Culture as a sign system - symbols, signs and cultural languages. Sign and symbol as basic concepts of semiotics

A sign is a sensually perceived object (event, action or phenomenon) that replaces and represents other objects, their properties and relationships. The possibilities of understanding and transmitting culture can be realized using various sign systems (or cultural languages): natural language, folklore, traditions, household items, hunting and other activities, rituals, rites, ceremonies, etiquette, type of home, through artistic images of various types art, writing and more. The language of culture is the totality of all sign methods of communication through which culturally significant information is transmitted.

The entire set of these symbolic means can be represented by the following types:

1. Designation signs, which are, for example, the basis of natural language. A unit of language is a word denoting an object, action, property and other characteristics of the world around a person. Signs-designations also include signs-signs (signs, symptoms), signs-copies (reproductions), sign behavior (imitation).

2. Model signs, which are also substitutes for real-life objects and actions. So, for example, within the cultural mythological code, the model of a real object, endowed with magical powers, becomes a cultural model - a “secondary objectivity”. This model contains hidden information about the meaning and methods of action with an object.

3. Symbols are signs that not only point to the depicted object, but express its meaning.

Symbol(from the Greek simbolon - identification mark, sign). The concept of "symbol" in Ancient Greece in its primary meaning it was extremely specific: an actual identification mark, evidence of the unity of two disparate parts, by connecting which it was possible to obtain the original “whole.”

The numerous interpretations of the concept of symbol that have arisen throughout the history of human thought can be reduced to two main trends. In accordance with the first, the symbol is interpreted as a figuratively represented idea, as a means of adequately translating content into expression. According to the second, the symbol carries within itself the primary and further indecomposable experience of thinking that resists definition;

In the philosophy of the 20th century. the symbol as a complex multidimensional phenomenon is studied within the framework of a variety of approaches: semiotic, logical-semantic, epistemological, aesthetic, psychological, hermeneutic. Such aspects of the problem as the relationship between symbol, sign and image are considered; the place and role of the symbol in life; symbolism in art, religion, science; symbol as a sociocultural phenomenon; the nature of universal symbols, etc.

The creation of a holistic concept of a symbol is associated with the name Ernest Cassirer(1874-1945). In his “Philosophy of Symbolic Forms,” the symbol is considered as the only and absolute reality, “the system center of the spiritual world,” a key concept in which various aspects of culture and human life are synthesized. According to Cassirer, man is a "symbol-creating animal"; in other words, symbolic forms (language, myth, religion, art and science) appear as ways of objectification, self-disclosure of the spirit, in which chaos is ordered, culture exists and is reproduced.

No less significant place the concept of symbol occupies in analytical psychology Carl Gustav Jung(187-1961). He interprets the symbol as the main way of manifesting archetypes - figures of the collective unconscious, inherited from ancient times. The same archetype, according to Jung, can be expressed and emotionally experienced through different symbols. For example, the Self - the archetype of order and integrity of the individual - symbolically appears as a circle, mandala, crystal, stone, old sage, as well as through other images of unification, reconciliation of polarities, dynamic balance, eternal rebirth of the spirit. The main purpose of the symbol is a protective function. The symbol acts as an intermediary between the collective unconscious and the mental life of an individual; it is a restraining, stabilizing mechanism that prevents the manifestation of irrational Dionysian forces and impulses. The destruction of a symbol inevitably leads to destabilization of the spiritual life of society, emptiness, degeneration and ideological chaos.

By Claude Lévi-Strauss(b. 1908), any culture can be considered as an ensemble of symbolic systems, which primarily include language, marriage rules, art, science, and religion. In his works, he describes a special logic of archaic thinking, free from the strict subordination of means to ends. The symbol has an intermediate status between a concrete sensory image and an abstract concept.

In domestic science it is A.F. Losev(1893-1988) is credited with developing the theory of symbol in a general cultural aspect, in particular in relation to language, myth and art. In his work “Dialectics of Myth” (1930), recognizing the inseparability of the ideal and the material in a symbol, Losev drew attention to the relativity of the concept of a symbol depending on the linguistic, artistic or cultural context: “A given expressive form is always a symbol only in relation to something else "... "one and the same expressive form, depending on the way it is related to other semantic expressive or material forms, can be a symbol, a diagram, and an allegory at the same time.” Losev is characterized by the recognition of the universal meaning of symbolic forms, which allowed him to carry out direct analogies between symbol and myth. From this point of view, a myth is a symbol because they are characterized by “detachment from the meaning and idea of ​​everyday facts, but not from their factuality.” It is obvious that in all cases when we deal with a symbol, any of its meaning loses its original specificity and attachment to any particular situation: thus, the red color is generally considered a symbol of danger, bread - fertility and hospitality, a dove - a symbol of peace , the image of Icarus is a symbol of the human impulse towards the unknown, and the sail is a symbol of rebellious human passions, etc. Symbol meaning for human consciousness and for culture in general is that through it the path opens to the comprehension of universal truths and meanings, spiritual principles, ideals and values , without which the processes of human socialization, his creative activity and the transfer of sociocultural experience are impossible. In spiritual culture and art, a symbol is an image taken in aspects of its significance and polysemy. In this case, the meaningful side of the symbol is not given in its specific formulation, and its comprehension depends on the co-creation and spiritual potential of the perceiving personality.

Among the many needs of man, there is one that sharply distinguishes him from animals - the need for symbolization. Man does not just live in a physical environment, he lives in a symbolic universe. The world of meanings in which he lived at the dawn of his history was determined by rituals. Ritual actions acted as symbols, the knowledge of which determined the level of mastery of culture and the social significance of the individual. Consequently, from the very beginning of their appearance until now, symbols do not exist on their own, but are a product of human consciousness. Man, as a microcosm, creates an image, a picture, a symbol of the macrocosm - the world.

The connection between people is inherent in the word “symbol”. Originally, this Greek word denoted a shard that served as a sign of friendly relations. When parting with the guest, the owner handed him half of the broken shard, and kept the other part for himself. No matter how long after this guest appeared in the house again, he was recognized by the shard. “Identity card” is the original meaning of the word “symbol” in antiquity.

Interest in symbols is great not only in linguistics, but also in philosophy, semiotics, psychology, literary criticism, mythological-poetics, folkloristics, cultural studies, etc., however, we absolutely agree with the thought of A. A. Potebnya, who wrote that only from the point of view of language, it is possible to put the symbols in an order consistent with the views of the people, and not with the arbitrariness of the writer. The result of interest was several rather independent ideas about the symbol: 1) symbol - a concept identical to a sign (in artificial formalized languages); 2) a universal category, reflecting the specifics of the figurative development of life through art (in aesthetics and philosophy of art); 3) some cultural object, the meaning of which is conventional (i.e., enshrined in dictionaries) analogue of the meaning of another object (in cultural studies, sociology and a number of other humanities).

nitarian sciences); 4) a symbol as a sign that involves the use of its primary content as a form for other content (a broad understanding of the symbol that exists in many humanities - philosophy, linguistics, semiotics, etc.). I. Kant, F. W. Schelling, G. W. F. Hegel, I. W. Goethe spoke about the symbol as a way of knowing the true divine meaning.

The most interesting understanding of the symbol for us, to which we will return, exists in the philosophy of language (A.F. Losev, E.V. Shelestyuk).

As a result of the joint interdisciplinary work of linguists, historians, archaeologists, art historians, musicologists, psychologists, religious scholars, folklorists and representatives of other fields of knowledge, numerous dictionaries appeared (Carlot H. E. Dictionary of Symbols. - M., 1994; Bauer V., Dumou I. , Golovin S. Encyclopedia of symbols. - M., 1995; Encyclopedia of symbols. - M., 1996; A dictionary of symbols - N.Y., 1971; , 1989; Cooper J. C. Lexikon alter Symbole. - Leipzig, 1986, etc.). Today, there are numerous institutes and centers where various aspects of the symbol are studied: the Warburg-Corthodd Institute in London, which deals with iconology; C. G. Jung Institute in Zurich; Ludwig Kaymer Institute in Basel, etc.

Our interest in a symbol is limited by the framework of culture; from this point of view, a symbol can be attributed to stereotypical phenomena characteristic of any culture. A symbol encoded in the context of different cultures has different meanings in them. We consider the artistic symbol in East Slavic cultures, so we are more impressed by the fourth understanding of the symbol - the symbol as a sign in which the primary content acts as a form for the secondary.

Thus, for our understanding of a symbol, it is fundamental to correlate it with the content of the cultural information it conveys. A.F. Losev wrote that a symbol contains a generalized principle of further development of the semantic content contained in it, i.e. a symbol can be considered as a specific factor in the sociocultural encoding of information and at the same time as a mechanism for transmitting this information. This same property of the symbol was emphasized by Yu. M. Lotman; he noted that culture is always, on the one hand, a certain number of inherited texts, and on the other, inherited symbols.

The term "symbol" is understood differently by literary scholars and linguists. Yu. S. Stepanov, for example, argues that symbol is not a scientific concept, it is a concept of poetics; each time it is significant only within the framework of a certain poetic system, and in it it

true. And indeed, we know many of just such symbols: the symbol of the road by N. Gogol, the garden by A. Chekhov, the desert by M. Lermontov, the snowstorm by A. Pushkin and the Symbolists, smoke by Tyutchev, the symbol of the wing and house by M. Tsvetaeva, symbols of border, threshold, etc. As a rule, one can say about these symbols in the words of Yu. M. Lotman that they are the “plot gene.” However, along with them there are linguistic symbols that are generated in the process of evolution and functioning of the language. Such symbols have a mythological, or rather, archetypal nature. For example, a rainbow for Russians is a symbol of hope, prosperity, dreams, i.e. it has a sharply positive meaning; hence the expressions rainbow cops, rosy mood, rosy hopes, etc. This symbol originates from a biblical legend: after global flood God, as a sign of an agreement with people that there would be no more floods, left a rainbow on earth. Thus, the metaphor here, complicated by cultural connotations, turns into a symbol. But more often, several metaphors, intertwined, create a symbol.

S.S. Averintsev in the “Literary Encyclopedic Dictionary” (Moscow, 1987, p. 378) defines symbol as follows: “Symbol in art is a universal aesthetic category, revealed through comparison with related categories - the artistic image, on the one hand, the sign and allegories - on the other." In the “Newest Philosophical Dictionary” (Ed. L. Rodionova. - M., 1999) the following rather broad understanding of symbol is given: it is “a concept that captures the ability of material things and events, sensory images to express ideal content, different from their immediate sensory content. bodily existence."

