Home Releases 18 (4)

PROBLEMS OF THEORY AND PRACTICE OF EDUCATIONAL INTERPRETATION OF LITERARY TEXT IN TEACHING SCHOOLCHILDREN THE RUSSIAN LANGUAGE

Pedagogy and Education , UDC: 373.1 DOI: 10.24412/2076-9121-2024-4-64-79

Authors

  • Desyaeva Natalya D. Doctor of Pedagogical Sciences, Professor
  • Assuirova Larisa V. Doctor of Pedagogical Sciences, Associate Professor
  • Leonovich Evgeniy N. Doctor of Pedagogical Sciences, Professor
  • Silchenkova Lyudmila S. Doctor of Pedagogical Sciences, Associate Professor

Annotation

The relevance of the problem formulated by the authors in the article lies in the significance of the concept of educational text interpretation for the theory and methodology of teaching not only the Russian language and literature, but also other humanities, due to the need to see the inextricable unity of receptive and productive communication, perception and generation of text. The cultural conformity of addressing a literary text in an educational environment always presupposes a complete understanding of its meaning by the reader, the result of which is his own speech work, a statement about what he read. The purpose of this study is an attempt to derive theoretical principles of the methodology of teaching the Russian language regarding the criteria for selecting texts for educational interpretation, the mechanisms of interpretive activity of schoolchildren, the basis of which allows us to develop a system for teaching the interpretation of literary texts in Russian language lessons. The research was carried out using methods of 1) theoretical analysis of the problem in the context of studying current scientific literature, 2) structural and semantic analysis of educational texts of artistic style, 3) content analysis of the texts of schoolchildren’s essays, which present the results of their interpretative activities, 4) systematization of interpretive shortcomings in school essays. As a result, the original idea was confirmed that the results of students’ communicative interpretative activity are largely influenced by the characteristics of the original educational texts, the methodological processing of which should be carried out taking into account the laws of interpretation as the process of perception and interpretation of a speech work, which leads to schoolchildren gaining conscious experience of understanding texts in the process of their linguistic analysis as the initial stage of the communicative process. The study of the stated problem made it possible to identify the prospects and challenges associated with the introduction of methods of educational interpretation of literary texts into the process of teaching schoolchildren the Russian language, which is an important step in modern educational practice.

