BITERNARY OPPOSITION AS AN ELEMENT OF MULTIPOLAR SOCIO-CULTURAL SYSTEM DESCRIPTION LANGUAGE IN POSTSTRUCTURAL ANTHROPOLOGY
https://doi.org/10.24833/2541-8831-2019-4-12-118-128
Abstract
The target of research is the structuralist and poststructuralist paradigm of describing and explaining cultural constants through binary or ternary semiotic codes. The author’s hypothesis, based on anthropological theories of V. Turner and Cl. Levi-Strauss as well as those of contemporary South American anthropologists E. V. de Castro and E. Kohn, is that socio-cultural oppositions must be considered not as binary but as ternary ones. The main aim is to trace the influence of structuralism and poststructuralism on the construction of binary, ternary, tetrary schemes of coordination and subordination of elements of complex «neuro»-systems in Ethnology and Social Anthropology. The originality of the study lies, first, in clarification of the formal components of binarism and its derivatives (such as «monodualism», «monotrialism», and «bitrialism», the latter being introduced into scholarly circulation for the first time) as an approach that claims to be a universal explanation of the existence of cultural constants, and, secondly, in author’s suggestion to replace the discrete horizontal and vertical planar projections of the «primitive ontology», produced by binary and ternary oppositions, with the one integrating them into three, namely tridimensional, «bitriplet». Conclusion: in social sciences logical binarism of structuralism together with post-structuralism were replaced by tetrary, monodual, bitriple semiotic schemes with a large number of poles and fractional scale divisions of the states of analyzed systems that are able to capture and describe not only two-dimensional but three-dimensional statically-balanced and dynamically-non-balanced states of complex metaphysical, mytho-ritual, and social systems.
About the Author
I. P. Davydov
Lomonosov Moscow State University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Doctor of Science (Philosophy), Associate Professor of Department of the Philosophy of Religion and Religious Studies, Faculty of Philosophy
Russia, 119991, GSP-1, Moscow, Lenin Hills, Moscow State University, Training and Research Corps «Shuvalov,» the Faculty of Philosophy). Philosophy of Religion and Religious Studies
ioasaph@yandex.ru
References
1. Dandes A. Binarnye oppozitsii v mife: retrospektivnyi vzgliad na polemiku Proppa i Levi-Strosa [Binary Opposition in Myth: The Propp / Lévi-Stross Debate in Retrospect]. Fol’klor: semiotika i/ili psikhoanaliz: Sb. Statei [Folklore: semiotics and / or psychoanalysis: Sat. articles]. / Tr. from English A.S. Arkhipova et al. Comp. A.S. Arkhipova. Moscow, Eastern Literature, 2003. pp. 108–118 (In Russian).
2. Dumézil G. Les Dieux souverains des Indo-Européens. Paris, Gallimard, 1977 (Russ.ed.: Diumezil’ Zh. Verkhovnye bogi indoevropeitsev / Per. s frants. T.V. Tsiv’ian. Moscow, Science, 1986. 234 p.).
3. Dumézil G. La Religion romaine archaïque, avec unappendice sur la religion des Étrusques. Paris: Payot, 1966. (Russ.ed.: Diumezil’ Zh. Religiia Drevnego Rima s prilozheniem, posviashchennym religii etruskov / Per. s frants. i latyni pod red. F.A. Pirvitsa i T.G. Sidasha. Saint-Petersburg, Kvadrivium, 2018. 896 p.).
4. Ivanov Viach.Vs. Izbrannye trudy po semiotike i istorii kul’tury: v 3 tt. T. 1 [Selected works on semiotics and cultural history: in 3 vols. T. 1]. Moscow, School «Languages of Russian culture», 1998. 912 p. (In Russian).
5. Ivanov Viach.Vs. Chet i nechet: asimmetriia mozga i znakovykh system [Even and odd: asymmetry of the brain and sign systems]. Moscow, Sov. radio, 1978. 184 p. (In Russian).
