Russian Federation
The article is devoted to the consideration of the role of the interrogative sentence in the organization of the dialogical space of a literary text. The relevance of the study is due to the continuing interest in dialogue as the main form of speech, the insufficient degree of knowledge of the functional load of the interrogative sentence in it. The purpose of the article is to consider the interrogative sentence as a temoformulating component of the dialogue. The study uses the method of component analysis, the method of continuous sampling of illustrative material. The analysis of the linguistic material showed that the interrogative sentence has a priority role in the organization of the dialogue in comparison with other functional types of sentences. The interrogative sentence is a structure–forming component of the dialogical space that determines the topic of speech contact and, as a result, the content as a whole. The results of the study can be used in the formation of the speech culture of native speakers.
communication, artistic text, dialogue, interrogative sentence, communicants, addressee, addressee
1. Beletskaya O.D. Cognitive-communicative interpretation of question-answer unities: diss. … cand. philol. Sciences. Tver, 1999. 126 p.
2. Berdnikova L.P., Gurova N.V. Strategies in the use of interrogatives in interpersonal communication. M.-Pyatigorsk, 2006. 190 p.
3. Bobyreva E.V. Semantics and pragmatics of initial and final replicas of the dialogue: author. diss. … cand. philol. Sciences. Volgograd, 1996. 22 p.
4. Vinokur T.G. The speaker and the listener. Variants of speech behavior. M.: KomKniga, 2005. 176 p.
5. Volkova L.B. Dialogue in speech and thought activity (experimental study of questions to the text): abstract of the thesis. diss. … cand. philol. Sciences. St. Petersburg, 1995. 20 p.
6. Gasteva N.I. Dialogical unity in colloquial speech: author. diss. … cand. philol. Sciences. Saratov, 1990. 20 p.
7. Golubeva-Monatkina N.I. Questions and Answers of Dialogic Speech: A Classification Study. M.: Editorial URSS, 2004. 200 p.
8. Gusev S.S., Tulchinsky G.L. The problem of understanding in philosophy: philosophical and epistemological analysis. M.: Politizdat, 1985. 192 p.
9. Issers O.S. Communicative strategies and tactics of Russian speech. M.: Editorial URSS, 2003. 284 p.
10. Kucherenosov V.E. Interrogative sentence and dialogue of a question-answer type in Russian (structural and pragmatic characteristics): Author. diss. … cand. philol. Sciences. Kyiv, 1988. 24 p.
11. Loginov A.V. The category of interrogativity in Russian. M.: MPGU, 2021. 276 p.
12. Milevskaya T.E. Means of expressing speech contact in the Russian language (Question-answer complex in popular science works): Author. diss. … cand. philol. Sciences. L., 1985. 17 p.
13. Orlova M.N. The structure of the dialogue in modern Russian (Question-answer form): author. diss. … cand. philol. Sciences. Saratov, 1968. 20 p.
14. Ryzhov S.A. Functional-semantic properties of interrogative replicas in a dynamic model of dialogue: author. diss. … cand. philol. Sciences. Ulyanovsk, 2003. 20 p.
15. Svyatogor I.P. On some features of the syntax of dialogical speech in modern Russian (dialectical unity). Kaluga, 1960. 39 p.
16. Stelmashuk A. Dialogization and ways of its implementation in various speech spheres of the modern Russian language (artistic and scientific prose): diss. … doc. philol. Nauk, St. Petersburg, 1993. 428 p.
17. Sycheva I.B. Counter question and its functioning in the dynamics of dialogue: diss. … cand. philol. Sciences. Eagle, 2008. 161 p.
18. Teplitskaya N.I. Some problems of the dialogic text: author. diss. … cand. philol. Sciences. M., 1975. 31 p.
19. Khokhlovskaya O.G. Dialogical discourse in the linguoculturological aspect: author. diss. … cand. philol. Sciences. Chelyabinsk, 2006. 20 p.
20. Shvedova N.Yu. Essays on the syntax of Russian colloquial speech. M.: Publishing House of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, 1960. 378 p.
21. Schweitzer A.D. Modern Sociolinguistics: Theory, Problems, Methods M.: Nauka, 1976. 176 p.
