Sloppy and inaccurate attribution of images. Method of attribution, technical and technological research and identification of cultural values, museum objects, cultural heritage objects (historical and cultural monuments). Date interpretation problem
How can one find those indisputable originals that should adorn museums among countless paintings by unknown masters, renewed, rewritten, damaged by restorations, among a huge number of copies, imitations, repetitions and forgeries?
About a century ago, among art connoisseurs, a type of professional art critic, the so-called connoisseur, arose. Moving from country to country, from museum to museum, having seen a lot, possessing an excellent visual memory, and unusually receptive to art, the connoisseur made attribution his specialty works of art. The accumulated knowledge and developed intuition allowed the connoisseur to make “if not always infallible, then usually a fairly accurate conclusion about the authenticity and authorship of a particular work.” “The new type of connoisseur,” wrote B. Vipper, “is of little interest in the laws of the development of art or the specifics of genres or the general problems of the artistic culture of the era; he is not even interested in the personality of this or that artist. He is primarily interested in a given work of art from the point of view of how authentic it is (that is, whether it is an original, a copy or a fake), when it was created and who is its author.”
The leading role in the development of “connoisseurship” as a method of studying art belonged to the Italian Giovanni Morelli, who for the first time tried to deduce some patterns of construction of works of painting, to create a “grammar of artistic language,” which, in his opinion, should have become the basis of the attribution method. Morelli's attribution method consisted of studying the details of the artistic form to determine the specifics of the master's individual manner.
Morelli attached especially great importance to the design of the hands, the shape of the model’s ears and nails. The latter, in his opinion, are especially characteristic of the individual handwriting of the master, free from imitation, and not bound by the tradition of the school. “Most masters,” writes Morelli, “are in the habit of paying the main attention to the face and depicting it as full of meaning as possible. In students, simple imitation is often noticeable, but this least concerns the hands and ears, which are very different for each individual. If the type of depiction of a saint is usually characteristic of an entire school, the manner of painting folds of clothing is passed on from master to student and imitator, then the depiction of hands and ears, as well as landscapes, is characteristic of every independent artist. Every significant artist has his own type of depiction of the hand and ear.” The role of these elements is also great because, according to Morelli, the artist writes them almost unconsciously, “sometimes without noticing it.” Revolting against the desire to replace the study of the “language of form” with the general impression of the painting, Morelli emphasized that the external form is by no means random and arbitrary, as many people think, but is determined by the internal content of the work.
Morelli's method and his attributions had a strong influence on art historians across Europe. As for Morelli's theoretical legacy, it was developed by his follower Bernard Bernson. Like Morelli, Bernson divides the sources of definition of works into three types - documents, tradition and the paintings themselves.
The document, according to Bernson, has very little value. He is even inclined to argue that in most cases it will “have no value at all.” Noting, for example, that a contract for the execution of a work can certainly be interesting for defining the work, Bernson notes: “But who can guarantee that the mention in the contract refers specifically to a given work, from which we can conclude that the order was actually completed?!” The signature on it plays no more significant role in identifying a painting, since on a work that came out of the studio of a famous artist, the name of the master was placed regardless of the degree of his participation in the creation of the painting. Therefore, evidence such as signatures and dates should be treated no less meticulously than written documents. Moreover, it was the signatures that very early became the object of falsification. The role of tradition is also small. Although its significance is determined by its age and place of origin, it does not always allow certain evidence to be attributed with certainty to a specific work. Since neither documents nor traditions are able to provide reliable information about a work, the “only genuine source of judgment” remains - the work itself, and of the verification methods - the only reliable one - the “artistic recognition method”, based on the assumption that the identity of characteristics when compared works of art among themselves in order to establish their mutual relationship indicates the identity of origin, an assumption based, in turn, on the definition of characteristics as features that distinguish one artist from another 1 . Bernson admits, however, that the signs he considers by which one can identify a painting with the work of a particular master or reject this identity are so subtle that the benefit they can bring to research depends on the personal sensitivity of the researcher.
