FROM TEXT TO POLYCODE TEXT: SEMIOTIC CHANGES IN TEXT PRODUCTION

  • Tetiana Semeniuk Lesya Ukrainka Eastern European National University
  • Yulia Gordienko Lesya Ukrainka Eastern European National University
Keywords: text, polycode text, verbal, non-verbal, paraverbal resources, semiotic approach

Abstract

The article is devoted to the investigation of the linguistic notions of “text” and “polycode text”. The notion of a text has recently undergone a lot of changes in its interpretation. Nowadays, while defining of texts it has been offered to take into account different approaches to their study including not only grammatical, cognitive-semantic, communicative-pragmatic, but also semiotic and semiotic-cultural. The development of IT, the globalization, and changes in the ways of coding of information have increased the role of the semiotic approach in the interpretation of texts. Within the semiotic approach, today’s text is regarded as a set of monocode or polycode communicative resources which correlate with each other, form a complex integrative meaning and are addressed to recipients with a certain pragmatic purpose. It has been proposed to distinguish between monocode and polycode texts and to use the term “polycode” to accentuate the coexistence of two or more codes in one text space. A polycode text is regarded in the article as a coherent unit consisting of several semiotic codes: verbal, non-verbal (photographs, pictures, pictograms, ideograms, smiles, cartoons, tables), paraverbal (color, font, punctuation, layout, diacritical marks). Changes in the encoding of the information in texts and the emergence of new communicative resources have led to the necessity of the reviewing of text’s textuality. Polycoding and multimodality have been regarded in the research as standarts of textuality as well as cohesion, coherence, intentionality, acceptability, informativity, situationality and intertextuality.

References

Anisimova, Elena. 2003. Lingvistika Teksta i Mezhkulturnaja Kommunikacija (na Materiale Kreoliozovannyh Tekstov). Moskva: Akademija.

Anisimova, Elena. 1992. “Paralingvistika i Tekst (k Probleme Kreolizovannyh i Gibridnyh Tekstov)”. Voprosy Jazykoznanija 1: 71–79.

Arias, Anna-Maria. 2011. “Polikodovyj Tekst kak Semiotiko-Semanticheskoe i Esteticheskoe Znakovoe Edinstvo (na Primere Nemeckoj Karikatury)”. Izvestija Sankt-Peterburgskogo Universiteta Jekonomiki i Finansov 6 (72): 62–65.

Batsevych, Fedir. 2004. Osnovi Komunіkativnoji Lіngvіstiki. Kyiv: Akademіja.

Bateman, John, Schmidt, Karl-Heinrich. 2011. Multimodal Film Analysis: How Films Mean. London: Routledge.

Bearne, Eve. 2003. “Rethinking Literacy: Communication, Representation and Text”. Reading Literacy and Language 37 (3): 98–103.

Beaugrande, Robert-Allain de, Dressler Wolfgang Ulrich. 1981. Einführung in die Textlinguistik. Tübingen: Niemeyer.

Bernackaja, Ada. 2000. “K Probleme “Kreolizaciji Teksta: Istorija i Sovremennoe Sostojanie”. Rechevoe Obshhenie: Specializirovannyj Vestnik. Krasnojarsk: Krasnojarskij gos. un-t. 3 (11): 104–110.

Bogdanov, Valentin. 1993. Tekst i Tekstovoe Obshchenie. Saint Petersburg: Nauka.

Bolshakova, Ljudmila. 2008. “O Soderzhanii Ponjatija “Polikodovyj Tekst“. Vestnik SamGU 4 (63): 19–23.

Brinker Klaus, Cölfen, Hermann, Pappert, Steffen. 2010. Linguistische Textanalyse. Eine Einführung in Grundbegriffe und Methoden. Berlin: Erich Schmidt.

Chernjavskaja, Valeria. 2009. Lingvistika Teksta. Polikodovost, Intertekstualnost, Interdiskursivnost. Moskva: URSS.

Datchenko, Julija. 2015. “Іnterpretacіja Pisanki jak Vіzuano-Kulturnogo Tekstu”. Doslіdzhennja z Leksikologіji і Gramatiki Ukrajinskoji Movi. Edit. І. Popova. Dnіpropetrovsk: Bіla K. O. (16): 3–10.

Eiger, Henrich , Juht, Vladimir. 1974. “K Postroeniju Tipologii Tekstov”. Lingvistika teksta: Materialy Nauch. Konerenzii 1: 103–109.

Fix ,Ulla. 2008. Text und Textlinguistik. Textlinguistik. 15 Einführungen. Hrsg. von Nina Janich. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.

Forceville, Charles. 2006. “Non-verbal and multimodal metaphor in a cognitivist framework: Agendas for research”. Gitte Kristiansen, Michel Achard, René Dirven and Francisco Ruiz de Mendoza Ibàñez (eds.), Cognitive Linguistics: Current Applications and Future Perspectives: 379–402. Berlin / New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

Galperin, Ilja. 1981. Tekst kak Objekt Lingvisticheskogo Issledovanija. Moskva: Nauka.

Gauzenblaz, Karl. 1978. “O Harakteristike i Klassifikaciji Rechevyh Proizvedenij” Novoe v zarubezhnoj lingvistike 8: 57–78. Moskva

Halizev, Valentin. 2000. Teorija Literatury. Moskva: Vyssh. Shkola.

