Mimetic imagery in English biblical ecodiscourse

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Kyiv National Linguistic University

MIMETIC IMAGERY IN ENGLISH BIBLICAL ECODISCOURSE

Professor O.M. Morokhovsky Chair of English

Philology and Philosophy of Language

Introduction and scientific novelty

Sensory and spatial imagery, which might be interpreted as manifestations of verbal holography [4; 12; 13; 16], in English biblical ecodiscourse is represented in two ways statically, in narrative situations, where numerous images rotate around a single point miming the mechanisms of sensory perception [8], or dynamically, through mimetic strategies, thus creating an allusion of spatial and/or sensory perception [4, p. 49, 53]. To reproduce an object as part of a multidimensional space the narrator usually needs at least three projections [6, p. 27], imitating its holographic visionbased onvarious interpretations of the object in focus [2, p. 84].

This article examines mimetic imagery in English biblical ecodiscourse manifested via its sensory and spatial narrative tools, which outline physical and spiritual boundaries of things permitted and not permitted, accepted or unaccepted by God, man and nature.

Recent researches and publications

Sensory and spatial images as iconic representations of reality are associated with the phenomenon of mimesis (in Greek “imitation”) as a reproduction of “certain characteristic features of an object through iconic nomination and pastiche” [9, p. 418]. In his book “Mimesis” M. P. Potolsky [23] notes that mimesis imitates “a dizzying array of originals: nature, truth, beauty, mannerisms, actions, situations, examples, ideas” [23, p. 1].

At the same time, other scholars interpret the phenomenon of mimesis as the “imitation” that reproduces only insignificant primary features of objects or things [24, p. 259; 3, p. 332]. According to such a viewpoint, mimetic similarity refers not to “imitation” in form and color, words and sound, but to their "embodiment" which is seen and perceived [3, p. 348]. A well-known scholar of ancient arts K. Otfried understood mimesis as a category and an idea through which any object of the external world is notjust imitated, but “manifests” its innate spiritual essence [3, p. 335].

Traditional definitions of mimesis explain it as “the imitation or representation of aspects of the sensible world, especially human actions, in literature and art” [18]; treat it as “representation and interpretation of reality in literature of different historical epochs” [1, p. 9]. Mimesis is also described as the main principle of artist's creativity in ancient aesthetics [14; 17]. Thus, the creation of mimesis embraces three main processes: observation, imitation, and rehearsal [20, p. 3]. As M. Riffaterre claimed [25, p. 141], “the reader's response to a mimesis consists in a rationalization tending to verify and complete the mimesis and to expand on it in sensory terms (through visualizations)”.

From a linguistic point of view, mimesis might be also approached as a rhetorical device defined as “intentional reproduction of certain characteristic features of one language in another one for the purpose of showing an inadequately repetitive speech, imitating or mocking the opponent, distracting attention from the topic under discussion etc.” [15, p. 3]. In such a case it involves imitation of gestures, pronunciation, utterances, or the repetition of the opponent's words [22, p. 102; 11, p. 25] to downscale the status of the interlocutor.

Purpose of paper

The paper aims to systematize and interpret verbal means of creating mimetic imagery in English biblical ecodiscourse. For that purpose, the following tasks should be performed: 1) to identify verbal means of mimetic imagery in English biblical ecodiscourse; 2) to demonstrate sensory and spatial images as means of creating the effect of multidimensionality through three projections in the space of biblical narrations; 3) to reveal hidden senses of the respective biblical narrations with regard to their mimetic imagery in various projections. The object of the paper is mimetic imagery in English biblical ecodiscourse, and its subject-matter is constituted by linguistic means employed for its creation as a multidimensional verbal phenomenon.

Results and Discussion

Based on the methodology developed by O.P. Vorobyova [4], we analyze multidimensional spacial mimetic images used in biblical narrations taken from Genesis and Exodus of Old Testament [19] through three projections: preparatory, instructive, and executional.