Without touching here on the discussion about understanding the essence of a symbol, we note that the role of a linguistic symbol lies in changing the meaning of the linguistic essence to a symbolic function. A symbol is a kind of conglomerate of equivalent meanings, and this is what distinguishes it from other tropes. The direct meaning in a symbol is equal to the abstract: an abstract idea is encoded in concrete content in order to express the abstract through the concrete, but the concrete is also encoded in the abstract in order to show its ideal, abstract meaning. Thus, the meaning of both the abstract and the concrete is enriched: the sun is a symbol of gold, but gold is also a symbol of the sun. But in their unity they give a new amalgamated essence (from the word amalgam).

A word-symbol is a kind of “data bank” that can be imagined in the form of a spiral, i.e. circles, as if hidden into each other and turning into one another. This is a semantic spiral of a symbol, which includes a wide range of meanings, ranging from implicit (hidden, potential), i.e. not expressed in any way in the word, but being an integral part of it, and ending with the scale of semantic substitutes (substitutive

lei), i.e. programmed replacement of one value with another. For example, Belarusians say: “If licorice is red, then it is good, if licorice is tasty,” i.e. here the symbolic meaning of sweets is good, tasty, love, happiness. The path draws closer to death, symbols of anger are a snake, a wasp, a nettle, they burn; fire is a symbol of anger and malice among the Slavs. The sun is a symbol of beauty, love, fun. A. A. Potebnya considers the word “good” to be possessive from the word “khrs” (sun).

Yu.M. Lotman wrote that the most common idea of ​​a symbol is associated with the idea of ​​some content, which, in turn, serves as a plan of expression for another, usually culturally more valuable, content. Therefore, the material exponent (carrier) of substitution is not only the reality, but also the name. For example, not the realities the hand, the cross are symbols in the expressions right hand, bear your cross, but the names: the hand is power, the cross is a symbol of sacrifice, the connection of earth and sky, the spiritual height of the cross is vertical, the material world is horizontal; the cross during prayer is our agreement with Christ, i.e. symbol of the faith of Christ, etc. Probably, one should not look for the most accurate meaning of a symbol; one should focus on the usual (generally accepted) meanings that are accessible to perception and understanding and on the nodal points of correlation of meanings in the symbol. For example, a dove is a symbol of the Holy Spirit, a symbol of peace, but also a symbol of the other world (in M. Tsvetaeva’s “Alleys” there are black doves). Thus, the most important property of symbols is their immanent (internally inherent) polysemy and vagueness of boundaries. The same symbol can have several meanings.

In the understanding of V.N. Telia, the examples we have given are quasi-symbols. The repertoire of quasi-symbols, like symbols, arises as a result of culturally significant selection. Examples: symbol - a cross on the dome of a church, quasi-symbol - the word (name) “cross”.

A number of characteristics of a symbol can be identified: imagery (iconicity), motivation, complexity of content, polysemy, vagueness of the boundaries of meaning in a symbol, archetypal character of a symbol, its universality in a particular culture, intersection of symbols in different cultures, national-cultural specificity of a number of symbols , the embeddedness of a symbol in a myth and archetype.

The approach to symbolism through myth was founded by C. Lévi-Strauss. He viewed a symbol as a bundle of paradigmatic relations with symbolic-logical meanings. Mythology appeared as one of the semiotic codes for designating universal images and ideas. Thus, in the archaic Slavic picture of the world, fish were a symbol of the lower cosmic zone, large animals - the middle one, birds - the upper cosmic zone.

The most important property of a symbol is its imagery, which is why many scientists approach the concept of a symbol through an image. In many definitions there is a bundle of concepts “image–symbol–sign”. Symbol and sign, being the most important words of the semiotic lexicon, really have a lot in common: both are built according to a three-component model (signified - signifier and semiotic connective), are conventional, etc. But the meaning of a sign, unlike a symbol, must be not only conventional, but also specific; for example, traffic signs, due to their specificity, help to avoid accidents. According to N.D. Arutyunova, signs are conventionalized, and symbols are canonized: the cross becomes a symbol of the Christian faith, a symbol of suffering, a symbol of the unification of space, etc. A symbol, unlike a sign, does not imply a direct indication of denotation. “Signs regulate movement along land, water and air routes; symbols lead along the roads of life”1.

If the essence of a sign is a pure indication (G.G. Gadamer), then the essence of a symbol is more than an indication: it unites different planes of reality into a single whole in the process of semantic activity in a particular culture. An example is phraseological units, the individual components of which become symbols. So, the nose is a symbol of a vulnerable spot in a person, hence the phraseology: wipe your nose, lead by the nose, pinch your nose, even if your nose bleeds. Another symbol of the nose as a response device stands out from the following phraseological units: off the nose (to dislike), to turn one’s nose (to express disagreement), to turn one’s nose up (to express contempt).

The symbol is based on an image. Every symbol is an image, but an image can be considered a symbol only under certain conditions. N. Fry highlights following criteria“symbolism” of the image in poetry: 1) the presence of abstract symbolic meaning is explicated (manifested) by the context; 2) the image is presented in such a way that its literal interpretation is impossible or insufficient; 3) the image implies (hides) an association with myth, legend, folklore.

It seems that a sign becomes a symbol when its use involves a reaction not to the symbolized object itself, but to a whole range of secondary conventional meanings.

Signs require understanding, and symbols require interpretation. Thus, a symbol has a sign nature and all the properties of a sign are inherent in it, besides which there are also specific ones. Even F. de Saussure contrasted symbols and conventional signs, pointing out that symbols have an iconic element. F. de Saussure wrote in this regard that scales can be a symbol of justice

1 Arutyunova N.D. Language and the human world. – M., 1998. – P. 342.

hundred, since they iconically contain the idea of ​​balance, but the cart does not. Thus, although the symbol does not imply a direct indication of denotation, external or deep internal similarity with the symbolized object can be preserved.

A symbol is a concept akin to an image, which is why people often talk about symbolic images. The symbol is accompanied by high meanings, while the image can be associated with an object of any level. If the transition from an image to a metaphor is caused by semantic and artistic needs, then the transition to a symbol (both from an image and from a sign) is determined by factors of an extralinguistic nature.

The image is psychological, the metaphor is semantic, the symbol is functional, it is designed to unite the efforts of social, tribal and national groups (Arutyunova, 1998, p. 338). From her point of view, the symbol has a higher semiotic status than the image. This is due to the fact that the symbol is more often interpreted in cultural terms (cf.: in Russian culture, the hand is a symbol of power and a symbol of help - first-hand, to be the right hand, to have your own hand, but also a symbol of punishment - the hand will not shake, hands itch, raise your hand).

The symbol must also be distinguished from the gestalt. They differ primarily in the function they perform.

As mentioned above, at the surface linguistic level, the same gestalt can be realized as different meanings, and only special research can establish their unity.

Yu.M. Lotman wrote: the basis of the artistic concept is not a rationally formulated theme, but a symbol - “the seed of the development of a future text.” Speaking about the functioning of a symbol in a cultural system, he argues that a symbol is the memory of a culture.

Let's show this with an example. A Christian symbol that is widespread in different cultures is the number seven (in Germanic cultures, nine functions as a prototypical number, which was later replaced by the number seven); in Russian culture, seven is a symbol of something excessive: behind seven locks (seals) - very strongly hidden, in deep secrecy; seven spans in the forehead - very smart; It’s a very long way to sip jelly seven miles away; seven sweats disappeared - very tired; seven messages to heaven and all through the forest - a lot and meaningless; seven Fridays a week - change your mind often; to be in seventh heaven is to be very happy. Therefore, it is hardly possible to talk here about the national specificity of the symbol “seven” - this symbol is also present in the Germanic languages. Forty in the meaning of “many” is found only in Russian culture, therefore the phraseological unit forty forty is culturally specific.

Another important property of a symbol is its motivation, which is established between concrete and abstract elements.

cops of symbolic content. It is motivation that distinguishes a symbol from a sign, in which the connection between the signified and the signifier is arbitrary and conventional. The motivation of the symbol is explained by analogy, which forms the basis of such semantic transposition (transfer) as metaphor, metonymy and synecdoche.

It is motivation that unites symbol with metaphor and metonymy. E. Cassirer was one of the first to note the role of metaphor in the symbolic construction of reality (Cassirer, 1970). Metaphor explains analogies in myths; on the basis of metaphor, concrete and abstract aspects in the content of the symbol are connected: goddess - earth - mother; a snake crawling on the ground is a symbol of the earth (metonymy) and a symbol of the underground deity (metaphor). Therefore, it can be stated that there are metaphorical and metonymic symbols.

Each person, thanks to his human properties, is capable of speaking and understanding the language of symbols; the language of symbols, as E. Fromm noted, does not need to be taught, its distribution is not limited to certain groups of people, because the symbol has an archetypal nature and is transmitted to us on an unconscious level.

We understand the archetype, following C. G. Jung, as genetically fixed ancient images and socio-cultural ideas that are the property of the “collective unconscious” and lie at the basis of creativity. For Jung, archetypes are a hypothetical model, an unconscious aspiration, by the manifestations of which one can judge its existence. But an archetype is also the primordial images of the unconscious, recurring motifs throughout history. These primary images and ideas are embodied in the form of symbols in myths and beliefs, in works of literature and art. All poetry is permeated with archetypes, which are primary images, first of all, of nature: forest, field, sea, birth, marriage, death, etc. The purest archetypes are found in mythology and folklore. Therefore, when we talk about mythologems in phraseological units or other linguistic phenomena, most often the term “mythologem” turns out to be a synonym for “archetype”.

The main features of K. Jung's archetypes: involuntariness, unconsciousness, autonomy, genetic conditioning (Jung, 1991). The main archetypes he identified: shadow, hero, fool, wise old man (old woman), Prometheus, etc.

Archetypes are embodied in a large number of symbols, so we can talk about archetypal symbols, such as the World Tree, the World Egg, the World Mountain, etc.

The archetypicality of a symbol is its important property, which is twofold. On the one hand, the symbol reflects

images of the unconscious, most of which are archetypes. On the other hand, the archetype is conscious, it enters our reality, often greatly transformed.

A number of symbols are nationally specific. Thus, the Chinese include a toad and a hare (symbols of immortality) in the image of the moon, and a crow (symbol of filial piety) in the sun. In Slavic culture, these symbols have a different meaning: the hare is a symbol of cowardice, the raven is a prophetic bird that, when it flies to a home, brings misfortune, etc.

