge distinguishes two levels of knowledge - the study (interpretation) of texts and the construction of explanations and theories.

The opposition of natural sciences and humanities presupposes the opposition of technical and humanitarian cultures [Rozin 2005: 72]. Unlike the natural sciences, the humanities are focused not on engineering, but on humanitarian activities and practices (pedagogy, criticism, politics, art).

Let's use the example of the Russian religious philosopher S.L. Fran-

ka: the researcher of the anthill is not himself a participant in the anthill, the bacteriologist belongs to a different group of phenomena than the world of microorganisms he studies, while the social scientist himself is - consciously or unconsciously - a citizen, i.e. a participant in the society he is studying (quoted from: [Chernigovskaya 2007: 65]).

creative work, education, self-education, etc.) [Rozin 2006: 81].

Humanities, including philological research, deals with the cultural background, which is explicitly present in the results of the study or is implicitly involved in the formulation of conclusions.

A.T. Khrolenko

FUNDAMENTALS OF MODERN PHILOLOGY

Tutorial

for students and undergraduates of philological faculties of higher educational institutions

Moscow Publishing house "FLINTA"

UDC 80(075.8) BBK 80ya73

Scientific editor – Dr. Philol. Sciences, Prof. O. V. Nikitin

REVIEWERS:

Dr. Philol. sciences, head Department of Russian Language and Teaching Methods, Belgorod State National Research University, Prof. V.K. Kharchenko;

Doctor of Philosophy, Doctor of History sciences, head Department of Philosophy, Kursk State Medical University,

Professor S.P. Shchavelev

Khrolenko A.T.

Х94 Fundamentals of modern philology [Electronic resource]: textbook. manual / scientific ed. O.V. Nikitin. – M.: FLINTA, 2013. – 344 p.

ISBN 978-5-9765-1418-8

The textbook was prepared in accordance with the requirements of the State educational standard in the direction of “Philology”. It examines the key problems of modern higher education theory

And practices: the nature of humanitarian knowledge, methodology of philology, place

And the role of text in verbal sciences, philology in the sociocultural space. The book contains a description of the structure of this discipline, discusses current issues of modern science: paralanguage of philology; society – personality – linguistic globalization; ecology of culture and language

And etc. Particular attention is paid to the methodology of philological research, the introduction and application of new technologies in the humanities.

For students and undergraduates of philological faculties of higher educational institutions, graduate students and doctoral students, a wide range of Slavists, historians, cultural studies and philology teachers, researchers, teachers of specialized classes in the humanities, as well as for readers interested in studying the foundations of philological education at the present stage.

UDC 80(075.8) BBK 80ya73

Part I. THE NATURE OF PHILOLOGICAL KNOWLEDGE Specifics of humanitarian and philological knowledge. (20)

What is philology? (20) Unresolved issues of philology (26). Features of humanitarian knowledge (27). Difficulties of philological knowledge (31). Understanding as the basis of philological knowledge (32). Meaning – dialogism – truth in philological research (34). Precision or intuition? (36) What unites the natural sciences and humanities? (37) Scientific knowledge (39). Philological periphery (41). Extrascientific knowledge (42). Everyday practical knowledge (42). Naive linguistics (43). Study of naive forms of knowledge (46). Naive literary criticism (47). Naive philology (48). The place of tacit knowledge in philological analysis (48). The relationship between scientific and extra-scientific knowledge (50). Pseudoscience (50)

The structure of philology as scientific knowledge. (57) Initial unity of Russian philology (57). Start

differentiation of philology (58). General scientific prerequisites for the differentiation of philology (59). Disciplinary structure of science (59). Pattern of differentiation (60). Definitions of literary criticism and linguistics (63). The originality of the subject of literary criticism (64). The place of linguistics in the structure of scientific philology (67). The dominance of linguistics (68). The basic nature of linguistics (69). Limitations of linguistics (72). Foundations for the unity of philology (73). In search of the unity of philology as scientific knowledge (78). Centripetal trends in philology (84). Text as a stimulus for the integration of philology (84). Discursive

analysis and its role in the convergence of philological disciplines (85). The emergence of new intraphilological sciences (86). Linguoculturology (86). Linguistic folkloristics (87). Cross-cultural linguistics and folkloristics (88). The formation of a new literature (88). Theoretical understanding of general philological

questions (89)

Text in philology.(91) M. M. Bakhtin on the place of text in the humanities (91). What is text (92). Meaning as a basis

text (94). Non-single-layer text (95). Text and Discourse (99). Difficult issues in textual criticism (100). The unconscious in the structure of cognition and creativity (101). The language system and the unconscious (102). The communication process and the unconscious (107)

