Textual connections of the mythonyms in I.A. Bunin’s poetry

Full Text

Introduction

Mythonyms are special signs of the “landscape of names” (Gutschmidt, 1983: 153‒156) in I.A. Bunin's individual author's picture of the world. Due to their intertextual nature, inexhaustible aesthetic-axiological and philosophical worldview potential, they are oriented at performing not only individualizing, identifying, differentiating, aesthetic functions (Lamping, 1983; Gutschmidt, 1991; Knappová, 1992; Kohlheim, 2018; Dvořáková, 2018), but also at text-forming ones. In the artistic text, mythological names get “inexhaustible possibilities in the realization of meanings” (Nurullina, Usmanova, 2016: 199). They become the reference signs that express I.A. Bunin’s constitutive worldview aim ‒ to overcome the particularization of cultural worlds and cognize the full existence through the harmony of the past, present, and future, microand macrocosm, the unity of all peoples and races.

The issue of modeling Bunin's poetry onomasticon, revealing the connections and relations of onyms with other units in the aspect of his artistic text lexical organization, the originality of idiostyle and linguistic personality under the influence of Russian and world culture is relevant. In Russian language studies, it is addressed in the context of poetics and narratology (Prashcheruk, 2016; Bazhenova, 2016), literary onomastics, linguodiscourse, supertext linguistics (Yarovaya, 2000; Krasnova, 2005; Brazhnik, 2015), linguistic cognitology and cultural linguistics (Bogdanova, 2007; Rudneva, 2007), translation studies (Setti, 2014; Miloud, 2021). Linguists emphasize the criteria for classifying onyms of Bunin's onomasticon (referential meaning, type of use, method of artistic nomination, morphological composition, etc.) (Pronchenko, 2015); accumulation of extra-linguistic information in the anthroponym semantics (character's appearance, social status, traits of character, etc.) (Yarovaya, 2000); the role of real and literary toponyms in creating the image of Bunin's Russia (Krasnova, 2005); the reconstruction of anthroponymic systems in certain prose texts (“Life of Arsenyev”, “Village”, “Sukhodol”, “Clean Monday”, etc.) (Romanenkova, 2015); proper names metaphorization mechanisms (Brazhnik, 2015); possibilities of onyms to explicate concepts (“Nature”, “Landscape”) (Bogdanova, 2007; Rudneva, 2007), etc.

The systematic study of the poetic mythonymy as a prominent part of I.A. Bunin's artistic texts onomasticon received an impetus in 2021 in the I.A. Bunin Eletsky State University scientific project “I.A. Bunin's Poetic Multimythologism: Linguistic, Literary and Cultural Aspects” supported by the Russian Foundation for Basic Research and Lipetsk Region Administration. A series of articles devoted to the sources of mythonyms in I. A. Bunin's poetry, the taxonomy of mythological names, their connotative potential, and their role in representing the mythopoetic picture of the world have been published (for example, see: Borodina et al., 2021; Selemeneva, 2021; Trubitsina, 2021).

The aim of this study is to examine the connections of mythonyms in I.A. Bunin's lyrics, thanks to which their text-building potential is realized, conditioned by the peculiarities of the author's individual worldview, the need to explicate the content-conceptual information and form the subtext.

The realization of this aim will help to fill in the lacuna in the theoretical description of mythological names as significant units of the fiction text lexical level, helping to comprehend its meaning due to the original syntactic syntagmatics, contextual synonymy and antonymy, associative links.

Materials and methods

The material of the study was I.A. Bunin's poems from the scientific edition of his lyrics published in 2014 under the editorship of Prof. T.M. Dvinyatina^[1]. From the poetic texts in the two-volume collection by the method of continuous sampling were extracted 272 mythonyms. This formed the author's card index of examples.

When processing, analyzing, and interpreting the collected linguistic material, we used general and private scientific methods: descriptive, taxonomic, quantitative, modeling methods, and contextual analysis.

