SEMIOTIC NATURE OF FOLK TALE DISCOURSE

Discourse is considered to be a significant object of linguistic research in the framework of approaches worked out by sociolinguistics, pragmalinguistics, linguistics of speech and cognitive linguistics. Nevertheless, existing interpretations of discourse are numerous and heterogeneous. Being oral or written, various in length and treated “in textual or sociocultural and social-interactional terms,” it is referred to “an elusive area, an imprecise and constantly emerging and emergent interface between language and culture” [1, p. 22]. J. P. Gee differentiates “discourse” with a little “d” to mean language-in-use from “Discourse” with a capital “D” including besides language a nonverbal component (language plus “other stuff”) [2, p. 26].

Sociocognitive approach to discourse originates from Teun A. van Dijk’s ideas and defines discourse as a general idea of text, a concept of text. In this meaning discourse can be compared to a prototype, a cognitive structure similar to mental structures representing objects and events [3, p. 191, 205]. In this case discourse assumes material form in infinitely many texts united by thematic unity, common structural and stylistic features and the same communicative sphere while any single text is marked as formal embodiment (materialization) of discourse [4, p. 232].

Folk tale discourse is an integrative part of existential discourse. Its transformation from situational-role to personal-oriented existential variety of discourse was due to the transition of oral communication into written. This shift of transmission resulted in the loss of its participants’ role relations (those of story teller and listener) and in digressions from traditional formulaic style [5, p. 54].

All diversity of folk tale definitions can be reduced to a few most general definitions, congruent to definitions of discourse. In particular, folk tale discourse is defined as:

- a kind of personal communication, the purpose of which is to detect and experience the essential meaning of life, to interpret the nature of the relationship between man and the world [6, p. 43-44];

- a socio-cultural and communicative product of speech and thought of an ethnic group containing axiological strategies and cultural information in a variety of texts [7, p. 8]; [8, p. 7];

- a dynamic process of cognitive and linguistic activity, inscribed in a fabulous context and its result – the text – represented in the special social form [5, p. 31].

The definition analysis reveals emphasis either on processional or resulting aspects or on their interaction. Another significant characteristic of folk tale discourse is its semiotic space attending to a specific communicative sphere. N. N. Mironova was the first to describe fictional discourse as “a special sign system serving cultural communication” [9, p. 48]. In addition, V. V. Krasnykh writes that any discourse by its nature is essentially a single semiotic system possessing its own discursive units – mentefacts and text as units of planes of content and expression [10, p. 37].

Assertions of semiotic character can be applied in full measure to folk tale discourse, being a kinship with fictional discourse and a source of literary tradition. Folk tale discourse is based upon de-sacralized myth as “a way of social memory organization” [11, p. 175]. Being a non-text type and preceding event, myth in the form of reductive programs, frames, situations and events penetrates into signs of varying complexity. The symbolism of folk tale discourse is primarily determined by signs referring to mythological situation. Transformation of original mythological configurations (names, images, attributes, motifs, subjects) in accordance with axiological dominants of folk consciousness leads to the formation of specific folk tale signs – folk tale images functioning as folk tale names, events and expressions.

The semiotic nature of folk tale discourse reveals itself most explicitly in a situation of its interaction with other discourse types. As a result of this interaction folk tale images are borrowed to the non-fictional continuum and begin to function as precedent phenomena initiating in the minds of society a desired range of positive associations. Thus, folk tales are widely used and processed in accordance with the theatrical, television or computer discourse format, becoming theater and television performances or computer games. Mass production of toys and souvenirs, creation of great amusement parks as well as appeal to mythological structures of mass consciousness in order to increase the demand for consumer goods result from introduction of folk tale characters and motifs to advertising discourse. In educational discourse folk tales act as an effective means of socialization of children and organization of educational process. Besides, writers and painters turn to this genre of folk literature so that on its basis they could create new works of art having a meaningful emotional and aesthetic impact on the audience.

N. A. Akimenko brings out clearly the correlation between folk tale, political and religious discourses. Folk tale and political discourses are based on a system of identical mythological beliefs creatively transformed in each to receive diverse manifestations according to their aims. Despite different purposes and nature of folk tale and religious discourses, their proximity is verified by inner organization (speech formulas, recurrence, repetition) as well as by the structural and semantic characteristics of their onomastic systems [5, p. 18–26].

Folk tale discourse can be regarded as text in the broadest semiotic interpretation. In Bart’s understanding of text [12, p. 452–458] it demonstrates the holistic multiplicity of meanings interacting with each other and giving rise to new meanings. Being a creolized system like any form of folk culture folk tale discourse concentrates on the signifiant, releases the signifie from unambiguous interpretation and determines possibilities of its multifold existence.

From the standpoint of semiosis, or sign process, represented as a five-member ratio V, W, X, Y, Z by Ch. W. Morris [13, p. 119], folk tale text as a form of folk tale discourse manifestation and fabulousness (skazochnost’) as its genre-forming category can be treated as the signifiant of the sign in the broad non-linguistic interpretation (V). The signification of the sign (Y) is the fabulous world constructed in the folk artistic consciousness which reflects creatively transformed experience the ethnic group acquired while interacting with the objective reality. This sign – folk tale discourse - in a particular communicative situation (context Z) arouses in the addressee-interpreter (W) predisposition to a certain reaction (interpretant X). In other words, the story-teller’s masterly narration of a folk tale determines the listeners’ due communicative behaviour in accordance with the functional characteristics of folk tale discourse.

Consequently, folk tale discourse is a complex linguo-semiotic phenomenon, a product of speech and thought of an ethnic group manifested in different genres of folk works of art (folk tales, legends, nursery tales, historical and local tales) together with extralinguistic factors. The works of art that make up folk tale discourse are united by the common category of fabulousness with the miraculous as its central component and accumulate mythological beliefs shared by society in the system of verbal and nonverbal signs.