Abstract: Subtext in a work of art. Subtext as an artistic device in literature Subtext of a work

Word subtext is increasingly found in linguistic and literary practice in the study of texts. Obviously, some authors use this word as a term, but do not always define it. Perhaps this is due to the fact that the internal form of this term is so transparent that even without any definition it seems clear what concept it denotes. However, this evidence is more than illusory.

Let's analyze the use of the word subtext both in everyday and scientific speech and show what concepts can be denoted by this term. But first, let's talk about how a natural language word generally differs from a scientific term, and about what the logical operation of defining a term is.

Thinking in general is thinking with the help of concepts and categories. As I. Kant wrote, “we cannot think of a single object except with the help of categories.” The difference between scientific thinking is that it consciously and relatively consistently builds a system of concepts and categories in the process of development of science and consciously uses it, whereas in natural language, the categorical side of a word is “obscured” by polysemy, synonymy, and expressiveness; the logical in language is hidden under purely linguistic connections and relationships. Hegel wrote insightfully about this: “Forms of thought are revealed and deposited primarily in human language... Language has penetrated into everything that for a person becomes something internal, in general a representation, into everything that he makes his own, and all that what it transforms into language and expresses in language contains, whether in a hidden, confused or more developed form, a certain category ... "

A term is a word for which it is possible to say with complete clarity what concept it denotes. In other words, the term can be defined. As long as a term is not defined, it remains a word with more or less clear conceptual content. The vocabulary of science is continuously enriched with new terms, which present great difficulties to both lexicographers and practicing scientists, since here we often encounter doublets, when several terms denote one concept, and that lack of clarity and confusion of conceptual content that Hegel wrote about. Therefore, newly emerged terms require logical processing, the tool of which is the definition operation. Consistent application of the definition will allow you to analyze the vocabulary of science, highlight the original, undefined terms, realize the doublet nature of some terms, and clarify the conceptual content of unclear terms.

Definition is an operation by which a new, unknown term is reduced to a combination of already known non-synonymous terms being defined. Such definitions in logic are called requalifying. Through requalifying definitions, a new meaning is assigned to a language word, determined by the meaning of the defining terms and, ultimately, by the entire system of concepts of a given field of knowledge. Therefore, before introducing a new term, one should establish the most general semantic category to which the concept denoted by the term belongs. Having established the area of meaning, it is subjected to analysis, that is, the consistent division of a general concept or class of objects according to grounds essential for a given science. The new concepts identified in this way have an analytical form, that is, they consist of several terms. New terms are introduced to abbreviate these concepts. Thus, definition is a process of descent from the general to the particular. As a result of this sequential division, a concept is finally isolated, to denote which it is convenient to introduce a new term, using a word of natural language or creating a new word.

Let us now try from these positions to define the term subtext.

First of all, it is necessary to decide which of the two main categories - substance or accident - the concept denoted by the term falls under subtext. Use of the word subtext shows that it does not designate an independently existing thing, but its sign, an accident. We say, for example, that this story has subtext, that there is deep subtext in his words, etc. Subtext here is some kind of sign.

Now let’s answer the question: what substance has the sign of subtext? The use of a word shows that this is some kind of statement at all, be it a replica of a dialogue, a fragment of text, or even a whole text, if only it belongs to one subject of speech. An utterance has many characteristics - both semantic and stylistic. From the analysis of the use of the word subtext, we can conclude that the designated feature relates to the semantics of the statement, and not to its style. They say, for example, that someone did not raise a statement because it contained deep implications.

So, the semantics of a statement is the area of meaning to which the concept denoted by the term subtext refers. Semantic features of a statement are also denoted by the terms content, meaning, meaning, internal meaning, implicit content, referent, designatum etc. What is the relationship between these terms? Does each of them represent a specific concept or are some of them synonymous? Which of the concepts denoted by these terms is more general, and which are subordinate to it, denoting its types? Without answers to these questions, it is impossible to talk about a system of categories in which the concept denoted by the term subtext, could take its place.

In our opinion, the most general concept is the concept of content. This term cannot be defined, that is, its meaning cannot be expressed using non-synonymous means of language. This is the case when the meaning and meaning of a term are acquired in the process of language acquisition and seem obvious: it is obvious that there is some content in every message.

The concept of content can be divided into two types. One type of content is associated with the use of linguistic signs - their grammatical form, syntactic rules of communication, and the meaning of the lexemes that make up the utterance. Let us denote this type of content by the term meaning. The meaning of a statement in semiotics is denoted by the terms denotation, referent, in logic - extensional. The meaning of a statement is, in principle, understandable to all speakers of a given language, i.e. it is objective.

Another type of content is not directly expressed in linguistic signs, but is inserted by the speaker into the utterance and is somehow read from it by the listener. Let us denote this type of content by the term meaning. Other names for meaning: in semiotics - significat, designat, in logic - intension. The meaning of an utterance is subjective both on the part of the speaker and the listener, it is specific and changeable. The listener may extract from a statement a meaning that is completely different from what the speaker wanted to put into it. Thus, speaking about meaning, we come to a very complex problem of understanding. It is important for us now to emphasize only that knowledge of the language, its vocabulary and grammar is only a condition for understanding the meaning of the statement.