Results

Bunin’s poetic mythonymicon was delimitated with the help of a broad approach based on the following provisions:

‒ the connection of philosophical and religious ideologies with ancient mythological representations and the blurring of boundaries between the images of real and fictional objects of treatises of different confessions due to endowing them with transcendental properties;

‒ heterogeneity of mythonym denotates (objects of virtual, hypothetical or conditionally real world), explained by different degree of convergence of objects from real and fictional worlds by members of the language community;

‒ heterogeneity and diversity of mythological names sources (archaic myths of different ethnic groups; folklore texts ‒ fairy tales, bylinas, wedding lyrical songs, spiritual poems; religious texts ‒ Tanakh, Bible, Koran, Holy Tradition, etc.).

This approach allowed us to include in Bunin's mythonymicon usual (79.8%) and individual author units (20.2%) that differ in their structural organization (3 groups: simple, complex, compound), semantics (12 subgroups: names of people, gods, wizards, animals and birds, plants, rivers and seas, cities, objects, etc.), position in the poem (title complex, epigraph, main part) and frequency (single, of low-, mediumor high-frequency).

Their textual relations play a special role in the order of mythonyms in the lexical signs system embodying I. A. Bunin's artistic picture of the world and the author's intention. It is established that mythoanthroponyms and theonyms have the richest syntagmatic links in lyrical texts. This is due to their frequency and the seme ‘face’ in their meaning. Syntagmatic links help to identify mythonyms in their semantic classification (e.g., demononym or mythozoonyme); demonstrate the selectivity of some semantic classes (e.g., demononyms, mythozoonymes, mythoornitonyms) in terms of choosing a partner in the syntagmatic chain; illustrate the phenomenon of semantic agreement (mythohydronyms).

Paradigmatic relations in I.A. Bunin's poetry are represented in contextual synonymy and antonymy. Synonymic relationships are characteristic of demononyms, mythoanthroponyms, mythopersononyms, mythotoponyms, and theonyms, while antonymic relationships are found in mythotoponyms and mythopersononyms.

The associative relations of mythonyms in microand macro-contexts of Bunin's texts are determined by their intertextual nature and the level of precedence (high, medium, and low).

Discussion

Of all the 12 semantic categories of mythological names, only demononyms, mythoanthroponyms and theonyms are regularly combined with adjectives, participles and nouns: confused Eve, tempting Serpent, rebellious Angel, sad Selene, Sibylla's voice, Naveen's cry, Baal's laughter, Cypride's dove, Odin's cloak, Abel's world, Perun's dungeon, Lamb's wrath, Morpheus' hour, etc. Due to their high frequency and the seme 'face' in their meaning allow them to be connected with attributive word-forms or act as attributive ones: The moon, the god Sin, meets her with dawn^[2]; the medieval Archistratigus, / Written centuries ago / On the one-headed church, / Was thin-legged, all in steel and winged^[3], etc. As onyms, some of such adjectives, participles and nouns are included in compound theonyms and demononyms: Angel of Death, Risen Light, Desert Angel, Angels of Service, Creator Scepter-Wearing, etc.

In Bunin's poetic contexts, which are characterized by brevity and focus on a minimum of linguistic means to convey meaning, it is the attributive word forms that help to identify the semantic category of a mythonym. For example, the mythonym Serpent functions in two poems ‒ “Alisafia” (1912) and “Temptation” (1952). In the former it is extended by the prepositional adjective sea, in the latter ‒ by the participle tempting. Cf: ‒ Submit, sister: you were married by your father / With the sea Serpent^[4]. ‒ ...The tempting serpent / Is seeking with a trembling sting for the naked confused Eve^[5]. In the poem “Alisafia”, the apellative mythonym Serpent is used as a mythozoonym ‒ the name of a fantastic beast that lives in the sea and is described in various myths (Scandinavian, Greek, Mesopotamian, etc.). In the poem “Temptation” the mythonym Serpent refers to the religious and mythological ideas of Jews and Christians about the evil, cunning tempting spirit, who seduces people, incites to sin, so the lexeme can be attributed to the group of demononyms.

