Religiously Marked Allusions as Knowledge Structures Activators

Full Text

Religiously marked allusion is an indirect reference to the precedent religious text accumulate information base in relation to the referent in large or small scales. The implicit information encrypted in the semantic construct of the religiously marked allusions (henceforth RMA) presuppose activation of knowledge structures respectively. When RMAs are on the spotlight of a linguistic research, inextricably linked interrelation between information and knowledge is of huge significance to be studied.

A primary function of any text is to impart and deliver certain information to its addressee. Up until recent the term “information” has been at the center of the research interests of exact, humanitarian and social sciences. In its broadest sense, information, [lat. ınformatio – information, enlightenment] – 1) knowledge obtained from investigation, study, or instruction; 2) Intelligence, news, facts, data; 3) the attribute inherent in and communicated by one of two or more alternative sequences or arrangements of something that produce specific effects (MWD); 4) facts provided or learned about something or someone and/or what is conveyed or represented by a particular arrangement or sequence of things (OLD). Information about the world is one of the core investigative objects of Cognitive linguistics. Cognitive approach to the term admits information as mental phenomenon, acquired in the experience of cognizing the world, during the perception and generalization of this experience (КСКТ 1997). In general, information refers to all those data that come to a person from the outside through various sensory-perceptual and sensory-motor channels, as well as to those data that have already been processed by the central nervous system, internalized and reinterpreted by a person and presented in his/her cognition in the form of mental representations.

Information about the world is one of the core investigative objects of Cognitive linguistics. Cognitive approach to the term regards information as a mental phenomenon, acquired in the experience of cognizing the world, during the perception and generalization of this experience (КСКТ 1996). J. Fodor defines information as an “internal code” (Fodor 1975); G. Miller and P.N. Johnson-Laird understand mental information as a “conceptual structure” (Miller, Johnson-Laird 1976); Mental information encompasses various mental spaces, the content of which can be both information about the real world and about plans, beliefs, intentions, etc. Information in the literary text is differently outlined owing to its pragmatic functions. Literary texts, according to V.I. Tupa, “are not directly addressed to our consciousness, ... but through our inner vision, our inner audition and ... inner comprehension of literary works” (Tupa 2002:8). The hidden meaning of such a text must be decoded, relying on intuition, knowledge structures, and experience. In every literary text, behind the depicted scenes there is always a subtext – internal, imaginatively implied meaning that is not verbally externalized (Ахманова 2007:331).

As has been stated above, RMAs convey religious information and only those who have religious knowledge are capable of decoding and interpreting the context and content that the RMA is presented. So this all stands for the fact that the term “information” is closely connected to the term “knowledge”. In fact, information presented in the structured form, i.e. blocks of information is called knowledge structures. This way the term knowledge structures was introduced in the science entailing blocks of information containing a system of interrelated concepts. The phenomenon of knowledge is studied in different sciences in various directions and aspects of its existence and functioning. Knowledge is one of the most essential notions of cognitive linguistics and thus, its formation, storage, representation and types are comprehensively studied within this science. Cognitive linguistics is a science that focuses on language as a cognitive mechanism. According to the cognitivists, knowledge is the result of cognition and categorization of the elements, objects or any other phenomena of different kinds; it is an adequate reflection of reality in the human mind; a product of processing verbal and non-verbal experience that forms “the image of the world”, on the basis of which one can make his/her own inferences (Герасимов, Петров 1988: 14). According to the short dictionary of cognitive terms compiled by E.S. Kubryakova, among the most important questions, the followings are scrutinized within cognitive linguistics: a) what causes the emergence of knowledge: patterns objectively existing in the world or subjective vision of the world by an individual; b) how the growth of knowledge and its progress take place; c) what types of knowledge can be distinguished and put in opposition to each other (empirical and rational knowledge; procedural and declarative; linguistic (verbal) and non-linguistic, extralinguistic, non-verbal; etc.); d) what mechanisms and/or procedures characterize the acquisition of knowledge and during what processes it arises (on the one hand, induction and deduction, inferences, reasoning, etc.; on the other hand, operations involving comparison, identification, recognition, categorization and classification of objects, associations and associative linking of units); e) in what form, where and in what structures knowledge is represented in the human mind, what knowledge representation systems exist in it and how they interact with each other (for example, among different knowledge representation structures, frames, scripts, propositions can be outlined, and among systems of knowledge memory, mental lexicon, conceptual structure can be outlined); f) the question of the use of knowledge in the processes of thinking and speaking (КСКТ 1996). E.S. Kubryakova points out that the language system should be understood as a projection “cognized by man, as a reflex of his thinking about the world and about language, as a set of means that serve to describe all this. Knowledge about the language and knowledge of the language presupposes the allocation of different units and categories as components of the system. They mediate its role (i.e. language) in understanding the world and in fixing the structures of experience and knowledge, opinions and evaluations, ... and the possibility of operating with them in the human mind” (Kubryakova, 2004: 22-23). Knowledge is stored in the human mind by means of concepts, which in their turn are represented by frames, scenarios, scripts, image, propositional schemas, and other cognitive structures (Ashurova, Galieva 2016).

