Національна Академія Мистецтв України Інститут культурології

The proverb «без догляду немає ладу» (there’s no order without supervision) demonstrates arguments in favor of the conjecture concerning the origination of the etymon of лад from √*ls with the respective semantic field of ‘gliding, vestige’ [Мельничук, 1986, 145]. In its turn глядіти comes back to гладкий = Germ. glatt, gleiten = glide; the semantic simile would here build up the Middle Nether German glaren ‘to glow’ = glare, Germ. Glanz. Thus it goes about the semantic development of √*ghel ‘to cut > to glare’. The question arises whether гладкий (smooth) and лад (order) are regarded here as the cognates the first of which is built of prothetic velar consonant analogous to such relations that take place between класти and Germ. laden that have the same etymon and the equal meaning? At the same time it is quite possible that it arises here also an unsolved etymological problem instead of a usual etymological simulation that one can suspect. An overtly alliterative proverb «временем и смерд барыню берет» ‘sometimes (another interpretation: ‘due to the time’) a beggar can take a lady’ [Даль, 716] contains the alliterative idiom “брать барыню” ‘to take a lady’; besides, one traces here the approximation of время ‘time’ (from the nest of вертеть, веревка ‘to turn, rope’) and смерд ‘beggar’ (of смерть ‘death’, Lat. mordeo ‘to erode’) thus referring to etymological connections. The etymological issue of alliterative devices can be exemplified with the proverbs «в добрый час молвить, в худой помолчать» ‘it’s to say in good time and to keep silence in bad time’ and «что тому Богу молиться, который не милует?» ‘what’s the reason to pray to the god that doesn’t pardon?’ [Даль, 932, 241] where one can trace the kinship of молва ‘rumor’ and молитва ‘prayer’ that together with the Germ. melden ‘to infom’ come back to the etymon reflected in молоть; молчать ‘to mill, to keep silence’; the nest of милый, мир, менять ‘nice, peace, to change’ stands apart but all they are united with √*ms ‘to fling, to pu;;’ [Мельничук, 1986, 142].

It is relics bearing witness of the etymological past of language that give base for experimental rudimentary formation and occasional locutions with the deviational forms of lexical attraction as the examination of lexical compatibility. The proverb «блискавка блисне – камінь трісне» ‘a lightning flashes – a stone splits’ represents th old association of stroke and flash [Левицкий, 3, 2001, 209]. The proverb «дело небогато, да делано рогато» ‘the job is not rich but igt is made up horny’ could be taken for the hint to the “Horn of Abundance” if there weren’t meant an opposite connotation of ‘negligence’; «то мудрено, что на льду сварено» ‘it is too wise that is cooked upon ice’ implies not only the absurdity of boiling ice but also the revival of old association of frost with ‘scald of burn’ (attested with the meaning of голоть ‘burning cold’); the etymological relics of the confrontation of ‘sitting’ as ‘immobility’ is attested in the proverb «годі сидіти, пора їхати» ‘it’s enough to sit, it’s time to go’; the proverb «ховай глибше – знайдеш швидше» ‘hide deeper, then you’ll find swifter’ contains not only the alliteration “ховати – (зна)ходити” but also the combination of ‘depth’ and ‘concealment’ that implies wide consequences. Thus the experimental lexical attraction represented in proverbial locutions comes to the necessity of special historical interpretation of words where rudimental meanings engendered with this attraction would be compared with the relics of etymological development. One can say of syntactic perspective that grows into the diachronic perspective.

It is to stress that imagination itself and imaginative regularities become often the arguments for etymological decisions, and these images’ transitions are supplied with proverbial locutions. One can find, for instance, stable idiomatic locutions common for the Old Slavonic, Gothic and Greek that attest the semantic lineages⁶⁹⁴. The arguments of the kind are to be traced also in the so called textual etymology where the whole stable lexical combinations are reconstructed⁶⁹⁵. Semantic arguments of proverbial kind can be exemplified with the etymological development of кость = Lat. ossa that (as O.N. Trubachev has shown) can be brought back to Lat. est (as an alternative decision to the root *kes / *sek). This conjecture can be supported with the parallel development of Germ. Bein = bone coming back to Germ. bin = be as the idea of the mortality of existence [Lewickij, 2003, 103-104]. It all can be generalized with the conclusion on etymological reliability of proverbial data⁶⁹⁶. The reasonability if etymological searches for folklore in general is acknowledged for ages⁶⁹⁷. The researches of the formulae of etymons’ combinations in particular enable substantiations of the origin of the terms tragedy and drama as the ritual term of offering a victim⁶⁹⁸. It is of significance that such etymological formulae are retained in vivid speech in particular in the relics of old anagrammatic versification as in the case of poetic locution urbi et orbi ‘to city and to world’ and respective “Риму и миру”⁶⁹⁹. The last sample demonstrates in particular the case of preponderant etymological simulation so that one can say of a particular poetic etymology.