Observations on the use of words subtext show that the term is often used as a doublet of the term meaning. For example: “Already in relatively simple speech utterances or messages, along with the external, open meaning of the text, there is also its internal meaning, which is denoted by the term subtext"; "Psychologically, it is very important to study the ways of transition from text to subtext, from external meaning to internal meaning." In the book by K. A. Dolinin "Interpretation of Text" the concept of content is also divided into explicit content (or meaning) and implicit content (or subtext ) Term subtext turns out to be just a metaphorical designation of the same concept that is denoted by the term meaning, internal meaning, implicit content, significat. If authors, like A. R. Luria or K. A. Dolinin, specifically stipulate the doublet nature of these terms, then the use of the term subtext does not raise any objections.

But maybe we can take one more step in dividing concepts? Perhaps the concept of meaning can be divided into types on some basis, and one of them will be conveniently designated by the term subtext?

The concept of meaning can, for example, be divided according to the addressee, namely: to whom the statement is addressed and to whom its meaning should be clear - in principle, to all people or a select circle of initiates, so to speak, laymen or epiphanes. In the first case, the meaning of the statement will be exoteric, in the second - esoteric (Greek. - “external”, “representing no secret, intended for the uninitiated”; - “inner”, “secret, hidden, intended exclusively for initiates”). The term subtext It is advisable to designate the meaning that is intended only for the elite and understandable only to the initiates, that is, the esoteric meaning. The subtext is not every meaning, but only the one that is designed to be understood by the initiated, the chosen ones. The question arises: is this definition of subtext real or only nominal? In other words, are there really statements that are intended to be understood by initiates?

There are a lot of such statements in oral dialogical everyday speech; we can say that everyday speech is the predominant sphere of esoteric meanings. When a wife says to her husband: “Are we going to the cinema tomorrow?”, and he answers her: “Of course, I’ve already bought tickets,” then third parties present, at best, will guess from the intonation that there is some kind of -there is a subtext, some kind of secret meaning, but only those who are privy to the relationship between husband and wife (they know, for example, that they are in a quarrel) will understand this secret, esoteric meaning: they will see in the wife’s words a proposal to make peace, and in the husband’s answer - agreement to establish peace. Thus, understanding the subtext of a statement is entirely based on knowledge of the extralinguistic situation. Because of this limitation, subtext is quite rare in written speech, with the exception of the epistolary genre. Let's give a few examples from Eugene Onegin. The night before the duel

Vladimir closes the book,
Takes a pen; his poems,
Full of love nonsense
They sound and flow. Reads them
He speaks out loud, in lyrical heat,
Like Delvig drunk at a feast (6, XX).

The comparison of Lensky with a drunken Delvig, reading poetry in a lyrical heat, was quite unexpected and incomprehensible for the first readers of the novel. Delvig was known as a balanced, calm, taciturn person. Only the most intimate circle of friends knew that at friendly parties Delvig loved to perform and read improvised poetry. As Yu. M. Lotman, a commentator on the novel “Eugene Onegin,” writes, “only the narrowest circle that saw and remembered Delvig the lyceum student, Delvig the improviser, understood the text completely.” In the same way, the appeal “Zizi, crystal of my soul...” (5, XXXII) could only be understood by those who knew that “Zizi is the childhood and home name of Eupraxia Nikolaevna Wulf.” Or another example:

Veuve Clicquot or Moët
Blessed Wine
In a frozen bottle for a poet
It was immediately brought to the table.
It sparkles with Hypocrene,
With its play and foam
(Like this and that)
I was captivated... (4, XLV)

To understand the esoteric meaning, the subtext of Pushkin’s “similarity of this and that,” you need to know that the censor deleted from A. Baratynsky’s poem the comparison of the “proud mind” with Ai. Baratynsky, Pushkin, Vyazemsky, Delvig hotly discussed the ban on the censor in their circles. “Under these conditions, Pushkin’s “similarity of this and that” was made for initiates as a daring replacement for a comparison prohibited by censorship.” Thus, these fragments of the novel are understandable only to those who should be understandable; their meaning is secret, esoteric, or subtextual, understandable only to a narrow circle of initiates.

Because there are many terms for meaning ( meaning, implicit content, internal meaning, conceptual content), then it would be more expedient not to create doubletism, adding to this series the term subtext, and to designate with this term one of the types of meaning - esoteric.

From all that has been said, some conclusions can be drawn. Any research must begin with a definition of terms. From a scientific point of view, it is incorrect to state that a certain study is devoted to the study of subtext (for example, in Chekhov) without defining what concept is denoted by this term. If this term denotes the internal content of a work, then its study will be the subject of stylistics, poetics and literary history. If this term denotes an esoteric, secret meaning, then its study will be the subject of a biography. Depending on the definition, the subject of study and the techniques and methods of research change.

Preliminary clarification of the conceptual content of a term is a necessary condition for the successful and consistent development of the theory of the subject. Neglect of this condition, the use as terms of words of natural language with their confused conceptual content, professional jargon, the meaning of which is understandable only intuitively, often leads to logical contradictions, ambiguity, and confusion of presentation. In this regard, let us consider the use of the term subtext in the article by T. I. Silman “Subtext as a linguistic phenomenon” (the article was published about 20 years ago, but references to it are still often found in the scientific literature) and the book by I. R. Galperin “Text as an object of linguistic research."

