The Birth of a Myth in the Literary Works by S. Sanbaev: the Archetype of Cosmogony

Full Text

Introduction

20th-century literature is distinguished by the unique nature of artistic quest, particularly the synthesis of realism and neo-mythologism. Mythologism often becomes a figurative embodiment of an intellectual principle that does not contradict the tenets of a realistic portrayal of reality. Mythology remains for literature the basis of motifs, images, and archetypes. Many works pose pressing moral questions to their readers.

The relationship between myth and literature is a problem that still requires scientific understanding. Myth is interpreted as a narrative of a special type, born of spontaneous artistry and having aesthetic significance. The direction of the myth is always harmonizing: it is a victory over the forces of Chaos, as noted by  E. Meletinsky. By accepting conventional forms of life, myth contributes to the creation of some higher reality, which is perceived by the bearers of a given tradition as a source of the ideal. Mythological thinking is affective, concrete, and sensuous: these very qualities ensure the poetics of myth. By virtue of its syncretism, myth cannot be reduced to strictly artistic phenomena; nevertheless, its artistic origin is undeniable. According to E. Meletinsky, world literature has gone from universal symbolism to realism, having overcome three stages: mythologism, demythologization, and remythologization [1].

Remythologization contrasts the poetry of myth with the prose of everyday life; it is in myth that views that are universal are embodied.

What is myth? It is a collective fantasy capable of reflecting reality in the form of a system of concretely sensual, tangible personifications, conceivable to the bearer of archaic consciousness as reality itself. In terms of this system, the world is not only described but also known. Literature, science, and religion differentiated themselves from mythology at later stages of civilization. When included in new structures, mythological models are reinterpreted. Relics of mythological thinking are residually preserved in the consciousness of modern society. Myth is a symbolic expression of events that took place in the history of people during the archaic stages of their development. Even Socrates said that a poet, to be a true poet, must create myths, not arguments. Literature as a system of symbols does not appeal to any particular myth, but to Myth as a generic concept; in a sense, it itself is Myth. Art in the modern world replaces the mythology of primitive society: literature can rise to a comprehensive reality.

American researcher D. Vickery offers four principles of mythological literary criticism. According to the first, the creation of myths is inherent in human thinking itself. It meets the basic needs of human consciousness. The second principle says that myth is the fundamental principle from which literature arose historically. The third principle suggests that myth not only initiates artistic creation but also provides images for its interpretation. The fourth principle is that the ability of literature to move people is due to its mythological qualities. Thus, the role of literature lies in its expression of the essence of myth — namely, creating for a person a sense of the meaning of his life.

Through the myth-making of Kazakh writers, a structuring of the world took place, on which the very national consciousness of the people is based. If Soviet literature considered the mythological nature of artistic discourse as the original property of “young written literature”, then for the Kazakh writer it was an act of introspection, understanding his own soul as the soul of a representative of an authentic ethnic group. This was determined by several extralinguistic factors: the departure from the nomadic type of management contributed to the disintegration of national identity, and the writer had to take on the role of the Myth-Creator, carrying spiritual information in his work.

According to Carl Jung, myth-making is a real function of a civilized person [2. P. 81]. National identity is becoming an important task of our time: its function is to unify the country’s population, united by common interests and ideas about life. In this context, mythology acts in this case as a “unifying principle”.

The revival of the historical experience of the past, national traditions, and customs is involved in the reconstruction of the national worldview, which acts as a mechanism for the spiritual consolidation of the ethnic community. It is through mythology that the individual plunges into the past, which creatively transforms him and returns him to reality mentally whole and protected. According to Jung, the essence of immersion in mythology is a return to one’s origins.

Methodological basis

The first attempts to homogenize the Kazakh nation belong to the writers of the 20th century: it is they who sought to create harmony out of chaos, to bring an existential sound into literature.

The connection between Kazakh literature and mythology is genetic: art originates from the depths of traditional mythology, its motifs and archetypal images, including cosmogony as the birth of a new world, the eternal confrontation between the forces of good and evil, descent into the underworld, wandering into labyrinth, the motif of an orphan child, a journey to the end of the world in search of sacred knowledge or finding a treasure as an attribute of the sacred. Art grows from the very depths of the human spirit: myth opens a path for the individual to create a new world.

