• Volodymir Prokhorov
Keywords: discourse, text, linguistic curatorium, information, meaning


The article gives a brief assessment of the state of discursive studies, examines the main parameters of the discourse of linguistic studies, identifies the main structural units of discourse that determine the directions of linguistic research. The modern scientific approaches to the study of the language system elements, problem of comprehension of the concepts «discourse» and «text», basic lexical grammatical parameters of discourse are considered. Discourse is the object for investigation of many humanitarian sciences today and one of the broadly used terms in different fields of stylistics, cultural studies, literary criticism, psychology and philosophy. The notion covers all aspects of communication including the idea and meaning of a spoken or written text, the sender and the receiver and the immediate situational context.

The article deals with the problems of modern trends of linguistic studies of different types of discourse. There drawback linguistic studies of the discourse, which is based on the absence of ontological outlined this phenomenon. This fact allows for arbitrary interpretation of the definition of discourse and a simple declaration of his work in the title. Based on the analysis of theoretical sources and practical work is deemed to be correct scientific approach in discourse linguistics.

This article considers discourse as a category giving a new perspective on the text. The author analyses various concepts of discourse, which were developed over the last decades within the cognitive, constructivist-poststructuralist, and neorhetorical approaches. Despite being based on different methodological principles, the concepts analysed in a text have a common ground: they focus on the same research object, namely, the text. Mono- and transtextual discourse models make it possible to transgress the limits of the text placing it within the dynamic space of communication. Discourse theory and the notion of discourse mark a new turn of the spiral of cognition that makes it possible to see and justify the cognitive and communicative potential of a text.


1. Ахманова О.С. Словарь лингвистических терминов. – М.: Сов. энциклопедия, 1969. – 608 с.
2. Гончаренко В.В., Шингарева Е.А. Фреймы для распознавания смысла текста / В.В. Гончаренко, Е.А. Шингарева. – Кишинев: Штиинца, 1984. – 243 с.
3. Косериу Э. Контрастивная лингвистика и перевод: их соотношение // Новое в зарубежной лингвистике. Вып. XXV. Контрастивная лингвистика: Переводы / Сост. В.П. Нерознака; Общ. ред. и вступ. Ст. В.Г. Гака. – М.: Прогресс, 1989. – С. 63-81.
4. Прохорова П. Дискурсивная лингвистика: камо грядеши? / П.Прохорова // Наукові записки. – Вип. 153. – Серія: Філологічні науки. – Кропивницький: Видавець Лисенко В.Ф., 2017. – С. 298 – 301.
5. Русакова О.Ф. Современные теории дискурса: опыт классификаций / О.Ф. Русакова // Современные теории дискурса: мультидисциплинарный анализ (Серия «Дискурсология») – Екатеринбург: Издательский Дом «Дискурс-Пи», 2006, – С. 10 – 28.
6. Шама И.Н. К вопросу о хронотопе «страшной мести» Н.В. Гоголя // Культурологiчний вiсник: Науково-теоретичний щорiчник Нижньої Надднiпрянщини. – Запорiжжя, 1995. – С. 73-75.
7. Швейцер А.Д. Теория перевода: Статус, проблемы, аспекты. – М.: Наука, 1988. – 215 с.
8. Языкознание. Большой энциклопедический словарь / Гл. ред. В. Н. Ярцева. – 2-е изд. – М.: Большая Российская энциклопедия, 1998. – 685 с.