DISCURSIVE PARAMETERS OF THE WRITERS' DIARIES

Abstract

The article deals with detailed textual analysis of Ukrainian writers' diaries in the aspect of discursive features. The proposed scientific research is an approach to specify and generalize those pragmatically relevant parameters, which qualitatively distinguish the diaries of masters of the word from other memoir-artistic works. It has been found that all the discursive features of the writers' diaries are directly or indirectly subordinated to the anthropocentric specificity of the genre, as the person of the author always is the core and a kind of filter of the narrative process. Attention is focused on the detailed characteristic of the communicative situation in the diary discourse of Ukrainian writers, that is most often represented in the format «I – I», less often «I – HE». During such intrapersonal communication, the evaluative component of the researched discourse is clearly highlighted and is quite lined up into a complex of axiological circles projected onto the «I-image» of the author of the diary («I am an artist», «I am a citizen», «I am a person», «I am among people”, «I am the environment»). The patterns of representation in diary entries of temporal images of the past, present and future are traced, which directly determine the intra- and extra-lingual discourse field of the writer's diary. In addition, the image of the present is the most reflected among them, because the author mainly is inside the described events. Special attention is paid to clarifying the place of diaries of wordsmiths in the classification paradigm of discourses. Taking into consideration the sociolinguistic typology that includes the division of discourses into personal and institutional ones, we attribute diaries to the first group, because just there the narrator appears as a unique individual with a versatile inner world. Writers' diaries gain traits of both types of essential variety of personal discourse: direct one, which is divided into both content breakthrough and content transition, and also indirect one. There is an accent on the fact that any diary discourse isn’t a pure representation of a specific classificatory variety, instead it is usually a compilation of several varieties with clear dominant features of the only one of them.