Tomsk State Pedagogical University Bulletin
RU EN






Today: 16.07.2025
Home Issues 2018 Year Issue №2 THE STRUCTURAL DIVERSITY OF THE FEMININE COMPARISONS IN THE LANGUAGE OF THE NOVEL THE KUKOTSKY ENIGMA BY L. ULITSKAYA
  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Bulletin Archive
    • 2025 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
    • 2024 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
    • 2023 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
    • 2022 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
    • 2021 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
    • 2020 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
    • 2019 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
    • 2018 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
    • 2017 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
    • 2016 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
    • 2015 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
    • 2014 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
    • 2013 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
      • Issue №13
    • 2012 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
      • Issue №13
    • 2011 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
      • Issue №13
    • 2010 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
    • 2009 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
    • 2008 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
    • 2007 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
    • 2006 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
    • 2005 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
    • 2004 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
    • 2003 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
    • 2002 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
    • 2001 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
    • 2000 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
    • 1999 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
    • 1998 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
    • 1997 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
  • Rating
  • Search
  • News
  • Editorial Board
  • Information for Authors
  • Review Procedure
  • Information for Readers
  • Editor’s Publisher Ethics
  • Contacts
  • Manuscript submission
  • Received articles
  • Accepted articles
  • Subscribe
  • Service Entrance
vestnik.tspu.ru
praxema.tspu.ru
ling.tspu.ru
npo.tspu.ru
edujournal.tspu.ru

TSPU Bulletin is a peer-reviewed open-access scientific journal.

E-LIBRARY (РИНЦ)
Ulrich's Periodicals Directory
Google Scholar
European reference index for the humanities and the social sciences (erih plus)
Search by Author
- Not selected -
  • - Not selected -
Яндекс.Метрика

THE STRUCTURAL DIVERSITY OF THE FEMININE COMPARISONS IN THE LANGUAGE OF THE NOVEL THE KUKOTSKY ENIGMA BY L. ULITSKAYA

Li Yanfen

DOI: 10.23951/1609-624X-2018-2-91-98

Information About Author:

Li Yanfeng, Novosibirsk State Pedagogical University (ul. Vilyuskaya, 45, Novosibirsk, Russian Federation, 630126). Guangxi Medical University (Nanning, China). E-mail: liyanfeng@yandex.com

The significance of research is attributed to the constant attention of linguists paid to the discourse of women’s prose and to the usage of the components of functional-semantic categories, including the category «comparativeness», in the language of artistic works. The article considers the participation of different structural comparisons in the description of the female characters in the novel The Kukotsky Enigma by Lyudmila Ulitskaya. The structural diversity of comparisons is presented within the functional-semantic field of comparativeness. All forms of comparatives are present in the language of the novel, with conjunctional comparisons by similarity prevailing. From comparisons on the difference, there are forms of comparative and negative parallelisms. The gender approach to describing femininely marked comparatives facilitates to identify idiostyle characteristics of the writer, namely the tendency to extend and concretize the image of comparison, the usage of comparisons for the comparison of heroines, the author’s boldness and frankness of comparative images as well as the images’ allusiveness, and axiological differences between feminine comparisons in the speech of the characters and in the author’s speech. The article pays attention to the text-forming function of comparatives in the broad sense in the language of the novel The Kukotsky Enigma by Lуudmila Ulitskaya, namely to «the correlation of the tropes and realities».

Keywords: gender, feminine comparison, the methods of expressing the semantic category «comparativeness», allusions, Ulitskaya’s novel The Kukotsky Enigma

References:

1. Cheremisina M. I. Sravnitel’nye konstruktsii russkogo yazyka [Comparative constructions in Russian]. Ed. by K. A. Timofeev. Novosibirsk, Nauka, Sibirskoye otdeleniye Publ., 1976. 272 p. (in Russian).

2. Ogol’tsev V. M. Ustoychivyye sravneniya v sisteme russkoy frazeologii [Stable comparisons in system of the Russian phraseology]. Moscow, Librokom Publ., 2015. 192 p. (in Russian).

3. Skvoretskaya E. V. Komparativnost’: iz istorii sredstv vyrazheniya sravneniya v russkom yazyke [Comparativeness: from history of means of expression of comparison in Russian]. Semanticheskiy i pragmaticheskiy aspekty vyskazyvaniya [Semantic and pragmatic aspects of the utterance]. Novosibirsk, NSPI Publ., 1991, pp. 26–36 (in Russian).