One can find a whole set of coupled locutions where etymological substantiation enables finding the semantic processes where transitions appear to be deeply steeped in the past. The etymological synonyms are to be found in the stable Ukrainian idiomatic locution «добре дбати» ‘to care carefully’. At one side the nest дибати, довбати, дбати ‘to hollow out, to care’ designates the generalized image of work and labor. This interpretation is attested in particular with the proverb «хто дбає, той має» ‘that has who cares’. At another side the epithet добрий refers to the primary meaning of Lat. faber ‘a laborious (person)’ so that it goes about coming back to the same semantic field. The similar case of etymological synonymy is to be found in the locution «перетовчене та перемелене» ‘pounded and milled’ where товкти, толока ‘to pound, a crowd’ has the cognates only in Greek q ‘to pound’ while молоти, млин ‘to grind, a mill’ belongs to the Indo-European universe. The both Slavonic lexemes demonstrate variants of widening the root (with -u and -l respectively) attested in particular in the origin of мови ‘speech’ that comes back to молоти ‘to mill, to grind’. It gives also grounds to seek references with the etymologically isolated Ukrainian товкмачити = Rus. толковать ‘to interpret’ (adopted in Germ. Dolmetscher ‘interpreter’) that can be conceived as the derivation in the field of verba dicendi from the root of товкти. In this case the whole locution can be read as something not only elaborated but also discussed. The Church Slavonic locution стuденецъ истлhния ‘a pit for sewage, for litter’ [Дьяченко, 679] discloses etymological procedures concealed behind the alliteration of the common root’s dental: студити ‘to cool’ is of the same root that Lat. stilla ‘a drop’, Germ. Staub ‘dust’ (and perhaps Stube ‘a room’, Stein = stone whereas тлhти ‘to smoulder, to rot’ comes back to тля ‘plant-louse’ (Lat. tinea). Meanwhile within a broader etymological perspective the both roots betray their common origin from the etymon with the initial *ts- with a wide circle of meanings from ‘stable, direct’ to ‘dry, covered’.

Rhyme as the device of etymological regeneration can be attested with the Ukrainian proverb «що везеш олово, бідна твоя голово?» ‘what for do you cart the tin, poor is your head?’ [Зіновіїв № 1268] where Олово ‘tin’ as the designation of white metal of little value is akin to the tabooed name of “white bird” лебідь ‘swan’ and to the toponym Alps (“white mountains”), Elba (“white river” that flows through limestone). In its turn голова ‘head’ belongs to the nest that includes глина, глиба ‘clay, clod’, Lat. globus, Germ. Klaue = claw and designates convex, massive objects so that the both semantic fields seem to have little common. Meanwhile it is from the last nest that залоза ‘a gland’ comes (the organ with the mentioned convex form) and at last залізо ‘iron’ as the metal substance obtained with casting in the described shapes. Thus one metal is compared here with another. The relics of the “iron images” are attested in the song formula «лізу, лізу по білому залізу» ‘I clamber on white iron’ or in the designation of a snake as «залізної гілляки» ‘iron branch’ as well as in an etymological figure «*залізна голова» ‘iron head’. In particular «біле залізо» ‘white iron’ can be then conceuved as the synonym to the used designation of the cheap metal tin and become the metaphor of the lost value at all. The confrontation of олово vs. залізо (tin vs. iron, the last being etymologically akin to голова ‘head’) gives pretext to build up the image of «*олов’яної голови» ‘tinned head’ as the metaphor of stupidity.

The similar alliterative profile-making devices are to encounter in the proverb «велик дуб та дупнат» ‘the oak-tree is big but hollow’ [Зіновіїв] where the both alliterated дуб ‘oak-tree’ and дупло ‘a hollow’ come back to √*dheubh ‘deep, to hollow out’ with such reflexes as дно ‘bottom’; meanwhile there are also other possible reconstruction that come to the etymon, attested in to be as the metathesis of the preceding. In this respect Дуб ‘an oak-tree’ is to be taken as the metaphor of an object or a person whereas its epithet of hollowness becomes the synecdoche of the deficiencies so that the whole locutions come to the disclosure of contradictions. It is worth noticing that the discussed etymological figure is also used as a song formula: «Ой на горі дуб дуплавий / А мій милий кучерявий» ‘Oh there’s a hollow oak on a mountain, and my sweetheart has curly hair’ [Гошовский, 1968].One has to attach here also another adage, «у великому судні та на самому дні» ‘in a great ship at the very bottom’ where the rhyme makes the both words draw together. When судно, суд ‘ship, law-court’ come back to the same root that is present in давати ‘to give’ it is the rhyme with the initial dental that underlines the root morpheme and promotes revealing the hidden etymological sense. In the both cases the poles of contradiction are confronted.