One of the essential subject matters of Cognitive linguistics is the classification of knowledge structures. Among different attempts dedicated to the matter of grouping knowledge structures, it is of expedient importance to highlight the one made by N.N. Boldyrev. According to him, a) knowledge about linguistic forms, their meanings as well as categories, and knowledge of linguistic units and categories that serve to interpret the conceptual content, and b) knowledge about the objects and phenomena exist (Boldyrev, 2006). Synthesizing the theoretical literature on the classification of knowledge structures, it can be subsumed that knowledge structures basically fall under two main types: linguistic and extra linguistic knowledge structures. Linguistic knowledge refers to the totality of knowledge about language and its aspects (phonology, syntax, semantics and etc.). Non-linguistic knowledge, according to V.I. Gerasimov and V.V. Petrov, is subdivided into encyclopedic (general knowledge about different aspects of life, i.e. history, politics, geography and many more), communicative ( knowledge of communicative aims, intentions, setting, communicants, speech acts and their realization in the communicative situation) and cultural (knowledge about literature, art, values, customs, traditions, religion, mythology, beliefs and others) knowledge structures (Герасимов, Петров 1988). In the literary textual communication, knowledge is of a specific character. It includes knowledge about the author and his intentions, knowledge about the personages and their intentions in textual situations (Ashurova, Galieva 2016).

It is of interest to note that most of the specific types of knowledge structures can be presented in opposition:

• The first classification in the most general form represents the division of knowledge into scientific (includes knowledge of philosophical, economic, natural and humanitarian character) and non-scientific (ordinary, everyday) type.
• The distinction between declarative and procedural knowledge. Declarative knowledge is knowledge about something, manifested at the level of verbal description. Procedural knowledge is knowledge of how to do something, it manifests itself at the level of real action.
• Collective and individual knowledge structures are distinguished. Collective knowledge structures embrace knowledge shared by a definite group of people and thus regarded as collective property. Individual knowledge structures comprise personal qualitative and quantitative features of collective knowledge as they accumulate on the basis of collective knowledge that is specifically perceived by an individual.
• Empirical and rationale knowledge structures are put in opposition. Empirical knowledge is derived from investigations, observations, experimentation and experience. According to empiricists, the decisive role in the process of conceptualizing the world is a lifetime experience, on the basis of which knowledge is formed. Rationale knowledge is deduced from theoretical assumptions.
• Universal and nationally specific knowledge structures are differentiated. Universal knowledge structures entail the totality of knowledge that is commonly known to peoples across counties. Nationally specific knowledge structures are specifically known to a certain ethnic community.
• Objective and subjective knowledge structures are discerned Objective knowledge structures encompass the information base that is unbiased, verified and provable. Subjective knowledge structures constitute the knowledge that is acquired on the basis of the evaluation made over certain objects, people or situations.
• Knowledge can be old and new. As is well-know, new knowledge is usually acquired on the basis of the old one or in other words, becomes to some extent, predictable at the background of old knowledge (cited from Ashurova, Galieva 2018).