So, after analyzing different concepts of symbol, we came to the conclusion that a symbol is a thing endowed with meaning. For example, a cross, bread, sword, blood, circle, etc. So, bread is real and visible, it has shape, color, weight, taste, etc. But when we say Give us this day our daily bread or read the words of Christ I am the seven bread of life... (John 6:35), bread becomes a symbol of life, or rather, food necessary for spiritual life. According to Yu. M. Lotman, symbols form the core of culture. They, as a rule, come from the depths of centuries, for example: any curling, curling is perceived by us as a symbol of happiness, joy (cf. the saying Vesya, y sok, curl, usok: there will be a piece of meat). But there are also those that arose relatively recently: the dove is a symbol of peace (“the father” of this symbol is P. Picasso), shaking colored hands is a symbol of friendship between peoples, etc.

What causes symbols to appear in culture? A. A. Potebnya believes that this is the need to restore the forgotten own meaning of words: viburnum became a symbol of the maiden for the same reason why the maiden is called red, by the unity of the basic representation of fire - light in the words: maiden, red, viburnum. A. A. Potebnya believes that there are three types of relations between the original word and the symbol: comparison, opposition and causal relation, or the relation of causality (causality). Until now, people treat erysipelas by applying a red rag, because erysipelas is similar in the tongue to the color red and fire.

The symbol has no addressee: it is addressed to all native speakers. It performs the function of storing entire texts in collapsed form. For example, a nest is a symbol of a family, a home. The title of I. S. Turgenev’s novel “The Noble Nest” contains a whole layer of Russian culture.

Poetic language, along with metaphor and other figurative means, makes extensive use of symbol. In fairness, we must cite the opinion of V. Bryusov, who argued that primitive art was realistic and not symbolic: “Deviations towards symbolism and convention are caused in it not by strength, but by the powerlessness of the master. A primitive artist depicts, for example, a king or leader who is not larger in size than other people

because such a figure is more beautiful in its outline, but because of the inability to achieve the expression of a “royal” face”1. But here, exploring ancient cultures at a high level of cultural development, V. Bryusov states the high symbolism, for example, of the cultures of the Aegeans, Mayans, etc. Poetic symbolism, like poetic metaphor, is individual, changing from time to time and from poet to poet. to the poet. In poetic texts these two phenomena are quite close. Any element of a poem - grapheme, phoneme, lexeme - once in the force field of the matter of the text, acquires numerous connotations that can become the content of a poetic symbol.

Of particular interest in this regard is the poetry of the Symbolists, in which the poet draws a series of images that have not yet formed into a complete picture. That is why theorists of symbolism called such poetry “poetry of allusions.” The reader of such works must have a sensitive soul and a subtle imagination in order to recreate only the mental image intended by the author.

There are works that can only be comprehended by penetrating the deep meaning of symbolic images that occupy a dominant position in the literary text. For example, in “Sign of Trouble” by V. Bykov we are faced with several important symbols that, like knots, connect the threads of the entire work: these are the symbols of Golgotha ​​and the ashes (destroyed and abandoned farm). They partially overlap each other: Golgotha ​​is a mountain, but not in Palestine, but in Nazi-occupied Belarus. V. Bykov's Golgotha ​​symbolizes the suffering of people caused by various troubles for which they are not to blame. This symbol appears earlier in the text (when describing the pre-war period), but war begins, normal human life is destroyed, and ashes begin to form. Golgotha ​​lives and dies with its heroes. The Ashes survived them, and now it reports the event, recalling the trials that the heroes went through, whose life is the path to immortality.

The literary text embodied that feature of human worldview that allowed E. Cassirer to call man a symbolic being.

C. G. Jung wrote: “It is in the nature of a symbol to combine opposites; so it connects the opposition of the real-unreal, being, on the one hand, a psychological reality... it, on the other hand, does not correspond to physical reality. A symbol is a fact and yet an appearance.”2 Literature, being, according to F. Schiller’s definition, an art that creates visions

1 Bryusov V. Collected works. – M, 1975. – T. 7. – P. 320.

2 Jung K.G. Archetype and symbol. – M., 1991. – P. 213.

ability, chooses symbolic grounds for recreating its own fictitious reality. Bunuel's symbols are dark and cannot be expressed in words. A. Blok also believed that the symbol should be dark in its final depth.

The symbolic use of a word can be formed in a specific text (or many texts of one author), or it can be introduced into the text from culture. The symbol, as it were, builds on the direct meaning of the corresponding word, without replacing or modifying it, but at the same time being included in a wider cultural context. Any trope can come into contact with a symbol, participating in the formation of extra-textual meanings, because a symbol is a universal trope that can be combined with any set of artistic means that form the figurative structure of the text.

The symbols are deeply national. Here is a humorous example from V. Pelevin’s novel “Chapaev and Emptiness”, sarcastically reinforcing the national character of the symbol-archetype: on bandit cars and the cars of the “new Russians” a huge winch is placed on the nose: “Anthropologists engaged in the study of “new Russians?”, believe, that during showdowns such winches are used as a battering ram, and some scientists even see in their wide distribution indirect evidence of the long-awaited revival of national spirituality - from their point of view, winches perform the mystical function of figureheads that once adorned Slavic boats.”

Let's consider several symbols (universal and national) based on the material of Russian poetry. One of the important symbols widely used in poetry is the dream. Sleep from the perspective of paganism is always a movement to another world, to “strangers”. And in this sense, dreams for paganism are no less real than reality. For Christianity, the otherworld of evil does not exist; evil is a spiritual emptiness, a zone of absence of Light and Good. Evil does not and cannot have its own, legitimate, permanent place in the world: it is rooted in the spiritual world, in the human soul. And a dream is a natural phenomenon for a person, which brings out the inner evil of a person, his condition. Here is how, for example, A. Tarkovsky interprets this idea:

I dream of some kind of sea, some kind of alien ship, and grief, some kind of grief; My dark heart oppresses me.

In a specific poetic text by a specific author, any word can become a symbol. Thus, in the poetry of S. Yesenin, the word blue became a symbol of the motherland, close and dear to the poet’s heart, and the word blue acquired a similar meaning in his poetry:

Pre-dawn, blue, tender...

I left my home, I left Blue Rus'.

Symbols can be not only units of language. In the 20s, P. A. Florensky wanted to create a “Dictionary of Symbols” (Symbolarium), which would consist of geometric figures. Indeed, it is known that, for example, a point, negligibly small in quantity, is the Principle through which all space is produced; it symbolizes the Center, the first cause, the place from which everything comes and to which everything returns. The point from which the ray emanates is God the Creator, who creates the Universe, which gives the Unit, etc.

Quite often, color designations can become symbols. As L. Wittgenstein said: “Color encourages us to philosophize.” At all times, scientists have struggled to solve the problem of color. Recent research in this area shows that 10 pigment genes in humans are responsible for color, making up a specific set - each has its own, so two people can look at the same object, but perceive its color differently. And observations of people with persistent brain lesions have revealed that concepts about colors, words expressing these concepts, and the connection between concepts and words depend on different systems of the brain. This explains why there are differences in reactions to color in different cultures (for example, “green” in the USA is safety, and in France it is a crime; for the Chinese, white is a symbol of mourning, sadness, and for Europeans, these functions are performed by black) . Therefore, human color language is mental in nature. People see meanings behind colors.

Many color names have a direct relation to light. A. A. Potebnya, referring to Zizaniya, writes that the word “crimson” is interpreted through the word “white”, and therefore the squirrel is so named not because in northern regions its color approaches white, but because the colors red and white are identical in basic concept. The day has two stable epithets in popular culture - red and white, and both, it turns out, were equal at first, for both go back to the god Yaril, the patron of the sun and fire. White and red are symbols of beauty, but white is also a symbol of love—washing white means “to love.” Red is not only beautiful, but also bright and associated with fire.

The black color, coming from fire, symbolizes ugliness, hatred, sadness, death, i.e. symbolism opposite to light. Night is also a symbol of grief, because it is black and dark. Green color is also related to light, but symbolizes youth (young-green).

Let's consider the symbolic meaning of the colors present in S. Yesenin's description of the birch, where there are two colors - green and white. Here you should pay attention to color symbolism, regarding which no stable opinion has yet been formed. Traditionally, green is associated with life and prosperity, white with light. Yolanda Jacobi argues in her studies of Jungian psychology that green, the color of the earthly, tangible, directly perceptible plant world, corresponds to the function of perception. A. Wierzbicka puts forward an interesting theory, which is based on the idea that color concepts are associated with certain “universal elements of human experience.” Color perception arises when we associate our visual categories with certain universal patterns or models accessible to humans, among which A. Vezhbitskaya suggests including fire, sun, flora, sky, earth (just like day and night). Thus, in order to talk about color, we must project our perception onto what surrounds us. This idea, it seems to us, can be seen in the following example. The color green, often used to describe birch, is the color of vegetation. But it can also symbolize youth (this can be seen in the use of green in the meaning of “young”). This connection of ideas can be considered as the initial one in the formation of another connection: girl - birch, where the starting point for comparing the bride with the birch is the connection of the concepts “young - green”. This probably explains the fact that for Russians, the birch tree is not only a symbol of the homeland, Russia, but the birch tree also symbolizes the bride, young and immaculate. Here are the lines from S. Yesenin’s poem “My Way”:

Green-haired, in a white skirt, a birch tree stands over the pond.

The green color also symbolizes beauty and fun (spring is called bright, shiny and cheerful; by the way, the words cheerful and spring are consonant, and perhaps even related). The conclusion of A. A. Potebnya that green means cheerful is also confirmed by the material of Germanic languages. Thus, we see that the adjective denoting color goes from a figurative epithet to an evaluative one. Researchers have also noticed that the estimated value is very stable. Therefore, we can say that color symbolism is archetypal in its structure.

Whiteness also symbolizes beauty, since the word white is used as an evaluative definition of “good, beautiful” and is on a par with the words ardent, bright, and they, in their own right,

They come from the name of the god of light and fire of Slavic mythology - Yarila. Due to its affinity with light (gold and burn), white should have the same meanings as light. Everything connected with the sun and light was perceived as positive and beautiful. In addition, white, as mentioned above, was also a symbol of love. Hence Yesenin’s metaphor – “white birch trees”. Thus, through color symbolism, birch also appears as a symbol of graceful beauty and purity.

The birch becomes a symbol of Russia, a symbol of Russian nature. You should pay attention to Yesenin’s metaphor: white birch trunk = milk (poems “I’ll go to Skufya as a humble monk...”, “Hooligan”). If you look at a birch grove from a distance, you can see a solid milky white spot. But there is also a deeper subtext to this symbol, which is based on a metaphor. Milk is usually bound to the cow. And, as you know, among the Slavs this animal was extremely revered, since the cow gave a person both food and clothing that protected him from the cold; His mother, the earth, endowed him with the same gifts; this is evidenced by the fact that the creative forces of nature and the herds of sheep and cows were called by identical names. The cow was considered a symbol of earthly fertility, which is reflected in similar comparisons representing rain clouds as milk cows (milk is a metaphor for rain). Thus, milk is a connecting link between man and earth, man and heaven. The cow embodies the idea of ​​life and the cycle of nature. Milk is closeness to the mother. S. Yesenin, starting from this metaphor, finds broader analogies: the milk of birches is what binds him to the earth, this is the Motherland, old Rus', which is his mother. Consequently, S. Yesenin’s homeland comes close to words associated with the concepts of “mother” and “earth”. IN folk tradition Such a connection between the theme of the homeland and the cult of the clan and the cult of the land is stable and archetypal.