Another direction in attribution is represented by Bernson's contemporary Max Friedlander. Recognizing the individual merits of the Morelli-Bernson method, Friedlander contrasted it with a researcher of art who has a “subtle tool,” which is the “sense of style.” Friedlander compares the researcher’s idea of an artist to a tuning fork. Of several tuning forks located in space, when a sound occurs, only the one tuned in the same tone begins to sound. The same thing happens when identifying paintings. Of all the ideas about artists “living” in a connoisseur, which must be clearly “tuned”, only one should resonate when looking at an unknown painting. At this moment, “as if by itself, the definition of the picture that I saw for the first time” occurs. Hence, the basis of attribution is not a careful “morphology” of features (Bernson), but the first impression. Any analysis destroys part of this impression. Only after the whole has spoken can one begin scientific analysis, in which (Friedlander admits this) the slightest detail can matter. He admits that each method of consideration can be useful, that any research can “supplement and confirm the first impression or, conversely, reject it,” but it will never, in any case, replace it. Thus, Friedlander’s attribution method is a keen artistic sensitivity, intuition, which “like a compass needle, despite fluctuations, shows us the way.”
The considered points of view are not limited to views on the principles of defining paintings. Other followers of the attributional method of studying art also had their say - T. Frimmel, K. Voll, K. Hofstede de Groot, W. Bode and others. However, for the history of art, their practical activities were perhaps more important than their views on the method of work connoisseur. After all, is there much difference between the “creative act” of attribution as interpreted by Friedländer, who based it on intuition, and, say, the “sharp, accurate vision” of a work of art by Hofstede de Groot? True, in contrast to Friedlander, who emphasizes the “unconsciousness” of the comparison process, and therefore the impossibility of verbal argumentation of a judgment, Hofstede de Groot demands from the expert strict argumentation of his opinion: “the expert ... must be able to willingly communicate his arguments when he they will ask" 2.
In Hofstede's attribution, de Groot attaches great importance to the quality of the work. Recognizing that the perception of quality is in a certain sense subjective, he also leaves behind it a certain objectivity based on experience.
Qualitative assessment is the basis of the definition and in the opinion of B. Vipper, who paid tribute to attribution work and considered attribution not only the “touchstone” of scientific research work in the museum, but also its “ripest fruit, its crowning”.
What is the quality of a work of art, how objective is this aspect of the recognition process? “By quality of a work of art we always mean a certain degree of its perfection,” writes Vipper. And he continues: “The connoisseur wants to know whether this is a copy or an original. Already in the first moment, as soon as the picture placed before him flashed, he experienced a feeling of quality that should be decisive in his judgment. Then he deepens into prolonged contemplation and the further he peers, the more irresistibly the consciousness of unconditional perfection appears. What might have seemed like a random and temporary impression turned into a real reality.”
It would seem quite simple: “unconditional perfection”, determined by a connoisseur, is a guarantee of the authenticity of paintings. However, upon closer examination the problem becomes more complex. “...There is quality,” notes Whipper, “but what is it? After all, gradations of quality allow not only extreme poles, yes or no, but also a great variety of intermediate shades.” As a result, Whipper arrives at a purely subjective assessment of quality by perceiving a work of art as a process of merging “image” and “picture”. “The peculiarity of artistic perception lies precisely in the fact that we see the image and the painting separately and simultaneously. The sooner they merge, the higher the quality of the artwork. The quality criterion is thus determined by the rate of oscillation between the painting and the image. ...To put it differently, quality is the merging of time and space in a new artistic reality. Why is Rembrandt superior to Bol or Flinck? Before the paintings of the epigones, contemplation becomes shaky. The image ceases to be a painting for a while, or the painting does not immediately become an image.”
The Wipper attribution method in its main parts comes from Morelli-Bernson and Friedlander. Whipper distinguishes three main cases of attribution. The first is when attribution is done “lightning fast”. This is the intuitive principle behind the Friedlander method. The second is accidental attribution, when an engraving or drawing, found by chance, suggests the name of the author of an unknown painting. Both paths are exceptions. The third, main way is that the researcher gradually, using a number of techniques, approaches the definition of the author. In his later work, Wipper considers “texture” and “emotional rhythm” to be the defining criteria of this process. The concept of texture implies “specific processing of form,” a kind of individual handwriting. This includes the laying of paints, the nature of the stroke, the painter’s sense of color, etc. Emotional rhythm is a temporary, dynamic principle that is the bearer of the spiritual content and sensory expression of a work of art. Texture and emotional rhythm, according to Vipper, are the two most changeable and sensitive elements in the structure of a work of art. And although they are difficult not only to imitate, but also to “verbal interpretation” (remember Friedlander), the ability to understand rhythm and texture is ultimately a prerequisite for the correct assessment of artistic quality, the understanding of which is precisely the “alpha and omega of true museology” (and consequently, its highest form—“attribution work”).