Kazakh literature of the second half of the 20th century is anthropocentric, but the person is not considered in it as an immanent, self-contained being; he is included in the history of mankind, his existence being is universal and archetypal. The Kazakh writer is a thinker who is aware of the power of retransmitted images.

Kazakhstan has developed its own mythological school. It goes back to the folkloric works of Ch. Valikhanov, A. Baitursynov, M. Auezov, S. Kaskabasov, and E. Tursunov. Thus, in the works of S. Kaskabasov we find mythological and ritual structures of folklore. In the work “Kazakh non-fairytale prose” the researcher uses such terms as myth, mythical consciousness, mythical time, and mythological thinking [3].

According to S. Kondybay, the Kazakh equivalent of the term myth is “ertegi”, in literal translation — a legend, a fairy tale. This word goes back to the proto-form ert, “action”, “order”: a body of knowledge of an ideological nature in ancient times meant certain rules governing social behavior. In Old Kazakh, this signified “myth”. Subsequently, when myth ceased to be realized and lived as a reality, the term acquired modern actual semantics — “fairy tale”. It gave impetus to the emergence of such formulas as “a long time ago, in time immemorial” (ertede)¹.

Researcher E. Tursunov introduces the concept of secondary mythologization into scientific circulation. He sees the ideological core of Kazakh mythology in the cult of ancestors (worship of aruakhs), noting that it is typical for Kazakhs to comprehend themselves in the world in the aspect of mythological time. The present is perceived in unity with the past, and the past is perceived as the present. This is manifested, in particular, in ideas about the totem: the totem is not only the ancestor of humans (for example, the Wolf), but also their contemporary. The man, the bearer of the mythological consciousness, is convinced that he descends from the Wolf, but he himself is the Wolf. Mythological motifs, according to Tursunov, appear not only in folklore but also in literature [4].

Sh. Yeleukenov believes that myth is the cornerstone of the Kazakh epic —  it contains the rudiments of the people’s worldview. Through the work of akyns and zhyrau, the myth entered the “flesh of Kazakh prose” [5].

The achievement of the Kazakh mythological school was the fundamental work of S. Kondybay “Mifke oralu” (“Return to the myth”). According to scientists, the myth is the focus of the cultural memory of mankind, it is the possibility of creating a single field of the Kazakh scientific paradigm. He believes that the reconstruction of Kazakh mythology should take place at the intersection of such humanities disciplines as linguistics, literary criticism, folklore, philosophy, psychology, ethnography, archeology, cultural studies. Understanding the Turkic world itself is possible through the comprehension of the Kazakh language itself. Mythology, according to S. Kondybai, is “the brain of any independent nation”². National mythology, according to M.M. Auezov, allows a people to answer the etiological and teleological questions (“Who are we?”, “Where are we going from?”, “What are we striving for?”) and is the foundation for Kazakhstan’s cultural self-sufficiency.

Literature has always been the material that “nourishes” the theory of myth. Myth is born in the depths of human consciousness, it is supraindividual, therefore its archetypal core is universal. Differences in mythology are due to the life situation of ethnic groups. The retransmission of archetypal motifs leads us to the idea of the existence of a single primary source—the Creator.

“The idea of some divine essence, the power of which surpasses any human conception, was always widespread everywhere and manifested itself… unconsciously, since it is precisely this that is the archetype. …It seems that we have no choice but to consciously recognize the idea of God” [2. P. 35]. This study does not adhere to a single mythological school — ritual, linguistic, structuralist or archetypal. However, we will turn to the methodological basis of each of them during our analysis to solve a specific task — to identify the mythological substratum in the work of S. Sanbaev “White Aruana”.

If the Kazakh writer expresses the national spirit in the myth, it is worth noting that the “national” is not an immanent spiritual system, it is expressed in the manifestation of the existential in a person. Myths make up the sum of knowledge that people use: only an appeal to accumulated experience allows a person to continue his individual existence. Forgetting the contents of the collective memory is tantamount to a regression to a state of nature, sin, or catastrophe [6].

The return to myth, as demonstrated in Kazakh literature, is an awareness of another, divine world or the world of ancestors, since literature is a continuation of the mythological narrative: going beyond time, carried out with the help of reading, is what brings together the functions of myth and literature.

The mythological way of mastering the world has become for Kazakh literature a way of creative transformation of reality. The Kazakh worldview is characterized by such features as a sense of freedom, an inextricable connection with nature, a religious community with Being, and predestination.