At the preparatory stage of construing a multidimensional mimetic image, its spatial locus in biblical narrations is highlighted, which shows where and how the biblical event will unfold. In Exodus it describes the exodus of the Israelites from Egypt through the desert to the Sinai mount. The latter does not only symbolize the emergence of God, but also outlines a new spiritual dimension of the relationships between God and man. The top and bottom of the mountain are presented as markers of space delimitation and, at the same time, unification of heavenly and earthly beings. In the story of the fall in Genesis such a preparatory stage of mimetic imagery construal points to the space of the Garden of Eden, focusing upon the tree of knowledge of good and evil as the spatial and narrative-conceptual centre of events.

Next stage of creating a multidimensional mimetic biblical imagery, which involves its instructive projection, depicts such a spatial arrangement of objects that iconically reproduces the boundaries of permitted and not permitted (e.g., God asked to set bounds around the mountain - people cannot cross the borders of the mountain in order not to be stoned).

Finally, the executional projection as the bases for a closing procedure of creating a multidimensional mimetic biblical imagery provides a spatial arrangement of the characters, depending on their fulfillment or violation of God's commandments.

Sensory and spatial imagery in Exodus is grounded in classical mimesis with its three projections, when the effect of the narrative depth and volume is created with the help of various means of space designation. Here belongs the description of Lord, Moses and the Israelites changing their location with regard to the narration's pivot - Mount Sinai. The latter symbolizes the appearance of God and God's covenant with Israel for regulating Israelites' way oflife.

According to the book of Exodus, on having left the land of Egypt, the children of Israel travelled through the desert for three months and finally camped in front of the mountain - “2. there Israel camped before the mount” (Ex 19:2). To create the illusion of visual perspective the respective biblical narration describes the Lord addressing Moses from the top of the mountain (out of the mountain) while the latter, in his turn, ascended the mountain (went up): “3. And Moses went up unto God, and the LORD called unto him out of the mountain” (Ex 19: 3). From this perspective God's actions and His care for Israelites are compared to the protection of eagles' wings: “4. how I bare you on eagles' wings, and brought you unto myself' (Ex 19: 4), when He hopes for their obedience (will obey my voice; keep my covenant) as His greatest treasure (a peculiar treasure): “5. if you will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth is mine” (Ex 19: 5). The whole scene is perceived as a preparation for something very important - the appearance of God in front of the people. That is why Lord's address to those who are at the bottom of the mountain, through Moses as a mediator, may be regarded as a preparatory projection in creating the respective mimetic imagery, i.e. the projection of the people's preparation for the acquisition of God's knowledge.

The next address of Lord to Moses and to people through Moses is realized through the instructive projection of space imagery. By the end of the conversation between God and Moses the latter is still on top of the mountain, further coming down to the people: “14. Moses went down from the mount unto the people” (Ex 19: 14). The illusion of the verbal picture's narrative depth is achieved through spatial arrangement of Moses and people. He gives instructions to the children of Israel: they should be placed at the foot of the mountain (upon mount Sinai) to observe the appearance of God in majesty on mount Sinai (will come down): “11. the LORD will come down in the sight of all people upon mount Sinai” (Ex 19: 11), which is emphasized by the image of natural phenomenon - a thick cloud: “9.1 come unto thee in a thick cloud, that the people may hear when I speak with thee” (Ex 19: 9). The cloud ought to point to the people the place of the Lord on the mountain and prepare them to be ready to hear His voice (thepeople may hear). They were supposed to come to the mountain after the signal of a trumpet: “13. when the trumphet soundeth long, they shall come up to the mountain” (Ex 19: 13) and hear the voice of God. Here sensory imagery comes into play. The idea of the inviolability of the holy mountain is intensified by the expression set bounds round about: “12.And thou shalt set bounds unto the people round about” (Ex 19: 12), further supported by the phrases with the semantics of warning (take heed; go not up into the mount; not touch the border ofit) and death (shall be surelyput to death; shall surely be stoned or shot; shall not live). It proves the Israelites' obedience to the Lord and their readiness to follow God's instructions.