The mythonyms in the syntagmatic chain are combined with verbs. Different semantic types of mythonyms are connected with certain lexical-semantic groups of verbs. Thus, the widest combinative possibilities in I.A. Bunin’s poetry belong to mythoanthroponyms and theonyms. They are connected with the verbs of being and non-being, speech and thought activity, physiological and emotional-psychological state, visual and auditory perception, creation and destruction of a material object, movement, displacement and location in space, verbs of contact, luminescence, manifestation: to be (‘to exist’), to erect (‘to construct, build’), to speak (‘to utter words, make speech’), to be proud of (‘to rejoice and feel joyful pride in someone, something’), to rattle (‘to make loud, rolling sounds; a rumbling noise’), to walk (‘to move by treading with one's feet’), to embrace (‘to put one's arms or arm around someone to express affection; to enclose in an embrace’), to sit (‘to stay motionless in one place’), to sleep (‘to be in a state of dreaming’), to cut off (‘to chop off’), to die (‘to cease to live, to cease to exist’), etc. For example: Heimdall was seeking for the divine spring^[6]; The Lord was talking to Joseph in the night, / When the Holy Mother and Child were resting...^[7]; The sun and darkness mingled, the foundations of the rocks trembled, / And Moses saw how She was being erected…^[8] etc.

Mythopersononyms as a result of semantic derivation and the seme ‘person’ in the meaning are regularly combined with the same semantic groups of verbs as theonyms and mythoanthroponyms: to wander (‘to walk slowly without a certain direction’), to climb (‘to walk and elevate somewhere’), to look (‘to look at someone or something; to have one's eyes fixed on something’), to know (‘to have some data, information about someone, something, to be aware of something’), to sing (‘to use one's voice as a musical instrument, to make musical sounds with one's voice, to perform vocal works’), to stand (‘to be, to stay in an upright position on a surface’), etc. For example: The forest silence is mysteriously murmuring, / The Autumn sings and wanders invisibly through the forests...^[9]; But the Death stole the name / And was carried away on a black horse^[10], etc.

Demonyms, mythozoonyms, and mythoornitonyms are mostly coordinated by verbs of movement in space and speech activity: to whirl (‘to fly, rolling’), to fly (‘to volar’), to rush (‘to move very quickly’), to go around (‘to make a circular movement, to walk around something, in a certain space’), to approach (‘going, to come near someone or something’), to say (‘to inform, to state something’), to ask (‘to address with a question’), etc. For example: ...And the Hosts of Heaven said...^[11]; The deer sprang up, having seen the archer...^[12] etc.

The combination of the substantial part of mythotoponyms ‒ mythohydronyms ‒ illustrates the phenomenon of semantic agreement, when word forms united in a predicative combination have the same semes. For example, mythotoponyms Kovser and Almaznaya River are semantically and formally connected only with the verbs to flow and to pour: river (‘water stream’) → flows (‘to move water in some direction’) and pours (‘to flow with a stream’): And there flows, there pours beyond the mist / The river of all rivers, the azure Kovser^[13]; Before the Great Throne / there already flows, smoking, the Almaznaya River^[14].

Other semantic groups of mythonyms in Bunin's poetry ‒ mythochrematonyms, spellonyms, mythochrononyms, mythophytonyms, mythoethnonyms – due to their low frequency do not possess the breadth of syntagmatic relations or special selectivity in terms of their combinative possibilities.

Paradigmatic relations in the textual space of Bunin's works are represented by the synonymy of demononyms, mythoanthroponyms, mythopersononyms, mythotonyms and theonyms. This synonymy is contextual. Synonyms to well-known mythological names in Bunin's artistic picture of the world are conditioned by the need to explicate modified general cultural archetypes and symbols, original understanding and experiencing of cultural traditions of different ethnic groups, creation of various geocultural images-topos at the intersection of real knowledge and mythological ideas about them.

