Language Communications As A Way Of Expressing And Construction Of Russian Culture

Abstract

The research proceeds from the fact that language forms an instrumental and semantic layer that determines the content of consciousness and it is the basis of human existence.It becomes a universal means of cognition of social reality, symbolization of cultural values, and means of communication. Thanks to speech forms, cultural symbols acquire sacredness and appeal to the transcendent. But under the influence of secularization processes, the idea of the sacred-transcendent partially loses its relevance, which turns out to be a prerequisite for the degradation of language and culture in some areas of social existence. The existence of the word in Russian culture is not completely subordinated to this trend.Its originality, to the greatest extent, is expressed by verbal communication, which is characterized by an extremely multi-vector orientation. Through the word, polylogue occurs both within the cultural space and between cultures; it interacts with natural and transcendent reality. In religious Russian culture, where "God is the Word", the Word has an all-encompassing character: the whole world is the Word. Being a word within a Word, a person is a carrier of not only secular, but also sacred meanings. A person enters into a dialogue with the Word as an objective-subjective reality. And the transcendent and secular word lives, to a certain extent, its own life, presenting itself as a self-sufficient word-monad. The word appears as a "living tissue" of the Russian cosmos.

Keywords: CommunicationculturelanguageRussian culturesacredverbal

Introduction

All practical life activity of a person is determined by their language culture. The impact of language is so universal that it is difficult to say with any certainty whether it is a priori ability or a person acquires it as a result of socio-cultural development of reality. We can only say with certainty that a person's awareness of his own being, of the Other's being, is largely determined by language capabilities. Language provides the necessary conditions and means for a person to overcome the limitations of their individualistic experience, go beyond it and realize their cognitive, communicative, and personal needs.

History provides a lot of evidence of the close intertwining of language and culture, as a result of which changes in one lead to changes in the other. This correlation persists today. The speech is filled with a large number of new terms, but at the same time some of the words, on the contrary, disappear, the style and content of communication changes. In parallel, radical changes are taking place in the culture, which in some of its manifestations demonstrates loyalty to tradition, and in some is transformed so much that it becomes unrecognizable, sinking deeper and deeper into virtuality, into the world of simulacra. The identification of reference points of intersection of speech communication processes and cultural transformations is important not only from a theoretical point of view, but also from a practical point of view, since it allows you to explain and predict events in the information environment and thereby influence them.

The word is a tool for communication between a person and various spheres of being. There is a simultaneous and interrelated deployment of both vertical (directed to the transcendent) and horizontal (directed to the earthly) lines of verbal communication. Thus, acultural verbal-communicative "cross" is built. One of the first "horizontal" vectors was nature. Through spells, incantations, mantras, and prayers, man communicated with the spirits of nature, the natural elements, and the souls of animals and plants. Being a "symbolic animal" (Kassirer, 2018), man, unlike other living beings, entered into communication with nature not directly, but indirectly, through a symbol, sign, metaphor, which often find expression in a verbal form. Carrying out the mission entrusted to him by God, man gives "names" to certain phenomena of nature from ancient times to the present time.

Problem Statement

The research task is to develop and apply the principles of language analysis as a means of communication and culture construction. Special attention is paid to the role of language and its use in Russian culture.

Research Questions

The main research question to be addressed in this article is to determine the cultural and meaning-affirming potential of the word and speech communication in general.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of the research is to determine the communicative potential of language in the representation and construction of social reality, in the symbolic development of cultural space.

Research Methods

Based on the complexity of the research object, the authors sought a comprehensive methodological approach that combined the methodological principles of philosophical, cultural, and linguistic research. An important methodological basis is the philosophical and anthropological approach, which allows us to keep in focus the very ontological essence of language and a culture philosophical approach that allows us to analyze the content and key trends in the functioning of language communication in the socio-cultural space of the modern era.

The research of language means recorded the content of culture as a unity of profanation and holiness. This allowed to reveal the sacred character not only of religious, but also of secular symbols. Studies of cultural symbolism were based on the statements of scientists about the ambivalence of the symbol in the unity of its material and ideal components. The phenomenological analysis of the latter by referring to rites, rituals, and traditions, has shown that not only religious but also secular symbols are converted to the transcendent. The definition of the place of the transcendent in the content of cultural symbols was based on the dialectic of the transcendent and the transcendental.

Dialectical concepts of researchers of essences, functions, and forms of communicative interactions have been used to study dialogue as the basis of intercultural communication. The principles of historical and cultural analysis were applied to study the originality of communicative relations characteristic of Russian culture.

