Том 84, № 4 (2025)

Аn utterance of the form “N_DATBYTʼ NE V_INF” (Mne ne (po)guljatʼ po Parižu ‘It is impossible that I go for walks in Paris’) contains a verb in the infinitive that syntactically depends on the verb BYTʼ ‘be’.Such utterances present in fact two different constructions: one with an infinitive in the perfective aspect, and another one with an infinitive in the imperfective aspect. These constructions implement two idioms: [X-u] ˹BYTʼ … NE˺¹1 [Y-nutʼ] ‘It is/was/will be impossible that X has done Y’ and [X-u] ˹BYTʼ … NE˺¹2 [Y-atʼ] ‘It will be impossible that X does Y’. Both idioms are syntactically discontinuous (their lexical components are not syntactically linked). The paper describes two illustrative sentences that contain these idioms, giving and discussing their formal representations on the semantic, deep-syntactic and surface-syntactic levels; it also presents the lexical entries for both idioms with detailed linguistic comments.

The issues of creating a register (catalog) of online scientific philological information resources (FIR) at INION RAS are discussed. The history of the creation of firms and FIR catalogs is briefly described. The objectives of FIR cataloging are formulated: defining the boundaries of the subject area, assigning cataloging and user audience, defining requirements for firms, and developing a catalog management methodology. The issues of FIR quality are considered in detail, including genre content, relevance, professionalism of training, form of presentation, location of FIR creation. The typology and thematic classification of firms, the functionality of the catalog, the organization and methodology of its management are discussed. The tasks that need to be solved in the implementation of a sustainable and in-demand catalog of companies are formulated.

This paper discusses the results of further exploration of Kartvelian data against the background of the typological database of bivalent constructions BivalTyp. The emphasis is placed on the statistically significant findings that can characterize Kartvelian material as part of the whole sample.

The article is devoted to the analysis of the previously unnoticed connection between Gleb Uspensky’s story “She Straightened Out” (1885) and Zinaida Gippius’ story “The Goddess” (1893). The starting point of this research is the T.V. Dyachuk’s paradoxical thesis about the influence of the personality and creativity of Gleb Uspensky on the aesthetic and religious searches of the thinkers of the Silver Age. During the analysis of the Gippius’ story it was found that the connection between the two texts is based on the main female character’s image, which is created by “layering” associations with the statue of Venus. It is also noted that the key characteristics of this image, as well as the image of the statue of Venus de Milo in the Uspensky’s text, are visuality and sacrality. The image of the main male character is also analyzed: his main features (absent name, “spectator” behavior and experienced “straightening” effect) reveal the connection of the story with the story “She Straightened Out”. Other numerous coincidences in the Gippius’ text at the lexical, figurative and semantic levels are also described. The key device influencing the structure of the story “The Goddess” is the qui pro quo: a catastrophic substitution of the “goddess” by an “ordinary young lady” is performed in text. It is concluded that the functioning of the source text in the story is implicit: the ideas and images of “She Straightened Out” were perceived by Gippius as related and, transformed, embodied in her own text without setting them to be recognized by the reader and/or to be polemic with Uspensky.

The article examines the mythological allusion to the aesthetics of the god Apollo in the story “Apollo and Tamara” by M.M. Zoshchenko. The allusion is correlated with the Apollonism of F. Nietzsche and the mythological semantics formed around the image of the god Apollo. We note that in the story one can see the author’s verification of Nietzsche’s idea: simultaneously with the exposure of the ugliness of real life, the collapse of beautiful illusions occurs. In addition, the plot of the musical competition between Apollo Perepenchuk and Belenky probably resembles the mythological plot of Apollo and Marsyas/Dionysus; this plot reminiscence to a certain extent reflects the tendency of mutual penetration or competition in culture, and behind the aesthetic antithesis there is a hidden socio-cultural opposition: aristocratic and mass culture, classical and modern. It should also be noted that in the story Apollonism and Dionysism reflect the problem of the incompatibility of the concepts of “I” and “we”, individualism and collectivism.

The article makes an attempt to trace the history of the participation of the critic Yu.I. Aikhenvald in the Collected Works of A.S. Pushkin, ed. S.A. Vengerov. Aikhenvald’s letters to Vengerov, stored in the Manuscript Department of the Institute of Russian Literature of the Russian Academy of Sciences, as well as draft letters to the critic for 1907–1908, contained in Vengerov’s Office Book, are analyzed. In the Collected Works of Pushkin, only 2 essays by Aikhenvald were published – about “The Fountain of Bakhchisarai” and about “Poltava” – although another essay about “Gypsies” was sent, and it was assumed that the critic would provide another essay about “Mozart and Salieri” and about “A stingy knight”. It is concluded that it was the work on the essays in the Collected Works of Pushkin that gave Aikhenvald the idea of including chapters on Pushkin’s works in the 2nd edition of the I Issue of “Silhouettes of Russian Writers”. It was the work on the reissue of “Silhouettes...” and the release of this collection in the fall of 1908 that did not allow Aikhenvald to continue participating in the Collected Works of Pushkin. The Appendix publishes a number of letters from Aikhenvald and some editions of letters from Vengerov’s Office Book concerning the history of the critic’s participation in this publication. Two letters from Aikhenvald to Vengerov, written after the appearance of Vengerov’s article “Critic-Impressionist” (1910), are also published.

The article makes an attempt to trace the history of the participation of the critic Yu.I. Aikhenvald in the Collected Works of A.S. Pushkin, ed. S.A. Vengerov. Aikhenvald’s letters to Vengerov, stored in the Manuscript Department of the Institute of Russian Literature of the Russian Academy of Sciences, as well as draft letters to the critic for 1907–1908, contained in Vengerov’s Office Book, are analyzed. In the Collected Works of Pushkin, only 2 essays by Aikhenvald were published – about “The Fountain of Bakhchisarai” and about “Poltava” – although another essay about “Gypsies” was sent, and it was assumed that the critic would provide another essay about “Mozart and Salieri” and about “A stingy knight”. It is concluded that it was the work on the essays in the Collected Works of Pushkin that gave Aikhenvald the idea of including chapters on Pushkin’s works in the 2nd edition of the I Issue of “Silhouettes of Russian Writers”. It was the work on the reissue of “Silhouettes...” and the release of this collection in the fall of 1908 that did not allow Aikhenvald to continue participating in the Collected Works of Pushkin. The Appendix publishes a number of letters from Aikhenvald and some editions of letters from Vengerov’s Office Book concerning the history of the critic’s participation in this publication. Two letters from Aikhenvald to Vengerov, written after the appearance of Vengerov’s article “Critic-Impressionist” (1910), are also published.