Abstract
Background. The onym dimension of artistic expression undergoes noticeable transformations under the influence of important historical events. The armed aggression of the Russian Federation, which began in 2014, and especially its full-scale period, could not help but affect the mentality of Ukrainians, and their literary creativity, and, accordingly, the selection, organisation and coding / recoding of linguistic means in lyrical texts.Contribution to the research field. The author’s scientific interests are focused on literary onomastics and the study of changes in the Ukrainian discourse of the modern era. The analysis of toponyms in the Ukrainian poetic discourse of the period of the full-scale armed aggression of the Russian Federation has not yet been the subject of close research attention. These findings raise intriguing questions regarding the extent of society’s diverse speech response to the colossal tragedy.Purpose. The purpose of this research is to investigate the peculiarities of the development of toponymy in modern poetic discourse using the example of the latest constructions of military dimension.Methods. The article uses the sampling method, method of classification description, comparative-semantic method and contextual-interpretive analysis.Results. Modern poetic discourse has significantly expanded its placename dimension with the latest markers of the Russian-Ukrainian war, which are structured into the opposition “own – enemy” / “own – foreign.” The appearance of such precedent units is determined by an extralinguistic factor, and their choice is determined by the authors’ artistic guidelines and the personal perception peculiarities of the tragedy. The highest productivity in the construction of military dimension is shown by oeconyms represented by the largest number of lexemes denoting the places of hostilities (Bakhmut, Beryslav, Burluk, Bucha, Borodianka, Brovary, Volnovakha, Vorzel, Horenka, Hostomel, Enerhodar, Izium, Irpin, Kakhovka, Kyiv, Konotop, Kramatorsk, Kupiansk, Manhush, Mariupol, Mariinka, Mykolaiv, Moschun, Olenivka, Oleshky, Okhtyrka, Romanivka, Soledar, Kharkiv, Kherson, Chernihiv, Shchastia, etc.), rear (Lviv, Chernivtsi, Uzhhorod, Ivano-Frankivsk, Ternopil), places where the enemy is located (Perm, Irkutsk, Rostov) and places where refugees are sheltering (Krakow, Warsaw, Lisbon, Cascais). It is natural that the toponymic constructs of the military dimension consistently actualize the semantics of martyrdom, suffering, and death, often against the background of sacralization.Discussion. We see research prospects in the continuation of the study of the open toponymic dimension of modern Ukrainian poetry as a powerful construct of the artistic understanding of war.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.