6. Ivanov Viach.Vs., Toporov V.N. Slavianskie iazykovye modeliruiushchie semioticheskie sistemy (Drevnii period) [Slavic language modeling semiotic systems (Ancient period)]. Moscow, Science, 1965. 246 p. (In Russian).
7. Castro Eduardo B. Viveiros, de. Métaphysiques cannibals. Paris, PUF, 2010 (Russ. ed.: Kastru E.V., de. Kannibal’skie metafiziki. Rubezhi poststrukturnoi antropologii / Tr. D.Iu. Kralechkina. Moscow, Ad Marginem Press, 2017 (2009). 142 p.).
8. Kohn E. How Forests Think: Toward an Anthropology Beyond the Human. Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2013 (Russ. ed.: Kon E. Kak mysliat lesa: k antropologii po tu storonu cheloveka / Tr. A. Borovikova. Moscow, Ad Marginem Press, 2018. 344 p.).
9. Lévi-Strauss Cl. Anthropologie structurale. Paris: Plon, 1958 (Russ. ed.: Levi-Stros K. Strukturnaia antropologiia / Tr. From fr., ed. Viach. Vs. Ivanova. Moscow, Science, 1985. 536 p.).
10. Lévi-Strauss Cl. Le totémismea ujourd`hui. Paris: PUF, 1962 (Russ.ed.: Levi-Stros K. Totemizm segodnia. Nepriruchennaia mysl’. Pervobytnoe myshlenie / Transl. from French, entry and approx. A.B. Ostrovsky. Moscow, Republic, 1994. pp. 37-336).
11. Lévi-Strauss Cl. La structure et la forme. Réflexions sur unouvrage de Vladimir Propp. Cahiers de l`Institut de Science Economique appliquée, 1960, № 9. pp. 3-36 (Russ.ed.: Levi-Stross K. Struktura i forma. Razmyshleniia ob odnoi rabote Vladimira Proppa. Frantsuzskaia semiotika: Ot strukturalizma k poststrukturalizmu / trans. with french and will enter G.K. Kosikova. Moscow, Progress, 2000. pp. 121-152).
12. Jakobson R., Lévi-Strauss Cl. «Les chats» de Charles Baudelaire. L`home, 1962, pp. 5–21 (Russ.ed.: LeviStross K., Iakobson R. «Koshki» Sharlia Bodlera. Frantsuzskaia semiotika: Ot strukturalizma k poststrukturalizmu / Trans. with french and enter. Art. G.K. Kosikova. Moscow, Progress, 2000. pp. 98-120.).
13. Koengas Maranda E., Maranda P. Structural Models in Folklore and Transformational Essays. Тhe Hague. – Paris, 1971. P. 16–94 (Maranda P., Kengas-Maranda E. Strukturnye modeli v fol’klore. Zarubezhnye issledovaniia po semiotike fol’klora: sb. statei / Tr. from English and french. T.V. Tsivyan. Moscow, Science, 1985. pp. 194-260.).
14. Ostrovskii A.B. Paradigma mifologicheskogo myshleniia: ocherk vklada K. Levi-Strosa [The paradigm of mythological thinking: a sketch of the contribution of K. Levy-Strauss]. Saint-Petersburg, Kronos, 2004. 182 p. (In Russian).
15. Panofsky E. Die Perspektiveals «symbolische Form». Vortraege der Bibliothek Warburg 1924/1925. Leipzig; Berlin, 1927 (Russ.ed.: Panofskii E. Perspektiva kak «simvolicheskaia forma». Perspektiva kak «simvolicheskaia forma». Goticheskaia arkhitektura i skholastika / Tr. with Germ. and English. Saint-Petersburg, ABC-Classic, 2004. pp. 30-211.).
16. Propp V. Fairy tale morphology. London, 1928 (Propp V.Ia. Morfologiia skazki. Leningrad, Academia, 1928. 152 p. [Rep .: Riga, b / g].).
