Syntactic deviation as a communicative strategy of the narrator in Feodosy Pechersky’s teachings
https://doi.org/10.26907/2782-4756-2026-84-2-58-63
Abstract
The article examines the use of a construction, found in the texts of Feodosiy Pechersky’s Old Russian teachings, which can be defined as syntactic deviation (using a predicate in the form of the 1st person plural of the present/simple future tense instead of the expected imperative of the 2nd person plural). This technique, intentionally used by the narrator (“addresser”), allows not only drawing the listener’s (“addressee’s”) attention to the expression of the text’s communicative task, but also integrating it into the overall syntactic perspective of the unfolding text of the Old Russian teaching, which implements the “we” communicative model. This model is the most common one in the texts of Old Russian teachings, as it allows the narrator to avoid separating themselves from the listeners and emphasize the idea of shared salvation. The repeated use of the construction in the texts of the one narrator’s teachings allows us to recognize it as a feature of his idiosyncrasy and consider it as a special method of conveying the author’s idea. The consolidation of this syntactic construction in the teachings of Feodosiy Pechersky allows us to talk about its status as a speech formula. This is supported by the lexical and grammatical means of organizing the utterance. Thus, we can recognize this construction as an element of the given structure of the Old Russian text.
About the Author
K. A. Kalinin
Naberezhnye Chelny State Pedagogical University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Kalinin Konstantin Andreevich, Ph.D. in Philology, Acting Head of the Department of Russian and Tatar Philology
28 Nizametdinov R. M. Str., Naberezhnye Chelny, 423806
References
1. Uzhankov, A. N. (2022). Kartina mira drevnerusskogo knizhnika. Kategorii russkoj srednevekovoj kul'tury [The Worldview of the Old Russian Bookman. Categories of Russian Medieval Culture]. 212 p. Moscow, Institut Naslediya. (In Russian)
2. Antonova, M. V. (2011). Drevnerusskoe poslanie XI–XIII vekov: poetika zhanra [Old Russian Letters of the 11th–13th Centuries: The Genre Poetics]. 357 p. Bryansk, Kursiv. (In Russian)
3. Eremin, I. P. (1947). Literaturnoe nasledie Feodosiya Pecherskogo [The Literary Legacy of Feodosiy Pechersky]. TODRL. No. 5, pp. 167–184. Moscow, Leningrad. (In Russian)
4. Vaulina, S. S., Serganova, D. A. (2021). Modal'nost' kak sposob raskrytiya lichnosti avtora pamyatnika drevnerusskoi pis'mennosti “Pouchenie Vladimira Monomaha” [Modality as a Way of Revealing the Personality of the Author of the Monument of Old Russian Literature “Vladimir Monomakh’s Instruction”]. Vestnik Baltiiskogo federal'nogo universiteta im. I. Kanta. Seriya: Filologiya, pedagogika, psihologiya. No. 1, pp. 12–18. (In Russian)
5. Serganova, D. A. (2022). Pobuditel'nost' kak klyuchevoi komponent avtorskoi modal'nosti v drevnerusskoi oratorskoi proze XI–XIII vekov [Persuasiveness as a Key Component of the Author's Modality in Old Russian Oratorical Prose of the 11th–13th Centuries]. Aktual'nye voprosy sovremennoi filologii i zhurnalistiki. No. 3(46), pp. 72–77. (In Russian)
6. Kuznetsov, I. V. (2009). Ritoricheskie strategii literaturnogo diskursa (na materiale russkoi slovesnosti XI–XIX vv.): avtoref. dis. d-ra. filol. nauk [Historical Strategies of Literary Discourse (Based on Russian Literature of the 11th–19th Centuries): Doctoral Thesis Abstract]. Moscow, 43 p. (In Russian)
7. Rakhimkulova, G. F. (2003). Sintaksicheskii sboi v proze V. Nabokova i ego igrovye funktsii [Syntactic Failure in V. Nabokov’s Prose and Its Play Functions]. Izvestiya vysshikh uchebnykh zavedenii. SeveroKavkazskii region. Obshchestvennye nauki. No. 2(122), pp. 102–105. (In Russian)
8. Ovchinnikova, I. G. (2018). Sintagmaticheskie sboi v russkoi rechi: interpretatsiya v svete aktual'nykh modelei mental'nogo leksikona [Syntagmatic Failures in Russian Speech: Interpretation in the Light of Current Models of the Mental Lexicon]. Voprosy psiholingvistiki. No. 36, pp. 84–98. (In Russian)
9. Kalinin, K. A. (2023). Zadannaya struktura drevnerusskih pouchenij XI–XIII vv. v svete teorii slovesnyh ryadov teksta [The Structure of Old Russian Teachings of the 11th–13th Centuries in the Light of the Theory of Word Series in the Text]. Vestnik Literaturnogo instituta im. A. M. Gor'kogo. No. 2–3, pp. 104–113. (In Russian)
10. Konyavskaya, E. L. (2000). Avtorskoe samosoznanie drevnerusskogo knizhnika (XI – seredina XV v.) [The Author’s Self-Awareness of the Old Russian Scribe (the 11th– mid-15th century)]. 199 p. Moscow, Yazyki russkoi kul'tury. (In Russian)
11. Kolesov, V. V. (2026). Slovo i tekst v drevnerusskoi traditsii [Word and Text in the Old Russian Tradition]. Drevnerusskii literaturnyi yazyk. Pp. 275–296. Moscow, Yurait. (In Russian)
12. Kalinin, K. A., Kolesnikova, S. M. (2026). Spetsifika kommunikativnoi organizatsii teksta drevnerusskikh pouchenii [The Specificity of the Communicative Organization of the Text of Old Russian Teachings]. Prepodavatel' XXI vek. No. 1, No. 2, pp. 362–371. (In Russian)
13. Papyan, Yu. M. (2005). Otbor i organizatsiya yazykovogo materiala (k probleme kategorii stilistiki teksta) [Selection and Organization of Linguistic Material (on the text stylistics categories)]. Vestnik Literaturnogo instituta imeni A. M. Gor'kogo. No. 2, pp. 60–74. (In Russian)
14. Petrenko, E. A. (2011). Kommunikativnye strategii i taktiki drevnerusskogo knizhnika i strategii ikh realizatsii v “Povesti o Varlaame i Ioasafe”: avtoref. dis. kand. filol. nauk [Communicative Strategies and Tactics of the Old Russian Scribe and Their Implementation Strategies in “The Tale of Varlaam and Joasaph”: Ph.D. Thesis Abstract ]. Vladivostok, 25 p. (In Russian)
Review
For citations:
Kalinin K.A. Syntactic deviation as a communicative strategy of the narrator in Feodosy Pechersky’s teachings. Philology and Culture. 2026;(2):58-53. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.26907/2782-4756-2026-84-2-58-63
Views:
35
JATS XML
Email this article 