It should be stressed that for the analysis of RMAs the following types of knowledge structures are the most relevant: linguistic (word, word combination, phraseological unit, text fragment) and non-linguistic, specifically, religious, old and new, objective and subjective (evaluative), individual and collective knowledge structures. It is worthy of emphasis that the oppositions between old and new knowledge structures, or even contradictions between collective and individual knowledge structures can be observed in RMAs . This all is conditioned by the fact that the author describes the events from his/her own perspectives, which inevitably gets enriched with his subjective modality.

To justify the emergence of these oppositions we intend to present the analysis of the story “Judgment Seat” by Somerset Maugham.

The factual information of the story is that the main personages of the story John, Mary and Ruth live a life full of physical and mental tortures in hope of heavenly rewarding in compensation to their tolerance. Mary who once loved and respected her husband loses her trust in him after finding out about his infidelities with Ruth and can never forgive him for his betrayal and herself for being so fragile and scared of being deserted by him. John, a man of dignity, though passionately loves another woman, does not abandon his wife only because he has no another way out as a real Christian gentleman. Ruth, John's beloved, does not dare to be in relation with a married man and directs herself to charitable works. At a glance, they all seem to be living in accordance with the recorded deeds of good in the sacred texts and unwritten rules of the society. At last, when their lives were accidentally swept away, they feel sense of relief and hope to rest in peace forever. Now when they found themselves in the Judgment seat their bodiless souls were full of satisfaction to have got ridden of unhappy life behind. Each of them is certain to be rewarded accordingly by the Lord, since they did not commit sin – did not betray the family, society and belief. However, God's will and judgment goes beyond their expectations, and they were punished instead of being rewarded: “The Eternal annihilated them”.

The story beholds people's stereotyped views of socio-religious character, and to explicate it, the dominant concept around which the sequences of events are constructed should be revealed. The title of the story and the repetition of the phrase “Judgment seat” via the means of foregrounding (coupling) throughout the story, makes it the dominant concept of the story that is externalized via a RMA referring to the religious event recorded about in some holy scriptures. To decode the conceptual information (the author's message) behind the RMA, the religious event is to be enlivened in its whole spectrum, as the lack of religious knowledge puts the decipherment of the subtext at risk. So the RMA “Judgment seat” activates the old and at the same time collective religious knowledge structures about the Day of Last Judgment when all are to be tried in the presence of God and are recompensed for the good and bad deeds. Across time and space, the idea of such has been penetrated and absorbed into the lives of peoples under the influence of religious beliefs. The collective knowledge structures activated in the story entail that the personages tend to believe that those, who live not going against the rules, will be rewarded after all or vice verse: “They were decent people and they respected themselves, the beliefs in which they had been bred, and the society in which they lived. How could he betray an innocent girl, and what had she to do with a married man?” So Mary, John and Ruth are self-assured to be rewarded because they did not commit sinful acts: they remained true to the society and God: “They offered up to God, as it were a sacrifice, their hopes of happiness, the joy of life and the beauty of the world”

In the story, the RMA showcases the embodiment of the author’s individual way of visualizing the Day of Judgment. The old and collective knowledge given in the precedent text is distorted and reinterpreted by the author. As a consequence, new and knowledge of subjective (evaluative) character is presented in the analyzed story. At first glance, the new knowledge expressed by Maugham seems to be quite contradictory to the Bible. However, if we delve deeper into both the Bible and story, it can be witnessed that the essence behind each is the idea that people should be happy and the sacrifice at the expense of happiness should not be the choice. Indeed, the old knowledge structures deriving from the Bible assure that God created men to live a happy life:

“The precepts of the Lord are right, giving joy to the heart. The commands of the Lord are radiant, giving light to the eyes” (Psalm 19:8);

“Go, eat your bread with joy, and drink your wine with a merry heart, for God has already approved what you do” (Ecclesiastes 9:7);

“These things I have spoken to you, that my joy may be in you, and that your joy may be full” (John 15:11 );

“With joy you will draw water from the wells of salvation” (Isaiah 12: 3);

“A glad heart makes the face cheerful, but heartache crushes the spirit” (Proverbs 15:13).