Findings

The language space of a person, reflecting the existence of his personality, also determines his place and position in the structure of socio-cultural reality. Philosophy draws attention to the fact that almost the only form of human connection with the surrounding social and natural reality is language. Wherever a person manifests himself: in the practical-material sphere (producing, consuming), emotional (experiencing affects, experiencing certain feelings), cognitive (constructing an intellectual attitude to the world), etc., his relationship with any spheres of social life is determined by language, its features, its structure, and ways of construction. In this sense, the human world is the world of his language space, implemented in various ways of social communication (Luria, 2019). The latter is a fundamental function of language and forms an information space that sets the parameters of the socio-cultural division of activities and has the ability to cause a response in one form or another. Therefore, the knowledge of the deep nature of language and its role in the communication process is one of the most relevant areas of scientific and philosophical knowledge. This problem is studied at the intersection of interdisciplinary research that combines the universality of philosophical theoretical reflection with the specific meanings of a number of specialized fields of knowledge (linguistics, neuro-linguistics, psychology, cultural studies, etc.). The discussion of the problem of language at the intersection of interdisciplinary research allows us to clarify many complex aspects of the functioning of mechanisms and structural elements of consciousness as a complex phenomenon. The communicative processes of language reveal the creative potential of consciousness in the creation and acquisition of new knowledge, make available decoding of acts of knowledge in general.

The world, as it is understood by philosophical and scientific knowledge, is constituted in judgment. So, in Wittgenshtein's (1994) theory we find the development of this idea in the justification of the linguistic concept, in which the emphasis is not on the act of thinking, but on the act of speaking. According to this position, the world of social space realizes itself in the structure of social communication and is constituted in speech action. In this context, there is an awareness that all the problems that a person faces in any form of social communication are language problems, which means that their solution requires the use of language tools. From the content and style of speech, as a result of the influence of the features of the national language, the general culture of the individual, the received education, arise various difficulties. And here we cannot but agree with Wittgenshtein (1994) that the significance of philosophy and humanitarian knowledge in general lies precisely in its ability to show a person all the mistakes that accompany his discursive practices, to find a way out of the labyrinth of false judgments and confusions.

The truth or falsity of a language utterance concerns its relation to the reality it represents: the utterance is true if it corresponds to reality, and false if it does not. In this aspect, language is seen as a sign, hence as a symbolic manifestation of reality. The symbolic character of the utterance, which is revealed in the process of communication, assumes as a response, first of all, not an action, but another utterance that accepts or denies the first, and finally, perhaps problematizes it. This is a dialogue. But communication, while outwardly possessing all the attributes of dialogue, will not be so if its goals are limited only to the exchange of information, leaving aside the possibility of genuine insight into the meaning of messages. In this context, from our point of view, it is fair to assume that humanity, in the true cultural sense of the word, began with the ability to use dialogue as a means of socio-cultural communication.

Language, as a litmus test, accurately reflects the inner world of a person, its relationship with socio-cultural reality and, to a certain extent, has a greater degree of influence on a person than the influence that a person has on language. Therefore, the criterion for separating a cultural person from a pseudo-cultural person is not just the ability to speak, but the gift of essential utterance. It is this quality of language that fixes the position of a person in a socio-cultural niche. It is no accident that the philosophy of language draws attention to the fact that one of the manifestations of social stratification is not in what a person's financial situation, connections and other signs of social stratification, but in what language he uses, what is his language picture of the world, implemented in socio-cultural communication.

Modern Russian language communicative reality demonstrates a phenomenon close to the pre-Lomonosov era, when in the 17th century everything that fell into the written text could already be considered literary. Today, in official speech, a person can pronounce a formalized text structure and allow himself to simultaneously insert the language turns of the "low-ranking" verbal culture. On the one hand, it certainly indicates that the language is always in development, unnoticeable for its native speaker and due to the influence of different socio-cultural phenomena (Zolotukhin & Zhukova, 2017). On the other hand, it is an indicator that transforming into an era of total simplification, the reduction of the complex in the direction of primitive-simple, and the language shows this kind of aberration in its narrative expression.