The motif of SILENCE can show how etymological semantic transformations become those of poetical images’ development. The motif has been conceived differnetly in the Slavonic and the Hellenic, the clear distinction having been deminstrated by Ye.M. Vereshschagin who points out the confrontation of the spiritual and the corporeal aspects⁷⁰⁰. At the same time in the derivative утешение ‘consolation’ the Hellenic connotations can be reproduced as in thelocution «синему морю на утешение» ‘for the consoalation of the blue sea’ [Дьяченко, 2002, 768]. Still more observable such connotation becomes in the image of «тихої води» ‘calm water’ as in the adage «тиха вода глибока» ‘calm water is deep’. Still another layer of connotations can be disclosed through the kinship of тиші with the Lithuanian tiesa ‘truth’ obviously retained in the proverbs «хто живе тихо, не знає про лихо» ‘who lives calmly that doesn’t know calamity’ as well as in the opposite sentence «од тиха все лихо» ‘all calamities are from calmness’ where calmness is meant as the mask of hypocrisy. . The stability of such oppostition is attested with proverbial samples «Як дій швидко, то бридко, дій тихо, то лихо» ‘when doest swiftly, it’ll be ugly, when doest calmly, it’ll be calamity’, «Зверху гарно та тихо, в середині ворушиться лихо» ‘it’s good and calm outwardly, and in the core the evil stirs’. Still another connotation can be detected in the confrontationof calm with speed in the proverb «Хто спішить, той людей смішить, а хто тихо ходить, той на ум наводить» ‘who hurries that will make people laugh, and who goes calmly that adds wits’ where the formula «тихо ходити» ‘go calmly’ contains a metathesis that enables reciprocal approximation of calmness and rest implied in the √*sed ‘to sit, to fall’ that is the basis for the verb ходити ‘to go’. n its turn another predicate (вести) belongs to the Slavonic-German- Hellenistic isoglosses and thus refers to Germ. Widmen ‘to devote’ as well as to Old Sl. вено = Germ. Wittum = .

The well known Gospel’s enunciation «не бачити бервено у власному оці» (from “Why do you see the speck in your neighbour’s eye, but do not notice the log in your own eye?”, Matthew, 7.3) can be interpreted as an etymological figure if one takes into account that Old Slavonic бервно ‘log’ from the canonic translation (substituted with колоду ‘block’ in the modernized translation) and брова ‘brow’ are of the same root⁷⁰¹. The known N.A. Nekrasov’s line «суждены нам благие порывы, но свершить ничего не дано» ‘there are noble impulses destined for us, but it isn’t given anything to accomplish for us’ demonstrates the duplicate opportunities for comprehension. The opposition «порыв – свершение» ‘impulse – accomplishment’ can be represented as the metathesis of √* reu / * uer, and it is proved with the symmetry of line. At the same time the extreme members of the line build up a genuine etymological figure: суд ‘law court > to destine’ comes from the root of давати ‘to give’ so that the forgotten semantic connection gets revival in the poetic line. A kind of etymological tautology can be revealed in the German proverb «viele Worte, viel Lügen» ‘many words – many deceits’ when one takes into account that etymologically Wort = word corresponds to Russian врать ‘to deceive’ and Lüge = лгать = to lie.

The riddle «впала стрічка через річку, поєднавши береги» ‘a ribbon falls across the river and binds the banks’ (bridge) as an etymological figure demonstrates the nest comprising such reflexes as ріка, ринути, зронити, роїтися, ‘river, to rush, to drop, to swarm’, here belongs also струмінь ‘stream’ (with s – mobile and t - epentheticum), At the same time the word Стрічка ‘ribbon’ with the same accumulation of consonants (*str) is isolated. One traces here the deetymologization with alliterative approximation\of semantic connotations so that the ritual meaning of the bridge described by A.A> Potebnya [Потебня, 1883, 127 -137] is to be found here.