4. Moskvin V. P. Russkaya metafora. Ocherk semioticheskoy teorii [Russian metaphor. Essay on semiotic theory]. Moscow, LKI Publ., 2012. 200 p. (in Russian).

5. Berkov V. P. Komparativnost’ [Comparativeness]. Teoriya funktsional’noy grammatiki: Kachestvennost’. Kolichestvennost’ [The theory of functional grammar: Quality. Quantity]. Ed. by A. V. Bondarko. St. Petersburg, Nauka Publ., 1996. Pp. 107–160 (in Russian).

6. Petrochenko L. A., Federyaeva N. O. O sposobakh vyrazheniya kategorii komparativnosti [On the methods of expressing the category of comparativeness]. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta – TSPU Bulletin, 2006, no. 9 (60), pp. 45–51 (in Russian).

7. Han Qingling. Study on metaphor. The Rhetoric Study, 1999, no. 2, pp. 13–14 (in Chinese).

8. Khachmafova Z. R. Gendernaya stratifikatsiya yazyka zhenskoy prozy (na materiale russkogo i nemetskogo yazykov) [gender stratification of feminine prose language (in the Russian and German languages)]. Izvestiya RGPU im. A. I. Hertsena – Izvestia: Herzen University Journal of Humanities & Science, 2010, no. 120, pp. 186–196 (in Russian).

9. Korobeynikova A. A. Vneshniy vid kak sosctavlyayushchaya poeticheskogo obraza muzhiny (po dannym leksicheskoy struktury liricheskikh tekstov A. Akhmatovoy and M. Tsvetaevoy) [The appearance as a component of the poetic image of man (according to the lexical structure of lyrical texts by A. Akhmatova and M. Tsvetaeva)]. Vestnik YUUrGU. Seriya: Lingvistika – Bulletin of the South Ural State University. Series «Linguistics», 2008, no. 16 (116), pp. 89–94 (in Russian).

10. Rezanova Z. I., Komissarova O. V. Metafora v modelirovanii gendernykh oppozitsiy: metodika, analiz, tipologiya [Metaphor in modeling gender opposition: methods of analysis, typology]. Yazyk i kul’tura – Language and culture, 2012, no. 2 (18). pp. 80–90 (in Russian).

11. Vorob’eva S. Yu. Problema «Zhenskogo stilya» v literaturovedenii (gendernyy aspekt) [The problem of «feminine style» in literary criticism (Gender Aspect)]. Izvestiya Saratovskogo universiteta. Novaya seriya. Seriya: Filologiya. Zhurnalistika – Izvestiya of Saratov University. New Series. Series: Philology. Journalism, 2013, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 87–91 (in Russian).

12. Mongush E. D. Gendernaya problematika i eye khudozhestvennaya realizatsiya v maloy proze L. Petrushevskoy [Gender perspectives and artistic realization in small prose L. Petrushevskaya]. Mir nauki, kul’tury, obrazovaniya – The world of science, culture and education, 2011, no. 6 (31), pp. 280–283 (in Russian).

13. Pan Jiayun. On metaphor. The Rhetoric Study, 2001, no. 6, pp. 15–16 (in Chinese).

14. Aкhapkin D. N. Filologicheskaya metafora v poezii I. Brodskogo. Avtoref. dis. kand. filol. nauk [Linguistic metaphor in the poetry of I. Brodsky. Abstract of thesis of cand. of philol. sci.]. Saint Petersburg, 2002. 21 p. (in Russian).

15. Gal’perin I. R. Tekst kak ob’’ekt lingvisticheskogo issledovaniya [Text as an object of linguistic research]. Moscow, LENAND Publ., 2016. 137 p. (in Russian).

16. Kozhevnikova N. A. O sootnoshenii tropa i realii v khudozhestvennom tekste [On the relation between trops and realia of the artistic text]. Poetika i stilistika [Poetics and stylistics. 1989–1990]. Moscow, Nauka Publ., 1990, pp. 37–63 (in Russian).

li_yanfen_.._91_98_2_191_2018.pdf ( 583.51 kB ) li_yanfen_.._91_98_2_191_2018.zip ( 573.33 kB )

Issue: 2, 2018

Series of issue: Issue 2

Rubric: TOPICAL ISSUES OF COGNITIVE-DISCURSIVE LINGUISTICS, CULTURAL LINGUISTICS AND INTER-CULTURAL COMMUNICATION

Pages: 91 — 98

Downloads: 1161

For citation:


© 2025 Tomsk State Pedagogical University Bulletin

Development and support: Network Project Laboratory TSPU