Инструментарий русистики: корпусные подходы
The article is the first of its kind historiographical and theoretical review of the views of thinkers of the Middle Ages and modern history on the so-called "Hyperborean question", which are analyzed in a broad historical context with an emphasis on the political and ideological aspect of this issue.
The theme of Hyperborea, which was topical throughout most of the era of antiquity, towards the beginning of the Middle Ages almost completely left the fileld of both public consciousness and scientific thought, remaining only as a poetic metaphor that had radically changed it's meaning. Now this concept is associated with the threat from the north-east, coupled with deep contempt for the barbarians. From the 9th to the 16th century the epithet "Hyperboreans" referred mostly to the Russian people. A new discipline - Russian studies - developed in the context of the "hyperborean" issues. With the accumulation of geographical knowledge and the clarification of toponyms, the concept of "Hyperborea" had every chance to remain nothing more than a source of poetic allegories.
However, in the sixteenth century, with the beginning of the era of the formation of nation states, this topic acquired a new sound, becoming one of the instruments of political myth-making, primarily in the Northern European states, including Sweden which was seeking the opportunity to justify not only its exceptional role in world history, but also the claim to the leading position in Europe. The Norman hypothesis imposed on Russia by the West from the beginning of the 18th century, is directly connected with the Hyperborean question. Attempts by the Swedes to usurp the name Hyperborea caused an acute reaction in Russia. Russian writer V. Kopnist proposed an alternative theory, according to which the Hyperboreans were the ancestors of the Russian people, and it is Russia that should be considered the cradle of civilization.
The boundary of the 18th-19th centuries was marked by the skepticism of the European reading public about the attempts to find the direct descendants of the Hyperboreans among the existing peoples. The theme of Hyperborea has lost its relevance for almost a century, revived in the works of the fashionable esoteric thinkers on the one hand, and on the other hand - representatives of classical philology and historians of ancient philosophy, who broadened the range of scientific interests.
The domain of modality is structurally diverse and may be described in multiple ways (for example, see Perkins, 1983; Wierzbicka, 1987; Hengeveld, 1988/2004; Sweetser, 1990; Bondarko, 1990; Bybee et al., 1994; van der Auwera and Plungian, 1998; Palmer, 2001; Hansen, 2004; Nuyts, 2006; Khrakovsky, 2007). The article reports on the Russian part of a larger survey of Slavic modal words and elucidates the role of formal and semantic context of modal words in a new way. The availability of large corpus data paves the way for study of the empirical reliability of existing classifications originally proposed by philosophers. An important property of the modal words is that they are largely ambiguous, developing new modal meanings both diachronically and from the synchronic point of view.
The Russian language, despite being one of the most studied in the world, until recently has been little explored quantitatively. After a burst of research activity in the years 1960–1980, quantitative studies of Russian vanished. They are now reappearing in an entirely different context. Today, we have large and deeply annotated corpora available for extended quantitative research, such as the Rus- sian National Corpus, ruWac, ruTenTen, to name just a few (websites for these and other resources will be found in a special section in the References). The present volume is intended to fill the lacuna between the available data and the methods that can be applied to studying them.
Our goal is to present current trends in researching Russian quantitative linguis- tics, to evaluate the research methods vis-à-vis Russian data, and to show both the advantages and the disadvantages of the methods. We especially encouraged our authors to focus on evaluating statistical methods and new models of analysis. New findings concern applicability, evaluation, and the challenges that arise from using quantitative approaches to Russian data. The goal of this volume is therefore twofold: a) to address the topic of quantitative analysis of the Russian language, and b) to present an evaluation of methods applied to Russian data.
The article considers the place of linguistics in the hierarchy of the humanities in different periods of time during the XX–XXI centuries. It is about the role of linguistics in the world, and its strengthening is associated with the development of interdisciplinary relations of various kinds. Interdisciplinarity may arise as a result of increasing interest in language, in linguistic methods, in the relationship between language and thought, society, and so on. The situation in the USSR is considered separately, where other factors, primarily the social context, contributed to the prestige of linguistics. It is noted that today linguistics has partially lost its high place in the hierarchy of the humanities.