The relics of Indo – European anagrammatic verse with the consequences of etymological regeneration can be detected in the proverb «це чорт бідний, а чоловік убогий» ‘devil is poor and a man is unfortunate’ where it is not only the connection of чорт ’devil’ with чорним ‘black’ in opposite to чоловік ‘man’ with чолом ‘forehead’ but first of all the etymological sensitivity where біда ‘unhappiness’ implies the synonymous designation of devul біс. A paragon for the alliterative issues in etymological regeneration can be seen in the proverb «терпение и труд все перетрут» ‘endurance and labor will all rub together’ where труд and тереть build up etymological figure while терпеть is united together with страдание, страх ‘suffering, fear’ (with s - mobile) meanwhile the both nests are comprised with the broader etymon. Alliterative profile promotes intensifying etymological “memory” in the confrontation “сова – сокіл” ‘owl - falcon’ in some proverbs («сова соколу не пара» ‘an owl is not couple for a falcon’, «видно сокола по польоту, а сову по погляду» ‘one can recognize falcon from the flight and owl from the gaze’). When сова is akin to сопілка, сопель ‘a pipe’ as the musical instruments, сокіл ‘falcon’ is attached to ‘swan’ so that the semantic polarization of the same initial syllables turns out to become valid. Alliteration promotes in elucidating the etymological background of the proverb «тяжко зібрати кінці до купи» ‘it is difficult to bring the ends together (to the common heap)’ where one nest comprises кінець ‘end’, чин ‘deed’, чадо ‘child’, початок ‘commencement’ (the well known sample of semantic ambivalence) and another represents купа ‘heap’ as the designation of convex objects.

That the devices of etymological regeneration and simulation are sometimes used in folklore preponderantly and many a time deliver substance for lexical experiments with conversion can be attested with the riddle «тріщі виочило, шкіри визубило, вертом хвостить» ‘untranslatable: the nouns and verbs are changed in their places: eyes – gape, teeth – grin, tail - twist’ (a cat). This sample entails also wider consequences: the root of “вишкірити” ‘to grin’ is homonymous to the name of a perfectly distinct semantic field: шкіра ‘skin’ from. √* sker- ‘to cut’ (there are also other etymological conjectures). One can compare etymological sources reflected in proverbs to the recapitulation in biology where together with the mimetic reproduction of genuine heritage the mimicry is observable.

The coexistence and coherence of the opposite tendencies of etymological regeneration and simulation (deetymologization) reveals the dialectics of integrity and incompleteness of a language. The processes of migration and assimilation of separate elements of a language system that create the foundation of contamination are enabled with a relative independence of these elements due to imperfect state of each such system. The integrity of a code foresees its incompleteness addressing thus out of its boundaries to other dialects where those meanings are present that emerge here only as a result of figurative transformation. It concerns also the integrity of a text as a narration that never can be exhausted and always can be continued. A persuasive testimony of the interaction between deetymologization and etymological regeneration can be found in the known Lomonosov’s verse «Открылась бездна, звезд полна / Звездам числа нет, бездне дна» (the abyss has been opened, it is filled with stars; the stars are innumerable, the abyss is bottomless). Here one encounters, together with the figura etymologica дна бездны also paronymic attraction where бездна (abyss) and звезды (stars) are mutually likened through the common element * - езд – belonging to prefix in the first word and to the root in the second. These alliterated words are further confronted to the other lexical units including the lateral р / л.

These processes concerning the interaction of the inner and outer forms of word attest essential shifts taking place in epigrammatic lyrics. Under the conditions of lyrics, as well as it has already been seen in proverbs, the relations [signifying / signified] don’t coincide with those of colloquial speech. The signified and designated things themselves become devices for indicating the otherness. They don’t mean what they designate, they point out to details encircling the invisible centre of a circumlocution. Respectively also the signifying layer of language endures transformation that reveal themselves in particular in the inner rhyme and cognate phenomena of “sound painting” that had happened to be designated earlier in Old Slavonic as «плетение словес» (the embroidery of words). As a result phonosemantic motivational conditions of a verbal sign win significance as the special devices of poetic idiolect⁷⁰². These conditions are to be seen in particular in inner rhymes that ultimately give the effects of onomatopoeia where the meaning becomes already determined with the newly created connections within the sound picture of a poetic work⁷⁰³. Diachronic & prosodic aspects of verse gaining importance in lyrics have common in that they go beyond the limits of the given linguistic actuality. Prosody refers to the reality beyond the speech (especially to that of singing), and diachronic procedures of etymological regeneration together with simulation enlivens the hereditary properties of a word.