Gray color is a symbol of resurrection from the dead, a symbol of the Universal Unconscious. Man identified with gray as the original color of the Universe (the baby lives in gray color, the animal world too). Gray is the color of mourning, so the ancient Jews sprinkled themselves with ashes (an expression of grief, mourning).

Popular poetic symbols are also known: autumn is old age, blooming viburnum is a girl, clouds are misfortunes, winds are enemies, a nightingale is a lover, a steppe eagle is a dashing Cossack, rains are tears, spring is the beginning of love, winter is its dying, etc. .d.

To identify the composition of word-symbols in the poetry of the 20th century, to compile a dictionary of such poetic symbols, in which one could find information not only about the content of a particular symbol, but also about its use and origin, is the task of philological science for the near future.

Only a person who has mastered the cultural values ​​of the nation, who knows the poetry of his people well, is rewarded with the ability to use poetic symbols and images.

Stereotype as a phenomenon of cultural space

The phenomenon of “stereotype” itself is considered not only in the works of linguists, but also sociologists, ethnographers, cognitive scientists, psychologists, ethnopsycholinguists (U. Lippman, I. S. Kon, J. Collin, Yu. D. Apresyan, Yu. A. Sorokin, V.A. Ryzhkov, Yu.E. Prokhorov, V.V. Krasnykh, P.N. Shikhirev, A.V. Mikheev, S.M. Tolstaya, E. Bart-minsky, A.K. Bayburin, G. S. Batygin, S. V. Silinsky, etc.).

Representatives of each of these sciences highlight in a stereotype those properties that they notice from the perspective of their field of study, and therefore social stereotypes, communication stereotypes, mental stereotypes, cultural stereotypes, ethnocultural stereotypes, etc. are highlighted. For example, social stereotypes manifest themselves as stereotypes of thinking and behavior of an individual. Ethnocultural stereotypes are a generalized idea of ​​the typical features that characterize a particular people. German neatness, Russian “maybe”, Chinese ceremonies, African temperament, hot temper of Italians, stubbornness of Finns, slowness of Estonians, Polish gallantry - stereotypical ideas about the whole people that apply to each of its representatives. Most jokes about national character are based on stereotypical ideas. Let's give an example: “We sent representatives of different nationalities a film with the following content: a hot desert and a scorching sun. A man and a woman are walking with difficulty. And suddenly the man takes out a juicy orange and gives it to the woman. Viewers are asked the question: what nationality is he?”

The French spectator replies: “Only a Frenchman could treat a lady so gallantly!” Russian: “No. This is Russian: you have to be such a fool! I would eat it myself." Jew: “No, it’s a Jew: who else could get an orange in the desert?” There are stereotypes here - the gallantry of the French, the recklessness of the Russians, the resourcefulness of the Jews.

There are autostereotypes that reflect what people think about themselves, and heterostereotypes that relate to other people, and they are more critical. For example, what is considered a manifestation of prudence among one’s own people, is considered a manifestation of greed among another people. People perceive ethnocultural stereotypes as models that must be conformed to so that “people don’t laugh.” Therefore, stereotypes have a fairly strong influence on people, stimulating in them the formation of character traits that are reflected in the stereotype.

Experts in ethnic psychology who study ethnocultural stereotypes note that nations at a high level of economic development emphasize qualities such as intelligence, efficiency, and enterprise, while nations with more backward economies emphasize kindness, cordiality, and hospitality. This can be confirmed by the research of S.G. Ter-Minasova, according to her results, in English society professionalism, hard work, responsibility, etc. are more valued, and in Russian - hospitality, sociability, fairness (Ter-Minasova, 2000, p. .255).

N.V. Ufimtseva differentiates ethnic stereotypes and cultural stereotypes: ethnic stereotypes are inaccessible to the self-reflection of a “naive” member of an ethnic group and are facts of behavior and the collective unconscious, they cannot be specially taught, and cultural stereotypes are accessible to self-reflection and are facts of behavior, the individual unconscious and consciousness, they can already be taught.

The concept of a stereotype was first used by W. Lippmann back in 1922, who believed that these are ordered, schematic “pictures of the world” determined by culture in a person’s head, which save his efforts when perceiving complex objects of the world. With this understanding of the stereotype, two of its important features stand out - being determined by culture and being a means of saving labor effort, and, accordingly, linguistic means. If algorithms for solving mathematical problems save a person’s thinking, then stereotypes “save” the personality itself.

In cognitive linguistics and ethnolinguistics, the term stereotype refers to the content side of language and culture, i.e. is understood as a mental (thinking) stereotype that correlates with a “naive picture of the world.” We find such an understanding of the stereotype in the works of E. Bartminsky and his school; the linguistic picture of the world and the linguistic stereotype are correlated in him as part and whole, while the linguistic stereotype is understood as a judgment or several judgments relating to a specific object of the extralinguistic world, a subjectively determined representation of an object in which descriptive and evaluative features coexist and which is the result of interpretation reality within the framework of socially developed cognitive models. We consider a linguistic stereotype not only a judgment or several judgments, but also any stable expression consisting of several words, for example, a stable comparison, cliche, etc.: a person of Caucasian nationality, gray-haired as a harrier, a new Russian. The use of such stereotypes facilitates and simplifies communication, saving the energy of communicants.

Yu. A. Sorokin defines a stereotype as a certain process and result of communication (behavior) according to certain semiotics.

ical models, the list of which is closed due to certain semiotic-technological principles accepted in a certain society. In this case, the semiotic model is implemented at the social, socio-psychological levels (standard) or at the linguistic, psychological levels (norm). The standard and norm exist in two forms: as a stamp (an overly explicit complex sign) or as a cliche (an insufficiently explicit complex sign).

V.V. Krasnykh divides stereotypes into two types - stereotypes-images and stereotypes-situations. Examples of image stereotypes: a bee is a hard worker, a ram is stubborn, and situation stereotypes: a ticket is a composter, a stork is a cabbage.

Stereotypes are always national, and if there are analogues in other cultures, then these are quasi-stereotypes, because, while coinciding in general, they differ in nuances and details that are of fundamental importance. For example, the phenomena and situation of queuing are different in different cultures, and therefore, stereotypical behavior will also be different: in Russia they ask “Who is last?” or simply stand in line; in a number of European countries, they tear off a receipt in a special machine and then follow the numbers that light up above the window, for example, at the post office.

So, a stereotype is a certain fragment of the conceptual picture of the world, a mental “picture”, a stable cultural and national idea (according to Yu. E. Prokhorov, “super stable” and “super fixed”) about an object or situation. It represents some culturally determined idea of ​​an object, phenomenon, situation. But this is not only a mental image, but also its verbal shell. Belonging to a particular culture is determined precisely by the presence of a basic stereotypical core of knowledge, which is repeated in the process of socialization of an individual in a given society, therefore stereotypes are considered pre-precious (important, representative) names in a culture. A stereotype is a phenomenon of language and speech, a stabilizing factor that allows, on the one hand, to store and transform some of the dominant components of a given culture, and on the other, to express oneself among “one’s own” and at the same time identify one’s “one.”

The formation of ethnic consciousness and culture as regulators of human behavior are based on both innate and acquired in the process of socialization factors - cultural stereotypes, which are acquired from the moment a person begins to identify himself with a certain ethnic group, a certain culture and recognize himself as an element of them. .

The mechanism for the formation of stereotypes are many cognitive processes, because stereotypes perform a number of cognitive functions - the function of schematization and simplification, the function of forming and storing group ideology, etc.

We live in a world of stereotypes imposed on us by culture. The set of mental stereotypes of an ethnos is known to each of its representatives. Stereotypes are, for example, expressions in which a representative of a rural, peasant culture will say about a bright moonlit night: it is so light that you can sew, while a city dweller in this typical situation will say: it is so light that you can read. Similar stereotypes are used by native speakers in standard communication situations. Moreover, almost any feature, not just the logically main one, can become dominant in a stereotype.

The culturosphere of a certain ethnic group contains a number of elements of a stereotypical nature, which, as a rule, are not perceived by bearers of another culture; These elements are called lacunae by Yu. A. Sorokin and I. Yu. Markovina: everything that the recipient noticed in a foreign cultural text, but does not understand, that seems strange to him and requires interpretation, serves as a signal of the presence in the text of national-specific elements of the culture in which a text has been created, namely gaps.

The stability of a culture and its viability are determined by the extent to which the structures that determine its unity and integrity are developed. The integrity of culture presupposes the development of cultural stereotypes - stereotypes of goal setting, behavior, perception, understanding, communication, etc., i.e. stereotypes of the general picture of the world. An important role in the formation of stereotypes is played by the frequency of occurrence of certain objects and phenomena in people’s lives, often expressed in longer human contacts with these objects compared to others, which leads to stereotyping of such objects.

A behavior stereotype is the most important among stereotypes; it can turn into a ritual. And in general, stereotypes have much in common with traditions, customs, myths, rituals, but they differ from the latter in that traditions and customs are characterized by their objectified significance, openness to others, while stereotypes remain at the level of hidden mentalities that exist among “their own.”

So, a stereotype is characteristic of the consciousness and language of a representative of a culture, it is a kind of core of culture, its bright representative, and therefore the support of the individual in the dialogue of cultures.

To describe the language of a particular region in the light of linguoculturology, we use the scheme proposed by N. I. Tolstoy in ethnolinguistics: the literary language corresponds to the elite culture, dialects and dialects - to folk culture, etc.

This scheme can be used in the linguocultural description of any other region.

The most striking linguistic feature, which reflects the culture of the people, are phraseological units and proverbs, metaphors and symbols. For example, mythologems, archetypes, standards, stereotypes, customs, rituals, and beliefs are fixed in language.

The national and cultural identity of phraseological units, metaphors, and symbols is formed through cultural connotation. And yet we maintain that language is not the repository of culture.

The unit of language - the word - is only a signal, the function of which is to awaken human consciousness, to touch upon certain concepts in it that are ready to respond to this signal.