Language is both a form of expression of culture and a way of constructing it. Since it can be considered a priority form of symbolic development of the world, any symbolic form can be considered as a kind of language. The richness of the human language and the fullness of Russian speech opens up whole spheres of existence that go far beyond the boundaries of everyday life. When gaps are formed in the language and the denoting the Absolute words disappear, then the culture becomes poorer. Language deformations are the result of deep transformations of culture, and the emasculation of language, in turn, leads to the simplification of culture. These processes are the result of certain trends in social development and are expressed in the loss of cultural connection with higher, ultimate meanings. We try to show this.

Language, setting the contours of culture, usually gives it the characteristics of the profane and sacred, each of which is revealed in a fairly wide range of words. The sphere of the profane is accompanied by markers of the ordinary, theme diocrity, the relative, and, of course, the natural. In turn, the natural area is called the self-evident experience of everyday life, which is supplemented by a scientific picture of the world. This area is more or less ordered, subject to cause-and-effect relationships, which is reflected in terms of communication and development.

The situation is much more complicated with the conceptual expression of the sphere of the sacred, first, because its content is devoid of clear outlines and little verifiable, and, secondly, its numerous interpretations are internally contradictory and psychologically overloaded. According to the interpretations of many scientists, sacred is expressed through the lexems of sublime, creepy, attractive, through the concept of fascination. The semantic field of the sacred is an alluring, threatening and intense radical otherness and transcendent superiority, something that is excluded from the profane.

Some of the connotations listed above may seem strange to someone unfamiliar with special literature. On a mundane level, theholy/sacred is associated with something that has a positive meaning for us. Why do the above language expressions contain terms that denote something dangerous for a person? There are reasons for this. Thus, the etymology of the word "sacred" refers to ancient Rome, where "sacer", that is, the sacred, was applied to both the gods and the criminal (Benveniste, 1973). This polarity of attitude to the sacred is also characteristic of modern man's contact with the objects of his faith: hope for mercy and fear of punishment, emotion and despair at the realization of his sinfulness. The sacred is an abyss that both beckons and terrifies.

The sacred finds its concentrated expression in cultural symbolism, which acts as a language, as a text. There is a large layer of literature devoted to the symbol problem. For example, E. Kassirer defines a symbol as a sensual embodiment of the ideal (Kassirer, 2018), and Losev (1995) - as a generalized principle of further development of the semantic content rolled up in it. All interpretations of the symbol indicate the presence of two components, one of which is clearly palpable, and the other is supersensible. Just like any speech unit-the unity of the material carrier and the ideal meaning.

Semantic analysis of religious symbols of culture shows that they contain a point of contact between the world of this world and the other world. And religious symbols acquire a sacred character precisely by turning to the transcendent, to the supernatural. And can we say that through language means the qualities of the sacred and supernatural are spread to the symbols of secular culture? There is no doubt about some secular symbols, they are sacred. This is a funeral, a wedding, the birth of a child, taking the military oath. They are recognized and called sublime and attractive, disturbing and frightening. This conceptual series is formed from the fact that there is a deep understanding – after this meeting, the former will not be. This event snatches us out of the usual everyday life, and the new, future is unpredictable.

Why do we call some secular symbols sacred? Probably because they are included in the tradition; as they are commonly said, they are "sanctified by tradition". But it also means the sanctity of traditions. It is achieved by their turning to the projections of transcendent existence, to what is beyond the boundaries of the material world. Grave care for believers and for many atheists is not just a symbol of memory of the dead, but a way of indirect communication with them, which continues to exist today. And so, they will throw a handful of earth on the coffin lid, eat kutya and pancakes at the wake, take care of the grave, preferring to do this especially on parents' days and Whitsunday. All funeral rites would be meaningless if death were seen only as a transition into nothingness, and the posthumous existence was seen only as a thinning and disappearing image of memory.

Linguistic and cultural analysis of symbols of secular communication shows a wide variety of replicas of the transcendent-sacred. Numerous "Miss" contests are hidden cartoons of the worship of ancient goddesses of fertility, and the good wishes that the culprit of any celebration listens to are really addressed not to him, but to fate, the guardian angel, and God. Even the attitude of fans, such as sports fans, to the object of their worship is essentially religious. In this regard, Geertz (2017) noted: "Indeed, one can say that a person treats the game of golf as a "religion", not when he simply practices it with passion and plays it on Sundays, but when he finds in it a symbol of some transcendent truth (p. 116). In other words, "the practice of sacralization extends directly or indirectly not only to the religious sphere itself, but also to non-religious phenomena on the principle of similarity" (Gavrilov, 2015, p. 147).