Camel Mythology in Nomadic Culture

According to O.K. Abisheva, in the modern literature of Kazakhstan there is an image that goes back to myth as an archaic-traditional form of thinking [7]. This is the image of the camel, represented by two variants of manifestation: Bactrian (two-humped camel) and Aruana (one-humped camel). The camel is one of the animals that formed the basis of the nomadic type of management; the whole way of life of the peoples of Central Asia relates to it. The camel was domesticated in pastoral as early as culture five thousand years BC. Being the main support of the nomad’s economy, the camel is distinguished by its excellent adaptability to environmental conditions: it endures heat, goes without water for a long time, is unpretentious in food, resistant to cold, moves across the steppes and dunes. Its main need is space, expanse. The symbolism of the Bactrian and Aruana goes back to ancient archetypal images of nomadic culture. In the strict sense, this is a mythologeme—an element of a literary text, a collective pattern contained in the subconscious of the people, relayed both in a myth and in a literary work. Thus, this is an archaic motif, based on which a mythological or literary plot can be reconstructed. The image of the camel is one of the mythologems of Turkic culture.

We consider the image of a camel in its connection with the higher spheres of being. Archaic consciousness perceives all phenomena and elements as personifications of various animals and deities; in the hierarchy of these figurative and symbolic representations, the camel occupies a special place as an intermediary between man and Heaven. The symbolism of the image of a camel goes back to the idea of an indivisible single Cosmos; it is created from nothing and is itself the fundamental principle. In the worldview of the Turks, he is a symbol of the primordial world [8].

In the mythology of the Turkic peoples, the camel has a special place. So, in The Book of My Grandfather Korkut [7], common for the Turkic tribes, there is a legend about a winged camel, on which the baksy travels around the four cardinal points, escaping from death. According to the legend, it was predicted to a great old man that he would die if he remembered death. In all corners of the world he sought salvation, however, wherever he went, everywhere people dug graves. Then he killed his companion—a magical camel —and made a musical instrument—kobyz —from the skin around her neck. According to the Kazakh ethnographer A.K. Akishev, the myths about the heavenly camel (sometimes it is a fire-breathing camel) embody the image of the solar thunder god. In Mongolian fairy tales, the Tengrian Thunderers traveled on camels; in the mythology of the Iranians, the image of a camel was associated with the image of a snake-dragon; he was identified with the cosmos [8. P. 74].

Among the Kazakhs, the camel was the most expensive sacrifice brought to higher powers. It was also considered a talisman: its bones were used in healing magic, meat was valued as apotropaic. The camel embodied the idea of fertility; in this sense, his image was associated with male power. It is a symbol of endurance, vitality, power, perseverance. In the art of the nomads of Central Asia, the image of a camel is extremely widespread. The first rock carvings, according to L.I. Rempel, appear in the 2nd millennium BC [9]. These are scenes of running and fighting camels found in Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, and Turkmenistan. A censer was discovered on the territory of Semirechye, the symbolism of which A.K. Akishev calls cosmogonic. In the center of the bowl are images of camels with their heads to each other; their four humps symbolize the four cardinal directions. Their pairing could also mean gender differences; in this case, they personify the fruitful forces of the earth, the dual unity of cosmic principles, the dialectics of Indo-Iranian mythology itself [8. P. 75].

An image of an animal with the head of a camel was also found in modern-day Uzbekistan. Various items — statuettes, coins, and gems with images of a camel — testify to the existence of a cult tradition of this animal. I.L. Rempel identifies several significant aspects in the interpretation of the camel: the cultic, the dynastic, and the ludic. Its image was correlated with the indomitability and power of the god of war and victory. “In this aspect, the camel people and its winged double are, as it were, a cosmic deity. It also served as a sign of royalty and greatness. All three aspects named above—cultic, dynastic, and ludic—correspond at the same  time historical development of images of thinking: mythological, epic, folklore”  [9. P. 97–98].

The image of the camel in the cultures of Central Asia was considered sacred. In the works of writers of this region there are plots that retransmit it. The recurrence of this image also indicates that it is a kind of mythopoetic invariant, which contains many meanings in a reduced way.

