Poetic discourse: text, hermeneutics, harmony

The article is devoted to the investigation of poetic discourse. Discourse is understood as the actualization of text structures in interaction with extralinguistic factors. The article considers the problems of understanding, methods of comprehension and the method of analyzing a poetic text; understanding of the unity of language and thinking, the author's axiological paradigm, refracted through the prism of the dynamics of cultural experience. The author analyze fiction that allow to retrace the formation of poetic concept. The influence of the structure on the formation of text is also presented. The main individual concepts are determined. The given examples illustrate the statements under consideration.

THE DEVELOPMENT OF ЕDUCATION IN THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE IN THE XVI TH CENTURY

This article discusses the education system and its important aspects, which were the basis for the development of the Ottoman Empire, which reached its peak of development in the XVI th century. There is also evidenceof the extensive attention paid to the field by sultans and other officials, as well as credible sources on its results. The article emphasizes that relations between independent Uzbekistan and the Republic of Turkey have always been in the spirit of friendship and solidarity, the proximity of the two peoples is associated not only with ethnicity, but also with the unity of language and religion, the historical unity of cultures.Index Terms: “Sibyan” schools, “dorut-talim”, “Darul-ibn”, “khalfa”, “Pusar”, Vaqfiya, “mudarris”, “mufid”, “donishmand”, “suhte”, Dor-al hadis, Dor al -kurra, Dor-at-tib

THE INTERACTION OF LANGUAGES AND CULTURES AS AN OBJECT OF POLYPARADIGMATIC RESEARCH

The focus of this article is on the integral unity of language and culture, which predetermined the evolution of the person speaking . An appeal to the ancient holistic methodology revealed the trinity of psychological intention and speech itself in the correlation with cultural values. Consequently, teaching a foreign language, focused on active communication with native speakers, is also an object of polyparadigmatic research, which should precede the development of new teaching technologies. The undertaken consideration made it possible to single out a synergetic approach as combining the teaching of a foreign language, culture and the way of beingness formed on their basis with a personal need for self-development and self-realization.

Difficulties in Understanding and Translating of Gen. 11, 1-9 into the Greek (LXX), Aramaic and Latin (Vulg) Languages

Настоящая статья посвящена филологическому анализу библейского повествования о возведении Вавилонского города и башни. В первой части исследования был переведён на русский язык и проанализирован масоретский текст Быт. 11, 1-9. Благодаря этому были определены ключевые темы для изучения: единство языка, технология и цель строительства города и башни, суд Божий относительно замысла людей; каждой из них посвящён отдельный параграф статьи. В результате стало очевидным, что при переводе данного фрагмента из Ветхого Завета авторы LXX использовали, вероятно, методы таргумической интерпретации библейского текста, что явно отразилось на Vulg и святоотеческих комментариях. This article is dedicated to the philological analysis of the biblical story about the building of the Babylon's city and tower. In the first part of the studying, the Masoretic text of Gen. 11, 1-9 was translated into Russian and was analyzed. Due to this, the key topics for studying were identified: the unity of language, technology and purpose of the building of the city and the tower, the judgment of God regarding to the intention of people; each of which is dedicated to a separate paragraph of the article. As a result, it became obvious that in translating this fragment from the Old Testament, the authors of LXX probably used methods of targumic interpretation of the biblical text, which clearly affected on the Vulg and on the St.-Fathers commentaries.

LINGUOCULTURAL PECULIARITIES OF GERMAN AND GEORGIAN PHRASEOLOGICAL UNITS – CONTRASTIVE ANALYSIS

Knowledge about the world begins with gaining knowledge about the language. Language is a part of our national culture and plays one of the main roles in its formation. Unity of language, culture and thinking determines and forms not only national mentality, but national character as well. Specific features of the national identity are reflected in phraseological units. Phraseological unit in German, as well as in Georgian language, is a complex verbal formation. Linguistic and extralinguistic factors play an importanat role in the formation and development of phraseological units. But there are still questions – how are these phraseological units created and which language is the source language and which one is the target one. Our goal is to study the origin and structure of some German phraseological units (especially idiomatic phraseology)and to find their equivalents in Georgian. We also aim at enriching idiomatic phraseologisms with the examples of their actual use in current parlance, finding their Georgian equivalents. The present work tries to contribute to broadening the scope of investigation and methodology of the previous contrastive German-Georgian phraseology research and fill research gaps in this field.

PECULARITIES OF THE OSSETIAN NATIONAL IDENTITY

Единство языка, культуры и традиций было важным фактором, объединяющим разрозненные осетинские сообщества, расположенные как на территории Северной и Южной Осетии, так и на сопредельных территориях. Одной из особенностей осетин как этноса является то, что, согласно сведени- ям В.Ф. Миллера, в XIX в. у них не было единого самоназвания. Это же отмечала и Н.Г. Волкова, которая утверждала, что в своей собственной среде осетины четко различают две группы: иронцев и дигорцев. Она же считала, что общее название для всей территории Осетии в осетинском языке отсутствует. Осе- тины почувствовали себя единой нацией впервые за долгое время в конце 80-х – начале 90-х годов двадцатого века под воздействием внешних угроз. The unity of language, culture and traditions was an important factor in bringing together separate Ossetian communities located in the territory of both North and South Ossetia, as well as in the neighbouring territories. One of the characteristics of the Ossetians, as an ethnos, is that they have no common name, according to V.F. Miller in the 19th century. The same was noted by N.G. Volkova, who claimed that the Ossetians in their own environment are clearly distinguished into two groups: the Irons and Digors. She also considered the Ossetic language lacked a common name for the whole territory of Ossetia. The Ossetians felt national unity for the fi rst time in many years in late 1980s and early 1990s, being under the infl uence of external threats.