Paralanguage in literary text. (110) Two-channel speech. Paralanguage (110) . Parakinesics (111). Paraphonics (111) . Information capacity of paralanguage (112). Theoretical aspect of studying paralanguage (113). Corporeal nature of consciousness (115). Pragmatic aspect of learning paralanguage (118). Paralinguistics(paraphilology) (119). Artistic and creative aspect of paralanguage (119). L. N. Tolstoy on paralanguage (121). Paralanguage in literary text (122). Searches for building units of paralanguage (124). Conceptual and terminological paralinguistic apparatus (125). Paralanguage and inner speech (129). Paralanguage in prose E.I. Nosova (132). Comparative analysis of paralanguage in literary texts (133)

Philology in the system of sciences. On the issue of classification of sciences (136). Humanities (137). The increasing role of language (141). Philology among the humanities. History (143). Philology and cultural sciences: cultural studies and linguoculturology (145). Ethnography and ethnolinguistics (146). Philology and socio-economic sciences: sociology and sociolinguistics (148). Philology and political science (151). Jurisprudence and legal linguistics (153). Philology and sciences of the psychological and pedagogical cycle: psychology and psycholinguistics (155). Cooperation of philology with the sciences of the mathematical and natural science cycle (157). Philology and mathematics (157). Philology and computer science (160). Biology and linguistics (164). Philology and genetics (165). Anthroponymy and genetics (168). Philology and geography (177). Neurophysiology and neurolinguistics (177)

Part II. METHODOLOGY OF PHILOLOGY............................................181

Specificity and methodology of philological research.

(182) The concept of scientific research (182). Stages of scientific

research (182). Specific features of philological study

following (183). Philological research and the world of the unconscious (190). Intuition in Science (190). Methodology of philologists

chemical sciences (193). Scientific method (196). The limitations of any scientific method (197). Hermeneutics as the beginning of philological methodology (199). The need to revise philological tools (201). Discipline “Philological text analysis” and problems of methodology (203). Compositional analysis (204). Motive analysis (205). A method close to experiment (205). Biographical method (205). Semioesthetic method (206). Intertextual analysis (206). Discourse analysis (209). Narrative method (213). The concept of narrative (213). Narrative as a tool of scientific knowledge (216). Narrative in philology (219). Content analysis (221). Megatext as an empirical basis of philology (226). Frequency dictionaries of megatexts as a philological tool. Dominant analysis (229). Methodology of “concrete literary criticism” (234)

Exact methods in philology. (238) Interest of philology in mathematics (238). « Accurate literary criticism" (239) . Linguistics and mathematics (248). Frequency dictionaries (249). Study of the author's idiostyle (252). Limitations of quantitative methods (261)

Philology and linguistic globalization (268). The concept of globalization

tion (global studies) (268). The concept of linguistic globalization (269). Linguistic globalization in Europe (273). Linguistic globalization in Germany (275). Linguistic globalization and science (using the example of Germany) (276). Linguistic globalization and scientific thinking (277). Globalization and the Humanities (279). Linguistic globalization, regionalism and nationalism (280). Status of English (282). The cultural value of multilingualism (282). Linguistic globalization in Japan (285). Linguistic globalization in Russia (285)

Philology and its environmental aspects (288). The concept of eco-

ology (288). Ecolinguistic ideas of I.V. Goethe (289). Became

tion of ecolinguistics (290). Saving the Word (291). Why save your word (291). Native speaker as an object of ecological therapy

(296). What does the protection of speech consist of (297). Who should take care of preserving the word (298). The role of the family in preserving the word (298). School as a stronghold of culture (299). The peasantry is the creator and custodian of special organic forms of culture (299). Intelligentsia and culture (300). The role of linguistic personality in preserving words (302). State, state ideology and ecology of speech (305). Points of mass cultural support (309). Contacts of languages ​​and cultures - good or bad? (309) Instructive experience of saving words (312)

PHILOLOGY - GENERAL HUMAN SCIENCE

Foreword by the scientific editor

The concept of the textbook “Fundamentals of Modern Philology” allows us to consider a wide range of important problems of vocabulary in the context of humanities education. The book is aimed primarily at university audiences - students and undergraduates, whose curriculum has introduced new disciplines designed to expand and deepen knowledge

V topical issues of modern science, understand its “intent”, evaluate the most promising and controversial fragments of the philological picture of the world. Its creator - the scientist - largely depends on the conjuncture of science and is not able to “digest” all of its cultural constants, but he is obliged to know and feel the paralanguage of philology, understand the scale of values ​​of the educational environment, see and preach the creative power of verbal art. In this regard, this textbook will be extremely useful for future philological specialists who have not yet formed scientific priorities and stereotypes. Here, in our opinion, it is important to look beyond the formality and show the place of philology

Nowadays.