As is understandable from the biblical verses, God wants people’s joy to be full, and so does Somerset Maugham trying to remind the readers about God’s will in the story: “He asked himself if it was for this that he had made the rising sun shine on the boundless sea and the snow glitter on the mountain tops; was it for this that the brooks sang blithely as they hastened down the hillsides and the golden corn waved in the evening breeze?” So God created all of the beauties of the world to serve for the happiness of people. The contradictions here between old and new knowledge structures may appear owing to the fact that people sometimes adhere to the unwritten rules of the society more than the Bible itself or on the other hand, this may occur due to the oblivion or misinterpretation of God’s orders (when the community on behalf of the majority misleadingly adapts biblical rules):“I have often wondered why men think I attach so much importance to sexual irregularity,” he (Lord) said. “If they read my works more attentively they would see that I have always been sympathetic to that particular form of human frailty….“I sometimes think,” said the Eternal, “that the stars never shine more brightly than when reflected in the muddy waters of a wayside ditch.” After all, the author comes up with God’s verdict and the reason why the three were punished instead of being rewarded is that they did not behold a happy life: The Eternal blew lightly, he blew as a man might blow out a lighted match, and, behold! where the three poor souls had stood – was nothing. The Eternal annihilated them

On the other hand, there is another nuance that shows the mismatch between the old/collective and new/subjective knowledge structures (the author’s individual evaluation) about “Living righteously”. As has already been evidenced above, according to the collective belief, the personages were to be rewarded for being sinless (for not betraying the family, society and religion), however, in accord with how the author evaluates the events they were punished for not doing all the good as well as charity sincerely in order to have the mercy of God: all of the personages devoted themselves to good deeds, but none did it earnestly. Ruth dedicated herself to charity to compensate the loss of her love, meanwhile she becomes stony-hearted and “Her religion was fierce and narrow; her very kindness was cruel because it was founded not on love but on reason; she became domineering, intolerant and vindictive”. John though did not betray and stayed loyal to his wife became “sullen and angry, dragged himself along the weary years waiting for the release of death. Life lost its meaning to him; he had made his effort and in conquering was conquered; the only emotion that remained with him was the unceasing, secret hatred with which he looked upon his wife. He used her with kindness and consideration; he did everything that could be expected of a man who was a Christian and a gentleman. He did his duty”. Mary who once was “a good, faithful and (it must be confessed) exceptional wife, ... could not forgive him for the sacrifice he had made for her sake. She grew acid and querulous. Despite the fact that they did not do anything wrong and turned themselves to what was assumed to be right and ordered by both the society and religion, their lives were “grey and drab” and they did not do any of their so-called “duties” heartily.

All in all, the old and collective religious knowledge structures embrace people’s already existing blocks of information about the Day of Judgment and animate this event when encountered in the story “Judgment seat”. New and individual, subjective-evaluative knowledge structures arisen by the author is the idea that people should behold a happy life and do good to each other sincerely.

In conclusion, the major points discussed and put forth in this article showcase that knowledge structures are basically grouped into linguistic (knowledge about the language, its system and forms) and non-linguistic (knowledge about the world) types. Specific types of knowledge structures can be reinterpreted and represented under the influence of the author’s individual picture of the world in the literary text. Religiously marked allusion, a reference to the precedent religious text, conveys religious information and hence knowledge structures of religious, old and new, objective and subjective-evaluative, collective and individual types are inherent in the semantic construct of RMA.

Sources

Merriam Webster Dictionary. URL: https://clck.ru/34FxcA

Oxford Learners Dictionary. URL: https://clck.ru/34Fxfr

The Holy Bible. New York: The Bible Society. The Chaucer Press Ltd., 1986. The Old Testament: 863 p., The New Testament: 338 p.

Maugham S. Judgment Seat. URL: https://clck.ru/34Fxge

About the authors

Mukhayyo R. Fayzullaeva

Author for correspondence.
Email: muhayyo.fayzullayeva.93@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-4557-912X

Candidate for PhD, Teacher, Department of Linguistics and English Literature

References

Supplementary files