DISCUSSION ANALYSIS AND LINGUISTICS OF THE TEXT: RELATIONSHIP BETTER
The transition to complex forms of social activity makes it possible to master those means of language that underlie the highest level of knowledge of theoretical thinking. This transition from the sensory to the rational leads to the solution of the problem of the connection between text and discourse and is that essential moment that combines the most diverse concepts of discourse and approaches to discursive analysis: from text to meaning, from the logical structure of discourse to its style characteristics, from the general properties of language before lingvospecific features. The article reveals and argued various scientific approaches to the interpretation of the concepts of discursive analysis and linguistics of the text, as well as their correlation and delineation within the framework of the linguistic paradigm. The independent subject of the study is text for linguistics of text, science, which is closely related to discursive analysis. The problem of the ratio of discursive analysis and linguistics of the text is complicated, however, by ambiguous understanding of the tasks of both disciplines and the lack of clear differentiation of the concepts of «text» and «discourse». Because of this, there is a problem of affinity - is there a discursive analysis of the continuation of linguistics of the text, does linguistics of the text itself as an independent discipline arose as a result of increased attention of linguistics to the phenomenon of human communication in general, and to the communicative function of speech directly, became a derivative of discursive analysis? In connection with this, the complex history of the development of the relations of discursive analysis and linguistics of the text, in which conditionally distinguished three stages, characterized by their own approach to the relation of text and discourse. Attention was also paid to the essence of the «pragmatic coup», which led to the crucial move of research interests from the issues of the intra-textual organization to the processes of textual and semantic construction. The fear of losing the object of linguistics of the text became the reason for the consistent separation of the concepts of «text» and «discourse», first of all, with the parameters «statics, system» (text) – «dynamics, procedurality» (discourse). It is also incomplete, according to the author, to contrast the text and discourse, based on the greater significance of the text. This approach does not take into account the fact that the text received by the recipient is the starting point for its discursive activity, and semantic completeness or integrity of the text is formed in the process of interaction between the author and the reader in the text field. Text and discourse are closely related and define each other.
Key words: discursive analysis, text linguistics, communication, pragmatic turn, functional theory of text, theory of activity, theory of speech acts, communicant, interpreter
2. Berezin F., Golovin B. Obshcheye yazykoznaniye. M.: Prosveshcheniye, 1979. 416 s (rus).
3. Van Deyk T. A. (1998). K opredeleniyu diskursa. [WWW-dokument] URL http://psyberlink.flogiston.ru/internet/bits/vandijk2.htm (rus)
4. Vítgenshteyn L. Tractatus Logico-philosophicus. Fílosofs’kí doslídzhennya. K.: Osnovi, 1995. 311 s (ukr).
5. Parokhnyuk L. Do problemy sutnosti movy: deyaki mirkuvannya y rozdumy. Dyvoslovo. 1996. № 11. S. 12-17 (ukr).
6. Svit ukrayinsʹkoho slova [Tekst]: navch. posib. dlya vsikh, khto lyubytʹ y shanuye ukr. Slovo. In-t ... Tarasa Shevchenka. K.: Khreshchatyk, 1994. 416 s (ukr).
7. Sitnichenko L. Chelovecheskoye obshcheniye v interpretatsiyakh sovremennoy zapadnoy filosofii (kriticheskiy analiz). K.: Naukova dumka, 1990. 112 s (ukr).
8. Sossyur F. de. Zametki po obshchey lingvistike. M.: Progress, 2001. 280 s (rus).
9. Tard H. Sotsialʹna lohika. Per z fr. - SPb.: Sotsialʹno-psykholohichnyy tsentr, 1996. 548 s (rus).
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.