The executional projection combines the two previous ones. At the beginning of the story people camped in front of the mountain gathered at its foot (at the nether part of the mount), waiting for the appearance of the Lord to get His commandments. Spatial arrangement of the participants - the Lord, Moses and the children of Israel - comes to the following. The Lord descended to the people from the heavens to the top of the mountain (descended upon; the top of the mount) in fire, which demonstrated an extraordinary character of the event: “18. the LORD descended upon it in fire ” (Ex 19: 18), “20. And the LORD went down upon mount Sinai, on the top of the mount” (Ex 19: 20). Sensory images (fire, a thick cloud, mount Sinai in smoke) and sound effects (a loud signal of trumpet, thunder and lightning)jointly create the mimetic imagery of God's emergence at the Sinai mount - “16. There were thunders and lightnings, and a thick cloud upon the mount, and the voice ofthe trumpet exceeding loud” (Ex 19: 16).

Finally, Moses descending from the Lord's location (went down unto the people), announced to the people the gist of God's speech concerning the Covenant, which laid down the rules for regulating human way of life.

Thus, mountain functions here as the central spatial image that, together with the accompanying sensory and spatial imagery, creates the effect of multidimensionality. Israelites obeyed all God's commandments: they had a ritual of sanctification and obedience to Lord (none of the Israeli people violated the rules and crossed the boundary around the mountain); they obeyed the orders of the Lord (washed clothes, abstained from coming to women) and, thus, they were ready to hear the Lord's speech.

In addition to classical mimesis, deep semantics of narration and the relationship between characters can be revealed by means of dialogic mimesis demonstrated by imitation and mimetic distorted phrases with manipulative purpose [10]. Let's describe the space of the story of the fall in Genesis as a multidimensional image of the Garden of Eden based on dialogic mimesis.

The preparatory projection stage of the narration is localized in a certain closed space, namely the Garden of Eden: “8. God planted a garden eastward in Eden” (Gen 2: 8), “16. every tree of the garden” (Gen 2: 16). It is indicated with the following lexical units: eastward, in Eden, every tree. The locus of the closed space is characterized through the description of the river watering the trees in the garden (to water the garden) and, at the same time, going out of the Garden of Eden with four heads connecting the outer space of the environment. That is why the spatial locus of the Garden of Eden symbolizes the ideal, harmonious world opposed to the initial chaos (Gen 2: 5-6).

At this stage two trees (the tree of life and the tree of knowledge of good and evil) function as the central spatial image of the Garden of Eden: “9. the tree oflife also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil” (Gen 2: 9).

The preparatory projection points to a condition for the realization of the instructive projection that outlines a spatial arrangement of the characters, depending on their violation of God's commandment not to eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil: “17. But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it” (Gen 2: 17) and becomes the narrative focus of the realization of the fall story.

The executional projection is also connected with the spatial locus of the deployment of events, because the fall is in disobeying God's prohibition against eating fruits of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. As soon as the first sinners, Adam and Eve, ate the fruit of the tree, their eyes opened (the eyes of them both were opened) and they saw that they were naked (they knew that they were naked; they sewedfig leaves). At this point the idea of committed sin and disobedience arose as a result of uncertainty and shame (hid; was naked), cowardice (Adam and his wife hid themselves; I (Adam) was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself) and obedience to temptation (beguiled) and, of course, it leads to a sense of separation from God - spatial, associated with expulsion of people from the closed space (the Garden of Eden), as well as spiritual.

During Eve's temptation by the Serpent, the latter pronounces the original statement of the Lord imitating it (of every tree of the garden, of the trees of the garden). The significance of God's statement repetition is based on various modal verbs - shall with the particle not and may. In the first example it points out on a mimetic order phrase - not eat of every tree of the garden, it was likely a push for Eve to answer. In the second example, it sounds like a possibility to eat fruit of the trees of the garden: “16. LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat” (Gen 2: 16); He (the serpent) “1. said unto the woman: hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?” (Gen 3: 1); “2. And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden” (Gen 3: 2).

The purpose of the mimetic strategy repetition in the story of fall in Genesis is to influence subconsciously on the interlocutor (Eve) through the use of a provocative question as a manipulative, considered in advance speech act. Eve repeats the statement using an affirmative form of the sentence (We may eat of thefruit of the trees of the garden). Continuing the conversation, Eve specifies why and of which tree it is impossible to eat fruit and thus her next phrase (expanded response phrase) becomes a push to the temptation: “3. But of thefruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat ofit, neither shallye touch it, lestye die” (Gen 3:3).

