1. The Subject matter of Text linguistics

3. The main directions of development of text linguistics
Stages of formation of text linguistics
"The problem of the text and the mechanisms of its formation is one of the most urgent in modern linguistics." Such, approximately, words begin numerous works devoted to the study of various aspects of this problem. Our study was carried out within the framework of text linguistics, a relatively new field of language science, which is actively developing in accordance with the scientific paradigms of modern linguistics.
Despite the relative novelty of the linguistic formulation of the question, the study of the text has a long history. At the first stage of the formation of linguistic science, the main task of researchers was considered to be the identification and description of the general patterns of human language and, in particular, "the creation of a system of general linguistic categorization, a systematics of linguistic forms in accordance with their function in the structure of the language mechanism, taking into account their semantic status in the language system" [Keiko, Olkhovikov 1982, p.29]. However, it should be noted that even ancient traditions were based on texts, which were the main object of research, interpretation and commentary, and on their basis the teaching of correct literary speech was formed. Of course, the text as such has not yet been the subject of study, or rather, grammar has not yet postulated such a subject. However, already in this period, at least in the Greco-Latin tradition, certain types of texts were distinguished. In the philological studies of antiquity, there were three main areas: grammar, studying "natural" texts, poetics - poetic texts and rhetoric - "a philological discipline that studies the ways of constructing artistic and expressive speech, primarily prose and oral" [Toporov 1990, p. 416] . Thus, the questions of the text, primarily oral, and the rules for its construction were the prerogative of rhetoric. "Obviously, - believes Yu.A. Levitsky, - that the problem of generating a text and to some extent its typology goes back to ancient rhetoric" [Levitsky 1998, p.4].
A similar division into grammar, rhetoric and poetics persisted in the Middle Ages, but later, in the 13th century, rhetoric and poetics united within the framework of a common direction - stylistics, which was "a section of linguistics that has style as its main subject in all linguistic meanings of this term" [ Stepanov 1990, p. 492]. In the 20th century, a new discipline appears - functional stylistics, which studies "the text in general, the speech act, oral or written" [ibid.]. In this regard, the functional style "appears as a result of the speaker's choice of linguistic forms from the possibilities previously given by the language ... and their combination in a speech act depending on its purpose" [Stepanov 1990, p. 493]. The subject of stylistics as a whole is the speech act and the text as its result.
In the second half of the 20th century, a kind of revival or "return" of rhetoric takes place [Avelichev 1986, pp. 18-24]. However, by this time, speech and text studies were carried out not only from the standpoint of stylistics and general rhetoric. There are a number of areas that focus on the same text: linguistics (grammar) of the text, pragmatics, sociolinguistics, psycholinguistics.
Text linguistics - the discipline in line with which our research was carried out - is "the direction of linguistic research, the object of which are the rules for constructing a coherent text and its semantic categories expressed according to these rules" [Nikolaeva 1990, p.267]. Many scholars now regard text linguistics as a broader science that includes several disciplines, studying not only the text, but also the textual approach to lower-level language units.
The first of the directions of Text Linguisticsreveals the contain, components associated with ensuring correct communication and, thereby, the correct construction of the text in general. This, more general, branch of Text Linguisticsdetermines the semantic differences in the use of communicatively oriented components of the statement - articles, attract. and indicate. pronouns, modal communicative particles, evaluative adjectives, verb types, accent underscores, etc. The semantic differences revealed in this case are related to the rules of logical. deployment of the content of the text, and to the rules of pragmatic. nature, defining a certain general fund of knowledge, common to the author and perceiving the "picture of the world", without unity, the text will be incomprehensible. This applies to the so-called. presuppositions. In this case, the text is understood as a wide contextual-consituational communicative environment - existing, implied or created by the author if he wants to influence the perceiver. For example, in the statements “The rumor about Don Juan even penetrated into a peaceful monastery”, “I didn’t even save a ruble,” a certain common fund of knowledge among the participants in communication is assumed. That. these statements correspond to the domain of generalizations. presuppositions. Statements like “He didn’t want this”, “I was a beauty in my youth”, thanks to the particles “same” and “because”, convey, as it were, well-known information about the facts or even impose the presented facts as well-known. By means of emphasis, one can convey a fact as a result of something long-awaited, possible (“Grandfather fell ill”) or, on the contrary, as an unexpected fact (“Grandfather fell ill!”). The use of owls the form in the imperative with the negation of "not" defines the situation as not controlled by the actant: "Just don't fall into his eyes", "Don't fall into the well"; on the contrary, non-owls. The view indicates a call to active action for the perceiver: “Just don’t get caught in his eyes”, “Don’t fall into the well.”

This direction of Text Linguisticsmerges with pragmatics, psycholinguistics, rhetoric, stylistics, and the theory of presuppositions. Dr. the direction of Text Linguisticsis engaged in the identification of deep meanings contained in one c.-l. closed text. In this case, the definition of the principle of the use of linguistic units (including the non-use of CL categories or separate ways of expressing them) helps to determine those sometimes hidden from literary scholars. and stylist. analysis of the semantic oppositions and themes of the text: for example, the opposition of the Russian Polovtsy in the "Tale of Igor's Campaign." as individuals - to an individualized enemy merging with the elements is expressed in the text of the monument through the absence of appeals in relation to the Polovtsy, they will attract. pronouns, generic concepts and titles, restrictive clauses, iedefinitions. nouns in singular hours, etc.

This direction approaches hermeneutics as an interpretation of the implicit meaning of the text; it is especially fruitful when applied to ancient texts, folk-archaic structure, as well as to poetic. texts. In both cases, Text Linguisticsin own. sense of the word studies, contains, the orientation of the choice of one k.-l. forms of two raviopossible in the text (for example, it is permissible to use both types of the verb, both articles, different word order, etc.); in this way, linguistic grammar differs from grammar, which prescribes one possible form, from stylistics, which determines the most appropriate unit for a given style, from rhetoric, which seeks the optimum. form of persuasion.
Explicit identification and development of these two directions as different 'can resolve the dispute about the primacy of the written or oral text in literary texts and whether it is possible to consider one isolated text as a text. statement.
The question of the boundaries of Text Linguistics turn as an integral part of the theory of the text.
In the most general form, the text is characterized as "a product of people's verbal and cogitative activity that arises both in the process of cognition of the surrounding reality and in the process of direct and indirect communication" [1, p.3-4].

At the same time, some researchers note that the definition of a text simply as a result of speech activity requires fundamental clarification from the point of view of psycholinguistics. So, L.N. Murzin writes "... a text is not just a product of speech activity, but the very process of creating a product. It does not exist outside of our consciousness, outside the processes of generation and perception. Therefore, the text is procedural and dynamic in nature. This is also the result of our speech activity, and at the same time the activity itself'' [55. p.3].