Fixing in the language of what goes beyond the immediate and relative is a condition for approaching the understanding of the meaning of life, and the very question of it, if a person remains within the limits of earthly existence, turns out to be far-fetched, loses the right to pose. Those whose language is free from statements that fix the ontological nature of the transcendent, are forced to use as a reference point, the measure of their own actions, the actions of other people, and the surrounding reality as a whole marker of transcendental structures. Usually, the forms of our consciousness and culture are nominated in this capacity. They find expression, for example, in a number of concepts − "universal", "humanism", "freedom", "intelligence", "creativity", etc. It is these transcendental patterns in a given language picture of the world that are the means that order the world and give it meaning. Being the ultimate and universal foundations of culture, they do not, according to the secular part of the population, need the sanction of the transcendent.

But if you look closely, this argument does not exclude, but rather suggests the need for the transcendent, if not in the" text "of our communication, then necessarily in the "subtext". This follows from the fact that the basis for evaluating our actions, the very meaning of our existence, in any case, are outside the boundaries of the individual, group, nation, etc., which makes them in a certain respect transcendent. As noted by Lavrukhina (2009): "The transcendental defines the immanent world, but, in turn, it can be represented as defined by more general premises that lie beyond the immanent world, so, by the transcendent" (p. 9). Thus, the actions of an individual are evaluated by the criteria of national culture, national culture–by compliance with the universal, and the universal – by consistency with the Absolute. Thus, any symbols of culture, including secular ones, in the deep foundations of speech communication contain an attitude to the transcendent to a greater or lesser extent.

But modern culture is becoming more and more one-dimensional, losing the transcendent-sacred dimension. In parallel, the language is simplified and deformed, losing those semantic units that reflected this transcendent area of being. To some extent, there is a return to the childhood of human civilization, when the archaic culture was only "pregnant" with the idea of the transcendent, the symbols of this culture reflected could not be called supernatural, mythical creatures were near man. The birth of the idea of the supernatural and the corresponding semantic field occurred later and was developed until the beginning of European modernization. From this point on, this idea and the speech forms of its expression began to fade, and especially where the secular began to prevail. Cox (2013) said that a person needs to have some kind of work to shape own character. In his view, however, secularization displaces the sacred order and creates its own system, which author calls organization. As you can see, the displacement of the supernatural / transcendent from the communication environment naturally leads to the fact that culture loses its sacredness, its innermost meaning, preserving the transcendent dimension, as in ancient times, only in a potential form. The attempt to limit meanings to the scopes of profane reality" has led to the fact that "man has lost the sense of solidity and unconditionality of his being (Gavrilov et al., 2019).

However, this is not the only trend, as it meets with resistance from those who realize how uncomfortable it is to live in a meaningless world. Therefore, people tend to see the meaninglessness of life in this world as a continuation of the meaningfulness of the otherworldly existence and express this experience in language. As a result, sacred cultural symbols, including symbols of secular culture, act as a mediator of contact with the eternal and absolute. If this is not the case, then why are they?

The culture of each community, expressed in its language, has its own encapsulated self-sufficiency and differs from the language culture of another world. This makes it possible to consider language as a special world with different shapes and configurations. The "real world" in which a person exists, in many ways, often unconsciously, is built on the language of stereotypes, unconscious narratives, the mentality of the people, based on language habits. Therefore, for a truly authentic understanding of the language of a particular people, it is necessary to enter the world of socio-cultural space, in the knowledge of which a state of "language empathy" is formed. This "language empathy" cannot be truly and profoundly conveyed by any dictionary, no matter how precise and meticulously detailed it may be.

There is a variety of communication languages: the language of facial expressions and gestures, action, dance, color and smell, the language of music and painting...But the most meaningful in cross-cultural communication is verbal language. Each culture uses all the richness of language structures, but one of them often dominates, characterizing the uniqueness of the ethnic group. Thus, Western culture is characterized by the idea that the best word is an action. Russian culture (fitting more into the Eastern tradition) is a culture, to a large extent, of word.

With the exception of extreme situations, Russia shows little in any action, but not because of inconsistency or lack of purpose. The action is not very organic for the feminine Russian soul (Berdyaev, 2016). In contrast to the West, in Russia the word is the action. Through the action, a person interacts with the world on an external, material-bodily level. It is not a self-sufficient, self-valuable word that is interested in becoming an action. If the word "guessed" (in the sense of form, place and time), it is "imprinted" into the inner universe of a person, transforming it. The word does not need to be translated into the "language of the soul", it initially speaks it.