The response phrase for the Serpent was necessary to provoke Eve changing the modality of her expanded response phrase (Ye shall not surely die): “4. And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die” (Gen 3: 4) explaining why the fruit can be eaten and what they can await after that (your eyes shall be open, ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evit). That is, people will be free, they will become like the gods, they will know new moral categories of good and evil.

As a result, Eve's attitude to God's commandment has changed because she followed her instincts and desires, and neglected her Creator's prohibition (LORD God commanded the man) not to eat fruit from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Relying on R. Girard's theory of mimetic desire [5; 21], the desire includes not only the subject (one who wishes) and the object (what is desirable), but also the mediator who wishes to possess a particular object. The mediator is an example for imitation, so the subject wishes this particular object. The mediator unites the subject and the object of desire, so the latter is always tripartite [7, p. 205]. Thus, in the biblical narration of the fall Eve is the subject of desire, the Serpent is a mediator, and fruit is the object.

Initial ecological relations God - man (Adam) points out on the obedient fulfillment of God's commandments, following relations Eve - the Serpent show a conflict situation and attitude to God, and at last - the reaction of man (Eve and Adam) to eat fruit or not, which determined the end of the narration.

Conclusion

The research proves that mimetic imagery involves sensory and spatial images, sound effects, classic and dialogic mimesis, which create the effect of multidimensionality through three projections in the space of biblical narrations.

It helps to reveal the hidden senses of biblical narrations in Genesis and Exodus, representing new perspectives for understanding the importance of mount Sinai and the Garden of Eden, the tree of knowledge of good and evil, relationships with God for the future life on the Earth. Each part of respective biblical story contains information about the whole providing information to reproduce the whole narrative, and each individual episode of the narration reveals the content of previous one, providing information to reproduce the complete narrative, thus explaining it.

Perspective studies are connected with the issues of narrative mechanisms of creating imagery which reveals the relationships between people in English biblical ecodiscourse.

References

1. Ауэрбах Э. Мимесис: изображение действительности в западноевропейской литературе. Москва, 1976. 556 с.

2. Белкин А.С. Основы возрастной педагогики: учеб, пособ. Москва, 2000. 192 с.

3. Вейдле В.В. Эмбриология поэзии: статьи по поэтике и теории искусства. Москва, 2002. 456 с.

4. Воробьева О.П. Словесная голография в пейзажном дискурсе Вирджинии Вулф: модусы, фракталы, фузии. Когниция, коммуникация, дискурс. 2010. №1.С. 47-74.

5. Жирар Р. Насилие и священное. Москва, 2000. 400 с.

6. Качалова Л.П. Метод голографического подхода и процесс интеграции психолого-педагогических знаний будущего учителя. Интеграция образования. 1999. № 4. С. 27-30.

7. Кострова Е.А. Теория священного в работе Рене Жирара «Насилие и священное». Религиоведческие исследования. 2010. № 3-4. С. 204-209.

8. Менегетти А. Онтопсихологическая педагогика / пер. с итал. Д.Ю. Петров. Пермь, 1993. 72 с. URL: http://royallib.rU/read/menegetti_antonio/ontopsihologicheskaya_pedagogika.html#61440.

9. Москвин В.П. Выразительные средства современной русской речи: тропы и фигуры: терминологический словарь. Ростов-на-Дону, 2007. 940 с.

10. Пивоварова Э.Ю. Границы мимезиса. Роль мимезиса в создании конфликтного диалога. Мова та міжкультурна комунікація: II Міжнародна науково-практична конференція. (Дніпропетровськ, 28-29 листопада 2012 р.). Дніпропетровськ, 2012. С. 72-77. URL: http://www.confcontact.com/2012_ll_28/7_pivovarova.htm.

11. Пивоварова Э.Ю. Мимезис в современном англоязычном драматургическом тексте: коммуникативнофункциональный и стилистический аспекты: дисс.... канд. филол. наук: 10.02.04. Ростов-на-Дону, 2014. 198 с.