T.I. Silman gives the following definition of subtext: “This is the meaning of an event or statement that is not expressed in words, hidden, but tangible for the reader or listener...”. Thus, subtext is a meaning not expressed in words (the terms are used as synonyms in the article deep meaning, additional meaning). From the author’s point of view, not every statement has a deep meaning, but only that which is repeated in the text: “... a passage that is the bearer of “subtext”, from a linguistic point of view, can be considered as a kind of repetition...” / But here the author gives a completely different definition of subtext: “...subtext is nothing more than a dispersed repetition...”. This means that subtext is no longer a semantic feature of the text, but an element of the text itself, not a feature of the statement, but the statement itself. There is, therefore, a violation of the law of identity.

And in the future the author replaces one concept with another and vice versa. So, on p. 86-87, citing examples from T. Mann’s novel “Buddenbrooks,” T. I. Silman speaks of the “additional meaning of the phrase,” which, however, for some reason is already called the “element” of subtext, of the “additional meanings” of the author’s statements. But on p. 88 talks about the meaning of subtext, on p. 89 - that certain details “give the subtext an even deeper meaning.” It is difficult to understand the author who first says that subtext is meaning (additional meaning), and then about the meaning of subtext, first as a semantic feature of a statement, and then as a material phenomenon: “The phenomenon of subtext is quite tangible...”. These contradictions are apparently connected with the fact that T. I. Silman simultaneously proceeds from the everyday meaning of the word subtext(“internal, hidden meaning”) and from the premise that subtext is a linguistic phenomenon, unfortunately, without indicating to which circle of linguistic (and precisely linguistic!) phenomena (and precisely phenomena!) the concept denoted term subtext. As for the actual content of T.I. Silman’s article, it boils down to the fact that it shows the role of repetition as one of the means of expressing the internal content, the meaning of the work, or, if you like, the subtext.

In I. R. Galperin’s book “Text as an Object of Linguistic Research,” the concept of information is divided into three types: content-factual (SFI), content-conceptual (SCI) and content-subtextual (SPI). The distinction between factual and conceptual information is based on the criterion of explicitness - implicitness: factual information is “always expressed verbally,” but “...readers... may understand conceptual, i.e., basic but hidden information differently.” Terms factual information and conceptual information, thus, denote the same concepts as the terms meaning And meaning in the context of this article; us. 37 the author, for example, speaks of penetration into “deep meaning, that is, into conceptual information.”

Subtextual information (subtext), like conceptual information, is not expressed verbally: “Subtext is implicit in nature.” Consequently, the selection of three types of information does not have one basis and cannot be considered scientifically correct. The text of I. R. Galperin’s book says rather that the terms conceptual information and subtextual information stand for one concept. For example: “The SFI is only an impetus for the operation of the mechanism for disclosing the SKI. The SFI is only the “foreground” of the work.” Obviously, it is assumed that conceptual information is the “background” of the work. But then it is said about the subtext that “this is the second plan of the message.” The question is, is there a difference between “background” and “background”? The conclusion suggests itself that these metaphors denote the same concept - hidden information extracted through interpretation.

Us. 48 the author defines subtext as “a dialogue between SFI and SKI,” but this is in clear contradiction with the text of I. R. Galperin’s book and with what we know about dialogue: if subtext is a type of information, then dialogue will have to be considered a type of information; this would be a very unusual use of the term dialogue, since it usually denotes the way the text is organized, and not the type of information.

In conclusion, we do not insist that the definition of the term proposed here subtext is the only one possible. This term can also denote some other concept. The significance of any definition in general depends on its content and practical usefulness, but this is no longer a question of logic, but a question of the content of science. We are only convinced that the conscious, consistent, logical use of this and any other term requires preliminary logical analysis in order to clarify the place of the concept denoted by the term in the system of related concepts of a given field of scientific knowledge.