Language is only a mechanism that facilitates the encoding and transmission of culture. Texts are the true guardian of culture. It is not language, but text that reflects the spiritual world of man. It is the text that is directly related to culture, because it is permeated with many cultural codes; it is the text that stores information about history, ethnography, national psychology, national behavior, i.e. about everything that makes up the content of culture. In turn, the rules for constructing a text depend on the cultural context in which it appears.

The text is created from linguistic units of lower levels, which, with appropriate selection, can strengthen the cultural signal. Phraseologisms are primarily such units.

Questions and tasks

1. How do real language and culture relate? Complete the diagram:

Literary language – ................................culture;

Dialects and dialects – ................................culture;

................................ – “third culture”, i.e. culture for the people;

................................ – professional subcultures.

2. Name several nicknames (nicknames) that are known to you (nicknames of comrades, classmates, political figures). What type of culture does this phenomenon itself belong to?

3. Give 5 Russian phraseological units and 5 phraseological units from the foreign language you are studying, which would reflect national specifics.

4. Find 10 metaphors in the poetic texts of B.L. Pasternak that would describe: a) the world; b) nature; c) human feelings; d) his emotional states.

5. What understandings of the symbol do you know? Give examples of number symbols and color symbols. Which ones are national symbols and which ones are universal?

6. What role do stereotypes play in culture? What are their functions?

A.Ya. Flier

On the functions of symbols in culture

Annotation. The article examines the totality of the social functions of a symbol in culture, the role of symbolic production in social communication, the construction of general concepts in language as symbols, and compares the role of religion and art with the role of language and social behavior as sources of symbolic production.

Key words. Symbol and sign, culture, social functions, communication, figurative systems in culture, religion and art, language and behavior as symbol-generating systems.

I want to start with general theoretical provisions that denote the worldview context within which cultural symbolism, its genesis and social functions will be considered.

I interpret culture as a special behavioral and communicative program that ensures the group (collective) nature of human life. The executor of cultural attitudes is an individual, but it is thanks to culture that he lives in close interaction with other people. Academician V.S. Stepin defines culture as a “suprabiological program,” i.e. not conditional biological origin person. I believe that culture is absolutely biological in its genesis and is the result of the development of a program of animal sociality, which ensures the same group nature of the life activity of most species of higher and many lower animals. However, in the course of its history, culture has acquired many social features determined by the specifics of purely human interactions, and to date it is mainly an artificially constructed information environment for people’s existence.

The cultural program of group life can be divided into several subprograms, among which two are of greatest importance - behavioral and communicative.

The first of them regulates a person’s practical behavior in relation to other people, promoting its constructiveness and non-conflict. It is based on a system of household (primarily family and neighborhood) customs , which are largely the result of the development of the instincts of animal sociality and repeat many of its principles. It should be noted that in the course of human history, repeated attempts have been made to overcome the system of customs (i.e., the reproduction of traditions) and replace it with more effective systems for regulating social interactions, based on the goals of the rational mind. The most famous among such alternatives are, firstly, political power(both in practical and legislative embodiment), replacing traditional customs with the forced regulation of social relations, corresponding to the interests of the holders of power. Secondly, religion, which seriously corrects customs with ideal speculative attitudes of consciousness and requires behavior consistent with these attitudes. And thirdly, social freedom, which also appeals to greater rationality of behavior, determined by the mind and free will of the social actor himself. These alternatives precisely refer to the supra-biological features of culture acquired in the course of history. But customs are based on the historical social experience of collective interactions and develop spontaneously, so overcoming them is partial and more or less conditional. Customs are very flexible and in family-neighborhood relations are always preserved in some form. But they no longer play a big role in people’s public life; The modern behavioral culture of city residents is mainly determined by political-religious-democratic values ​​that have developed over the course of human history.

Another cultural subprogram is a system of social communication, which is based on the human ability to produce, perceive and decipher characters and exchange information in symbolized form . Symbolic production here is understood broadly and includes:

The generation and use of words of spoken language (conventional designations of concepts, phenomena, events),

Written forms of recording information, alphabets, hieroglyphic systems, grammars,

Texts of any kind,

Toponymy (names of places, localities, geographical objects),

Figurative symbols of religion and art (in any form, from verbal to architectural),

Festive, solemn and other rituals and ceremonies,

Military-political ceremony, heraldry, insignia,

Various visual and sound signals,

Symbolic (more or less theatrical) behavior, etiquette, politeness,

Symbolic gestures, facial expressions, postures,

Ritual movements and dances,

The symbolism of clothing, hairstyles, makeup, jewelry, weapons, household items, image fashion in general,

Symbolic design of space, facades and interiors of buildings, spaces between buildings, etc.

Symbolic production in the communicative function is also a product of the development of certain abilities of animals that actively exchange information within the limits of their species capabilities. Research in recent decades shows that the volume of information exchanges between animals is much greater than what we usually imagine. Simply recording such information exchanges often requires special equipment. However, this is not comparable with the communicative capabilities of human culture, primarily in terms of the scale of symbolization of concepts.

The main social function of symbolic production and all symbolic activity is most closely associated with communication, with the exchange of information between people (both between contemporaries and the transmission of social experience to subsequent generations) and the transfer of information in a form alienated from the source and in a compactly “collapsed” form. Another function of cultural symbols, equally important, is to teach people “correct” social behavior and constantly stimulate it psychologically.

Thus, both subprograms of culture are closely related and in different situations complement and support each other.

Now let's take a closer look at the phenomenon of a cultural symbol. A symbol is a more or less conventional image (verbal, visual, sound or any other) of an object or concept. A symbol is, first of all, a sign that corresponds to all the parameters of a sign, as semioticians interpret it. But not every sign is a symbol. In my opinion, the difference between a symbol and a sign lies and is expressed primarily in their contextual dependence/independence. A sign usually means the same thing, regardless of the context of use. For example, a stool (as a concept) will mean a structure for sitting equally in a palace, in a hut, and in the middle of an open field. But, for example, the monarchical throne symbolizes the “royal place” only in the context of a palace, and, say, in the middle of a factory floor, it will no longer symbolize such a meaning. A symbol is always associated with the context of its use.

C. Pierce divided the phenomenon of signs into icon signs, index signs and symbol signs, Yu.M. Lotman - on iconic and conventional signs. Perhaps, regarding the symbol as a sign, we can agree with Lotman. Among the symbols, iconic (illustrative) signs clearly stand out, depicting a simplified version or a recognizable fragment of the desired concept, which is easily understood even by a person not familiar with this symbolic system (for example, almost all traffic signs). Completely different conventional signs, to understand which you need to be familiar with this symbolic system and know what each symbol means (for example, the meaning of letter symbols in the alphabet).

Another important feature of a symbol that is worth noting is that both the most significant and the most common, frequently occurring phenomena are usually subject to symbolization. At the same time, the object itself is like physical phenomenon may be single, but often used in vocabulary and symbolizing some important concept. Those. we're talking about namely about the prevalence of the concept in communication. For example, Versailles as a symbol of monarchical luxury.

List of spheres social life, where different symbols are most used, is very large. Among the most important are:

Sacred images,

Artistic images (verbal, visual, sound, etc.),

Images of power

Images of social prestige,

Images of national dignity and identity,

Images of gender attractiveness, etc.

The multiplicity and diversity of the surrounding world and especially the social reality created by human hands, as a rule, no longer allow people in communication to talk about any phenomena in their individual understanding. It is necessary to unite them into typological groups for some reason and operate with such groups in the intellectual and communicative process. This is called concept building. In order not to talk about each tree separately, man created the concept “tree”, which generally refers to all plants of this type. The concept of “tree” is a symbolic designation for the entire set of trees. Those. general concepts in language, these are precisely symbols, the operation of which significantly simplifies direct understanding and all social communication.

In social communication, an important role is played by the coincidence of views and assessments by different people of certain phenomena, events, and situations. When people's views on all issues differ, they simply have nothing to talk about. Convergence of views and, more broadly, finding common value approaches is the most important component of any social communication, i.e. dialogue And the desired coincidence of views is directly related to the use of symbols that are equally understandable to all participants in the dialogue. Availability common characters seems to be the most important factor ensuring the very possibility of constructive communication.

The symbolism of social prestige plays a very important role in the processes of social regulation. Usually it is concentrated in items of clothing, insignia, signs of status (crowns, miters, knight's belts), worn awards, some symbolic attributes in hands, weapons, etc. In recent centuries, fashion has been an important manifestation of the symbolism of prestige. Various types of manifestations of respect for someone else’s status play a huge role. In fact, all etiquette, palace ceremony, politeness, and hospitality are dedicated to this. An action to protect one's prestigious status (personal honor) was a duel, during which people sacrificed their lives for the sake of status symbols. The significant role that all these phenomena play in culture indicates that throughout history there has been a constant competition of social statuses and that it was an extremely important tool for regulating social relations. The symbolism of social prestige has always been one of the most significant symbolic subsystems of the social life of society.

Symbolic images play an important role in the process of human self-identification. Let me make a reservation right away that by self-identification I mean not only a person’s definition of his ethnic (national) affiliation, but to the same extent his understanding of his social class (class), political-ideological (party) and religious (confessional) affiliation. Since only specialists can professionally understand the objective foundations of such self-identification, the average person makes his self-determination mainly by focusing on symbolic images familiar to him, on iconic figures of history and modernity. I would even dare to call a person’s individual self-identification more likely his self-determination in familiar symbols than in the realities of his location in the social configuration of existence.

The key problem of understanding the functions of a symbol in culture is the idea of ​​the sources of symbolic production, the “factories” of symbolic products in the history of mankind. The traditional idea that in the past the main “factories” producing cultural symbols were religion and art is somewhat questionable. Judging by culture past centuries According to the works of writers of the past, who quite adequately described the cultural attitudes of representatives of different classes, the role of religion and especially art in the formation of the culture of the uneducated majority of the population looks very small. Of course, in different eras the influence of religion on different areas of life was different. But, apparently, the religiosity of people of the past was very individual, and its depth was determined by the totality of life circumstances and the level of education of a particular person. The idea of ​​total deep religiosity of the entire population, even in the Middle Ages, is a literary myth of later times.

As for literature and art, they influenced mainly the culture of the aristocracy. In Europe, familiarity with literature and art among most of the population actually began only in the twentieth century, with the spread of literacy, and then radio and television, broadcasting music, plays, etc., but especially thanks to cinema. Before this, the influence of contemporary art on the mass of the population was very fragmented (mainly through the church), and folk artistic culture mainly broadcast traditional symbols rather than producing new ones. Even greater difficulty with this issue was observed in the countries of the East. So, literature and art became a source of symbolic production that has a serious impact on the culture of the masses relatively recently (in fact, in parallel with the decline in the influence of religion, perhaps compensating for this decline in its own way).