Satimzhan Sanbaev’s “White Aruana”

The prose of Satimzhan Sanbaev occupies an important place in the contemporary literary process of Kazakhstan. Its distinctive feature is the artist’s excellent knowledge of the national way of aul (village) life. The author’s works (“And the Eternal Battle”, “When They Thirst for a Myth”, “Wells of the Hot Valleys”, “The Old Pipe”, “The Black Whirlwind”, etc.) are characterized by deep philosophicality, contemplation, and an interweaving of the semantic and figurative levels of the artistic word. “White Aruana” is one of the early works of the writer. The story deals with love for the motherland, loneliness, the fragility of human happiness. The work is full of associations and cultural codes. The plot of the story unfolds against the backdrop of the expanse of the steppe; bright author’s sketches allow the reader to plunge into the rhythm of aul life.

Sanbaev’s work is materialized in the style of a folk song epic; its fabric is permeated with poetic repetitions, inversions, lyrical monologues, which makes it possible to correlate the text, both compositionally and intonationally, with the authentic tolgau genre—contemplation-reflection [10]. The chosen genre style gives the author the opportunity to recreate the intonation of thoughts about the universe, life, nature. The folklore basis of the text is also the genre of legend  (the central motif is the devotion of animals to their native land).

The folklore technique of parallelism is the basis of the compositional drawing of the story: the fates of Myrzagali and Auruana are similar, which emphasizes the idea that a person is close to his roots.

The main characters of the story are old Myrzagali and a beautiful white camel; their destinies are intertwined, in a certain sense contaminated, and through the attitude of one subject of the narrative, we gain access to the psychological experiences of another. It is through the image of Aruana that the reader is immersed in complex human relationships. The artistic fabric of the work remains intact; it does not delaminate, held together by the author’s presence in the text.

Myrzagali, who returned from the war infirm, is increasingly thinking about the emptiness and meaninglessness of his life: “He recalled if there was a minute when he tried to leave life ... He tried but could not. And no one, except for the old woman who lived this long and boring life with him, knew about his pain”³.

His only consolation is a small white camel, personifying for the old man everything pure and bright that was in his life. Aruana does not share Myrzagali’s feelings. She yearns for her homeland, for the once abandoned Mangistau. The story, which has a complex subtext, relates to the folklore legend of the Kazakhs about the fidelity of animals to their native land. For Aruana, there is not and cannot be “here-being.” The call of another life draws her to her native land. “It was the wind of the country of strange mountains, which she remembered. By the sea, by the Mek mountains, such a wind is born. The mountains are filled with strange, quiet sounds and, as it were, rush upward, straightening up, stretching waking up and—becoming even more impractical. Sensitive saigas tremble, turning their ears and sniffing this resonant dry wind, and run to the north, from the sun, lowering their heads into your short shadows; they hide their beaks in the grass; disturbingly looking at the shimmering sky, the shepherds drive the herds closer to the wells. The dry wind comes to Mangistau for a long time ... on the chest and stomach of the Aruana. She went further into the steppe, dissolving in a sultry haze”⁴.

Her homeland beckoned Aruana, and she ran away, but Myrzagali returned her time after time. The plot lines of the old man and the white camel do not just form a parallel; they are superimposed one on top of the other: the history of its owner also passes through the history of Aruana. In Aruana, unhappy and cut off from home, found herself alone among strangers, Myrzagali sees himself. It is quite obvious here that there are some analogies, a significant cross-talk of human and animal realities: in perceiving the camel’s experience, the reader subtly reframes this perception onto the level of human reactions, emotions, and feelings [11].

Myrzagali falls ill and ends up in the hospital; Aruana is subjected to execution: so that she does not run away and gives birth, the veins of her eyes are cut. But the memory of the home does not leave her. When a dry wind comes to the steppe, Aruana gives voice to her camel and runs towards the wind. She is driven by a great instinct; smooth and swift her run. Hearing the clatter of hooves overtaking her, the camel stumbles, makes a leap over a deep ravine and falls soundlessly. Myrzagali cries for a long time, living through his pain. Now he is bringing home his Aruana’s camel, a baby who knows only this house, who will be devoted to him for the rest of its life. “Ahead, swaying on long straight legs and stumbling, walked a willow. He wept thinly and pitifully, looking around, not yet realizing that he had lost his mother forever. He walked obediently in front of him, because ahead of him lay his homeland, lay the village where he was born and where yes, he will run away from here, like his mother, who all her life went to Mangistau”⁵.