2.1. Subtext as part of the formal structure of the text

One of the first attempts to create a linguistic concept of subtext belongs to T.I. Silman. In the article “Subtext as a Linguistic Phenomenon,” she defines subtext as “dispersed, distanced repetition, ... at the basis of any subtextual meaning there is always something that has already happened once and, in one form or another, reproduced anew” (Silman 1969a, 85). Note that the researcher, like later I.R. Halperin distinguishes between subtext - the way the text is organized - and the subtextual meaning conveyed in this way. However, in contrast to the point of view of I.R. Galperin, subtext in the understanding of T.I. Silman is a formal phenomenon, part of the syntactic structure of the text. Subtext, from her point of view, always has a two-vertex structure: the first vertex sets the topic of the statement, creating a “basic situation”, and the second, using the material specified by the primary segment of the text, creates subtext at the corresponding point in the text. At the same time, the researcher actually doubles the meaning of the term “subtext”, applying it both to the technique of dispersed repetition and to the “second peak,” that is, a segment of text repeating something introduced in the “base.” Moreover, T.I. Silman, apparently, does not completely abandon the traditional, semantic understanding of subtext, speaking about the “birth of subtext”, that the distant location of the base situation and the repetition situation “leads to the erosion of the accuracy of the repetition and to the creation of an uncertain psychological atmosphere, psychological (associative) "halo" that surrounds the repeat situation, due to interaction with the base situation, drawn together with its "halo" into a new situation. This is how a collision occurs between the primary and secondary meanings of the situation, from which the subtext is born" (Silman 1969a , 85). And yet the main thing for T.I. Silman is an understanding of subtext as a type of “... dispersed repetition, which arises against the background and taking into account the constant change and deepening of contextual connections... This is a complex phenomenon, representing the unity of various levels of language, lexical and syntactic, while being part of the overall compositional connections of a literary work " (Silman 1969b, 89). Thus, the subtext is considered by T.I. Silman as a special case of such a general category of text as cohesion, or coherence, which, as is known, is realized primarily by repetitions and anaphoric means of language (Galperin 1977, 527). At the same time, the “increase in meaning”, which, from the researcher’s point of view, distinguishes subtext from other types of repetition, arises precisely due to the distance, separation of the “base” and subtext (at least, T. I. Silman does not give another explanation for the fact of the emergence of a new meaning in the subtext); in other words, even the semantic effect generated by subtext, as T.I. understands it. Silman, explains it for purely formal reasons. Apparently, such great attention to the formal side of the subtext, the means of its formation, the actual identification of the subtext (if we still interpret it semantically) with these means, accomplished by T.I. Silman, was determined by the researcher’s desire to prove that subtext is precisely a linguistic phenomenon, that is, it represents a certain means of expression, if not entirely linguistic, then at least largely associated with linguistic means. However, the application of the term “subtext” to part of the surface structure of the text (and this is exactly how T.I. Silman suggests using this term) seems to contradict not only the more accepted use of the term in linguistics, but also linguistic intuition, reflecting what has developed in everyday speech practice idea of the meaning of a given word. Since at the present stage of development of text linguistics the primary task facing scientists is the task of formalizing, explicit expression in linguistic terms of that ordinary and often unconscious knowledge about the text that every communicator possesses, a linguistic term introduced on the basis of everyday representation may ignore some aspects of the designated phenomenon , implied by the “term” of ordinary language, but it is unlikely that it should come into direct conflict with the ordinary “term”. In addition, if we recognize subtext as a semantic rather than a formal phenomenon, this will not at all deprive it of the status of a linguistic phenomenon: as was shown in the previous part, subtext can be considered not just as information, but as an element of the structure of the content plan, but a description of the structure of the content plan, certainly falls within the scope of text linguistics. There is another, more specific objection to the identification of subtext with the device that generates it. Since this technique is not the only one, the researcher is forced, when explaining how subtext is generated in cases where this technique does not work, but there is still subtext, to unnecessarily expand the meaning of the term “repetition.” Thus, recognizing that the subtext can be prepared “...from the outside, by some external symbol or known event...” (Silman 1969b, 93), T.I. Silman is forced to call repetition also cases of primary introduction into the text of indications of these meanings external to the text. It is hardly necessary to point out the degree of discrepancy between this use of the term “repetition” and elementary linguistic intuition. Thus, the point of view according to which subtext is part of the formal structure of the text is based on some terminological misunderstanding: the designation of a semantic effect is transferred to the formal device that generates this effect. Such a bias can be explained, but can hardly be accepted. This conclusion is confirmed by the fact that in the decades since the publication of the works of T.I. Silman, this point of view has not received sufficient distribution.