The word is a communication tool both in the internal and external cultural space. Just as important, it is a means of communication with the transcendent reality, with God. It is to this reality that prayers and church hymns are addressed. And God directly or indirectly enters into a dialogue with man, sometimes starting it, sometimes answering questions and pleas addressed to Him.

The word is more theurgic than the action, since it directly interacts with spiritual reality. For Russia, communication with the world on a supermaterial, metaphysical level (prayer, image) is more organic. To fulfill the theurgic role, the word does not need to be "voiced", it is enough to be true. Clothed in the "clothes of the world", the word is desacralized, loses its worldliness, emasculates. The inner (silent) word, which carries a sacred primordial purity, is quite enough for soul – making.

Through this very word, a person enters into "communication" with himself (with his "rib", conscience, fear, dream; where the conversation includes "head" and "heart"; "I", "it" and "super-I"; "child", "parent" and "adult", "I-real", "I-false" and "I-ideal"; "anima" and "animus"). In the inner universe of man, there are dialogues, arguments, and attempts to cheat, hide, rethink, and sometimes impose their vision.

Russia is a country of the Word, but not all, not of the word in general, but of the true, conscientious, merciful word. For Russia, the Word is a "bell", which wakes up souls, "ladder", on which you can climb to the First Word. The world began with the Word ("in the beginning was the Word..." (Bible)), and it will end with It ("the Word will be at the end") (Augustine, 2017, p. 182). The word attracts as the homeland, the Russian thirst for the Word has a nostalgic taste. Man – "the word clothed with flesh" - is the connecting thread between the First Word and the Word-Outcome, the Word-Judgment.

The movement towards the all-integral, all-healing Word cannot but be an ascent to All Word, the Theologian. That is why, "at the top of the ladder of knowledge are not scientists and philosophers, but saints" (Losev, 1991, p. 216). It was they who (both literally and figuratively) came closer to the divine Word. The word here appears as an objective reality, which can only be approached through knowledge combined with moral improvement. From the man-word to the Word-Man, through the creation with God (co-word with the Theologian, theology) – the path of the metahistorical ascent of the Russian soul.

In the sacramental phrase "Pushkin is our all", "the Word is our all" is immanently present. And not only that feminine Russian soul "loves with its ears", but also because the Christian commandment of humility and non-action was organic to the Russian soul. The Russian soul, filled with "passion dispassionate", aspiring to "Bride Non-Native", found an adequate way of self-expression in the word as an act of non-action. The word transforms the world without touching it directly; it pierces without piercing...

"Love in Russian" is more a dialogue of souls than a duel of bodies. The way of communication here is not an action, but a word (as evidenced by Russian literature) (Gachev, 2004). And now the popularity of "people of the word "(political scientists, bloggers, showmen) clearly peaks with the unpopularity of "people of business" (officials, businessmen). Despite the inflation of the word, it remains a magical dependency. Trust in the quasi-saving word appears as a compensation for the in authenticity of being. Such a trusting (to the point of mystical awe) attitude to the word is due to the fact that the word itself does not lie. But if the words are not false, I want to believe that the proposals made up of them are not false either.

A person tries to exist without a word (action movies, comics, techno-rock, op-art, kinetic movement, performance), a word tries to exist without a person (a verbal ocean that no one can conquer). The word born by man exists, to a certain extent, independently as a kind of autonomous entity (word-monad). It is possible to enter into a theurgic communicative interaction directly with the word as a living substance (write novels and philosophical treatises. The very utterance, the writing words has transforming a person.

The word in Russia leads some kind of its own, not very clear to us and subject life. The word in Russia does not need to be turned into an action, since it is valuable in itself. It is bigger than an action or bigger than personality, sometimes it is equal to Russia, and sometimes – it is bigger than the universe.

Cross-cultural communication is carried out through mass media, trade, war, migration of peoples, colonization, coercion…Russia is included in the dialogue of cultures, to a large extent, through a conscientious word (inseparable from a conscientious action). This is explained by the fact that the essential peculiarity of Russia is in "heart contemplation" (Ilyin, 1991, p. 193). And cordiality, just, and includes participation, charity and conscientiousness. Hence, and so characteristic of Russian philosophy and literature pan-moralism, which proceeds from the connection in the word of truth with justice.