The synonymic series of mythonyms are distinguished by three parameters:

‒ the number of constituent units: two-membered, three-membered, four-membered series, etc.;

‒ the structure of the incoming mythonyms: units with the same structure (only simple, one-word mythonyms) and units with different structure (simple and compound; simple and complex; simple, compound, and complex);

‒ the relation of mythonyms in synonymic series to the general linguistic mythonymicon (only well-known ones with transformed or untransformed graphical and phonetic form, well-known and individual author ones).

For example:

1) a two-member series of simple theonyms Datar ‒ Flame. The theonym Datar, with transformed graphical and phonetic appearance (in the sacred texts of Zoroastrians ‒ Atar), refers to the famous Iranian myth – how the god created the world where ‘fire was distributed’^[15]. Theonym Flame is an individual author one, formed by onymization of the appellative and actualizing the seme ‘fire’;

2) a three-member series of theonyms with different structure Balder ‒ Sun ‒ Resurrected Light. Balder and the Sun are simple mythonyms, the Resurrected Light is compound with the two-component model “participle + noun”. Balder is a well-known mythonym from Scandinavian mythology, naming the favorite son of Odin and Frigg; and the Sun and the Resurrected Light are individual author, appearing in the context and conditioned by I.A. Bunin's background knowledge (probably, he was familiar with the works of German mythologists of the 19th century) about Balder (Baldr) as a solar god dying and rising again^[16].

Theonyms from the above two synonymic series are included in the sphere of onomastic units (along with the mythonyms Agni, Madonna, Mitra, Ra, Ra-Osiris, God, etc.), which in I.A. Bunin's mythopoetic picture of the world express the fire theme, the axiological opposition good-evil, and the motif of resurrection.

Onomastic synonymy in Bunin's poetry is especially strong in the semantic group of theonyms. Here the most polysemantic synonymic series is found among names of the supreme person representing the sacral personification of the Absolute in theistic religions: God ‒ Lord ‒ God Almighty ‒ God the Father ‒ Allah ‒ Creator ‒ Heavenly King ‒ Great ‒ Eternal ‒ Omnipotent ‒ Head ‒ Lord of Powers ‒ Living ‒ Sabaoth ‒ Sitting ‒ Combining ‒ Creator ‒ Judge ‒ Being ‒ Yahweh. The process of nomination of the supernatural supreme being in I.A. Bunin's poetry is influenced by the associative field of the name God: absolute perfection, supreme reason, powerful single demiurge, creator of the material and spiritual world, the source of existence. Of the units listed in the synonymic series, the theonym God functions in Bunin's contexts (“The early dawn is fresh in April...” (1907), “For Treason” (1905), “The Lord of Sorrow” (1914), “Sanctuary” (1916)), referring to various religious and philosophical concepts, which allows us to speak of a special, syncretic religious worldview of the writer.

In the conventional sense, antonymy is “fundamentally inherent” to proper names (Superanskaya, 1973: 304). However, some mythonyms in Bunin's onomasticon can overcome this barrier postulated by A.V. Superanskaya due to, firstly, the active process of appellative onymization, which easily enter into antonymic relations at the lexical level, and secondly, the concentrated semantics of the mythonyms and opposite semes (‘virtue’ ‒ ‘sinfulness’, ‘being’ ‒ ‘nothingness’, ‘good’ ‒ ‘evil’, etc.). For example, the opposed mythonyms Heaven ‒ Hell, Life ‒ Death, Light ‒ Darkness represent left and right members of different binary oppositions, respectively, and integrate the philosophical-cultural, spatial-temporal, subjective-psychological and other aspects of the considered artistic texts in I.A. Bunin's worldview. Thus, the mythopersononyms Life ‒ Death represent a universal ontological horizontal opposition, where both members are equal and form the basis of the Russian linguistic picture of the world in general and the artistic picture of the world of I.A. Bunin, in particular. The mythonyms Paradise and Hell express the spatial-ontological dyad, and the theonym Light and the demononym Darkness ‒ the perceptual-axiological dyad. In general, these units, realizing antonymic relations, express a wide range of religious and philosophical ideas in Bunin's artistic and aesthetic space:

‒ the idea of the struggle between the world of light and goodness and the kingdom of darkness and evil, which is the basis of the world and refers to the concept of Zoroastrianism (the god of light Ormusd, the Light and the spirit Ahriman, the Darkness);

‒ the idea of paradise bliss and hell torment, borrowed from Abrahamic religions and represented in a set of mythotoponyms: Paradise, Jinnat, Eden, Irem ‒ Hell, Sakar;

‒ the idea of infinite duration of time, which is central in various theocentric ideological systems and religious worldviews. It is this idea, projected by Bunin the poet onto eternity, that connects the ontological opposition life-death with the dyads heaven-hell, light-darkness.

The cultural and value components in the meanings of mythonyms, used in a particular text according to I.A. Bunin’s aesthetic and philosophical attitudes, realize their associative links and construct Bunin's artistic and aesthetic system on the basis of the principle of individual author associativity. The actual textual relations of mythonyms are manifested through interaction:

‒ with each other;

‒ with other groups of onyms (astronyms, anthroponyms, hydronyms, polysonyms, ecclesionyms, etc.);

‒ with situationally and thematically related appellatives.

Mythological names can realize their associative potential at the level of micro(one poem) and macrocontexts (several poems, thematically related to each other). For example, the simple theonym Ra, naming the supreme deity ‒ the Sun ‒ in the ancient Egyptian pantheon, functions in three poems by I.A. Bunin: “Cairo” (1907), “Ra-Osiris, Lord of Day and Light...” (1905), “The Moan” (1903). In the first and second poetic texts it acts as a symbol of ancient Egyptian culture decline (God Ra in the grave. In the pit^[17]; ...And here, oh Ra, are the fruits of your victories: the noseless sphinx among the fields of Gizeh, / The lazy Nile and the blocks of pyramids...^[18]), and in the third ‒ the personification of the sun (Dawn is burning. And in the splendor of Ra / The wails of Memnon sound in the distance^[19]). At the level of the microcontext of the poem “Moan”, the theonym Ra is associatively connected with the ecclesionym Memnon (“singing” colossi of Memnon are the statues of Pharaoh Amenhotep III in front of the destroyed funerary temple) and the limnonym Merida (a salt lake in the Fayum oasis), as well as with the appellatives lotus, sun, pyramid, flame, sky, dawn. Such textual connection is realized due to the seme ‘light’ in the meaning of the mythonym Ra and in the meanings of the appellatives sun, flame, dawn; activation of the reader-analyst's background knowledge (solar sanctuaries of the god-demiurge were built near the pyramids; Ra was born from a lotus flower according to the ancient Egyptians; he traveled along the heavenly Nile in a solar boat, etc.). At the level of macrocontext, the theonym Ra has an even wider range of associatively related lexemes: theonyms Set, Osiris, Apite, potamonym Nile, ecclesionym Ali, polysonyms Gizeh, Thebes, Cairo, appellatives rook, sphinx, writing, obelisk, azure, valley, khamsin, sunset, abyss, age, grave, etc. Thus, the mythonym Ra is included in the linguistic means of expressing the real-mythological image of Ancient Egypt and serves as a marker of the oriental theme in I. A. Bunin's poetry.

Comparisons with mythonyms from different semantic groups: theonyms, mythopersononyms, mythoanthroponyms, mythoornithonyms, spellonyms, which are common in I.A. Bunin's lyrics, are based on associative connection. For example: The house was as old as Koshchei's chamber, / The pestilence bloomed by the glass...^[20] (spellonym Koshchei); The garden this night was like Irem's garden^[21] (mythotoponym Irem); Odin's cloak was like a vest, / The rust of the ages was on the iron sword...^[22] (theonym Odin), and others. Mythonyms with rich cultural and symbolic potential in the comparative construction create a special artistic fabric of Bunin's lyrics, model the textual space, which is regulated by the idea of the dialogue of national cultures, geographically and often chronologically distanced from each other.