As we noted above, the mythopoetic image of a camel is associated with the idea of originality and indivisibility. The mythological substratum of the image is a kind of prolepsis in the story about the eternal return to the origins. The image  of a white camel is associated with one of the basic universal archetypes —  the archetype of home.

We consider archetypes as patterns of the collective unconscious retransmitted in culture, carrying universal knowledge and ideas of a person about the world. This information was put into the core of the archetype through the centuries-old repetition of historical retranslation experienced by society from the archaic stage of its existence. Even though the historical context of the existence of the archetype changes, it remains an imprint of the original ideas of man about the world — according to Z. Freud, culture itself is built from the bricks of a long-forgotten worldview [12. P. 163]. Archetypes are constant, but their periphery is relatively mobile and adaptive.

“When Homo erectus, over the course of several millennia turned into Homo sapiens, three of its hypostases were simultaneously formed in its archetype:

1) the human mind appeared;

2) consciousness, thinking, and speech were formed;

3) the significance of his existence appeared,” writes A.K. Kairzhanov [13. P. 9].

An archetype is an element of the individual and collective psyche. It is versatile and dynamic. At the level of typical structures, such as motif and image, it is associated with myth — a prototype that repeats itself in culture.

According to A.F. Losev, myth is an intensely experienced, maximally concrete reality. Moreover, the myth is not a product of thought itself, that is, it does not represent an ideal being, or an abstraction. Myth is affective and tangible. It is not scientific, yet mythical truth is inherent. It is not metaphysical, because repelled from sensory experience and deals with “here-being” (this-worldliness, according to Losev’s formulation). Mythology is “vital and visual.” In this respect, it is not allegorical, that is, it is not seen as a set of schemes or parables, but symbolic. According to Losev’s final formula, myth is a miracle, or an expanded magical name [14].

Researcher Yu.V. Domansky proposes to understand archetypes as primary plot schemes, images or motifs that arose in the mind of a person at the earliest stage of human development [15. P. 11].

Home is one of the key spatial archetypes. Space is a category that is permanently filled with valuable content. On the one hand, this is everything that is outside the individual and therefore requires development — both material and mental. However, this archetype has another important structure — the existential one, and in this respect, it becomes the receptacle of the human soul itself.  “A person’s life is in space, which inevitably implies the question of the place of life — a country, a region, a city: what is it and what is the meaning of my life here? A person cannot bear the semantic and value emptiness of the place where he lives, he urgently needs to comprehend it and value it in order”⁶. According to  L.N. Gumilyov, “Even primitive man knew the boundaries of his habitat, the  so-called feeding and accommodating landscape in which he himself lived, his family and his tribe lived”⁷.

Thus, in Sanbaev’s story, we can consider the “home” archetype in two aspects. The first is the implementation of the spatial code, place, homeland. It correlates with the motive of return and is actualized in the work in the form of a white aruana. As we mentioned above, the camel and Myrzagali are in the work not only in a relationship of parallelism, but also in a certain contamination. This conclusion allows us to conclude that Myrzagali also needs to return; however, in this case, it is appropriate to talk not about a return to a specific topos (which took place; the old man returned to his native village after the war), but about a return to the origins — that mental and spiritual state that could be characterized as blissful for the hero. Myrzagali will have to return to the house of his own soul, to find peace and tranquility. Restoring the plot of the story, we see that the life of the protagonist is filled with sad events: he returned from the war infirm; wife cheated on him with a neighbor; the daughter living in the city does not communicate with her father. Aruana becomes for the old man the personification of the meaning of life. As an animal strives to return to its native Mangistau, so Myrzagali seek to restore integrity to his life. The camel is a cosmogonic symbol. The meaning of this mythologeme can be explicated through the motifs of cosmogonic originality, death and rebirth. Being an element of nomadic culture, the image of a camel is subject to the mythopoetic ideas of the Kazakh people about the rhythms of life-death-life, subject to the circular rotation of time. Such ideas are conditioned by the habitat of the ethno-collective itself: the world of the steppe, commensurate with the cycles of nature, obeys the laws of circular movement in space: from dzhailau (herds moving to summer pastures) to kuzdeu (autumn pastures), from kuzdeu to kystau (winter camps). The nomad’s world is polycentric: it is centered around a few ontologically significant places. However, the image of Aruana is associated with the theme of the one homeland to which she aspires. The camel is a dichotomous symbol. Realizing in its complex the semantics of the beginning, it also absorbs the meaning of the end. According to the research of A.K. Akishev, the image of the camel also carries the motive of death. The death of Aruana, in this sense, is a foregone conclusion: it should mark the initiatory transition that the protagonist has to make in order to regain his original integrity. This is the node level of the plot, leading the protagonist to catharsis. In this regard, the image of a camel born by Aruana is also significant: in the story it acts as a mythopoetic symbol of a new beginning, a new cosmogony in the soul of Myrzagali. In this case, we consider the “home” archetype in an existential aspect: it actualizes the idea of returning to the original state of the human soul, reborn and transformed.