So, the basis of attribution are: “intuition”, “psychological act”, “artistic sensitivity”, “flair” (which Hofstede de Groot mockingly compared with the “smell” of a dog), “sharp, accurate vision”, “emotional conviction”, etc. ... Therefore, no matter how the apologists of the attributional method of studying art prove the advantage of the methodology they develop, the basis of each of them - be it the “experimental method”, “artistic morphology”, “qualitative assessment”, etc. - is the subjective perception of artistic works accompanied by a subjective definition.
This is how Friedlander describes the process of defining a work. “I study the altar icon and see that it is written on oak. This means she is of Dutch or Low German origin. I find on it images of donors and a coat of arms. The history of costume and heraldry make it possible to arrive at a more precise localization and dating. By strict inference I establish: Bruges, about 1480. The little-known legend that the painting tells of leads me to a church in Bruges dedicated to the saint of this legend. I consult the church acts and find that in 1480 a citizen of the city of Bruges, whose name I recognized from the coat of arms, donated an altar and ordered an image for it from Memling. So, the icon was painted by Memling. The conclusion is purely scientific, strictly proven!
But even in this hypothetical case, where so much can be proven, not everything can be proven. In the end, it is still possible that Memling did not fulfill the order, delegated its execution to his students, or that someone else did the work instead of him. The decisive last word, even here, remains with the judgment of taste, just as the first word belonged to feeling... Moreover, to tell the truth, at first sight I immediately thought of Memling, I was waiting for Memling, I was looking for Memling. The thought of him was like a compass in my research wanderings."
Back in the 20s, Friedlander wrote that the connoisseur creates and destroys values, and thanks to this has a certain power; they believe him regardless of whether he is right or wrong. Indeed, in most cases, only trust and authority decide the matter. The name of the connoisseur gives weight to the painting, determines its price, and at the same time serves as a guarantee for the buyer. In this case, the expert, as we have seen, is not at all obliged to give reasons for his conclusion.
Let us recall one of the loudest sensations of our time - the story of the attribution of the painting “The Disciples at Emmaus”. Dr. Bredius, a generally recognized expert on Dutch painting, called this painting a first-class work by Wermeer of Delft. The delight with which this “peak of the four-hundred-year development of Dutch painting” was greeted, the articles of art critics and the demonstrations of spectators were the background against which, ten years later, one of the most ambitious scandals in the entire history of art played out. It turned out that “The Disciples at Emmaus” and fourteen works of “classical Dutch painting” (Terborch, Hals and Vermeer), “discovered” and sold between 1937 and the end of the Second World War, are fakes of the Dutch artist Han van Meegeren (Fig. 67, 68). “International art connoisseurs, recognized authorities of national Dutch museums, famous antique dealers - everyone read this news, and for them the whole world collapsed. The only man in the world was able to achieve this - to turn the luminaries of art history into ridiculous puppets for his game, which gave him a truly fantastic profit of almost $ 2,300,000, which he was able to pocket thanks to the impeccable expertise of these infallible experts.
Rice. 67. H. van Meegeren. "Drunk woman." A fake in the style of Frans Hals. The prototype was the famous painting by Hals “HilleBabbe”.
Rice. 68. H. van Meegeren. Fake Ver-mer of Delft (1935-1936)
The case of the Odessa jeweler I. Rukhomovsky, the exposure of forgeries of the Italian sculptor A. Dossena, the trial of O. Vacker, the scandal associated with van Meegeren, and hundreds of other stories about falsifications in the field of art indicate that experts limiting themselves exclusively to the features of style and external features of the painting turn out to be surprisingly untenable in relation to masterful imitations 3 .
But perhaps errors in attribution are associated only with deliberate fakes, and high-end fakes at that? It turns out not. Experts also make mistakes when attributing old paintings: unknown paintings, old copies, old fakes. During the trial, which took place in the 20s in the United States, Bernson's conclusion appeared, testifying that the painting “Labelle Ferroniere” from the Louvre was an indisputable original by Leonardo da Vinci. In a work devoted to the art of the northern Italian Renaissance masters, the expert admits that he studied this and another painting by Leonardo in the Louvre for 40 years and changed his mind about these paintings several times over the course of 15 years, but now he “finally” came to the conviction that The Louvre's Labelle Ferroniere shows no trace of Leonardo da Vinci's authorship. At the same time, Bernson was spoken of not only as one of the best, but also the most successful experts. “They thought that he was not mistaken,” the KnaursLexikon says about him, “but, of course, this is not true. Everyone makes mistakes."