Therefore, in my opinion, the main "factories" of symbolic production throughout history have been the image-rich vocabulary of spoken languages ​​and the more or less theatrical nature of culturally determined social behavior of people. This, in my opinion, is the main area of ​​production of symbols that influence the processes of life and support its collective nature. It is here that the symbolism of people’s everyday behavior and the symbolic richness of the vocabulary of their communication played in the past and still play a special socially consolidating role.

Until the 20th century a significant part of the city and almost the entire mass rural population European countries was illiterate, did not read newspapers or books, and cinema, radio, television and the Internet did not yet exist. The function of the Internet was mainly performed by the parish priest, whose ability to broadcast relevant information (in sermons) was minimal. Therefore, the man of the past navigated the world mainly by the symbols familiar to him, some of which, of course, were given to him by religion, but most of which were formed spontaneously in the language, rituals and customs of direct neighborly interaction. The cultural and regulatory role of such symbols in the past was very significant. Modern man relies more on directly event information gleaned from the media.

Consideration of the historical dynamics in the dominant themes of social symbols of different eras can be correlated with the study of the prevailing ideas about social good and evil in different eras. It should be said that the dominant theme of social symbolism in different periods history mainly correlates with ideas about good and evil, although, of course, we are not talking about complete identity. However, in the primitive era, social symbolism was dominated by the theme of observance of neighboring customs. This was clearly embodied in the rituals of peasant holidays, some elements of which date back to primitive times and in which the emphasis is on hospitality, good attitude towards neighbors, the whole complex of archaic customs and traditions of patriarchy, etc. The symbolism of the agrarian era is characterized by an expression of loyalty to the dominant religion, submission to fate, which is clearly reflected in numerous proverbs and sayings. The industrial era in its social symbolism is characterized by the glorification of material wealth, commercial success, entrepreneurial cunning, etc., which is reflected, for example, in many anecdotes and catchphrases, many of which have an international distribution in various versions, as well as in typical images of movie characters. The symbolism of the post-industrial era, judging by public manifestations, is focused mainly on the theme of protecting human dignity. Of course, this is only dominant symbolism, statistically relatively dominant over others, but does not at all exclude other thematics.

The question remains open to what extent the production of symbols can be considered the main social task culture, as E. Cassirer believed and L. White was largely inclined towards this? The answer to this question mainly depends on the assessment of the role of symbolic production in ensuring the group (collective) nature of human life. I am inclined to believe that symbolic production plays an extremely important supporting role in the group life of people. Naturally, by symbolic production I mean not only religion and art, the influence of which is great, but not absolute, but primarily the language and practice of social interactions. It is here that the bulk of symbols are generated that provide regulation of people’s social life, teach them “correct” social behavior and stimulate it. Social behavior of people is a procedure for the fulfillment of certain cultural attitudes, and their generation is associated mainly with the symbolic component of culture.

There is no doubt that speculative ideal values ​​are generated mainly by religion, literature and art, as well as philosophy and the humanities. But how great is their influence on the everyday culture of the average person, on the norms of his social interactions and communications? Apparently, two value-symbolic systems function in parallel in culture: perfect , forming a gallery of speculative standards of social behavior (mainly religious ascetics and cultural heroes), and socio-practical , summarizing the experience of real social interaction and communication in the collective life of people. The first is generated mainly by religion and art, and the second by language and the practice of social interactions. But how they relate to each other and how they influence each other is a question that requires special research...

NOTES

The article was prepared with the support of the Russian Humanitarian Foundation grant 15-03-00031 “Cultural regulation of social dynamics.”

Stepin V.S. Culture // Questions of Philosophy. 1999. No. 8.
See, for example: Reznikova Zh.I. Intelligence and language of animals and humans. Fundamentals of cognitive ethology. M.: Akademkniga, 2005.
See: Pinker, Steven. The Language Instinct. N.Y.: William Morrow and Company Inc. 1994 (Pinker S. Language as instinct. M.: Editorial URSS, 2004).
For more information about both functions, see: Flier A.Ya. Culture as a social-regulatory program: the stage of formation // Culture of culture. 2015. No. 1. URL: . Access date: 09/26/2015; Flier A.Ya. Culture as a symbolic activity: the stage of formation // Culture of culture. 2015. No. 1. URL: . Date of access: 09/26/2015.
Saussure, Ferdinand de. Cours de linguistique générale. Paris: Payot, 1995 (1re ed. 1916) (Saussure F. de. Course of general linguistics // Saussure F. de. Works on linguistics. M.: Progress, 1977.
Peirce, Charles Sanders. Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce / Eds. C. Hartshorne, P. Weiss (Vol.1-6); A. Burks (Vol.7-8). Harvard: Harvard University Press, 1931-1958 (Pierce C.S.. Selected philosophical works. M.: Logos, 2000).
Lotman Yu.M. Semiotics of cinema and problems of film aesthetics. Tallinn: Eesti Raamat, 1973.
For more details, see: Orlova E.A. Organization of examination of the social effectiveness of innovative projects // Culture of Culture. 2015. No. 4. URL: . Access date 10/12/2015.
See: Flier A.Ya. Good and evil in cultural and historical understanding // Information humanitarian portal Knowledge. Understanding. Skill. 2015. No. 3. URL: http://www.zpu-journal.ru/e-zpu/2015/3/Flier_Good-Evil/. Date of access: 09/26/2015.
Cassirer, Ernst. Philosophie der symbolischen Formen. Bd. 1-3. Вerlin, 1923-1929 (Cassirer E. Philosophy of symbolic forms: In 3 volumes. M.-SPb.: University Book, 2002).
White, Leslie Alvin. The Science of Culture: A Study of Man and Civilization. N.Y.: Farrar, Straus and Cudahy, 1949 (White L. The Science of Culture // White L. Selected: The Science of Culture. M.: ROSSPEN, 2004).

Flier A.Ya., 2016

Flier Andrey Yakovlevich,
Doctor of Philosophy, Professor,
chief researcher
Russian Research Institute of Cultural
and natural heritage named after D.S. Likhacheva.

1.Language of culture. Language of culture- these are those means, signs, forms, symbols, texts that allow people to enter into communicative connections with each other and navigate the cultural space. The relevance of the problem of cultural language is due to the following circumstances:

1) the problem of the language of culture is the problem of its meaning;

2) language is the core of the cultural system, since it synthesizes various aspects of human life - social, cultural-historical, psychological, aesthetic - and transmits it from generation to generation;

3) understanding the language of culture and mastering it gives a person freedom, gives the ability to evaluate and self-esteem, to make choices, opens up ways to include a person, opens up ways to include a person in a cultural context, helps to understand one’s place in culture, and navigate complex and dynamic social structures.

To date, the following generally accepted classification of languages ​​has emerged:

· natural languages as the main and historically primary means of knowledge and communication (Russian, French, Estonian, etc.). they are characterized by a continuous process of change, assimilation and death. Changing the meaning of words and concepts can be associated with a variety of factors, including and socio-political. A person’s vocabulary is on average 10-15 thousand words, some of them are active, which a person uses, the other part are passive, the meaning of which he understands, but does not use himself;

· artificial languages ​​are the languages ​​of science where the meaning is fixed and there are strict limits of use. Their appearance is due to the fact that everyday speech is polysemantic, and this is unacceptable in science, where the utmost adequacy of perception is necessary. Scientific knowledge seeks to avoid uncertainty in information, which can lead to inaccuracies and even errors. Artificial languages ​​also include languages ​​of conventional signals (Morse code, road signs);

· secondary languages(secondary modeling systems) are communication structures built on top of the natural language level (myth, religion, art).

One of the most important functions of culture is the storage and transmission of information from generation to generation. In the history of the human race, two channels for transmitting information have formed. One of them is genetic; through another channel, information is transmitted from generation to generation through various sign systems.

2. Signs and symbols in culture. Sign - This material object(phenomenon, event), acting as an objective substitute for some other object, property or relationship, and used for acquiring, storing, processing and transmitting messages (information, knowledge). This is a materialized carrier of the image of an object, limited by its functional purpose. The presence of a sign makes it possible to transmit information through technical communication channels and its various – mathematical, statistical, logical – processing. The entire set of these symbolic means can be represented as follows:

Ø symbols, which can be, for example, the basis of natural language. A unit of language is a word denoting an object, action, property and other characteristics of the world around a person. Signs-designations also include signs-signs (signs-symptoms), signs-copies (reproductions), sign behavior (imitation);

Ø model signs, which are also substitutes for real-life objects and actions;

Ø symbols are signs that not only point to the depicted object, but express its meaning.

Symbol in culture it is a universal, multi-valued category, revealed through a comparison of the objective image and the deep meaning. Turning into a symbol, the image becomes “transparent”; the meaning seems to shine through it. The aesthetic information carried by a symbol has a huge number of degrees of freedom. Far beyond the capabilities of human perception. A person’s daily life is filled with symbols and signs that regulate his behavior, allowing or prohibiting something, personifying and filling with meaning.

All this information is expressed in texts. At the same time, in the modern European tradition, it is customary to consider everything that is created artificially as a text. The text cannot be reduced to a speech act; any sign systems can be considered in this capacity: iconographic, material, activity. This understanding of the language of culture reveals a desire to overcome the linguistic plane. Moreover, in any language, considered in isolation, in any sign system there are contradictory foundations that do not allow an adequate and exhaustive description of reality. This requires a “metalanguage” that fills incompleteness. Often this function is performed by a language from another sign system, although the culture of the 20th century is characterized by a desire for an integrative language.

Thus, it is in the semantic field of the language of culture that the accumulation, formation into text, and then, with the help of various sciences, the decoding or decoding of information embedded in the deep structures of culture and consciousness occurs.

SIGN, SYMBOL, CODE, MEANING, CULTURAL LANGUAGE

As already noted, within the framework of the semiotic approach, culture is presented as a system of communications and information exchange, and cultural phenomena are considered as a system of signs.

A sign is a sensually perceived subject (sound, image, etc.) that replaces and represents other objects, their properties and relationships. The possibilities of understanding and transmitting culture can be realized using various sign systems (or cultural languages): natural language, folklore, traditions, household items, hunting or other activities, rituals, rites, ceremonies, etiquette, type of home, through artistic images of various types art, writing and more. The language of culture is the totality of all sign methods of verbal and non-verbal communication, with the help of which culturally significant information is transmitted.