Associative links of mythonyms in Bunin's poetry are conditioned by their intertextual nature and precedent character, which confirms the thesis about intertextuality as a key feature of the text (along with informativeness, intensionality, cohesion, etc.) (Vater, 1992). Of all onomasticon units of any writer, it is mythological names that perform not only the functions of nomination and axiological evaluation, but also “reference to a known cultural phenomenon” (Fomin, 2003: 140).

The level of precedence allows us to distinguish three groups of units in Bunin's mythonymy.

1. Mythonyms with high degree of precedence. These are mythoanthroponyms, theonyms, mythopersononyms, spellonyms from religious texts of Judaism, Muslimism, Christianity, Slavic, and ancient Greek mythology, Slavic folklore texts. Such mythological names are immediately fixed by the majority of readers-analysts, and their cultural information is decoded with the help of background knowledge: Abraham, Adam, Atlantis, Baba-Yaga, Gabriel, Devil, Eve, Firebird, Zeus, Jesus Christ, Cain, Morpheus, Paradise, Death, Judgment Day, etc., and the following words are used in this way. For example: Oh Jesus, in the agony on the cross / You bowed your face! / There are holy sounds in the heart, ‒ Give a tongue for them!^[23] In the above example, the name of the God-man who became an atoning sacrifice for the sins of people serves as a reference to the Christian religious and mythological system. The theonym with the prepositional emotional-expressive particle “oh” and the postpositional attributive construction “in the agony on the cross he bowed his face” actualize the motif of the suffering of Christ on the cross in the poem “Hearing the organ, the soul yearns...” (1889).
2. Mythonyms with the middle level of precedence include units from Greek, Scandinavian, Iranian, ancient Egyptian and other ethnic myths, religious and philosophical treatises and folklore texts, whose plots and characters are less known to readers: Alatyr, Horus, Halcione, Odin, Ra, Rem, Yahweh, Hugin, etc. For example: So, in the silence in the seaside villa / The surf is more audible in the fall, / Like the voice of Sibylla, / Impassive, wise, and blind^[24]. In the above example, the mythoanthroponym Sibylla from ancient mythology names a prophetess who ecstatically predicts the future. The mythonym is the organizing center of the poem “My sorrow is now calm...” (1901) and is associated with the sadness of outgoing youth, with autumn-winter stagnation, with the infinity of the life cycle in nature.
3. Mythonyms with a minimum level of precedence, which are known to a narrow circle of specialists: Apite, Busurkurgalu, Gilgal, Mistarim, Nergal, Sakar, Black Mati, etc. For example: When the ark was finished and filled / And I, the King of Kasisadr, Ksisutros, / Buried the charters of the law in Sippar, / The voice of the sky rang...^[25] The semantics of the highlighted mythonym from the poem by I.A. Bunin “The Flood. Chaldæan Myths” (1905) in the works of philologists for a long time was not clarified. Thus, I.A. Tairova believed that Kasisadra is a city (Tairova, 2010: 17). Similarly, T.M. Dvinyatina interpreted the mythonym: “Kasisadra is an ancient city in Mesopotamia” (Dvinyatina, 2015: 218). But V.V. Emelyanov identified a semantic error and indicated the true meaning of the mentioned mythological name: “...‘Tsar of Kasisadr’, i.e. in the modern reading of Atrahasis, was understood as the tsar of the city called Kasisadr” (Emelyanov, 2012: 22). The opinion of V.V. Emelyanov is fully shared by N.A. Trubitsina, commenting on the ambiguity of the interpretations of some mythonyms in the poem “The Flood. Chaldæan Myths”: Busurkurgal, Romano, Nergal et al. (Trubitsina, 2021: 86). Thus, both Kasisadr and Ksisutros denote the hero of Akkadian mythology, who became the forefather of a new generation of people on the Earth after the Flood. These names are mythoanthroponyms.