Many researchers of Russian art attributed the portrait of Catherine II, transferred to the Russian Museum in 1923, to Rokotov’s brushes. This is what A. Benois, a remarkable expert on Russian painting of the 18th century, believed in 1904 and 1906. However, ten years later he contradicted his own opinion. “I myself,” he wrote in 1916, “for many years believed this attribution, and somehow it never even occurred to me to take a critical view of it... And, however, now there is no doubt for me that this is a picture D. G. Levitsky. Some of the classically virtuoso techniques with which the folds of the satin robe are conveyed definitely point to Levitsky.”
Understanding the conventionality of many attributions of monuments of ancient Russian painting, the relativity of the division into schools, the researcher of Christian antiquities N. Pokrovsky wrote at the beginning of the century: “The usual scientific apparatus that is used in these cases is very extensive; and this is very important: the absence or vagueness of signs of antiquity of an icon when considering it from one point of view, for example, from the side of style and technique, is sometimes replaced by clear signs of antiquity when considering the same icon, for example, from the side of iconographic composition and paleography of inscriptions. One point of view tests the other. Hence, a quick assessment of the antiquity of icons based on one unconscious skill, as is often the case among amateurs and practitioners, despite its simplicity, may turn out to be erroneous in at least half of the cases.”
It is very instructive to compare the attributions of the same paintings made over several years by different specialists. As an example, we can cite several definitions of paintings from the Brukenthal Gallery (Romania) 4 . Without touching on the attributions of many experts who visited this collection, we will consider only a few of them made by the largest European authorities who made up the era in art history of the last quarter of the 19th - first quarter of the 20th century.
The portrait of Rogier van der Weyden (?), painted, according to the old French inscription on the back of the picture, by Dirk Bouts, Frimmel considered the work of Bruin, Bredius - van Scorel, and Beautier - Joos van Cleve, Hofstede de Groot and Voll considered the painting old copy from Boots.
The painting depicting the arrival of a satyr at a peasant's house was listed in Brukenthal's catalog as the work of Jordanes. Frimmel first considered it the work of Giliam van Hern, an imitator of Jordanes, and later “the best among the hitherto unknown paintings of France de Neve.” Bredius spoke in favor of the circle of Jan Lis or his follower, and Beautier considered the painting to be the work of Jan Lis.
In 1901, Bredius identified a cataloged work by Teniers the Younger as “an unpleasant landscape by another author,” and in 1909 he considered it to be the work of Teniers the Elder. Hofstede de Groot considered the same work to be the undisputed work of Teniers the Younger. Another work, which Frimmel considered a copy of Teniers the Younger, was considered by Hofstede de Groot to be the original, adding, however, that it was “not accurate enough.” Bredius did not comment at all on this thing, although he undoubtedly saw it.
The portrait of a wealthy Dutch townswoman, considered by the catalog to be the work of Van Dyck, was identified by Frimmel as a likely work by Teniers the Younger. Bredius strongly rejected Frimmel's attribution, but did not give his own. Voll hesitated between Netscher and Terborch.
And the last example is “Woman Playing the Clavichord.” In 1844 it was listed as a work by Titian, in 1893 it was identified as a work by an unknown Italian master. Frimmel saw in it the work of a follower of Rembrandt in the spirit of Constantin Ranesse. Bredius considered it the youthful work of Wermeer of Delft, who was influenced by Fabricius. Voll had the impression that he was, if not in front of the probable Wermeer, then in front of someone close to him. However, its wording read: “an unknown student of Rembrandt.” Hofstede de Groot, who saw the painting, did not mention it, although he dedicated a special monograph to Wermeer.
Do the examples given indicate the absurdity of the attributions being made, the groundlessness of the attribution method itself? Of course not. And yet, one cannot help but admit that attribution as a museum problem remains unresolved today. Its theoretical foundations are developed, to say the least, far from imperfectly, and its practice is so contradictory that specialists in the field of attribution, as one of the authors rightly notes, often find themselves “in a comical position.” As Lionello Venturi rightly noted, the “coefficient of relativity” in attribution is still too great to be considered a scientific method.