12. Суворова Т.Н. Голограмма как эффект контрапунктной организации системы словесных образов баллады. Известия Гомельского государственного университета имени Ф. Скорины. 2014. № 4 (85). С. 148-152.

13. Табанакова В.Д., Лапчинская Т.Н. Лингводидакгическая интерпретация голографической модели текста немецкого короткого рассказа. Вестник Тюменского государственного университета. 2009. №1.С. 222-227.

14. Философия: энциклопедический словарь / под ред. А.А. Ивина. Москва: Гардарики, 2004. 1072 с. URL: http://www.terme.ru/dictionary/187/word/mimesis.

15. ШиринаЕ.В. Мимезис какособыйвидповторачужойречи: автореф. дисс.... канд. филол. наук: спец. 10.02.01. Ростов-на-Дону, 1990. 19 с.

16. Шувалов В.И. Метафора в лексической системе немецкого языка: автореф. дисс.... докт. филол. наук: спец. 10.02.04. Москва, 2006. 36 с.

17. Эстетика: словарь. / под общ. ред. А.А. Беляева и др. Москва: Политиздат, 1989. 447 с. URL: http://www.terme.ru/ dictionary/706/word/mimesis.

18. American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language. Houghton Mifflin Company, 2009. URL: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/.

19. The Holy Bible. King James Version. New York: Ivy Books, 1991. 1112 p.

20. Billette S. Mimetic Learning at Work: Learning inthe Circumstances ofPractice. London, New York, 2014. 110 p.

21. Golsan R. Rene Girard and Myth: an introduction. New York, London, 2002. 237 p.

22. LanhamR.A. Handlist ofRhetorical Terms: a Guide for Students ofEnglishLiterature. London, 1991. 205 p.

23. Potolsky M. Mimesis. New York, London, 2006. 177 p.

24. ReichH. DerMimus. Berlin, 1903. 900 p.

25. Riffaterre M. Intertextual representation: on mimesis as interpretive discourse. Critical Inquiry. Chicago, 1984. Vol. 11, № 1. P. 141-162. URL http://ru.scribd.eom/doc/104760387/M-Riffaterre-Intertextual-Representation-On-Mimesis-asInterpretive-Discourse.

Summary

verbal mimetic imagery biblical

O. ZHYKHARIEVA. MIMETIC IMAGERY IN ENGLISH BIBLICAL ECODISCOURSE

This paper focuses on verbal means which create mimetic imagery and highlights the mechanisms of its generation in English biblical ecodiscourse. The research proves that sensory and spatial images and sound effects create a powerful, ecologically charged multilayerthree-projection mimetic imagery inbiblical narrations.

Key words: biblical ecodiscourse, biblical narration, mimetic imagery, sensory and spatial images.

Анотація

О. ЖИХАРЄВА. МІМЕТИЧНА ОБРАЗНІСТЬ В АНГЛОМОВНОМУ БІБЛІЙНОМУ ЕКОДИСКУРСІ

Дослідження пов'язане з виявленням вербальних засобів, за допомогою яких створюється міметична образність і механізми її породження в англомовному біблійному екодискурсі. Для розкриття міметичної образності було залучено сенсорні і просторові образи, звукові ефекти, які створюють потужну, екологічно заряджену багатошарову трипроекційну міметичну образність у просторі біблійних нарацій.

Ключові слова: біблійний екодискурс, біблійна нарація, міметична образність, сенсорно-просторові образи.

Аннотация

Е. ЖИХАРЕВА. МИМЕТИЧЕСКАЯ ОБРАЗНОСТЬ В АНГЛОЯЗЫЧНОМ БИБЛЕЙСКОМ ДИСКУРСЕ

Исследование основано на выявлении вербальных средств, с помощью которых создается миметическая образность и механизмы ее порождения в англоязычном библейском экодискурсе. Для раскрытия миметической образности были задействованы сенсорные и пространственные образы, звуковые эффекты, формирующие мощную, экологически заряженную многомерную трехпроекционную миметическую образность в пространстве библейских нарраций.

Ключевые слова: библейский экодискурс, библейская наррация, миметическая образность, сенсорно-пространственные образы.

Размещено на Allbest.ru