2.2. Subtext as part of the pragmatic structure of the text

Before considering the next point of view on subtext, it seems appropriate to dwell on the very concept of pragmatic text structure, since it is not generally accepted. However, if we accept that each utterance is characterized not only by formal and semantic parameters, but also by pragmatic parameters, it seems logical to distinguish not only syntactic and semantic structures, but also pragmatic structure as a separate aspect of the overall structure of the text. Many pragmatic characteristics of an utterance, especially those related to other aspects of the structure of the text, have already separately become the subject of linguistic description. However, the task of including all this data into a unified system of ideas about the pragmatic structure of the text as a single subsystem of “communicant meanings” still remains relevant. Of course, the central category for describing the pragmatic structure of a text should be the category of intentionality, the communicative task of the text. Consideration of subtext as a pragmatic effect, part of the pragmatic structure of the text can be found in the works of V.A. Kukharenko (Kukharenko 1974; Kukharenko 1988). True, it should be immediately stipulated that, as in the case of the concept of T.I. Silman, the original understanding of subtext is mixed in the works of V.A. Kukharenko with a completely traditional, semantic understanding of subtext. However, it seems useful to consider the individual, non-generally accepted aspects of the research interpretation of subtext, perhaps even slightly exaggerating its originality, since this will allow us to once again check the validity of the traditional interpretation. So, in his work “Types and means of expressing implication in English literary speech (based on the prose of E. Hemingway),” the researcher gives the following definition of subtext: “Subtext is the manner of artistic representation of phenomena consciously chosen by the author, which has an objective expression in the language of the works.” (Kukharenko 1974, 72). Although this definition belongs more to a literary critic than to a linguist, it deserves thoughtful analysis. First of all, one should not completely ignore the “literary” component of the definition, although it appears largely due to the fact that the researcher operates with facts extracted from literary texts and does not intend to consider any others. However, the introduction of V.A. Kukharenko’s definition of the subtext of connection to a certain functional style, to a certain area of language functioning, allows us to raise the question of how “pragmatic” the functional-stylistic characteristics of the text are. In fact, the sphere of language functioning is determined not so much by the formal and semantic means characteristic of it, but by the communicative tasks and intentions of the participants in communication carried out within the boundaries of the corresponding sphere. For example, journalism, as the “habitat” of the journalistic functional style, is determined primarily by the task of replicating various types of information - both factual and conceptual. Accordingly, texts whose level of complexity is obviously inadequate to the communicative abilities of the audience for which they are intended fall out of journalism, even if they are equipped with all the formal features of a journalistic text. Thus, limiting the scope of use of the term “subtext” exclusively to literary texts, V.A. Kukharenko has already “pragmatized” his understanding of this phenomenon. However, this can be considered an involuntary result of the scientist’s research orientation not towards the text in general, but specifically towards the literary text. A much more significant “pragmatizing” step seems to be the introduction of the term “manner” into the definition of subtext, especially with the clarification “consciously chosen.” We usually use the word "manner" in relation to a text, implying the fact that the speaker, in creating the text, selects various means of expression, so that the text appears not just as a sequence of signs, but as a sequence of signs chosen by the speaker, in a sense the text appears as a chain (or , more precisely, a hierarchy) of choices made by the speaker. These choices can be made consciously or unconsciously, but in any case they reflect some preferences, inclinations, and attitudes of the speaker. Therefore, the definition of subtext as a manner of presenting material actually identifies this phenomenon with one of the moments of the speaker’s speech activity - the choice he makes in favor of certain formal and semantic linguistic means. The active side of the subtext is also emphasized in the later work of V.A. Kukharenko, “Interpretation of the text” (Kukharenko 1988). Giving a more “linguistic” definition of subtext as a way of organizing the text, leading “to a sharp growth and deepening, as well as a change in the semantic and/or emotional and psychological content of the message without increasing the length of the latter” (Kukharenko 1988, 181), the researcher writes further about the special “ implicit manner of writing”, which creates a significant dependence of the success of the author’s communicative task on the awareness and concentration of the reader (Kukharenko 1988, 182). The phrase “implicit writing” is worth examining in more detail, since it is a perfect example of how the very language a researcher speaks begins to counteract his theoretical views. This formula in itself does not raise questions; the possibility of using it as a synonym for the term “subtext” seems doubtful. Indeed, if the subtext is a “manner” or “way,” then a native speaker should have no problem forming from this word an adverb characterizing actions performed in this way, just as the adverb “implicitly” (or the definition "implicit" is freely associated with nominalization). However, we do not find in the dictionaries the adverb “subtextually” or anything similar to it, just as we cannot use the word “subtext” in the position of an adverbial method of action (for example, the combination “express with the help of subtext”, “communicate with subtext” sounds doubtful). Apparently, V.A. Kukharenko wrongfully identified the result of a certain action of the speaker with this action itself; Moreover, the shift he proposed in the meaning of the word “subtext” does not correspond to the nomination model current in the Russian language: for native speakers of the Russian language it is natural to designate the result of an action by the name of the action (“decide - decision”; “report - message”; “work - work”), but not vice versa. It is interesting that in his second definition of subtext, the researcher, as in the first definition, does not say anything about the specifics of this “method” as such, but dwells in detail on the result of its application (in the future, V.A. Kukharenko actually accepts the point of view of I. R. Galperin and uses his terminology).

Let's summarize.

1. The attribution of subtext to the pragmatic structure of the text, as well as its inclusion in the formal structure, is based on the unlawful identification of this phenomenon with the moment of its generation; only in the concept of T.I. Silman considered this moment as part of the surface structure of the text, and in the concept of V.A. Kukharenko - as a choice made by the speaker in favor of a certain method of transmitting information.

SUBTEXT SUBTEXT, in literature (mostly fiction) a hidden meaning, different from the direct meaning of a statement, which is restored based on the context taking into account the situation. In the theater, the subtext is revealed by the actor through intonation, pause, facial expressions, and gesture.

Modern encyclopedia. 2000 .

Synonyms:

See what "SUBTEXT" is in other dictionaries:

In literature (mostly fiction), there is a hidden meaning, different from the direct meaning of the statement, which is restored based on the context, taking into account the situation. In the theater, the subtext is revealed by the actor with the help of intonation, pause, facial expressions,... ... Big Encyclopedic Dictionary

Meaning, meaning Dictionary of Russian synonyms. subtext noun, number of synonyms: 2 meaning (27) meaning... Synonym dictionary

Subtext- SUBTEXT, in literature (mostly fiction) a hidden meaning, different from the direct meaning of the statement, which is restored based on the context, taking into account the situation. In the theater, the subtext is revealed by the actor through intonation, pause... Illustrated Encyclopedic Dictionary

SUBTEXT, huh, husband. (book). Internal, hidden meaning of a text, statement; content that is inserted into the text by the reader or actor. | adj. subtextual, oh, oh. Ozhegov's explanatory dictionary. S.I. Ozhegov, N.Yu. Shvedova. 1949 1992 … Ozhegov's Explanatory Dictionary

The meaning contained in the text is implicit and does not coincide with its direct meaning. The subtext depends on the context of the statement, on the situation in which these words are spoken. In fiction, subtext often occurs in dialogue. For example, exchange... ... Literary encyclopedia