1 Here's how Bernson describes this process: “We are offered a painting without the artist's signature and without any other designation, and we are asked to identify its author. Usually the types of faces, composition, groupings and general tone of the picture show immediately that it belongs to one school or another. Further examination of these features reveals more signs of resemblance to one particular follower of this school than to any other, and the degree of talent and quality of the work indicate whether we have before us a great master or a minor and tertiary painter. By this time, the circle of our research is closed in a small space, but it is only here that the greatest difficulties begin. The striking similarity that has guided us until now now becomes not only of little help, but positively misleading us. The type, general tone and composition of this artist have too much in common with his immediate predecessors, with his most devoted students and faithful followers, and therefore cannot help us to distinguish his work from theirs. We can omit them in our considerations, when accurately determining the author of the picture, and rely only on data that requires a more intimate manifestation of personality. We must start with the reverse process of what we have been going through. Hitherto we have zealously endeavored to discover the closest resemblance between the unknown picture, taken here as an example, and others, the authors of which are known; Having found this similarity and decided that the author of our painting may be someone from a certain group of artists, we will now try to find what is the difference between this particular painting and the works of various members of this group. Having focused our attention on the differences, we will easily find, unexpectedly for us, a significant number of dissimilar features that we did not notice when we were looking for similarities - an absolutely sufficient number, in any case, for several candidates for authors to disappear and for only two or three artists to remain in group that we have now designated. Then we return again to the search for similarities between our unknown painting and the works of these two or three candidates, and the author will be recognized as the one with whose works our painting has the most similarities, in which individuality is intimately revealed.”
2 Wed. from Friedlander: “... gifted specialists, judging with inner conviction, do not usually like to give “evidence”; they experience approximately the same thing as Nietzsche, who once said: “That I am a barrel, or something, in order to carry my reasons with me.” ?
3 It should be said that not only experts and art historians found themselves in a similar situation. There are many cases where the artists themselves could not say whether they created this or that painting. The story of Claude Latour became widely known in Paris at one time. The artist, known under the name ZizedeMontparnasse, willingly copied paintings by modern masters, which her partner sold for huge sums of money. When in 1948 the deception was exposed and Utrillo was asked to point out the forgeries at the trial, he found himself in an equally awkward position, not knowing whether he or Latour had painted the paintings presented. These cases are by no means isolated. When Vlaminck could not distinguish his genuine paintings from fakes, he, in defense, said that he once painted a painting in the style of Cezanne, and he declared it his work.
4 S. Brukenthal (1721-1803), governor of Transylvania, opened his meeting in 1790 in the Sibiu Palace. In 1802 he donated the paintings to the Evangelical community, and in 1817 this collection became a public museum. Around 1800 Brukenthal compiled the first catalog of paintings. From the moment of Brukenthal's death until Frimmel's appearance there, the gallery was visited by numerous art lovers, among whom were competent connoisseurs, art historians, directors and curators of European museums.
Attributing photos, illustrations, videos or audio for sale on microstocks is the process of assigning titles, keywords, categories, and attaching releases to the files. In short, this is a responsible and labor-intensive task, on which the success of your cooperation with stocks largely depends. It is important to remember: all information when attributing files is filled in English language, but that shouldn't scare you. If your knowledge of English is insufficient, you can always resort to the help of translation programs, as well as online services.
Attribution of files on various sites, as a rule, includes the following points:
Title: The file title should not consist of one or two words, the optimal size is 5-10 words. You should not write streams of unnecessary epithets that do not reflect the essence of the work. The title should be meaningful and as informative as possible. Ideally, it should contain several keywords. Tip: When attributing photographs, illustrations, videos and audio files, put yourself in the buyer’s shoes. That is, imagine that you need to buy a certain piece of work, and think about how you would describe what you are looking for. The words and phrases that arise in the mind at the same time should be used in describing the files.
Description: Many photo stocks, in addition to the title of the work, offer to fill out a brief description of it (optimally 15-20 words). The main mistake of stockers is the identical title and description for the stock photo. Some sites, such as Dreamstime, even prohibit assigning the same title and description to works. Such works are simply not sent for verification. In addition, a minimum file description size for photo stocks is often set; for example, Bigstockphoto does not accept photos with a description of less than 7 words. The buyer needs to get as much information as possible about the content being purchased, so it is worth paying attention to the description Special attention. Here you can indicate in what format your file is presented, especially relevant when selling vector illustrations. In addition, you can indicate the benefit that the buyer will receive when choosing your file, for example, specify the various options for using the file.
Keywords: One of the most important aspects of attributing photographs and other files is the selection of keywords for microstock. You should not treat this process with disdain, because correctly selected keywords are the key to successful file sales in the future. Recommendations for writing keywords for microstocks:
- Make the most of your keyword limit. As a rule, stock photo sites offer to enter 50 keywords, don’t be lazy - come up with all fifty words. All keywords should be directly related to a photograph, video illustration or audio file, there is no need to write something that is not actually in your work.
