title: Text-in-text and the paradoxes of set theory
metadata.name: dc.contributor.author
metadata.value: Belyak, Gavriil N.
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.accessioned
metadata.value: 2019-01-28T14:52:22Z
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.available
metadata.value: 2019-01-28T14:52:22Z
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.issued
metadata.value: 2018-12
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.identifier.citation
metadata.value: Belyak G. N. [Text-in-text and the paradoxes of set theory]. Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Language and Literature. 2018, 15 (4): 618–624.
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.identifier.other
metadata.value: 10.21638/11701/spbu09.2018.409
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.identifier.uri
metadata.value: http://hdl.handle.net/11701/15345
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.description.abstract
metadata.value: V. M. Markovich believed that the meaning-generating “truth of the paradox arises and can exist
  only in the oscillation between two (or several) opposing truths”. Referring to Yu. M. Lotman,
  he wrote that a text can be perceived by the reader as an equivalent of reality only if it can not be
  reduced at any level “to a united, comprehensive and complete system”. Markovich refers to Lotman
  pointing out the paradoxical nature of the relationship between teхt and language. A text
  is written (coded) in a certain language, and at the same time the language (code) is contained
  in the text itself. The composition “text in the text” is a variation of such paradoxical structure.
  Using works of M. Bulgakov, V. Nabokov, A. Bitov and S. Nosov as examples, the article shows
  that with such a composition the nested structure only seems to be an element of the text, while
  at the same time it can contain the whole as its own element. Therefore, this means that text as a
  whole contains itself as its element. In set theory, a set that includes itself as its element is called
  reflexive. It is one of the most well-known paradoxes of set theory that is connected with the
  properties of reflexive sets, namely the Russell paradox, built on the coincidence of the message
  and the code. Since the scientific discourse assumes that the message should be different from
  the code, the discovery at the beginning of the 20th century of a whole series of such paradoxes
  led to the creation of new axiomatic systems in which the construction of reflexive sets was not
  allowed. The construction of reflexive sets in the framework of an artistic text that is inadmissible
  for an exact science becomes a dynamic meaning-generating structure.
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.language.iso
metadata.value: ru
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.publisher
metadata.value: St Petersburg State University
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.relation.ispartofseries
metadata.value: Vestnik of St Petersburg University. Language and Literature;Volume 15; Issue 4
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: paradox
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: realism
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: composition
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: set theory
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: semiotics
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.title
metadata.value: Text-in-text and the paradoxes of set theory
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.type
metadata.value: Article
metadata.lang: en_GB
resources.filename: 10-Belyak.pdf
resources.url: https://dspace.spbu.ru/bitstream/11701/15345/1/10-Belyak.pdf
resources.format: Adobe PDF
resources.size: 590,34 kB