A; m. Internal, hidden meaning of what l. text, statements. Speak with deep meaning. The story has an obvious point. Speak directly, without subtext. * * * the subtext in literature (mostly fiction) is hidden, different from the direct one... ... encyclopedic Dictionary

subtext- a hidden meaning, different from the direct meaning of the statement, which is restored on the basis of the context, taking into account the extra-speech situation. In the theater, the subtext is revealed by the actor through intonation, pause, facial expressions, and gesture. Category: language.... ... Terminological dictionary-thesaurus on literary criticism

subtext- a, m. Internal, hidden meaning of what l. text, statements. Speak with subtext. With Chekhov, the concept of subtext was born in literature and theater, as a new, hidden coordinate, as a tool for additional deepening and the most capacious... ... Popular dictionary of the Russian language

subtext- SUBTEXT, a, m Part of the content structure of the text, representing its internal hidden meaning. Sometimes the subtext is stronger than the text... Explanatory dictionary of Russian nouns

SUBTEXT- SUBTEXT, hidden, implicit meaning that does not coincide with the direct meaning of the text. P. depends on the general context of the utterance, on the purpose and expression of the utterance, and on the characteristics of the speech situation. P. appears in colloquial speech as a means of silence... Literary encyclopedic dictionary

Books

Liberated subtext, Huseynov Chingiz Gasanovich, The book is composed of novels by the famous Russian-Azerbaijani writer Chingiz Huseynov, translated into many languages of the world. But this is not an ordinary reissue: the author creates a new original... Category: Journalism Series: Biographies Publisher: B.S.G.-Press, Manufacturer: B.S.G.-Press,
Hidden meaning. Creating subtext in cinema, Seger L., Everything is not as simple as it seems. This applies to both life and art, especially when it comes to cinema: after all, in scripts, especially outstanding ones, in addition to the text, there is always another subtext. Linda… Category: Film history, general issues Series: Self-development Publisher:

The topic of my essay is connected with the desire to explore how subtext expresses the author's intention in the work of A.P. Chekhov. I was also interested in the opinion of famous Russian critics about how, in their opinion, this technique helps the writer reveal the main ideas of his works.

In my opinion, the study of this topic is interesting and relevant. I think it is important to know exactly how A.P. Chekhov built his works, “encoding” the main ideas in the subtext. To understand this, you need to analyze Chekhov's work.

How can the author convey his intention using subtext? I will explore this issue in this work, relying on the content of some of the works of A. P. Chekhov and the point of view of literary scholars, namely: S. A. Zamansky and his work “The Power of Chekhov’s Subtext”, the monograph by M. L. Semanova “Chekhov - artist", book by Chukovsky K.I. "About Chekhov", as well as research

M. P. Gromov “The Book about Chekhov” and A. P. Chudakov “Poetics and Prototypes.”

In addition, I will analyze the composition of the story “The Jumper” in order to understand how subtext influences the structure of the work. And also, using the example of the story “The Jumper,” I will try to find out what other artistic techniques the writer used to most fully realize his plan.

These are the questions that are of particular interest to me, and I will try to reveal them in the main part of the abstract.

First, let's define the term “subtext”. Here is the meaning of this word in various dictionaries:

1) Subtext - the internal, hidden meaning of a text or statement. (Efremova T.F. “Explanatory Dictionary”).

2) Subtext - internal, hidden meaning of a text, statement; content that is put into the text by the reader or artist. (Ozhegov S.I. “Explanatory Dictionary”).

3) Subtext - in literature (mainly fiction) - a hidden meaning, different from the direct meaning of the statement, which is restored based on the context, taking into account the situation. In the theater, the subtext is revealed by the actor with the help of intonation, pause, facial expressions, and gesture. ("Encyclopedic Dictionary").

So, summarizing all the definitions, we come to the conclusion that subtext is the hidden meaning of the text.

S. Zalygin wrote: “The subtext is good only if there is an excellent text. Understatement is appropriate when much has been said.” Literary critic M. L. Semanova in the article “Where there is life, there is poetry. About Chekhov’s titles” in the works of A.P. Chekhov says: “The famous words of Astrov at the map of Africa in the finale of “Uncle Vanya” (“And it must be that in this very Africa now the heat is a terrible thing”) cannot be understood in their hidden sense, if readers and viewers do not see the dramatic state of Astrov, a talented, large-scale person, whose capabilities are curtailed by life and not realized. The psychological implications of these words should become clear only “in the context” of Astrov’s previous mental state: he learned about Sonya’s love for him and, without responding to her feelings, he can no longer stay in this house, especially since he unwittingly caused pain to Voinitsky, infatuated with Elena Andreevna, who accidentally happened to witness her meeting with Astrov.

The subtext of the words about Africa is also discernible in the context of Astrov’s momentary state: he has just parted forever with Elena Andreevna, perhaps he has just realized that he is losing dear people (Sonya, Voinitsky, nanny Marina), that there are a number of joyless, tedious, monotonous years of loneliness ahead . Astrov experiences emotional excitement; he is embarrassed, sad, does not want to express these feelings, and he hides them behind a neutral phrase about Africa (you should pay attention to the author’s remark to this action: “There is a map of Africa on the wall, apparently no one here needs it”).

By creating a stylistic atmosphere in which hidden connections, unspoken thoughts and feelings can be adequately perceived by the reader and viewer to the author's intention, awakening in them the necessary associations, Chekhov increased reader activity. “In understatement,” writes the famous Soviet film director

G. M. Kozintsev about Chekhov - contains the possibility of creativity that arises in readers."

The famous literary critic S. Zamansky speaks about the subtexts in the works of A.P. Chekhov: “Chekhov's subtext reflects the hidden, latent, additional energy of a person. Often this energy has not yet been determined enough to break out, to manifest itself directly, directly... But always, in all cases, the “invisible” energy of the hero is inseparable from those of his specific and completely precise actions, which make it possible to feel these latent forces. .. And Chekhov’s subtext is read well, freely, not arbitrarily by intuition, but on the basis of the logic of the hero’s actions and taking into account all the accompanying circumstances.”