The entire set of these symbolic means can be represented by the following types:

– symbols, which are, for example, the basis of natural language. A unit of language is a word denoting an object, action, property and other characteristics of the world around a person. Signs-designations also include signs-signs (signs, symptoms), signs-copies (reproductions), sign behavior (imitation);

– model signs, which are also substitutes for real-life objects and actions. So, for example, within the cultural mythological code, a model of a real object, endowed with magical powers, becomes a cultural model - “secondary objectivity”. This model contains hidden information about the meaning and methods of action with an object;

– symbols are signs that not only point to the depicted object, but express its meaning. The distinction between the concepts of “sign” and “symbol” was already made in ancient Greek philosophy.

The symbol as a way of figuratively exploring the world, as an artistic allegorical image, is widely used in art. The meaning of symbolic images cannot be deciphered directly; it must be emotionally experienced and felt, it must be recognized. Famous culturologist Yu.M. Lotman understood a symbol not only as a sign of some artificial language (for example, chemical or mathematical symbols), but also as an expression of deep sacred meaning. Symbols of this kind have a large cultural and semantic capacity (cross, circle, pentagram, etc.), they go back to the pre-literate era and represent archaic texts that serve as the basis of any culture. Thus, a symbol is a socio-cultural sign, the content of which is an idea that is comprehended intuitively and cannot be expressed in an adequate verbal way.

The specificity of a symbol as a sign is its ability to evoke a generally significant reaction not to the symbolized object itself, but to the spectrum of meanings that is associated with this object.

Language plays an important role in the development of culture. The purpose of cultural languages ​​is to express the meanings of culture, i.e. that content that cannot be expressed directly and unambiguously.

The language of culture in the broad sense of this concept refers to those means, signs, symbols, texts that allow people to enter into communicative connections with each other and navigate the space of culture. The language of culture is a universal form of understanding reality, into which all newly emerging or already existing ideas, perceptions, concepts, images and other similar semantic structures (carriers of meaning) are organized.

Language captures ideas that are meaningful to a person and his relationship to them. In the sphere of social interaction, language acts as a guide, a mediator, a means that allows one to attach cultural meaning to subjective, individual experience, to transmit socially significant ideas, and to give such ideas a generally valid, shared meaning.

The most serious problem communication lies in the translation of meanings from one language to another, each of which has many semantic and grammatical features. In cultural studies, this problem of the effectiveness of cultural dialogue both on the “vertical”, i.e. between cultures of different eras, and “horizontally”, i.e. the dialogue of different cultures existing simultaneously, among themselves, is conceptualized as a problem of understanding. The complexity of understanding is due to the fact that perception and behavior are determined by stereotypes - ideological, national, class, gender, formed in a person since childhood. Understanding is apperceptive, i.e. new information is assimilated by correlation with what is already known, new knowledge and new experience are included in the system of knowledge already available, on this basis the selection, enrichment and classification of material occurs.

The main structural unit of cultural language is sign systems. Cultural researchers identify five main sign systems: natural, functional, conventional, verbal, and recording systems.

1. Natural signs mean things and natural phenomena in the case when they are pointed to some other objects or phenomena and are considered as a carrier of information about them. Most often, natural signs are an accessory, property, part of some whole and therefore provide information about the latter. Natural languages ​​are signs, for example, smoke is a sign of fire.

2. Functional signs are also sign-signs. But unlike natural signs, the connection of functional signs with what they point to is determined not by their objective properties, but by the functions that they perform. As a rule, these are things and phenomena that have a direct pragmatic purpose, but included in human activity in addition to their immediate functions, they also receive a sign function, i.e. give some information about things and phenomena. For example, functional signs include production equipment, since any mechanism or part can act as a sign that has information about the entire technical system of which it is an element, etc.

3. Conventional marks are marks in the full sense of the word. Their meanings are determined not by the objects and processes they inform about, but by agreements between people. There are four types of conventional signs:

a) signals notifying or warning people. For example, the colors of a traffic light, a zebra crossing on a pedestrian path, flag signaling in a fleet;

b) indices – symbols any objects or situations that have a compact, easily visible appearance and are used to distinguish these objects or situations from a number of others. For example, instrument readings, map symbols, various kinds conventional icons in diagrams, graphs, professional and business texts, etc.;

c) images are built on similarity, similarity with what they represent. This similarity can be external or internal, substantive in nature with a complete or partial coincidence of ideas and associations that evoke the image and what is depicted. For example, picture signs indicating pedestrian crossings, escalators, etc.;

d) symbols - cultural objects that act in the communicative or translation process as signs that simply point to the designated object, but express its meaning, i.e. convey abstract ideas or concepts associated with this object in a visually figurative form. The simplest forms of symbols are emblems, coats of arms, orders, banners, etc.

Along with individual conventional signs introduced for one reason or another, various systems of conventional signs arise in the course of cultural development. For example, heraldry, a system of traffic signs, ceremonial systems associated with the performance of various kinds of rituals (wedding, funeral, festive, religious and cult, assumption of office - coronation, inauguration, etc.). We can say that each area of ​​sociocultural life has its own symbolic system.

4. The most important sign system is verbal sign systems - spoken languages. Any natural language is a historically formed sign system, forming the basis of the entire culture of a particular people speaking a given language. The most main feature verbal system consists in its specific structural organization. The verbal system is a polystructural, branched, hierarchical, multi-level organization of signs. The basic structural unit is the word, which, in turn, is internally structured (root, suffix, prefix, ending, etc.). Words are combined into phrases, sentences, statements. The latter are used to create texts.

Natural language is an open sign system. It, unlike artificial formalized languages, is capable of unlimited development. This feature of language is of great importance for the study of culture. The history of cultural development is reflected in the history of language development. New phenomena in people's lives, discoveries in science and technology are captured in words, replenishing the vocabulary of the language - vocabulary. At the same time, words associated with living conditions that are becoming a thing of the past go out of use or change the meaning and stylistic coloring. Social transformations in the country have a particularly strong influence on the evolution of natural language. However, despite the mobility, the main vocabulary fund - the lexical “core” of the language - has been preserved for centuries. Thus, the language basically remains the same for centuries, and this is the basis for mutual understanding between generations and the preservation of the experience of the past in culture.

5. At a relatively high stage of development of human culture, sign recording systems are formed: writing (natural language recording system), musical notation, methods of recording dance, etc. The peculiarity of sign systems of this type is that they arise on the basis of other sign systems of spoken language, music, dance and are secondary in relation to them. The invention of sign recording systems is one of the greatest achievements of human culture. The emergence and development of writing played a particularly important role in the history of culture. Without writing, the development of science, technology, law, etc. would be impossible. The advent of writing marked the beginning of civilization.

The basic sign of writing is not a word, as in spoken language, but an objective and more abstract unit - a letter. Writing opened the way to the replication of signs - printing.

One of the important directions in the development of recording systems is the creation of artificial, formal languages, playing a major role in modern science and technology.

Meaning can be understood as that which provides the universal cohesion of the meanings of the signs of a given language.

The meanings have several levels:

1. The most superficial level of meaning is the so-called “common sense”. This is a meaning that has already manifested itself at the level of consciousness, rationalized and generally accepted. It coincides with the meaning and is expressed verbally;

2. The deepest level of meaning is the unmanifested content that connects a person with the world of values, laws, and patterns of behavior of a given culture. Between these extreme levels are those horizontals of meaning that need a code. If all cultural phenomena are considered as facts of communication, as messages, then they can only be understood in relation to some kind of intermediary, because the connection of sign systems with the reality they reflect is not direct. The need for such an intermediary is revealed when various phenomena are compared with each other and reduced to unified system. Therefore, a system of special characteristics – cultural codes – is necessary.

As part of the analysis of culture, fruitful attempts are being made to interpret culture as a certain structurally ordered, but historically changeable given, as a certain unity of fundamental codes. The very concept of “code” first appeared in communications technology (telegraph code, Morse code), in computer technology, mathematics, cybernetics, and genetics (genetic code). Without coding, the construction of artificial languages, machine translation, encryption and decryption of texts is impossible. In all these usages there is no need to refer to the meaning of the coded messages. In this case, a code is understood as a set of signs and a system of certain rules with the help of which information can be presented in the form of a set of these signs for transmission, processing and storage. Coding theory solves problems not of understanding, but of optimizing codes. In cultural studies, it is the content and understanding of cultural texts that comes to the fore, which is why the concept of “culture code” becomes so relevant and requires clarification. The need for a cultural code arises only when there is a transition from the world of signals to the world of meaning. The world of signals is a world of individual units calculated in bits of information, and the world of meaning is those meaningful forms that organize a person’s connection with the world of ideas, images and values ​​of a given culture. And if within formalized languages ​​a code can be understood as something due to which a certain signifier (meaning, concept) is correlated with a certain signified (referent), then in cultural languages ​​a code is something that allows us to understand the transformation of meaning into meaning.

Code is a model of the rule for generating a number of specific messages.

The main culture code must have the following characteristics:

1) self-sufficiency for the production, transmission and preservation of human culture;

2) openness to change.

All codes can be compared with each other on the basis common code, simpler and more comprehensive. A message, a cultural text, can open up to different readings depending on the code used. The code allows one to penetrate to the semantic level of culture; without knowledge of the code, the cultural text will be closed, incomprehensible, and unperceived. A person will see a system of signs, and not a system of meanings and meanings.

William Shakespeare's dictionary, according to researchers, contains 12,000 words. The vocabulary of a black man from the cannibal tribe “Mumbo-Yumbo” is 300,000 words. Ellochka Shchukina easily and freely managed with thirty. Here are the words, phrases and interjections that she meticulously selected from the entire great, verbose and powerful Russian language:

1. Be rude.

2. Ho-ho! (Expresses, depending on the circumstances: irony, surprise, delight, hatred, joy, contempt and satisfaction.)

3. Famous.

4. Gloomy. (In relation to everything. For example, “gloomy Petya has come”, “gloomy weather”, “gloomy case”, “gloomy cat”, etc.)

6. Creepy. (Creepy. For example, when meeting a good friend: “creepy meeting.”)

7. Guy. (In relation to all men I know, regardless of age and social status.)

8. Don't teach me how to live.

9. Like a child. (“I beat him like a child,” when playing cards. “I cut him off like a child,” apparently in a conversation with the tenant in charge.)

10. Beauty!

11. Thick and handsome. (Used as a characteristic of inanimate and animate objects.)

12. Let's go by cab. (Said to husband.)

13. Let's go in a taxi. (To male acquaintances.)

14. Your whole back is white. (Joke.)

15. Just think.

16. Ulya. (Affectionate ending of names. For example: Mishulya, Zinulya.)

17. Wow! (Irony, surprise, delight, hatred, joy, contempt and satisfaction.)

The very few words that remained served as a transmission link between Ellochka and the department store clerks. (Ilf I.A., Petrov E.P. The Twelve Chair; The Golden Calf: [Novels]. Saratov: Volga Book Publishing House, 1988. P. 136-137).