To sum up, one would conceive proverbial texts (as well as catchwords and refrains) as anonymous quotations borrowed from an alien speech as the target of interpretative efforts. Therefore they reveal the quality of reproducibility as the basis both for their migratory properties and to codification as paradigmatic side of the system of artistic conventions that coexist with common lexical compatibility. The migration is promoted with the property of transformability that provides the production of inferential statements disclosing the implicit contents. In particular alternative statements can be produced and put to examination as the antithetic inferences in the so called scenic proverbs evolved as discussions. The features of textual heterogeneity and incompleteness are the foundation for the division into three proverbial genera: proverbs in proper sense as propositional units are confronted to riddles as their inversed specialized versions with the narrowed field of interpretation with marked incompleteness at one side, and to adages as the elliptic insufficient speech units approaching composed lexical units at another side.

All proverbial enunciations (together with epigrams in literature) build up the class of allegories that belong to meditative lyrics (in opposite to incantations and other species of apostrophes that are the source of suggestive lyrics). As the multiplied tropes proverbs can be regarded as the rhetoric figure if metalepsis. It demonstrates the peculiarity of poetic idiolect where the relationship of direct vs/ derivative meanings becomes reverse in regard to the colloquial speech so that the derivation takes primordial place. The peculiarity of location as the alien speech’s fragments enables the quality of irony inherent in these enunciations. Due to the crisscrossed ways of usage ensuing from reproducibility proverbial phrases can be regarded as the so called intertextual isoglosses adoptive for variegated situational cases. In its turn transformability provides their compressive properties as the vehicles for the informative package of broader narrative textual entities.

The said can be exemplified with the following patterns of transformations where preliminarily the elimination of personal forms as inessential for proverbial invariant and conversion into passive voice are carried out. Then first of all the derivative meanings of words taken with the added inverted commas are displayed as the latencies implying further explication and expansion and lacunas of absent possible terms are disclosed, The second step will then be the disclosure of ambivalent actualities with the ensuing implications of alternative interpretation of proverbs. In particular it is with converting into negative that the alternative interpretations of actualities are examined. At last, the third step consists in the disclosure of catechetic structure of the sentence, its conversion into interrogative and the formation of the four types of questions (total / partial, modal / dictal) with the evolvement of a possible dialogue.
<man soll den Tag nicht vor dem Abend loben> = <не видав вечера, и хвалиться нечего / хвали жизнь при смерти, а день вечером / ^[“]Хвали^{[”] [“]}утро^{[”] [“]}вечером^[”]> → * утро хвалят вечером

I хвала →= результативность; утро / вечер →= начало / конец Lacunas: *хула; * вечное (безначальное бесконечное) * Хвала или хула тому, что с утром и вечером * Вечер всегда за утром (а не перед ним) * Хвалить утро вечером можно, хулить не обязательно

II 1) [rheme] вечер * не дождавшись вечера, не хвали день / * вечер – хвала дню (the end crowns the work) 2) [rheme] хвала дню (утру) * день (этот) достоин хвалы и без вечера

III [interrogative conversion] хвалить (ли) утро вечером? реальна ли похвала утру вечером? [catechetic structure] – Уже вечер? – Воздадим хвалу дню. [partial questions] – Можно ли вечером хвалить день?

<^[“]Чия^[”] б ^[“]гарчала^[”], а ^[“]твоя^[”] б ^[“]мовчала^[”]> → <*кому гарчати, тобі мовчати> → *.

I чия / кому →= загальне для всіх; твоє →= особливе; гарчати →= виявляти активність; мовчати →= утримуватися Lacunas: * (оцінка) гірше / краще * підстава (дозвіл) для активності * (твоє) «гарчання» (гірше від) «мовчання» * Навіть якщо припустити, що в когось є підстави «гарчати», йому належало б «мовчати» * «Іншим» «гарчати» вільно, але «нашим» належить «мовчати»

II 1) [rheme] гарчання для всіх * Можна погарчати, можна й помовчати * Чи мовчати, чи гарчати, однаково * Всім не мовчати, комусь можна і погарчати 2) [rheme] мовчання своїм * Мовчання, бо нема підстав для гарчання * Мовчання завжди краще від гарчання (хто мовчить, той лиха збудеться) (хто спить, той не грішить)

III [interrogative conversion] всім гарчання, а нам мовчання? [catechetic structure] * – До кого не звернись, скрізь кожен «гарчить» з цього приводу. – А тобі зась! Краще «мовчи», бо на ризик наразишся. [partial questions] * Чи таки справді не можна слова вимовити? * А кому ж вільно говорити?