17. Propp V.Ia. Strukturnoe i istoricheskoe izuchenie volshebnoi skazki [Structural and historical study of a fairy tale]. Fol’klor i deistvitel’nost’. Izbrannye stat’i [Folklore and reality. Selected Articles] / Comp. B.N. Putilova. Moscow, Science; Ch. ed. east Liters, 1976. pp. 132-152 (In Russian).
18. Radin P. The Trickster. A Study in American Indian Mythology.With commentaries by Karl Kerenyi and C.G. Jung. New York, Philosophical Library, 1956 (Russ.ed.: Radin P. Trikster. Issledovanie mifov severo-amerikanskikh indeitsev s kommentariiami K.G. Iunga i K.K. Keren’I / Tr. from English V.V. Kiryushchenko. Saint-Petersburg, Eurasia, 1999. 288 p.).
19. Trubetskoi N.S. Osnovy fonologii [Fundamentals of Phonology] / Tr. A.A. Kholodovich, ed. S.D. Katznelson’s afterword. A.A. Reformed. - 2nd ed. Moscow, Aspect Press, 2000. 352 p. (In Russian).
20. Turner Victor W. Three Symbols of Passage in Ndembu Circumcision Ritual: an Interpretation. Essays on the Ritual of Social Relations / by C.D. Forde, M. Fortes, M. Gluckman, V.W. Turner. Ed. by Max Gluckman. Manchester University Press, 1966 (1962). pp. 124–173; Turner Victor W. The Ritual Process.Structure and Anti-Structure. Cornell University Press, 1977 (1969); Turner Victor W. Revelation and Divination in Ndembu Ritual. Cornell University Press, 1975 (Russ. ed.: Terner V. Simvol i ritual / Transl. from English Comp. and foreword. V.A. Beilis. Moscow, Science, 1983a. 277 p.).
21. Turner V.W. Symbols in African Ritual. Science, 1973, Vol. 179, no. 4078, pp. 1100–1105 (Russ.ed.: Terner V. Simvoly v afrikanskom ritual. Simvol i ritual / Tr. from English Comp. and foreword. V.A. Beilis. Moscow, Science, 1983b. pp. 32–46.).
22. Tselesoobraznost’ cheloveka. Publichnaia lektsiia v «Novoi» antropologa, lingvista i semiotika Viacheslava Vsevolodovicha Ivanova. Voprosy zadaet Iuliia Latynina [The expediency of man. Public lecture in the «New» anthropologist, linguist and semiotics Vyacheslav Vsevolodovich Ivanov. Questions are asked by Julia Latynina]. Novaia gazeta - Novaya Gazeta, 2012a, no. 91. August 15. Available at: https://www.novayagazeta.ru/articles/2012/08/14/50996-tselesoobraznost-cheloveka (accessed 08 August 2019) (In Russian).
23. Tselesoobraznost’ cheloveka. Chast’ 2. Publichnaia lektsiia v «Novoi» antropologa, lingvista i semiotika Viacheslava Vsevolodovicha Ivanova. Voprosy zadaet Iuliia Latynina [The expediency of man. Part 2. Public lecture in the «New» anthropologist, linguist and semiotics Vyacheslav Vsevolodovich Ivanov. Questions are asked by Julia Latynina]. Novaia gazeta - Novaya Gazeta, 2012b, no. 92, August 17. Available at: https://www.novayagazeta.ru/articles/2012/08/16/51021-tselesoobraznost-cheloveka-chast-2 (accessed 08 August 2019) (In Russian).
24. Turner Victor W. On the Edge of the Bush. Anthropology as Experience. Tucson, Arizona, The University of Arizona Press, 1985. 328 p.
Review
For citations:
Davydov I.P. BITERNARY OPPOSITION AS AN ELEMENT OF MULTIPOLAR SOCIO-CULTURAL SYSTEM DESCRIPTION LANGUAGE IN POSTSTRUCTURAL ANTHROPOLOGY. Concept: philosophy, religion, culture. 2019;(4):118-128. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.24833/2541-8831-2019-4-12-118-128
Views:
695
Email this article 