This course can be used in the training system for undergraduates of state institutions of higher professional education in the direction of “Philology”. Within its framework, it is planned to study the history and methodology of this science in a wide multicultural space, both from the position of diachronic understanding of the emergence and functioning of the main stages of the development of philology, and in the current state.

specific technologies of philological research; the contribution of outstanding scientists to the development of this science; the nature of philological knowledge; structure of philology; the place and role of text in the humanities; concept of paralanguage; linguistic globalization; ecology of culture and language; and etc.

We especially note that in modern conditions, a master of philology must have fundamental training in the chosen specialty and borderline, related disciplines, be able to isolate, formulate and resolve a scientific problem, conduct competent communication in the relevant branch of philological science, and possess professional and practical skills. teaching language or literature at a university (and other types of educational institutions), speak two foreign languages ​​and, in general, be familiar with the architecture and tools of humanitarian knowledge.

Focusing on the state of modern philological science, pedagogy, psychology, linguodidactics, cultural studies and their latest achievements in various types of activities, a master of philology should be able to evaluate communication as a phenomenon, the state and factors of the development of literary and linguistic processes and their research; put forward, justify and prove scientific hypotheses using modern methods of philology, actively using the achievements of information culture of the 21st century; work in a scientific team, understand and know the organization of educational and research processes; have excellent command of modern technologies and teaching aids in higher education and new types of secondary educational institutions.

The preparation of a Master of Philology ends with the writing and defense of a final qualifying work (master's thesis), which is the final stage of higher professional education and will ensure not only the consolidation of the acquired knowledge and skills of scientific work culture, but also the necessary set of methodological ideas and methodological skills in the chosen field of professional activity , as well as the real possibility of using them in further work.

New book by Professor A.T. Khrolenko meets the proposed standards and is devoted to the current issues of modern university education, including traditional areas of philological science and new achievements of domestic scientists in the development and application of more advanced methodology, which helps to increase the accuracy of humanities research.

The first part of the textbook is designed to reveal the content of the nature of philological knowledge. The author asks a seemingly ordinary question for a specialist: “What is philology?” And it becomes clear that the boundaries of this science are not fully defined. Cited by A.T. Khrolenko’s generalizations indicate that not only eras, but different cultures and schools put forward their own understanding of this substance, which even now remains among the most controversial and “explosive” sciences.

In this part, the author also examines issues of scientific, extra-scientific and pseudo-scientific philology, gives interesting examples and comparisons that allow the reader to understand for himself the authenticity of certain statements, learn to understand the core of our science and distinguish it from the philological periphery.

Another problem highlighted by the scientist is the heterogeneity of the structure of philology, which by the end of the 19th century. is divided into linguistics and literary criticism, which over time acquire their own terms and a system of specific methods. Here, not only the views of the luminaries of science of the past deserve attention - I.A. Baudouin de Courtenay, E.D. Polivanov and others, but also the opinions of modern philologists reflecting on this topic (see, for example, the subtle observations of R.A. Budagov, Yu.M. Lotman, M.L. Gasparov, V.M. Alpatov, etc.) . Paradoxically, perhaps, I. Brodsky, an expert in poetic intuition, sounds in this vein, as if he was throwing his “philological consciousness” into another world, into the sphere of personal communication and philosophy. His judgments about Dostoevsky, given in the book, are like

The culture of a society is determined, among other things, by how it relates to the science of words. Attention to philology is an unmistakable test of an individual’s intellectual maturity. A well-known paradox has been noticed in philological education. Each science and scientific discipline can present a corresponding textbook: physics - “Physics”, chemistry - “Chemistry”, history - “History”, etc. The exception is philology. There are philological faculties or the degree of candidate and doctor of philological sciences, but there is no textbook or teaching aid with the corresponding word in the title. True, in 2011, a textbook by Professor A. A. Chuvakin “Fundamentals of Philology” was published, which for now remains in splendid isolation.

The deepening of specialized education in high school, the presence of philological classes, basic educational programs in philology in higher education and state educational standards urgently require educational books on an introduction to philology, its fundamentals, on the history and methodology of philology, etc. The appearance of such books and introduction into widespread educational practice, without a doubt, would stimulate a meaningful discussion on fundamental issues of science and scientific disciplines about words. Among these questions, the first is the question of the status of philology. There is no clear understanding of what this is – a field of knowledge, a unified science, a set of scientific disciplines, a methodology or a general approach. Teachers are interested in the question of the nature of philologization of education, philological competence, etc.