< Як же Ґандзю не кохати, як вона вміє брехати > = <* брехливість є підставою кохання до Ґандзі>

I «Ґандзя» →= постать спритного хитруна (trickster); брехливість (→ += жіноча хитрість); кохання (→ += терпіння) Lacunas: * зрадливість * недовіра * неможливо не «кохати» завдяки умінню «брехати» * незважаючи на брехливість не можна не ставитися довірливо * приваблює хитрість

II 1) [rheme] брехливість →= вигадливість * Коли б не «брехала», тоді б не «кохали» * – Знається на тому, як виходити з таких скрутних ситуацій – За кмітливість кохають 2) [rheme] кохання →= привабливість, толерантність * без симпатії така особа не буде, навіть коли вигадує * - Багато чого приплете до своєї розповіді – То мило й любо, най і неправда, але добре вигадано 3) [rheme] кохання →= недовіра * людина відома брехливістю, тому її всі «кохають» (хто раз збрехав, тому вдруге не вірять) 4) [rheme] брехливість →= зрадливість * доводиться спеціально «кохати», пильнувати, бо виявилося, що бреше * завжди кохали, а тут виявилося, що й «брехати» вміє

III [interrogative conversion] Кохання за «брехливість»? [catechetic structure] – Кохана? – Бо «брехлива» – Брехлива? – Тому й «кохана» [partial questions] – За що така закоханість? Ця «брехливість» до чого призведе? – До закоханості.

<krummes Holz gibt auch gerades Feuer> <^[“]кривые^{[”] [“]}дрова^[”] да ^[“]прямо^{[”] [“]}горят^[”]> → <*от кривых дров прямое горение (пламя)>

I дрова →= средства / источник; кривое / прямое →= ущербное / успешное; горение →= результаты (цели). Lacunas: * горючее / топливо; *тлеть / чадить → * от кривого полена только чад <Сырые дрова не горят, а тлеют – Даль (тлеть)>* прямые дрова – прямой огонь <подливать масла в огонь>

II 1) [rheme] кривые дрова * несмотря на то, что дрова кривые, не чадит * хоть средства и негодны, цель достигнута 2) [rheme] прямое горение * кривые дрова тоже могут хорошо гореть (И во лжи правда есть [Мельц et al., 85])

III [interrogative conversion] Кривые дрова да с прямым огнем? Что и как горит? Реален ли прямой огонь от кривых дров? [catechetic structure] – Дрова каковы? – Кривые. – А как горят? – Хорошо, прямо. [partial questions] – Будут ли эти кривые дрова гореть или чадить? – Какой огонь возможен от кривых дров?

<и вор Богу молится, да черт молитву его перехватывает> (Даль, Молиться) → * молитва не о том, о чем у людей.

I вор →= аномальный человек: и →= даже / хотя Lacunas: * человек обычный, не вор * все люди молятся Богу, а вора молитву к черту обращена * воры не о том молятся, что простые люди

II 1) [rheme] молящийся Богу (человек) * хотя и вор тоже молится, да еще вопрос, кому 2) [rheme] вор * молитва молитве рознь, грешник (вор) молитву до Бога не донесет

III [interrogative conversion] Кому обращена молитва вора и до кого она доходит? [catechetic structure] – И вор молится? – Да, только молитвы не те [partial questions] – Дойдет ли до Бога молитва такого грешника?

<Не стоит гроша / Хоть денег ни гроша, да походка хороша> (Даль, Похаживать) → * Несмотря на трудности, не теряется достоинство / * Создать видимость вопреки ничтожеству

I походка →= 1) внешность 2) внутренние качества, достоинство; бедность →= 1) внешние обстоятельства 2) внутренние качества Lacunas: * хромота (дело хромает) « хотя и нет средств, да дело не хромает * хотя на показ выставляет многое, внутри ничего * (внешность обманчива)

II 1) [rheme] бедность * не гляди, что нос задирает, на деле там белыми нитками шито (На брюхе шелк, а брюхе щелк) 2) [rheme] достоинство * нет ничего, а держать себя умеет

III [interrogative conversion] * Истинно ли хороша походка при таких обстоятельствах? [catechetic structure] – А чем это ничтожество может похвалиться? – Разве что походкой – Кто это так сумел выделиться? – Тот бедняк, несмотря на нищету [partial questions] О нищете известно, а вот откуда такая походка?

<умирай в поле, да не в яме> (Даль, Поле) → * от верной гибели не следует прятаться

I поле →= борьба: яма →= западня, смерть →= гибель Lacunas: * жертва * трусость * не напрасная гибель (пропадать, так вместе) (трус гибнет дважды)

II 1) [rheme] поле (место гибели) (на миру и смерть красна) (смерть с поднятой головой) (Валгалла) ) [rheme] гибель * в яму от смерти не спрячешься * в яме гибель верна, в поле еще будет кое-что

III [interrogative conversion] В поле или в яме гибнуть? [catechetic structure] - Где встретить гибель* - Лучше уж в поле [partial questions] - Где то поле, на котором суждено погибнуть?