Having analyzed the articles devoted to the role of subtext in Chekhov’s works, we can conclude that with the help of the veiled meaning of his works, Chekhov actually reveals to the readers the inner world of each of the characters, helps to feel the state of their soul, their thoughts, feelings. In addition, the writer awakens certain associations and gives the reader the right to understand the experiences of the characters in his own way, makes the reader a co-author, and awakens the imagination.

In my opinion, elements of subtext can also be found in the titles of Chekhov's works. Literary critic M.L. Semanova in her monograph on the work of A.P. Chekhov writes: “Chekhov’s titles indicate not only the object of the image (“Man in a Case”), but also convey the point of view of the author, hero, narrator, on whose behalf ( or “in the tone” of which) the story is told. The titles of works often indicate a coincidence (or divergence) between the author’s assessment of the person depicted and the narrator’s assessment of him. “Joke,” for example, is the name of a story told on behalf of the hero. This is his understanding of what happened. The reader guesses another - the author's - level of understanding: the author does not find it at all funny to desecrate human trust, love, hope for happiness; For him, what happened to the heroine is not a “joke” at all, but a hidden drama.”

So, having studied the articles of literary scholars about the work of A.P. Chekhov, we see that subtext can be found not only in the content of Chekhov’s works, but in their titles.

Literary critic M.P. Gromov, in an article dedicated to the work of A.P. Chekhov, writes: “Comparison in mature Chekhov’s prose is as common as in early<…>" But his comparison is “not just a stylistic move, not a decorative rhetorical figure; it is meaningful because it is subordinated to the general plan - both in a separate story and in the whole structure of Chekhov’s narrative.”

Let’s try to find comparisons in the story “The Jumper”: “He himself is very handsome, original, and his life, independent, free, alien to everything worldly, like the life of a bird "(about Ryabovsky in Chapter IV). Or: “They should have asked Korostelev: he knows everything and it’s not for nothing that he looks at his friend’s wife with such eyes, as if she is the main one, the real villain , and diphtheria is only her accomplice” (Chapter VIII).

M.P. Gromov also says: “Chekhov had his own principle of describing a person, which was preserved despite all the genre variations of the narrative in a single story, in the entire mass of stories and stories that form the narrative system... This principle, apparently, can be defined as follows: The more fully a character’s character is coordinated and fused with the environment, the less human there is in his portrait...”

As, for example, in the description of Dymov near death in the story “The Jumper”: “ Silent, resigned, incomprehensible creature, impersonal by its meekness, spineless, weak from excessive kindness, suffered silently somewhere on his couch and didn’t complain.” We see that the writer, with the help of special epithets, wants to show readers the helplessness and weakness of Dymov on the eve of his imminent death.

Having analyzed M. P. Gromov’s article on artistic techniques in Chekhov’s works and examined examples from Chekhov’s story “The Jumper,” we can conclude that his work is based primarily on such figurative and expressive means of language as comparisons and special ones, characteristic only of A. Epithets for P. Chekhov. It was these artistic techniques that helped the author create subtext in the story and realize his plan.

Let's draw some conclusions about the role of subtext in the works of A.P. Chekhov and put them in the table.

I. The role of subtext in Chekhov's works
	Chekhov's subtext reflects the hidden energy of the hero.
	The subtext reveals to the reader the inner world of the characters.
	With the help of subtext, the writer awakens certain associations and gives the reader the right to understand the experiences of the characters in his own way, makes the reader a co-author, and awakens the imagination.

II. Features of the composition of Chekhov's works that help in creating subtext
	The title contains part of the hidden meaning.
	The essence of the characters’ images is not fully revealed, but remains in the “sphere of the text.”
	A detailed description of small details in a work is a way of creating subtext and embodying the author's idea.
	The absence of a direct conclusion at the end of the work, allowing the reader to draw his own conclusions.
III. The main artistic techniques in Chekhov's works that contribute to the creation of subtext

	Specific, apt epithets.

In my work, I examined and analyzed issues of interest to me related to the theme of subtext in the works of A.P. Chekhov, and discovered a lot of interesting and useful things for myself.

Thus, I became acquainted with a new technique in literature for me - subtext, which can serve the author to realize his artistic plan.

In addition, after carefully reading some of Chekhov's stories and studying articles by literary critics, I became convinced that subtext has a great influence on the reader's understanding of the main idea of the work. This is primarily due to providing the reader with the opportunity to become a “co-author” of Chekhov, to develop his own imagination, to “think out” what is left unsaid.

I discovered that subtext influences the composition of a work. Using the example of Chekhov's story “The Jumper,” I became convinced that seemingly insignificant, small details can contain hidden meaning.

Also, after analyzing the articles of literary critics and the content of the story “The Jumper,” I came to the conclusion that the main artistic techniques in the work of A.P. Chekhov are comparisons and bright, figurative, precise epithets.

These conclusions are reflected in the final table.