Since “the difference in levels of precedence is quantitative, not qualitative” (Fomin, 2003: 143), we cannot argue that only mythonyms with a high degree of precedence are important in I.A. Bunin's mythopoetic picture of the world. Regardless of the level of precedence, each unit in the mythonymicon is a means for creating an individual author's picture of the world. Mythonyms fully meet the writer's need to express in words the existentiality of the worldview and the “wholeness of existence” (Karlova, 2011: 215), to embody aesthetic ideals, to show the sincerity and depth of experience, to bring together the subjective and the objective, to project the specific-temporal on the epochal, the national on the universal.

Conclusion

The analysis of the composition of Bunin's mythonymy allows us to conclude that paradigmatic, syntagmatic, associative relations of mythological names with other units (for example, other semantic groups of onyms, appellatives, verbal, and attributive lexicon) contribute to the semantic unfolding of poetic texts.

Acting as full-fledged signs of Bunin's onomastic code, mythonyms model the textual space. Realizing different types of textual relations, they reveal the inexhaustibility of their communicative potential, given by the language system, and code the totality of individual author meanings, ideas, themes, and motifs.

Mythonyms, on the one hand, demonstrate the dialog of Muslim, Christian, Buddhist, Jewish, Greco-Roman, Scandinavian, ancient Egyptian, Iranian and other cultures, and traditions within Bunin's texts; and on the other hand, they testify to the inclusion of Bunin's texts in the cultural space of ethnic mythologies (solar, cosmogonic, anthropological, eschatological, and other myths), religious and philosophical teachings, oral folk art.

There is no doubt that further study of the textual functioning of mythonyms and other semantic groups of onyms is promising in terms of creating an onomastic model of I. A. Bunin's idiostyle, solving the question of the specifics of individual author textual formation. After all, it is the mythonyms that become the open linguistic dominants setting other lexical units in motion and acting as a means of reconstructing semantic dominants.

_{¹ Bunin, I.A. (2014). Poems (T.M. Dvinyatina, introductory article, compilation, text preparation, notes). St. Petersburg: Pushkin House Publ., Vita Nova Publ.}

_{² Bunin, I.A. (2014). Poems (vol. 2, p. 28).}

_{³ Ibid., p. 159.}

_{⁴ Bunin, I.A. (2014). Poems (vol. 2, p. 89).}

_{⁵ Ibid., p. 131.}

_{⁶ Ibid., p. 12.}

_{⁷ Ibid., p. 105.}

_{⁸ Ibid.}

_{⁹ Bunin, I.A. (2014). Poems (vol. 1, p. 183).}

_{¹⁰ Ibid., vol. 2, p. 68.}

_{¹¹ Ibid., p. 104.}

_{¹² Ibid., p. 87.}

_{¹³ Ibid., vol. 1, p. 274.}

_{¹⁴ Ibid., vol. 2, p. 8.}

_{¹⁵ Tokarev, S.A. (1998). Myths of the peoples of the world. Vol. 1. A‒K (p. 121). Мoscow: Bolshaya Rossiyskaya Encyclopedia Publ.}

_{¹⁶ Ibid., p. 160.}

_{¹⁷ Bunin, I.A. (2014). Poems (vol. 2, p. 50).}

_{¹⁸ Ibid., vol. 1, p. 311‒312.}

_{¹⁹ Ibid., p. 259.}

_{²⁰ Ibid., vol. 2, p. 78.}

_{²¹ Ibid., p. 28.}

_{²² Ibid., p. 27.}

_{²³ Bunin, I.A. (2014). Poems (vol. 1, p. 117).}

_{²⁴ Ibid., p. 233.}

_{²⁵ Bunin, I.A. (2014). Poems (vol. 1, p. 286).}

About the authors

Olga A. Selemeneva

Author for correspondence.
Email: ol.selemeneva2011@yandex.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-0488-8428
SPIN-code: 4731-7091

Doctor of Philology, Associate Professor, Professor at the Department of the Russian language, Russian Teaching Methodology and Document Science

References