Article

Name: Perceptual Phyto-Images in Women’s Camp Prose

Authors: Elena G. Basalaeva, Francesco Varlaro

Novosibirsk State Pedagogical University, Novosibirsk, Russian Federation

Abstract:

The article examines the peculiarities of sensory-perceptual imagery within phytonymic terms in women’s camp prose. It is noted that through the actualization of visual, olfactory, gustatory, tactile, and auditory features and properties of objects from the plant world in female ego-documents, symbolic meanings inherent to phytonyms in the national worldview are realized. Additionally, processes of their extinction, modification, and formation of authorial symbolic semantics are observed. Varied perceptual representations of phyto-image formations, often based on syncretism of perception, broadly characterize various textual oppositions, such as free-carceral space, pastpresent, natural-artificial, salvation-hopelessness, and others. Olfactory characteristics of phytonyms dominate in textual fragments describing extra camp conditions, allowing the heroines to momentarily detach from the horrors of prison/camp/unfreedom. Gustatory features of berries can become metaphorical substitutes for emotional sensations, as well as acquire various image-symbolic meanings of a happy life, salvation, survival, humanity, and self-sacrifice. Visual plant images, as well as olfactory and gustatory ones, in female ego-documents become markers of free life, embody hope for the future, and symbolize life. Auditory and tactile features of phytonyms are actualized to a lesser extent in those texts; nevertheless, they also serve as reminders of another non-camp life, providing strength and protection.

Linguistic means of expressing perceptual phyto-images include a varied lexicon of sensory perception (for example, smell, aroma, sour, sweet, gray-smoky, bright, silence, rustle, velvety, and others), as well as elaborate metaphors (often anthropo-morphic), often based on syncretism of perception (smell-sight, smell-taste, sight-touch, sight-sound, etc.).

Keywords: perception lexicon, phytonym, camp prose, ego-document, E. S. Ginzburg, E. A. Kersnovskaya, O. Adamova-Sliozberg

Bibliography:

Baggerman A., Dekker R. Zhak Presser i traditsiya evreiskoi avtobiografii v Niderlandakh [Jacques Presser and the tradition of Jewish autobiography in the Netherlands]. Neprikosnovennyi zapas, 2019, no. 2 (124), pp. 238–256. (in Russ.)

Basalaeva E. G., Nosenko N. V. Pertseptivnye obrazy v lagernoy proze i ee perevode na angliyskiy yazyk [Perceptual images in camp prose and its English translation]. Siberian Journal of Philology, 2020, no. 4, pp. 293–307. (in Russ.) DOI 10.17223/18137083/ 73/20

Dyachenko Yu. A. Fitonimicheskaya leksika v khudozhestvennoi proze

E. I. Nosova [Phytonymic lexicon in the fiction prose of E. I. Nosov]. Cand. Philol. Sci. Diss. Kursk, 2010, 197 p. (in Russ.)

Dekker R. Egodocuments in the Netherlands from the Sixteenth to the Nineteenth century. In: Envisioning Self and Status. Self-representation in the Low Countries 1400–1700. Hull, 1999, pp. 255–285.

Dekker R. Jacques Presser’s heritage. Egodocuments in the study of history. Memoria y Civilización. Anuario de Historia, 2002, no. 5, pp. 13–37.

Kirillina N. V. “I ya vsyudu slyshu zvuki…”: funktsii pertseptivnoi leksiki slukhovogo vospriyatiya v yazyke poezii A. A. Akhmatovoi [“And I hear sounds everywhere”: functions of perceptive lexis of aural sensing in the language of A. Akhmatova’s poetry]. Bulletin of Moscow Region State University, 2016, no. 4, pp. 1–9. (in Russ.) URL: https://evestnik-mgou.ru/en/Articles/ Doc/772 (accessed 08.04.2024).

Kochetkov P. N. Leksika vospriyatiya v russkoi poezii kontsa XIX – nachala XX veka (na materiale poezii V. Ya. Bryusova) [The lexicon of perception in Russian poetry of the late 19th – early 20th century (on the material of

V. Ya. Brusov’s poetry)]. Abstract of Cand. Philol. Sci. Diss. Moscow, 1992, 16 p. (in Russ.)

Kolesov I. Yu. O yazykovom modelirovanii znaniya o zritel’nom vospriyatii [On lingual construal of the knowledge of vision]. Bulletin of Kemerovo State University, 2013, no. 2, pp. 81–86. (in Russ.)

Konovalova N. I. Fitonimika govorov srednego Urala v sistemno-funktsional’nom aspekte [Phytonymy of Middle Ural colloquialisms in the systemic-functional aspect]. Abstract of Cand. Philol. Sci. Diss. Moscow, 1993, 20 p. (in Russ.)

Korychankova S., Kryukova L. B., Khiznichenko A. V. Poeticheskaya kartina mira skvoz’ prizmu kategorii perceptivnosti [Poetic picture of the world through the prism of perceptual category]. Brno, 2016, 235 p. (in Russ.)

Raizman M. I. Zaderzhannaya literatura [Detained Literature]. Magadan, Okhotnik, 2009, 108 p. (in Russ.)

Rutz A. Einleitung. Zeitenblicke, 2002, Bd. 1, № 2. URL: http://www. zeitenblicke.de/2002/02/rutz/index.html (accessed 10.04.2024).

Safronov A. V. Zhanrovoe svoeobrazie russkoi khudozhestvennoi dokumentalistiki (ocherk, memuary, “lagernaya” proza) [The genre diversity of Russian artistic documentary literature (sketch, memoirs, “camp” prose)]. Ryazan, S. A. Esenin Ryazan State Uni. Press, 2012, 108 p. (in Russ.)

Shalamov V. T. Collected Works. In 6 vols. Moscow, TERRA-Knizhnyi klub Publ., 2015, vol. 5, 384 p. (in Russ.)

Starikova L. S. “Lagernaya proza” v kontekste russkoi literatury XX veka: ponyatie, granitsy, spetsifika [The “camp prose” in the context of the Russian literature of the 20th century: concept, framework, specificity]. Bulletin of Kemerovo State University, 2015, vol. 4, no. 2 (62), pp. 169–174. (in Russ.)

Varlaro F. Fitometafora v leksicheskoi strukture tekstov lagernoi prozy [Phytometaphor in the lexical structure of camp prose texts]. Cand. Philol. Sci. Diss. Novosibirsk, 2023, 234 p. (in Russ.)