So, having studied articles by literary scholars and read some of Chekhov’s stories, I tried to highlight the questions and problems that I stated in the introduction. Working on them, I enriched my knowledge about the work of Anton Pavlovich Chekhov.

1. Viduetskaya I. P. In Chekhov’s creative laboratory. – M.: “Science”, 1974;

2. Gromov M.P. A book about Chekhov. - M.: “Sovremennik”, 1989;

3. Zamansky S. A. The power of Chekhov's subtext. - M.: 1987;

4. Semanova M. L. Chekhov - artist. - M.: “Enlightenment”, 1971;

5. Soviet encyclopedic dictionary (4th ed.) - M.: “Soviet Encyclopedia”, 1990;

6. Student's Guide to Literature. – M.: “Eksmo”, 2002;

7. Chekhov A.P. Stories. Plays. – M.: “AST Olympus”, 1999;

8. Chudakov A.P. In Chekhov’s creative laboratory. - M.: “Science”,

9. Chukovsky K.I. About Chekhov. - M.: “Children’s Literature”, 1971;

The subtext of a work is a special type of allegory, artistic allusion. To understand a “phrase with subtext” means to perceive not only what is said directly, literally, but also what the author meant and kept silent about. Revealing the subtext thus presupposes the indispensable active co-creation of the reader, thought-out, second-guessing. Figuratively speaking, the reader must guess the picture from a few strokes that guide his imagination, and independently fill the artistic space that the author intentionally left empty. So, for example, in Akhmatov’s “I put on my right hand / The glove from my left hand,” we feel the enormous emotional tension of the heroine of the poem, we recreate her psychological state, although not a word is directly said about it, but only a hint is given - an external, everyday detail.

Hemingway compared a literary work to an iceberg, with only one-seventh of it on the surface and the rest hidden. But in order for the reader to uncover the subtext of the work, his imagination must be appropriately aroused and directed. Subtext is possible only when the text itself has received a certain organization. In what is written, the reader must feel the lack of clarity, the inexhaustibility of meaning, and at the same time find enough milestones and dashes to unravel the hint correctly, to create in his imagination the image that the writer is counting on.

The subtext of the work enriches the visual and expressive possibilities of the artistic word, allowing you to vividly and visibly present in the work those life phenomena that are impossible or impractical to speak about directly. That is why it is most often necessary for depicting a person’s mental life, for recreating complex psychological states. Direct naming of psychological processes often deprives them of subtlety and uniqueness, coarsens and straightens the internal state. Subtext avoids such danger.

For example, in Simonov’s novel “The Living and the Dead,” the commander, talking with Serpilin, constantly looks straight into his face, and the moment when he left the encirclement, he remembers, “for the first time in all time, looking not in front of himself, but to the side.” . With this inconspicuous detail, Simonov very clearly shows us how hard it was for the people surrounded, how hard it is for the commander to remember this now, and how much this memory, as they say, “ate into the soul” - in essence, you always experience it alone with yourself, even if there is an interlocutor nearby; you experience it as something deeply personal, and you even involuntarily avert your eyes, plunging into these memories. The psychological pattern is too complex to be outlined with complete clarity; The subtext of the work often turns out to be artistically more convincing and emotionally impressive than the direct image.

Psychological depiction using subtext is especially appropriate in a drama where there is no speech by the narrator. If the hero himself tells us about his inner state, this most often will not give the impression of authenticity, and sometimes it can sound completely comical. Epikhodov or Ranevskaya in Chekhov’s “The Cherry Orchard” can say to themselves that they are suffering - this produces a comic impression that corresponds to the author’s intention. But Lopakhin, for example, or Varya cannot talk about their suffering out loud - this would destroy the psychological appearance of these characters and change the author’s attitude towards them - but behind their everyday, outwardly calm dialogue we feel precisely the suffering - deeply hidden and that is why exciting sincere sympathy.

Sometimes subtext in literature is used not only to convey an internal state, but also to create plot episodes or external pictures. Here, for example, is how the suicide of the heroine is depicted in Pushkin’s poem “Prisoner of the Caucasus”: “Suddenly the waves began to rustle dully, / And a distant groan is heard... / He comes out onto the wild shore, / He looks back, the shores have become clear / And, foamed, they turned white; / But there is no young Circassian woman / Neither at the banks, nor under the mountain... / Everything is dead... on the sleeping beaches / Only a light sound of the wind is heard, / And under the moon in the splashing waters / The flowing circle disappears.”

This is an example of the use of subtext in the plot construction of a work. And here is a landscape picture drawn by Tvardovsky with the help of subtext: “The Christmas tree has become more noticeable in the forest.”

Here the subtext has slightly different functions. In the first case, he creates a romantic flavor, an enlightened elegiac mood, removing excessive detail and naturalism that would go against the general romantic structure of poetry. In the second case, the subtext creates a bright, poetic image that instantly appears before the eyes, “refreshing” the perception of the autumn forest, yellow trees, against which the green Christmas tree stands out sharply.

In subtext, especially expressing a psychological state, it is very important that the author’s hint is sufficiently clear, and on the other hand, it is not revealed too easily and prosaically. It is equally bad when a simple state, easily accessible to direct depiction, is masked by subtext, and when the meaning is so encrypted that it is unclear what, in fact, stands behind the author’s hint and whether there is anything at all. Both of these evoke a feeling of pretentiousness, beauty, and false significance, which, naturally, greatly reduces the artistic value of the work.