Related information.

1. Sign and symbol. Classification of signs.

Signs and symbols play a huge role in culture. Symbols are an expression of culture. Through symbols, unconscious meanings are revealed in the depths of the soul, which unite people and transform them from “I” to “We”. At the same time, without symbols, individuality is lost.

When it comes to symbols and signs, the question always arises: a sign - of what?, a symbol - of what? This question means that it is possible to reveal the meaning of these concepts only if we analyze their relationship to something third, to the original, which may not have (and most often does not have) anything in common in terms of physical, chemical and other properties with the carrier of reflection. But everyone is in some connection, being the result of human knowledge, putting this result in certain forms.

A sign is a material object (phenomenon, event), acting as an objective substitute for some other object, property or relationship, and used for acquiring, storing, processing and transmitting messages (information, knowledge). This is a materialized carrier of the image of an object, limited by its functional purpose.

The definition of a sign is based on the following formula: X understands and uses Y as a representative of Z. In this formula, X is the one who uses the sign (sign user) and participates in the communication process. Anything can act as Y and Z, but Y must be perceived, i.e. must actually be a material object.

By sign we mean the object Y itself, i.e. material carrier, or representative Z. In linguistics, a sign is a pair, i.e. some two-sided entity. In this case Y is called "meaning" sign, and Z is its "signified". A synonym for “signifier” is the term “form” or “plane of expression,” and the terms “plane of content” (“content”), “meaning,” and sometimes “meaning” are also used as synonyms for “signified.”

The presence of a sign makes it possible to transmit information (semiosis - sign process) through technical communication channels and its various - mathematical, statistical, logical - processing.

Semiosis is based on the intention of person A to convey message C to person B. Person A is called the sender of the message, person B is its recipient, or addressee. The sender selects the medium G (or communication channel) over which the message will be transmitted, and the code D.

Code D specifies the correspondence between the signified and the signifier, i.e. specifies a set of characters. The code must be chosen in such a way that the required message can be composed using the appropriate signifiers. The environment and the signifiers of the code must also fit together. The code must be known to the recipient, and the environment and signifiers must be accessible to his perception. Thus, perceiving the signifiers sent by the sender, the recipient, using a code, translates them into signifieds and thereby receives the message.

A special case of semiosis is speech communication (or speech act), and a special case of code is natural language. Then the sender is called the speaker, the receiver is called the listener, or also the addressee, and the signs are called linguistic signs. Code (and language as well) is a system that includes the structure of signs and the rules for its operation. The structure, in turn, consists of the signs themselves and the relationships between them (sometimes they also talk about the rules of combination).

Classic classification of signs:

a) copy signs (iconic signs) Copy the signified, the form and content are similar qualitatively or structurally: fingerprint, photocopier, photograph, battle plan, building plan;

b) sign-indexes (signs-signs) Fix a cause-and-effect relationship, their form and content are adjacent in space or time: for example, folk signs; footprints in the sand suggesting that someone has passed through the area previously, smoke suggesting the presence of fire, symptoms of illness suggesting illness itself

c) signs-symbols are for which the connection between form and content is established arbitrarily, according to an agreement relating specifically to this particular sign. For iconic and indexical signs, the form allows even an addressee who is not familiar with it to guess the content of the sign. As for symbolic signs, their form itself, i.e. outside a special agreement, does not give any idea of ​​the content.

Among linguistic signs, the overwhelming majority refers to symbols, so the linguistic sign is arbitrary: there is little in common between the signifiers of the Russian, English and German languages ​​stol, table and Tisch, although they all mean the same thing: “table”. The very connection between the signified and the signifier is arbitrary, established and determined by linguistic convention, and not by any natural reasons.

According to the way the signifier is perceived, signs are divided into visual, auditory, tactile, olfactory and gustatory. In human communication, the first three types are mainly used. Thus, linguistic signs belong to the first or second type (written and oral forms). Visual signs also include traffic lights, traffic controllers, road signs, facial expressions, gestures, postures, etc. Among the auditory signs one can note horns and sirens, bells (telephone, school, etc.), firing of a starting pistol, etc. The category of tactile signs includes, for example, touching gestures: patting, squeezing, stroking, etc. For blind and deaf people, this type of signs becomes the main one. Olfactory signs play a special role in the communication of many animal species. For example, bears and other wild animals mark their habitats with clumps of scent-bearing fur to scare off intruders and show that the area is already occupied.

According to the duration of existence of the signifier, signs are divided into instantaneous and long-term (stable). To instant ones, i.e. those that disappear immediately after use include, for example, spoken words, while written words are long-lasting signs.

Sign systems include natural languages, programming languages, the monetary system, sign language, etc. During communication, sign systems can interact. In the process of verbal communication, not only language is usually used, but also gestures and facial expressions, and signs of different sign systems in a certain way correlate with each other.

2. Nature of the symbol

The word “symbol” (from the Greek “sign, identifying mark”) is a sign, that is, any object, phenomenon, verbal or plastic image that has some meaning different from its own content.

In a symbol, this “other”, meaning, meaning is value. The meanings of any other signs relate either to things and objects of the real physical world, or to phenomena of mental and spiritual life (concepts, ideas, feelings, etc.). The meaning of symbols indicates the significance, value of these phenomena both for an individual person (individual symbols) and for small and large groups people, peoples, states, humanity as a whole.

The image of a seagull on the curtain of the Moscow Art Theater is a symbol of this theater group; the Volga River can be perceived not just as one of the rivers, but also as a symbol of Russia, understood in all the richness and diversity of its historical destiny; state flags, coats of arms, anthems - all these are symbolic signs of the historical dignity of states; a dove (and the image of a dove) can be perceived as a symbol of a value important to all humanity - peace.

The original meaning of this word was an identification card, which served as a simbolon - half a shard, which was a guest sign.

Among the ancient Greeks, the word “symbol” meant any material sign that had a conditional secret meaning for a certain group of people, for example, for fans of Cybele, Mithras. Symbols were also called insignia of state, public and religious associations. When Christianity and many secret religious societies (heresies) arose, password signs by which like-minded people recognized each other began to be called symbols (for example, the sign of the fish). The expression “symbol of faith” is attached to a brief presentation of the foundations of the secret teaching.

The symbol is used in a similar sense today. In addition, in mathematics, logic and other sciences, a symbol means the same as symbol. Multiple uses The word “symbol” makes it difficult to give it a general definition, to establish how it differs from other signs. The closest thing to understanding the specifics of a symbol is the interpretation of artistic symbols.

The value nature of the meaning of symbols distinguishes it from all other types of signs - from conventional signs, pointer signs, emblematic signs (or emblems), from pictorial (iconic) signs, or images, from allegorical sign structures, etc. All these signs, functioning in for their intended purpose, they carry information of a conceptual, semantic, but not value nature. In those cases where they are used to express value, they acquire symbolic meaning.

A person’s daily life is filled with symbols and signs that regulate his behavior, allowing or prohibiting something, personifying and filling with meaning.

In symbols and signs, both the external “I” of a person (self) and the internal “I” (I), the unconscious, given to him by nature, are manifested.

Concept of the symbol by Yu.M. Lotman

Yu.M. Lotman in his work “Symbol in Culture” indicates the possibility of two approaches to the study of symbols - rational and irrational. In one case, the symbol acts as a sign, in the other – as a storage device for cultural memory.

The specificity of this approach lies in the fact that the symbol accumulates the meanings in which it has ever appeared, piercing the culture vertically. From one historical era, a symbol with its inherent set of meanings passes into another, where it acquires new semantic comparisons and meanings without losing the old ones.

The symbol acts as a mechanism of cultural memory: “as a message from other cultural eras (other cultures), as a reminder of the ancient (eternal) foundations of culture.” In the structure of a symbol, according to Lotman, there is a moment of connection between different sign systems of the semiosphere, covering various codes, languages, cultural worlds, directions and types of human activity.

U.M. Lotman's symbol is not only a bridge from one level of existence to another, but a certain point of contact between the real and virtual world, real and suprareal, earthly and higher, in addition, a bridge connecting eras. The essence of the semiotic aspect of interpreting the concept of symbol is as follows: each art has its own language. Symbols - signs of cultural languages ​​- form a semantic network through which they carry the essence of a thing, from its deepest meanings to today's meanings.

Symbolic concept of culture by E. Cassirer

In his work “Philosophy of Symbolic Forms,” the German culturologist E. Cassirer (1874–1945) shows that at a certain stage of his evolution, at the stage of the emergence of self-consciousness, a person “breaks the chain connecting him with the outside world” and, if “the first steps of intellectual and the cultural life of a person can be represented as a kind of mental adaptation to the immediate environment,” then “as culture develops, the opposite tendency of human life is revealed.” It consists in creating a “symbolic system” that mediates all connections between a person and the world.

According to E. Cassirer, a person is in a state of constant dialogue with himself, and from this dialogue a “symbolic universe” is born in which a person now lives, the components of which are language, myth, art and religion.

“A person no longer confronts reality directly, he does not face it face to face. Physical reality seems to move away as a person’s symbolic activity grows. Instead of turning to the things themselves, a person is constantly turned to himself. He is so immersed in linguistic forms, artistic images, mythical symbols or religious rituals that he cannot see or know anything without the intervention of this artificial intermediary.

According to E. Cassirer, culture is universal in the sense that it mediates all his relationships not only in the sphere of theory, but also in the sphere of his practical everyday life. Even in this life, a person does not live “in the world of strict facts,” he lives among “imaginary emotions,” “among his own fantasies and dreams.”

Symbol and myth. Functionally, myth and symbol are similar in many ways, but in terms of primacy in the history of European culture, myth preceded symbol. Fundamental difference symbol from myth, is that myth is always a plot, it is always a certain external design of the concept of being. The symbol is above the plot and is much more blurred, vague, but it can absorb plots.

Myth-making is possible today, but only as a game of imagination, and not as absolute reality, myth is archaic, but the symbol still works in our culture, the symbol is an update of the myth on modern level state of civilization.

K. Levi-Strauss claimed to have found a way from symbols and signs to the unconscious structure of the mind, and therefore to the structure of the universe.

The unity of man and the universe is one of the most ancient and mysterious themes in culture. In legends, people are stars, the spirality of celestial nebulae is repeated many times in the ornaments of all earthly cultures, red blood owes its color to iron, and all the iron that is on earth, according to astronomers, arose in stellar matter.

The structure of many areas of the human body is spiral: the auricle, the iris of the eye... It was this sense of unity that allowed the mathematician and the poet V. Khlebnikov create your own model of a metalanguage consisting of seven layers.