All these samples attest the productivity of epigrammatic enunciations as the germs for textual expansion. Each sentence becomes the source for further propositional structures developing in the extent text. The practice of scenic proverbs where such opportunities make up the basis for textual growth demonstrates the wide applicability of such method of textual expansion. That is why dramatic genus can be said to develop immediately from proverbs as their textual expansion based on their interpretability and transformability.

Generally speaking interpretability & transformability become generic peculiarities’ determinants as the sides of textual integration. One deals in particular first of all with the peculiar interrelations between the apices of the communicative quadrangle “author – hero – addressee - observer” (resp. of their textual images) that determine particular integrative conditions. These relations intersect with the further three opposed pairs, those of distance vs. participation, contemplation vs. action, totality vs. particularity. Thus the way from epic narration to its dramatic representation looks like an almost full disappearance of an author’s (and narrator’s) image reduced to separate remarks and replaced with the hero’s voices. Respectively the epic distance between the narrator and narration’s object is reduced to the implicit author’s presence discernible from the heroes’ way of conduct. Meanwhile the distance between dramatic action and the observer arises as the indispensable prerequisite of dramatic action as distinct from the habitual life. If a spectator identifies himself or herself with the participant of scenic action it means the destruction of dramatic communication attesting the observer’s incompetence and inability to comprehend the text adequately.

Dramatic totality becomes evident already in the decision-making process when the existential problem appears so that the triumph or catastrophe means also the salvation or destruction of the whole worlds of the heroes. It is from here that specific risk and hazard of dramatic play appear. Epic narration aims at overcoming the narrator’s partial viewpoint with representing the outer world’s totality (while the. lyrical totality is displayed within the borders of the author’s inner world). In this respect dramatic addressee replaces the position of an author where the observer’s competence plays the role of textual integrative force of a distanced narrator. Distance can be said to be inverted in drama in regard to epic novel. This inverted distance of drama embodied in the stage as the border between the addressee and the observed action provokes and invites observer’s imagination to participate in textual integration. Epic novel presumes the distance of an author from the object while dramatic play presupposes the distance of addressee from the represented staged text as the presupposed arbiter. Epic and dramatic distances take opposite positions within the communicative process, namely those of author and addressee respectively. In this respect they both oppose also to lyrical distance concerning the secluded position of the solitude of a lyrical hero (incognito) that entails the transformation of observed images into isolating abstractions. Epic narration refrains from imparting autonomy to particulars because it would abuse the intended totality and objective adequacy granting a privileged position to separate details. Therefore epic conditions are not favorable for the formation of isolating abstractions in the way of a lyrical poem and prevent separate details from turning into poetic symbols.

In its turn drama doesn’t come to such abstraction on the lyrical way of distance due to decisive role of action. The prevalence of action makes dramatic genus oppose to epic and lyrical genera as those where contemplation prevails. Each particle of dramatic text must necessarily be involved in action as the arguments of decision-making process and concern it in this or that way. When a textual segment pretends to have no such functional destination it serves as retardation and therefore concerns action as in the case of the so called remplissage.

Meanwhile together with these general aesthetic properties one should take into consideration also purely grammatical differences arising from the conditions of genera. One can correlate in particular the three genera with the assertive, problematic and imperative modes of utterance. Obviously it goes about those implications that are to be obtained from the textual genera and not about the manifested textual structure. For instance as far as epic narration deals with the representation of the past such implications are to be built up in perfect aspect though obviously narration is by no means restricted with the preference of any tense. Still more evident such implicit aspectual attachment is to be traced in drama where each utterance must leave vestige in the action and therefore be directed to the future termination of the work. One can say of commands concealed under the surface of usual conversation. Dramatic text represents the situation that has been very wittily described by K. Fedin who has shown that a simple advertisement can contain implicit commands⁷⁰⁴. In lyrics the contemplative attitude entails the possibility of converting the utterances into passive voice without the distortion of semantic invariant as it has been demonstrated in proverbs. Such virtual transformation as the admissible versions of the text of respective genus ensues in its turn from the broad approach to modality that presupposes the involvement of the whole flow of utterances and can by no means be restricted to separate propositional structures: this circumstance has been the item of a special attention paid in connection with the analysis of implicit textual properties. It concerns in particular the use of active voice where as a rule the latent descriptions of contemplative state are to be found⁷⁰⁵. The property of contemplative participation peculiar for lyrics entails the apparent necessity of disclosing the possible conversion of the phrases found in the overtly manifested speech. The cases of such disclosure of modality can be found in the simplest utterances where the modal indicator is to be added in their imaginative transformations⁷⁰⁶. The already mentioned duplicity of existential and confirmative latent statements as the indispensable concomitant satellites of the modal and dictal aspects of each utterance always enable their explicit disclosure with the ensuing transformation of textual entity. It turns out that in difference to epics the dramatic and lyrical “deviations” from narrative norm demonstrate especially observable use of modality⁷⁰⁷. Therefore the disclosure of the modal implicit statements behind lyrical or dramatic works represents the essential generic property when drama entails imperative and lyrical utterance converts into passive.

