Home/ Search/ 2021/ Issue 1 (70)

Issue 1 (70)

HETERO-TEXTUALITY AND CO-SPATIALITY: FROM THE SEMIOTICS OF THE CITY TO THE TRANS-SEMIOTICS OF THE POST-CITY
Year	2021	Number	1(70)
Pages	70-79	Type	scientific article
UDC	82	BBK	83
Authors	Zamyatin Dmitry N.	Topic	SEMIOTICS OF THE CITY IN LITERARY TEXTS
Summary	Literary texts can be considered as the most attractive research material for analyzing the key features of both the semiotics of the city as a whole and the semiotics of individual cities, to which many works of art are devoted. The urban space of Modernity as a result of the processes of powerful semiotization can be considered as both textual and intertextual. The intertextuality of Modern urban spaces presupposes sets of “floating” topological signifiers corresponding to similar sets of “floating” topological signs. In the traditional semiotics of the city, the existence of two realities is assumed — the “real” reality and the “semiotic” reality, between which clear logical correspondences and/or relations can be observed and analyzed. The appearance of non-classical/post-classical urban narratives focused on the problems of dis-communication at the beginning of the 20th century became one of the important signs of the primary formation of the post-city and post-urbanism phenomena. The post-city is not a text and can not be regarded as a text; at the same time, it can generate separate texts that are not related to each other in any way. Post-urban texts, which are the communicative results of specific co-spatialities, remain local “flashes” that do not form a single text or meta-text (super-text). Hetero-textuality is a phenomenon of post-urban reality, which is characterized by the coexistence, as a rule, of texts that do not correlate with each other, relating to certain stable urban loci. Trans-semiotics in general context is understood as the study of any texts that involve the creation of sign-symbolic breaks or “gaps” with any other potentially possible correlating texts in the process of signification. Trans-semiotics of post-cities are studies of (literary) texts that involve the creation of sign-symbolic breaks or “gaps” with any other potentially possible correlating texts related to a particular urban locus in the process of signifying any urban loci. The post-city heterostructuality can be considered as the co-spatiality of mutually exclusive texts corresponding to “non-seeing” post-city loci. Post-urban trans-semiotics in the course of their development form a kind of “dark zones” that reject or neutralize any attempt at any semiotic interpretation.
Keywords	city semiotics, literary texts, literary and geographical images, post-city, trans-semiotics, post-city trans-semiotics, hetero-textuality, co-spatiality, post-urban text
References	Abashev V. V. [Pasternak’s city of Yuryatin: geography, semiotics and pragmatics of novelistic image]. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta [Tomsk State Pedagogical University Bulletin], 2010, no. 8 (98), pp. 115–121. (in Russ.). Avanesov S. S. [Urban space as anthropological phenomenon]. Praksema. Problemy vizual’noy semiotiki [Praxema. Journal of Visual Semiotics], 2018, no. 2 (16), pp. 10–31. DOI: 10.23951/2312-7899-2018-2-10-31 (in Russ.). Barthes R. Imperiya znakov [Empire of Signs]. Moscow: Praxis Publ., 2004. (in Russ.). Bateman J. A. Triangulating transmediality: A multimodal semiotic framework relating media, modes and genres. Discourse, Context & Media, 2017, vol. 20, pp. 160–174. DOI: 10.1016/j.dcm.2017.06.009 (in English). Burago E. G. [City semiotics: Kiev as a culture text]. Vestnik Rossiyskogo universiteta druzhby narodov. Seriya: Teoriya jazyka. Semiotika. Semantika [RUDN Journal of Language Studies, Semiotics and Semantics], 2016, no. 2, pp. 35–40. (in Russ.). Edwards C. Writing Rome: Textual Approaches to the City. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996. (in English). Lotringer S. Trans-Semiotic Analysis: Shaggy Codes. The Drama Review: TDR, 1978, vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 87–94. (in English). Masser D. Nelokal’nost’: Fenomen, menyayushchiy predstavleniye o prostranstve i vremeni, i yego znacheniye dlya chernykh dyr, Bol’shogo vzryva i teoriy vsego [Nonlocality: A phenomenon that changes the concept of space and time, and its significance for Black Holes, the Big Bang and theories of everything]. Moscow: Alpina Publ., 2018. (in Russ.). Mednis N. E. Veneciya v russkoy literature [Venice in Russian Literature]. Novosibirsk: NGPU Publ., 1999. (in Russ.). Remm T. Understanding the city through its semiotic spatialities. Sign Systems Studies, 2011, vol. 39, no. 2/4, pp. 124–143. DOI: 10.12697/SSS.2011.39.2-4.06 (in English). Rongina Ya. N. [Transsemiotic processes in semiospace]. Slovo, vyskazyvanie, tekst v kognitivnom, pragmaticheskom i kul’turologicheskom aspektah: materialy VIII Mezhdunarodnoy nauch. konf. [Word, utterance, text in cognitive, pragmatic and culturological aspects: materials of the 8^th International Sci. Conf.]. Chelyabinsk: Encyclopedia Publ., 2016, pp. 348–351. (in Russ.). Rybakov V. V. [Hermeneutics and transsemiotic experience]. Kontekst i refleksiya: filosofiya o mire i cheloveke [Context and Reflection: Philosophy of the World and Human Being], 2016, vol. 5, no. 6A, pp. 50–62. (in Russ.). Schmidt N. V. Gorodskoy tekst v poezii russkogo modernizma: avtoref. kand. diss. [Urban text in the poetry of Russian Modernism: Abst. Diss. Cand.]. Moscow, 2007. (in Russ.). Shafranskaya E. F. Tashkentskiy tekst v russkoy kul’ture [Tashkent Text in Russian Culture]. Moscow: Art-Khaus Media Publ., 2010. (in Russ.). Shakirov S. M. [On transmediality]. Mediasreda [Media Environment], 2017, no. 12, pp. 16–24. (in Russ.). Simonenko M. A. [The City within the paradigm of Hyper-textuality]. Uchenyye zapiski. Elektronnyy nauchnyy zhurnal Kurskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta [Scientific Notes: The online academic journal of Kursk State University], 2013, no. 2 (26), pp. 162–166. (in Russ.). Torop P. Cultural Semiotics. The Routledge Handbook of Language and Culture. London; New York: Routledge, 2015, pp. 170–181. (in English). Turoma S. [Yu. M. Lotman’s semiotics of urban space: experience of reinterpretation]. Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie [New Literary Review], 2009, no. 4 (98), pp. 66–76. (in Russ.). Woodard B. On an Ungrounded Earth: Towards a New Geophilosophy. Brooklyn; New York: Punctum books, 2013. (in English). Zamyatin D. N. [Spatialness, co-spatialness, geo-spatialism: new onthologies of the space]. Chelovek [Human Being], 2011, no. 6, pp. 70–82. (in Russ.). Zamyatin D. N. [Post-city: space and ontological models of imagination]. Polis. Politicheskie issledovaniya [Polis. Political Studies], 2018, no. 3, pp. 147–165. DOI: 10.17976/jpps/2018.03.10 (in Russ.). Zamyatin D. N. [Post-city (II): cartographies of imagination and co-spatiality politics]. Sotsiologicheskoe obozrenie [Russian Sociological Review], 2019, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 9–35. (in Russ.).
Download in PDF