- Describe not only what is in the photo or video, but also what the object does, what it looks like, what mood it evokes.
- Do not use different forms of one word (for example: joy, joyful, rejoice), choose one option. Such words only take up space in the keyword limit and do not bring any benefit, since search engines microstocks are adapted to changing word forms. Moreover, in the English version, such words can have one form, so when automatic translation you will get duplicate keywords, which is also of no use.
- Use the singular number, no need to write pencil and pencils in the same keyword field. The reasons are the same as in the previous paragraph of recommendations.
- When uploading a series of similar works, for example, photographs from the same photo shoot, do not assign the same keywords to them. Of course, some of the words will be the same in any case, but try to assign at least 5-10 individual keywords to each of these works. This will increase your chances of making a sale.
- Write key phrases, this is especially true for writing the names of holidays (for example: Valentine's Day, St. Patrick's Day), set expressions and phrases.
- Avoid including prepositions in keywords for microstocks; outside the phrase they do not carry any informative load. Prepositions will be more useful in file titles or descriptions. Don’t forget to put yourself in the buyer’s shoes, think about what queries you would use to search for a specific photo or video.
It's also worth noting that there are some for sale on audio stocks.
Categories: the main type of search on photo stocks is by keywords, but often when the buyer cannot decide exactly what should be present in the image or video, and cannot describe it in any specific words, he resorts to the “Categories” function. This is a collection of works on one specific topic, for example, abstraction, business, people, etc. As a rule, microstocks offer you to choose 2 or 3 categories, sometimes even subcategories. The most important rule when choosing categories during attribution is to choose only those categories that truly reflect your work. This will not only help buyers find the required file, but will also ensure that you pass the inspection, because incorrectly selected categories are one of the most common reasons for inspection refusals on photo stocks.
Release: Attaching model releases and property releases is a necessary process when attributing photos and videos that contain recognizable human faces or intellectual property. The form for filling out the release can be downloaded from any microstock site. As a rule, stocks provide the ability to download releases not only during the attribution process, but also before downloading the files themselves. All releases are stored on the site, they can be used at any time, this is especially true when uploading not just one, but a whole series of photographs with the same model. The lack of releases for those files where they are needed will be a valid reason for inspection refusal.
In addition to the above, when attributing, various photo stocks offer to tick off works that contain nude models, as well as editorial photos and videos (Editorial). Editorial files include files used to illustrate any significant events, as well as photographs of famous people.
File attribution can be divided into two types: before loading And after loading work on microstock. And if attribution after loading is simply filling out all the listed fields, then we need to talk in more detail about attribution before loading.
Attribution before uploading to microstock occurs with the help of editor programs, in which, in fact, files are created. For example, such popular graphic editors as Adobe Photoshop and Adobe Illustrator make it possible to fill in the title, description and keywords for microstocks through the function File -> File information. You can also enter other data there, for example, the name of the author, which allows you to preserve and confirm the copyright of the images, which is never superfluous. When uploading files attributed in editors, all information is imported to the microstock site and all data is reflected in the appropriate fields. The author only needs to select categories and attach releases if necessary.
The second way to attribute before loading is special programs, allowing not only to attribute files for microstocks, but also to send them directly to sites. This provides a lot of advantages, the main one of which is saving time, which is especially important when working with several drains at the same time. In addition, auxiliary programs can provide other functions, for example, tracking earnings and maintaining various kinds of statistics. One of the most popular assistant programs for microstockers is.
Whether to attribute files for microstocks before or after downloading, whether to use auxiliary programs or not is a personal matter, but in any case, take the process seriously, because in the end it will bear fruit in the form of a stable profit.
Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation
Moscow State University of Printing Arts
Faculty of Publishing and Editing
Department of Publishing and Editing
Test
in textual criticism
Problems of attribution and dating in textual criticism
Completed by: Kasikova O.A.