In its turn the delineated generic conditions can’t be taken for equal. The communicative asymmetry with the privileged position of an author determines the narrative communicative conditions that are to be taken for normal. Then both dramatic and lyrical textual strategies and tactics are supposed to be anomalous forms as the deviations from epic norm (represented in particular in its minimal scope in proverbial and parabolic texts). This deviational nature (conceived as poetical property in opposite to prose) is especially observable in drama. While comparing dramatic staged or screened version of a novel with its epic prosaic source one easily notices the “distortions” that make specific obstacles for the comprehension of the text. First of all one has to cope with the necessity of giving an account on the events of narration because it lacks immediate information when only exclusive direct speech of dramatis personae remains at hand. A dramatic play implies the existence of latent narration about the represented events still to be detected by a spectator. Such virtual narration can be defined as the latent narrative presupposition of a drama to be restored in an observer’s imagination from this direct speech. Such implication becomes a secondary reinterpretation (the very dramatic text being primary interpretation of reality retold in a presupposed epic narration) as a device to reveal the text’s entirety. Such general textual quality as incompleteness gets in drama the particular outlook of narrative presupposition where reticent contents are implied and supposed to be guessed from the enunciations overtly uttered by dramatis personae. There are no explicit reports of the action and the events taking place in drama, so one has to restore them in one’s own imagination as the inferences from the characters’ uttered speech building up the narrative presupposition. Thus in this case incompleteness as the inherent textual property turns into the insufficiency (that demands outer interpretative participation) together with the minimal necessity of information enabling such interpretative textual reconstruction. Therefore dramatic text is marked with the features of insufficient scope and necessary minimum of information to retain its coherence and identity. Obviously there arise respective lacunas & latencies that become the integral part and parcel of dramatic text.

The necessity of the latent narration to be reproduced both for the adequate comprehension and for the compression of drama entails what can be called the textual paradox of drama. It consists in the fact that the events being the object of conversations and discussions of dramatis personae are not retold immediately in the text of replicas and manifested in direct speech. They are mentioned only in indirect way as the vestiges left within characters’ utterances. Dramatic text looks like the description of an object that must still prove its own existence. One can say in this respect of dramatic phantom as the core of the contents⁷⁰⁸. Therefore it is marked with constant deficit (as the revelation of the mentioned insufficiency & necessity) that overweighs the excess. It is also revealed through reticence and ellipsis (together with the mentioned indispensable lacunas & latencies) as the generic properties of drama in addition to inherent narrative incompleteness entailing as a rule the necessity of observer’s participation to reproduce a plot. The immediate consequence of this textual deficit is the communicative peculiarity that belongs to the existential essence of drama.

The nature of such textual deficit of drama ensues from the very essence of quotation or direct speech as the form of reflected speech. Any cue (replica) of dramatis personae is to be regarded as a form of quotation and therefore it is always partial and incomplete. This inherent quality of partiality and informational deficit is the immediate result of the reflection and inversion as direct speech’s properties. Being conceived as estranged and alienated and subsequently represented as somebody’s quotation any speech becomes quotation separated from the author’s proper enunciations. Quotation as such represents the presence of otherness in verbal stream. Therefore the mere act of words’ location entails consequences concerning the essence of textual structure. Reflection always entails inversion so that the meaning of the reflected textual segment (with the location of direct speech) becomes modified as a partial negation of the sense that it would bear as the author’s immediate enunciation. Reflection & inversion being the inherent properties of any quotation as the utterance of an alien person, the ensuing semantic transition becomes the necessity that presume the existence of observer’s competence as a textual integrative force. Dramatic textual structure can be represented as a set of quotations that need such observer’s participation to be deciphered. Accordingly there is to be seen in drama the continuation of the isolating abstraction inherent to verbal cognitive system and applied now to the speech itself. A quotation represents a separated textual particle that becomes the vehicle of abstract attributes and presupposes interpretation to disclose the concrete object it helps to signify. Therefore there are only