Conclusions

The camel myth is one of the most significant in Central Asian literature. Camel mythology traces back to the ideas of nomads about cosmogony, the original indivisibility of life and death. It is no coincidence that the image of a camel, according to the views of the ancient nomads, incorporates elements of all known living beings. Folkloric and literary representations of this image are quite frequent. In the work of S. Sanbaev “White Aruana” the myth of the eternal return home is born. Three times the white Aruana runs away to Mangistau calling her; the third time (we note that the idea of finiteness is also embedded in the sacredness of the triad) turns out to be the last: the camel dies, realizing a significant component of her own figurative symbolism: the motive of death.

Being a cosmogonic symbol, the camel also realizes the semantics of death. In the ideas of nomadic peoples, death is a transition to a new cyclic segment of existence. Acting in the text as a kind of parallel to the main character, Myrzagali, aruana marks for him the transition to a new level. This meaning is supported by the image of a camel as the beginning of a new life cycle. The mythologeme of Aruana as a mythopoetic image is associated with the archetype of the home —  a sacred spatial code, which is natural to consider in two aspects: toponymic and existential.

The toponymic level of realization of the archetype is associated with the image of the white camel striving to return home. Existential — with the mental and spiritual space of Myrzagali, trying to restore integrity to his soul, and life — meaning. Thus, both protagonists return home. It is symptomatic that the white aruana dies: this mythopoetic image internally completes the motif of death and rebirth. Dying, the camel again becomes part of the universe. The semantics of the image as a cosmogonic symbol is updated. Having survived the death of his beloved, Myrzagali is also reborn: he returns home as a reborn person.

Thus, the camel myth develops not only the idea of devotion to one’s native land, but also of devotion to one’s own human essence — this idea becomes a concept-forming one for the entire narrative space of S. Sanbaev’s story.

 

_{¹ Kondybai, S. (2005). Kazakh Mythology: A Brief Dictionary. Almaty: Nurly Alem.}

_{² Kondybai, S. (2005). Kazakh Mythology: A Brief Dictionary. Almaty: Nurly Alem.}

_{³ Sanbayev, S. (2009). Collection of Works in 6 Volumes. Stories and Short Stories. Astana: Agroidat.}

_⁴ Ibid.

_{⁵ Sanbayev, S. (2009). Collection of Works in 6 Volumes. Stories and Short Stories. Astana: Agroidat.}

_{⁶ Gumilyov, L.N. (2019). Ancient Rus' and the Great Steppe. Moscow: Iris-press. (In Russ.). P. 5.}

_{⁷ Ibid. P. 5.}

About the authors

Sholpan A. Ismailova

Asfendiyarov Kazakh National Medical University

Author for correspondence.
Email: sholpan_is@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-6476-5702

PhD student, Senior Lecturer, lecturer in the Department of Language Disciplines

94 Tole Bi Str., Almaty, the Republic of Kazakhstan, 050000

Zhadyra A. Bayanbaeva

Al-Farabi Kazakh National University

Email: bayanbaevazhadra@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-1710-0791

PhD in Philology, Deputy Dean of the Faculty of Philology for Research and Innovation and International Cooperation

71 аl-Farabi Ave., Almaty, the Republic of Kazakhstan, 050040

Samalbai D. Daribaev

Al-Farabi Kazakh National University

Email: samal.daribaev@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-3551-770X

PhD in Philology, Senior Lecturer, Department of Kazakh Literature and Literary Theory

71 аl-Farabi Ave., Almaty, the Republic of Kazakhstan, 050040

References

Supplementary files