Gr. ZKi 5-1
No. book RZ 003/07
8-903-554-04-37
Checked:
MGUP
2011/12 academic year year
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction…………………………………………………………….…… …………………..3
1. Definition of the concepts “attribution” and “dating”….………………..………..4
2. Methods for resolving issues of attribution and dating.....……………….…......7
Conclusion…………………………………………………………………….18
Bibliography..……………………………………………………19
Introduction
The main task of textual criticism is to give the correct text of a published literary work. The question of what is considered a “correct” or “canonical” text is not always understood in the same way. Different philological schools had different understandings of the ways of restoration based on the remaining different editions of the text of the same work. Thus, until the middle of the 19th century, publishing technology was dominated by the exact reproduction of one manuscript, recognized for some reason as the best. From the middle 19th century so-called “critical” publications are common, reconstructing the supposed prototype by contamination versions of all manuscripts available for research. Textual criticism began XX century characterized by a very large psychologism in the approach to the question of the so-called “will of the author.”
The problem of establishing authorship and dating in literature is one of the oldest philological problems and is associated with the existence of anonymous and pseudonymous texts that are part of the field of textual criticism. This is the relevance of the topic of this test.
Until the middle of the 15th century, when printing was invented, all works of literature remained in the form of manuscripts, which only in the most rare cases were autographs or copies reviewed and corrected by the author. Not a single autograph has reached our time from works of ancient literature, and the authorship of the works of Platonagos and Aristotle is very controversial: in medieval literature, almost every work had a complex text history and a number of authors, and often the oldest list that reached us was separated by several centuries from time of creation of the work.
After the advent of printing, the problem of attribution and dating of texts remained, since a significant part of literary works either remains unpublished during the author’s lifetime, or was published with inaccuracies, distortions and in different years, both due to negligence and deliberately, for example, due to censorship conditions.
The purpose of this test is to reveal the textual meaning of the concepts of “attribution” and “dating”, as well as to consider the problems of attribution and dating of text using specific examples.
1. Definition of the concepts of “attribution”
and "dating"
Attribution (from Latin attributio - attribution) is the identification of the author of an anonymous or pseudonymous work, and a work can be understood as any related set of signs, including a film, painting, audio work, letter. Along with the term “attribution” in science they use the term heuristic . Attribution, as we have already noted, is one of the oldest problems textual criticism . Even in ancient times, doubts arose about the ownership of the Iliad and Odyssey by Homer; at the end of the 18th century. problems related to Homer's personality grew intoHomeric question. In the middle of the 19th century. the “Shakespearean question” arose around the anti-scientific assertion that a simple actor could not create great tragedies 1 .
Attribution is very important in the study of new Russian literature, and attribution also plays a large role in the study of ancient Russian literature, since up to the 17th century. handwritten works were distributed, as a rule, anonymously. They often represent multi-layered compilations in which it is impossible to separate one author (or, in general, the “book writer” who worked on the text) from another, to isolate from the whole the independent works previously included in it, or to remove the layers superimposed on the original basis. Attribution data is taken from the content of the text, identified as a result of decoding the signature or other mention of the author’s name, sometimes encrypted in secret writing or acrostic . The study of the ideology of the author of an anonymous work can provide material for attribution only with full consideration of all the features of the ideological life of a given era, with the identification of those peculiar aspects in which the author’s personal position is most clearly visible. Finally, for attribution in ancient Russian literature, you can use the results of stylistic analysis. The historical process has a slow and, to a certain extent, limited impact on language. There is relative independence of language. But at the same time, it is in the forms of language that all the most important changes in human life are recorded. When reading a text, it should be taken into account that as a language develops, its morphology changes. An important condition for error-free reading of the source text is knowledge of the terminology of the historical period in which it was created. Some words had many meanings, others could cease to exist in the future. Among the outdated vocabulary, there are historic words that disappeared from the language as a result of the loss of reality itself, and archaic words that were supplanted in the process of language development by other words that became the only names for these objects and phenomena. Historicisms, for example, include numerous names of legal and office documents from the Middle Ages (“vyrok”, “indicated”, etc.), ancient measures of weight and distance, etc. 2 .
As a rule, the search for attributional arguments is carried out in three main directions: the discovery of documentary and factual evidence, the disclosure of the ideological and figurative content of the text, and the analysis of language and style. Documentary sources of attribution include autographs , lists of works compiled by authors and persons close to them, correspondence, diaries, memoirs of authors and their contemporaries, documents stored in the archives of editorial offices, the censorship department, etc. A lot of factual data is often contained in the work itself: facts from the author’s biography, mention his other works, persons known to him, places he visited, events in which he participated, etc. Based on the discovered documentary sources, the authorship of A. S. Pushkin in relation to the “Gabrieliad” was confirmed, early works of N. A. Nekrasov, the corpus of articles and reviews by V. G. Belinsky, N. A. Dobrolyubov, M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin and others has been significantly expanded.