How to link insert

Desyaeva, N. D., Assuirova, L. V., Leonovich, E. N. & Silchenkova, L. S. (2024). PROBLEMS OF THEORY AND PRACTICE OF EDUCATIONAL INTERPRETATION OF LITERARY TEXT IN TEACHING SCHOOLCHILDREN THE RUSSIAN LANGUAGE Bulletin of the Moscow City Pedagogical University. Series "Pedagogy and Psychology", 18 (4), 64. https://doi.org/10.24412/2076-9121-2024-4-64-79
References
1. 1. Bakhtin, M. M. (1979). The problem of speech genres. In: Aesthetics of verbal creativity (pp. 159–206). Moscow, Art. (In Russ.). https://philologos.narod.ru/bakhtin/bakh_genre.htm
2. 2. Demyankov, V. Z. (2001). Linguistic interpretation of the text: Universal and national (idio-ethnic) strategies. In: Language and culture: Facts and values (pp. 309–323). Moscow: Languages of Slavic culture. (In Russ.). http://www.infolex.ru/Stepanov.html
3. 3. Poghosyan, D. A. (2020). Interpretation of literary text in linguodidactics. Eurasian Union of Scientists, 5(74), 47–49. (In Russ.). https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=44186567
4. 4. Bogdanova, E. S. (2015). Fictionality of a literary text as the basis for teaching schoolchildren text-perceiving and interpreting activities. Teacher education in Russia, 10, 231–239. (In Russ.). https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/fiktsionalnost-hudozhestvennogo-teksta-kak-osnova-metodiki-obucheniya-shkolnikov-tekstovosprinimayuschey-i-interpretatsionnoy
5. 5. Voiteleva, T. M. (2013) Analysis and interpretation of the text as a path to its understanding (methodological aspect). Rhema. Rema, 3. (In Russ.). https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/analiz-i-interpretatsiya-teksta-kak-put-k-ego-ponimaniyu-metodicheskiy-aspekt
6. 6. Sergeeva, E. S. (2020). The technique of understanding as one of the ways to interpret a literary text. Academic research in educational sciences, 4, 310–314. (In Russ.). https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/priyom-ponimaniya-kak-odin-iz-sposobov-interpretatsii-hudozhestvennogo-teksta
7. 7. Priorova, E. M., Savchenko, E. P., & Filchakova, E. M. (2018) The concept of “homeland” in English and Russian linguistic cultures. Philological sciences. Issues of theory and practice, 4-1(82). 159–164. (In Russ.). https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/kontsept-rodina-v-angliyskoy-i-russkoy-lingvokulturah
8. 8. Novozhilova, K. R. (2009). Cognitive interpretation of literary text. Bulletin of St. Petersburg University. Series 9, 1, 1, 49–58. (In Russ.). https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/kognitivnaya-interpretatsiya-hudozhestvennogo-teksta
9. 9. Genette, G. (1982). Palimpsestes: la littérature au second degré. Paris.
10. 10. Yang, F. (2021). Declaration on knowledge translation. Modern study of foreign languages, 5, 2–27.
11. 11. Zimnyaya, I. A. (1976). Semantic perception of a speech message. In: Semantic perception of a speech message (in conditions of mass communication) (pp. 5–33). Ed. by T. M. Dridze, & A. A. Leontyeva. Moscow: Science. (In Russ.). https://iling-ran.ru/library/psylingva/vosprijatie.pdf
12. 12. Belyanin, V. P. (2003). Psycholinguistics. Textbook. Moscow: Flint: Moscow Psychological and Social Institute. (In Russ.). http://lib.ysu.am/disciplines_bk/e500b25109704ac96d-0c0c6ce5f32c77.pdf
13. 13. Vachkova, S. N., & Piche-ool, T. S. (2008). On the advisability of a unified approach to the formation of a modern reader (scientific school of Professor N. N. Svetlovskaya). MCU Journal of Pedagogy and Psychology, 3(26), 59–69. (In Russ.). https://www.mgpu.ru/uploads/adv_documents/2815/1485948336-VestnikPedagogikaIPsihologiya3(26).Pdf
14. 14. Silchenkova, L. S. (2023). Meaningful reading in elementary school. Current issues in the professional training of modern primary school teachers, 10, 255–261. (In Russ.).
15. 15. Lederer, M. (2014). Translation. The Interpretative Model. New York.
16. 16. Tihanov, G. (2019). The Birth and the Death of Literary Theory: Regimes of Relevance in Russia and Beyond. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
17. 17. Bogdanova, E. S. (2016) Specifics of working on an essay based on the source text in Russian language lessons. Human Capital, 10(94), 34–38. (In Russ.). https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=26688681
18. 18. Doschinsky, R. A., Abramovskaya, L. N., Krainik, O. M., & Solovyova, T. V. (2023). Analytical report on the results of the 2023 Unified State Exam in the Russian language. Pedagogical Measurements, 3, 4–23. (In Russ.). https://doc.fipi.ru/zhurnal-fipi/PI-2023-03.pdf
19. 19. Rakitov, A. I. (1988). Experience in reconstructing the concept of understanding of Friedrich Schleiermacher. In: Historical and philosophical yearbook (pp. 150–165). Moscow: Nauka. (In Russ.).
20. 20. Liu, Sh., & Wang, L. (2021). Cognitive-psychological study of the generation of fragments of Chinese current affairs: studying the features of multi-text fragmentation from the point of view of the theory of memory limits. Forum on issues of language and culture, 3, 3–13.
21. 21. Preview Poor Folk by Fyodor Dostoyevsky (2024). Available at: https://booksdrive.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/Poor-folk-by-Fyodor-Dostoyevsky-pdf-free-download.pdf
22. 22. Safronova, I. N. (2007). Interpretation. In: Culture of Russian speech. Encyclopedic dictionary-reference book (pp. 219–221). Ed. by L. D. Ivanova, A. P. Skovorodnikova, E. N. Shiryaeva et al. Moscow: Flint; Nauka.
23. 23. Méchoulan, É. (2003). Intermédialités: histoire et théorie des arts, des lettres et des techniques. Intermediality: History and Theory of the Arts, des lettres et des techniques. Intermédialités, 1, 9–27. (In Russ.).
24. 24. Bassnet, S. (2014). Translation. London and New York: Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group.
25. 25. Paloposki, O. (2010). Domestication and foreignization. Handbook of Translation Studies. Ed. by Y. Gambier, L. van Doorslaer. John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2, 40–42.
26. 26. ХVIII Symposium of the International Dostoevsky Society (2023). The 150 Years of Demons. Book of Abstracts. Nagoya: Nagoya University of Foreign Studies Press.
27. 27. Bolotnova, N. S. (2011). On the typology of regulatory structures in the text as a form of communication. Bulletin of Tomsk State Pedagogical University, 3(105), 34–40. (In Russ.). https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/o-tipologii-regulyativnyh-struktur-v-tekste-kak-forme-kommunikatsii
28. 28. Ne, Y. (2023). Application of argumentative and subtractive translation methods in the practice of Russian news translation. Taste – Classic, 2, 60–62.
29. 29. Savory, Th. (1957). Threat of Translation. London.
30. 30. Matveeva, T. V. (2003). Review. In: Culture of Russian speech. Encyclopedic dictionary-reference book (p. 399). Ed. by L. D. Ivanova, A. P. Skovorodnikova, E. N. Shiryaeva et al. Moscow: Flinta; Nauka. (In Russ.).
31. 31. Lu, Zhi. (2020). Metaphor translation process and translation strategy on the threshold of cognitive translation studies. Research of the English language, 4, 116–127. (In Chin.).
32. 32. Aloe, S., & Apollonio, C. (2023, 04 Sept.). A Letter to Professor Ikuo Kameyama from International Dostoevsky Society and North American Dostoevsky Society. International Dostoevsky Society. https://www. ids2022n.jp/media/2023102-103126-494.pdf
Download file .pdf 392.96 kb