INTERSEMIOTICITY AND MULTIMEDIA: TRANSITION FROM TRADITIONAL TO ELECTRONIC TEXTS

JULIA VLADIMIROVNA BALAKINA,

ALEXEY VLADIMIROVICH SOSNIN

Abstrakt

The article looks into such features of modern electronic texts as intersemioticity and multimedia nature. Studying these features is essentially a new stage in researching intertextual relations; hence the article first turns to non-electronic texts, presenting on their basis the theoretical grounds of the notions in question, and only then proceeds to electronic texts tracing the evolution of the traditional conception of text. Electronic texts are regarded as multimodal, i.e. resulting from the synthesis of diverse semiotic objects and joining text and media in one syntagm. In order to distinguish the most common combinations of text and media, to explore the reasons why users combine them, and to establish their percentage ratios, the authors have conducted a social and linguistic study, whose results are analyzed in the article.

Słowa kluczowe: intersemioticity, multimedia, intertextuality, electronic text, semiotics
References

Arnheim R. 1989. The semiotic web. Berlin.

Balakina J. 2011. Anglicisms in Russian and German blogs. Frankfurt am Main.

Balakina J. 2016. Electronic texts – a cardinally new textual type? – Vestnik Volgogradskogo Gosudarstvennogo Universiteta 3: 29–35.

Barthes R. 1997. Image-Music-Text. London.

Bolter J. 2000. Remediation: Understanding new media. Cambridge.

Bochkaryov A. 2003. Intersemiotichnost’. Semanticheskij slovar’. [= The Dictionary of se­mantics]. Nizhny Novgorod.

Chesnokova I. 2011. Osobennosti ustnoj/pis’mennoj rechi v elektronnom pis’me. [= Oral and written features of electronic mail]. – Vestnik Burjatskogo gosuniversiteta 11: 132–135.

Crystal D. 2011. Internet linguistics: A student guide. London.

Ess Ch. 2005. Culture and computer-mediated communication: Toward new understand­ings. – Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 11.1: 179–191.

Gaudier-Brzeska H. 1915. Vortex (written from the trenches). – Blast [War Number] 2: 33–34.

Heibach C. 2003. Literatur im elektronischen Raum. Frankfurt am Main.

Herring S. 2001. The handbook of discourse analysis. Oxford.

Kolmogorov A. 2003. The truth benefits. [vol. 1]. Moscow.

Kress G., van Leeuwen T. 2006. Reading images. [2nd edition]. London.

Kristeva J. 1986. The Kristeva reader. Oxford.

Halliday M.A.K. 2004. An introduction to functional grammar. [3rd edition; revised by M.I.M. Matthiessen]. London.

Lévi-Strauss C. 1983. The raw and the cooked. [Mythologiques, vol. 1]. Chicago.

Locher M.A. 2014. The pragmatics of discourse. Berlin.

Lodge D. 1989. Nice work. NY.

Martinet A. 1960. Elements de linguistique generale. Paris.

Martinec R., Salway A. 2005. A system for image-text relations in new (and old) media. – Visual Communication 4: 339–374.

Ricoeur P. 1975. La metaphore vive. Paris.

Sosnin A.V. 2012. Matematicheskoe obosnovanie mnogomernosti i nesamodostatochnosti teksta. [= Mathematical description of the multi-dimensional and non-self-sufficient text]. – Vestnik Voronezhskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Serija: Lingvistika i mezhkul’turnaja kommunikacija 1: 94–199.

Tennyson A. 1994. The selected poems. Hertfordshire.

Thurlow C. 2004. Computer-mediated communication. London.

Zavjalova Z.S. 2014. Kommunikativnye transformacii social’nyh media. [= Communicative transformations of social media]. – Izvestija Tomskogo politehnicheskogo universiteta. Social’no-gumanitarnye tehnologii 6: 88–93.

Zhirmunskij V.M. 1923. Rifma, eyo istorija i teorija. [=Rhyme, its history and theory]. [vol. 3]. Petrograd.

Czasopismo ukazuje się w sposób ciągły on-line.
Pierwotną formą czasopisma jest wersja elektroniczna.