Russia positions itself in the world as a Word-country. But this is not "any" word, but one in which truth is combined with justice. Pan-moralism pervading Russian culture causes the word to become conscientious in order to be authentic. Only such a word is organic to the "heartfelt contemplation" that is so characteristic of Russian culture. By engaging in various types of intra-cultural and cross-cultural verbal communication, Russia sees its mission as" infecting the whole world with conscience".

Conclusion

Language permeates all the structures of being and consciousness. From the philosophical point of view, language is considered as the basis of the way of human and socio-cultural existence, in which it acquires mainly instrumental, communicative, and cognitive significance. Language space makes it possible for a person to double their potential and real capabilities and turns out to be a universal mediator in the relationship of consciousness and the world.

The language reflects the presence of a transcendent meaning not only in religious, but also in many secular cultural symbols that have a sacred character. Transcendence, which transcends the limits of the world of this world variability and relativity, connects man with the Absolute and thus creates conditions for understanding the meaning of individual and global existence. This feature of cultural symbolism is manifested in communicative practice through language, rituals, and traditions. The transcendent-sacred having passed in the deep past from a potential state to an actual one, in the new and modern history it again gradually takes implicit forms. This is evidenced by the phenomena of speech practice, the content of culture as a whole. It cannot be said that this is the only trend, because it meets resistance in the face of the desire of many people not to limit themselves to the boundaries of immanent reality, but to integrate themselves into the scale of transcendent existence.

The word appears as the most important tool of communication between man and nature, within the same cultural space, in the dialogues of cultures. Through the word, a person enters into a dialogue with himself ("internal dispute"); in the "inner universe" of a person, a polylogue often occurs between different structural units of his personality. Through the word, man enters into a dialogue with the transcendent; verbally, among other things, God responds to man or seeks him out. Finally, the word is not only an instrument of communication between different subjects (and between structural units of the same subject), it is also capable of being a subject itself, due to the fact that it lives its own life (the word-monad) as a living objectified reality. The communicative being of Russian culture, throughout its entire existence, has found expression to the greatest extent through the word.

References

1. Augustine (2017). Confessions. Modern Library.
2. Benveniste, E. (1973). Indo-European Language and Society (In 2 vol., Vol 2. Summaries, table, and index by Jean Lallot) (translated by Elizabeth Palmer). Faber & Faber.
3. Berdyaev, N. A. (2016). The Fate Of Russia. frsj Publications.
4. Cox, H. (2013). The Secular City: Secularization and Urbanization in Theological Perspective. Princeton University Press; Revised edition.
5. Gachev, G. (2004). Russkij Eros [Russian Eros]. EKSMO. [in Rus.]
6. Gavrilov, E. O. (2015). Modern religiousness as a representative and factor of social development: a monograph. FKOU VPO Kuzbass Institute FSIN of Russia. [in Rus.]
7. Gavrilov, E. O., Gavrilov, O. F., & Kazakov, E. F. (2019). Metamorphoses of Religion and the Human in the Modern World. Smart Technologies and Innovations in Design for Control of Technological Processes and Objects: Economy and Production, 139, 716-724. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-18553-4_89
8. Geertz, C. (2017). The interpretation of cultures. Basicbooks, Ink., Publishers.
9. Ilyin, I. A. (1991). About the future of Russia. Ed. Holy Trinity Monastery and telex Corporation Jordanville.
10. Kassirer, E. (2018). An Essay on Man. Inktank Publishing (2019) Humphrey Milford, Oxford University Press.
11. Lavrukhina, I. M. (2009). Ideya transcendentnogo : konceptual'nye versii v kul'ture [The idea of transcendental: conceptual versions in culture] (Doctoral Dissertation). Moscow. [in Rus.]
12. Losev, A. F. (1991). Russkaya filosofiya [Russian philosophy]. Losev A.F. Philosophy. Mythology. Culture. Moscow. [in Rus.]
13. Losev, A. F. (1995). Problema simvola i realisticheskoe iskusstvo [The problem of the symbol and realistic art]. skusstvo. [in Rus.]
14. Luria, A. R. (2019). Iazuk i soznanie [Language and Consciousness]. "Jupiter". [in Rus.]
15. Wittgenshtein, L. (1994). Filosofskie issledovaniya [Philosophical research]. Wittgenshtein L. Philosophically works: in 2 parts. Gnozis. [in Rus.]
16. Zolotukhin, V., & Zhukova, O. (2017). Problem of relations between human and society in conditions of social transformations.T he European Proceedings of Social & Behavioural Sciences EpSBS, 1085-1091. https://doi.org/10.15405/epsbs.2018.02.127