Heath, S. B. 2000. “Seeing our Way into Learning”. Cambridge Journal of Education 30(1): 121–131.

Hoffmann, Michael. 2004. “Zeichenklassen und Zeichenrelationen bei der Verknüpfung von Text und Bild. Ein Beitrag zur semiotischen Semantik”. Stabilität und Flexibilität in der Semantik. Strukturelle, kognitive, pragmatische und historische Perspektiven: 357–386 Hrsg. Inge Pohl und Klaus-Peter Konerding. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.

Holly, Werner. 2009. “Der Wort-Bild-Reißverschluss: Über die performative Dynamik audiovisueller Transkriptivität.” Oberfläche und Performanz. Untersuchungen zur Sprache als dynamische Gestalt: 389–406 Hrsg. Angelika Linke, Helmuth Feilke. Tübingen.

Jeshchenko, Tetiana. 2009. Tekst u Lіngvіsticі ta Inshih Fіlologіchnih Naukah. Kyiv: Akademіja.

Kibrik, Andrej. 2010. “Multimodalnaja Lingvistika”. Kognitivnye Issledovanija 4: 134–152. Moskva: Institut Psihologiji.

Kress, Gunther. (2010). Multimodality: A Social Semiotic Approach to Contemporary Communication. New York: Routledge.

Leewen, Eva. 1981. Sternes “Journal to Eliza”: A Semiological and Linguistic Approach to the Text. Tübingen: Narr Verlag.

Liu, Jing. 2016. “Visual Images Interpretive Strategies in Multimodal Texts.” Journal of Language Teaching and Researc. 4.6: 1259–263.

Meir, Irit, Padden, Carol, Aronoff, Mark, Sandler, Wendy. 2013. “Competing Iconicities in the Structure of Languages”. Cognitive Linguistics. Walter de Gruyter Berlin Boston 24 (2), 309–343. doi: 10.1515/cog-2013-0010.

Nikolaeva, Tatiana. 1978. “Lingvistika teksta: Sovremennoe Sostoianiie i Perspektivy”. Novoe v Zarubezhnoj Lingvistike. Moskva: Progress.

Opiłowski, Roman. 2013. “Von der Textlinguistik zur Bildlinguistik. Sprache-Bild-Texte im neuen Forschungsparadigma”. Zeitschrift des Verbandes Polnischer Germanisten 3: 217–225.

Pojmanova, Olga. 1997. Semanticheskoe Prostranstvo Videoverbalnogo Teksta: PhD diss., Moscow State Linguistic University.

Posner, Roland. 2004. “Basic Tasks of Cultural Semiotics”. Signs of Power – Power of Signs. Essays in Honor of Jeff Bernard, 56–89Vienna: INST.

Selіvanova, Olena. 2015. Osnovyi teorіi movnoi komunіkatsіi. Cherkasy: Vyd-vo Chabanenko Yu. A.

Selіvanova, Olena. 2008. Suchasna lіngvіstika: naprjamy і problemy. Poltava: Dovkіllja.

Semeniuk, Tetiana. 2017. Kognіtyvno-Semantychnі ta Pragmatychnі Osoblyvostі Nіmeckomovnih Polіkodovyh Tekstіv (na Materіalі Komertsіinoii Reklamy)”. PhD diss., Zaporizhzhya state university.

Sonin, Alexandr. 2005. Ponimanie Polikodovyh Tekstov: Kognitivnyj Aspekt. Moskva: In-t Jazykoznanija RAN.

Sorokin, Yurii, Tarasov, Evgenii. 1990. “Kreolizovannye Teksty i ih Kommunikativnaja Funktsyia”. Optimizacija rechevogo vozdejstvija, 178–187. Edit. by. R. Kotov. Moskva.

Schnotz, Wolfgang, Horz, Holger. 2009. “Online Lernen mit Texten und Bildern”. Online – Lernen. Handbuch für Wissenschaft und Praxis, 87–105. Hrsg. Paul Klimsa, Ludwig J. Issing. München: Oldenbourg.

Schröder, Hartmut. 1993. “Semiotische Aspekte multimodaler Texte”. Fachtextpragmatik, 189–21. Hrsg. Hartmut Stöckl. Tübingen: Narr.

Stöckl, Hartmut. 2004. Die Sprache im Bild – das Bild in der Sprache: zur Verknüpfung von Sprache und Bild im massenmedialen Text. Konzepte, Theorien, Analysemethoden. Berlin; New York: Walter de Gruyter.

Van Leeuwen, Theo. 2005. Introducing Social Semiotics. London: Routledge.

Weidenmann, Bernd. 1995. “Multicodierung und Multimodalität im Lernprozess”. Information und Lernen mit Multimedia, 65 – 84. Hrsg. L.J. Issing, P. Klimsa. Weinheim: Psychologie-Verlagsunion.

Zahnіtko, Anatolii. 2010. “Tekst: Rіvnі, Odynytsі, Katehorіi, Funktsіi, Osoblyvostі Zviazku”, 165–169. Accessed January 17, 2017. https://digilib.phil.muni.cz/bitstream/handle/11222.digilib/128814/Books_2010_2019_018-2013-1_24.pdf

Published
2018-11-22