For us, philology is the science, which has its own object text as a whole, and subject - meanings, embodied in the linguistic and paralinguistic structures of this text, as well as all the explicit and implicit patterns of the text and the properties and characteristics of its constituent units. At one time, the publishers of G. O. Vinokur’s work “Introduction to the Study of Philological Sciences” T. G. Vinokur and R. M. Tseitlin found in the scientist’s archive a remark made by G. O. Vinokur at the defense of his doctoral dissertation on textual criticism and the language of Pushkin: “Despite the dual nature of the proposed work, which contains, on the one hand, historical and literary works, and on the other, linguistic and stylistic ones, I look at myself as the author of this work, not as a literary historian and not as a linguist, and above all as a philologist in the specific meaning of this term. Both of these sciences are sisters, products of an equally oriented consciousness, which sets itself the task of interpreting the text. It is these common, actually philological tasks of both sciences, to the service of which I devote my energies, that I would like to remind you of with the proposed work.” Philology is the identification and study of meanings through the close cooperation of linguistics and literary criticism.

In our opinion, the academic discipline “Introduction to Philology” should include such topics as the object and subject of philology; features of humanitarian and including philological knowledge; text in philology; paralanguage in literary text; the concept of scientific and non-scientific philology; the structure of philology as scientific knowledge; philology research tools; family and cooperative connections of philology with other sciences.

The concept and content of the book, which the reader now holds in his hands, was formed in the process of developing and reading the corresponding training course at Kursk State University. The author is grateful to those bachelors and masters who contributed to the appearance of the book with their interested attention. I wish them good luck in their creative philological work!

I flatter myself that this book will be interesting and useful to teachers and secondary school students who wish to deepen their knowledge of philology, as well as to all those who are partial to both the Word and the science of it.

Low bow to Doctor of Philology, Professor of Kursk State University Maria Aleksandrovna Bobunova for her critical, benevolent and highly constructive analysis of the book manuscript.

Reviews, comments and suggestions are accepted at: .

Poll on the topic “What is philology?” among high school students, students, people with higher education and members of philological departments shows a wide range of opinions and the almost complete absence of any coherent definition of the science of words among some respondents.

“I know what it is until I am asked what it is” - these words of the Christian thinker of the Middle Ages Augustine the Blessed, which he said about the category of time, are quite applicable in thinking about philology.

On the one hand, this science is one of the most developed. It has a specific subject, precise methods for studying it, a system of theoretical conclusions and accumulated knowledge, and a wide scope of application to social practice [Volkov 2007: 23]. On the other hand, philology remains a science of unsolved problems, which are pointed out by everyone who comes into contact with it.

Let us turn to the history of philology and compare the understanding of the corresponding term among domestic representatives of philological knowledge, starting from the 18th century.

V. K. Trediakovsky, who rightfully proudly called himself a philologist, identified his science with eloquence.

His young contemporary M.V. Lomonosov was the first in Russian science to formulate a definition of the term philologist. In the illustrative dialogue from the “Brief Guide to Eloquence” there is a line: “Philip. Truly, I will begin and try to become a philologist from Philip.” [Lomonosov 1952: 342].

In the “Dictionary of the Russian Academy” the words philology no, but there are three cognate words - philologist, philological, philological. If philologist it is interpreted as “lovers” [SAR: 6: 488], then the potential word philology would mean “philosophy.”

One of the first definitions of the term philology was given by N. M. Yanovsky in his “New Interpreter of Words...” (1806): « PHILOLOGY, Gr. Love and learning languages ​​and literature; a science that contains rules and notes that serve to the general knowledge of languages, their criticism, the meaning of both their own and the transferred ones of their words and sayings, and finally everything that has to do with the expression in different dialects of peoples, both ancient and modern. “...” Philology includes various branches of human knowledge, except for the high sciences of mathematics and physics” [Yanovsky 1806: III: 987–988].

V.I. Dal also did not ignore the science of words in his famous dictionary. “Philology, linguistics, science or the study of ancient, dead languages; studying living languages" [Dal 1980: 4: 534]. If V.I. Dal, extremely narrowing the understanding of philology, reduces it to linguistics, then most subsequent authors expand the understanding of philology, including the cultural aspect.

In the authoritative “Russian Encyclopedic Dictionary” by I. N. Berezin, the term philology Two articles are devoted: “Comparative Philology” and “Philology”. The first is interpreted by him in the spirit of comparative studies - the leading direction in science of those years, the second - lubriciousness- is a brief outline of the content of this concept from antiquity, where oratory reached the heights of verbal mastery, to the second half of the 19th century, when it was divided into two branches: “the science of the language and literature of the people” and the science of the people. In the first case, the focus remains on the problems of grammar, criticism and hermeneutics, and in the second - ethnology and cultural studies (see: [Berezin 1878: 215]). For that time, such an understanding of philology was a noticeable step forward.