Phenomenological Aspects of Structuralist Literary Studies by Vladimir Toporov

The article is devoted to Vladimir Toporov, the largest representative of Russian semiotic culturology. In his works, Toporov went beyond the framework of classical structuralism and approached post-structuralism. The article poses the problem of how knowledge of poststructuralist theory can help understanding Toporov's statements. In the “Introduction”, it is proved that Toporov borrowed a lot from Husserl's phenomenological method, and, in this, he is similar to Jacques Derrida, who also created original methods and approaches by combining structuralism and phenomenology. The article provides numerous examples of how the searches of Derrida and Toporov went in parallel, and how, when the goals were different, they came to similar results that have methodological significance for today's literary criticism. The question includes the analysis of such concepts as “place”, “symbol”, “meaning”, “origin”, “etymology” in Toporov's system in their interrelation and correlation with the achievements of French post-structuralism. In the section “From the Linguistic to the Symbolic,” it is proved that Toporov understood linguistics as a general method of the humanities, including clarification of the limits of symbolisation in other sciences. In the section “Places of Symbolisation,” it is proved that Toporov, in the analysis of the novel genre, brought together the topic of the novel and the system of geographical places. In the section “Problematisation of Syntagmatics and Paradigmatics,” it is proved that Toporov metacriticised the syntax and basic compositional organisation of text, which is significant not only for linguistics, but also for methods of literary history. In the section “Toporov's Arguments,” it is proved that Toporov approved as a matter of course the most important provisions of the twentiethcentury continental philosophy from Heidegger to Derrida, for example, on the priority of difference over identity. All these Toporov's achievements are becoming clearer if to consider them in the context of the development of European post-structuralism (it was closer to literary criticism), which will help enrich the literary methods. The last section of the article, “The Reason for the Proximity of Derrida's and Toporov's Positions,” indicates how both researchers understood the ethical and epistemological background of the humanities, and proves that the concept of the widely understood “duty” lies at the heart of literature interpretations by both thinkers. This has made it possible to draw conclusions that the interpretation of intention and text, which Toporov gives, is a creative development of phenomenology comparable to Derrida's project, and can be further used in the study of philosophical conclusions from a literary text.

Keywords

Authors

References