There are cases when authors made efforts to ensure that they did not leave documentary evidence of their authorship (this applies, for example, to works of revolutionary or anti-government content); Moreover, documents may be discovered that come from the author and deny his authorship. In such cases, attributional arguments must be extracted from the text itself, from its ideological and artistic content, from a specific comparison of the ideas of an anonymous composition and the texts that undoubtedly belong to the alleged author. An example of attribution based on the main processing of the ideological analysis of the text is the work of B. P. Kozmin “The Resurrected Belinsky”, in which it is proven that Dobrolyubov belonged to a sharp political pamphlet - a letter to N. I. Grech. Many articles and reviews by Saltykov-Shchedrin were discovered and attributed to S.S. Borshchevsky, who applied the method of literary, ideological and textual parallels 3 .
An attribution technique based on language and style analysis is being actively developed. The desire of F. E. Korsh to attribute to Pushkin the ending of “The Mermaid” written by D. P. Zuev (1889) in this way led to the discrediting of this method. However, the latest attempts to develop and substantiate an attribution technique based on the analysis of language and style are of undoubted scientific interest 4 .
These are the three main directions of the search for attributional arguments. However, a truly indisputable attribution can only be achieved by a comprehensive use of all the arguments that are identified during the search process in all three directions.
Works that cannot be recognized as indisputably belonging to a given author are considered conditionally owned or attributed to him; in scientific publications they are placed in the “Dubia” section (from Latin dubitare - to doubt, hesitate) 5 . A special case of attribution is athethesis - the denial of ownership of works previously attributed to a given author.
One of the most important problems of textual criticism is dating. Dating is the establishment of the time of creation of a work, one of its editions, a list, etc. Extreme dates or intermediate moments of the creative process can be determined. What is most important is the time of the conception, the beginning and completion of the writing, and the date of the first publication. Dating can be done with varying degrees of accuracy; it can be absolute (calendar) and relative. If precise dating is not possible, then extreme chronological limits are determined (“terminus post quem” and “terminus ante quem”). The sources of dating are direct and indirect evidence found both in the content and style of the text itself, including indications of language, spelling, etc., and beyond - in diaries, letters, memoirs, other works, etc. Paleographical data are essential: the material of the manuscript or book, watermarks (filigree) of the paper, the nature of the handwriting, printing, etc., as well as textual argumentation: the relationship of the list with other lists and editions of the same work. Methodologically, dating is in many ways similar to attribution , is often connected with it and is inseparable from the reconstruction of the complete history of the dated text, in which the correct dating should find its confirmation 6 .
When dating a source, you will have to solve three problems each time:
1) The problem of choosing a scale.
In chronology, various absolute dating systems and methods for converting dates extracted from sources from one scale to another are considered well established. For example, dates “from the creation of the world” in Russian chronicles are translated into dates “from the Nativity of Christ” by simply subtracting the number 5508 from the chronicle date (however, in some cases 5500, 5509, and even 5510). At the same time, no convincing justification for such a date translation algorithm can be extracted from anywhere. In fact, one cannot seriously consider that the famous decree of Peter I on the transition to chronology from the Nativity of Christ should serve as such an algorithm - after all, the decree deals with the translation of current and future dates, and the dating contained in chronicles and others ancient sources say nothing there. Where is the confidence that the chronicle dates were always counted “from the creation of the world” and that throughout these datings the date of the “creation of the world” was always distant from the date of the “Birth of Christ” by the same 5508 (with a slight plus or minus) years? 7The situation is even more complicated with the translation of medieval Western European and especially ancient dates into the currently accepted scale.
2) Date interpretation problem.
Another problem facing a researcher who has undertaken to date the source he is studying is the problem of correctly interpreting the date recorded in the source. The fact is that dates in sources, especially in ancient ones, may be written completely differently from the way we are used to writing them down today and over the past two to three hundred years. In any case, before the widespread dissemination of the so-called Arabic numerals, dates (and numbers in general) were written in a wide variety of ways - from Sumerian cuneiform signs to letters of the ordinary alphabet, highlighted with titles. In Russia, the tradition of writing numbers alphabetically persisted for a very long time and was finally supplanted by Arabic numerical notation only in the 19th century. At the same time, very often these records look very ambiguous, which ambiguity is aggravated by the use of ascenders, the outline of different letters in very similar graphics and, conversely, the same letter in different ways, etc. Finally, there is no complete certainty and the question is mutual unambiguous correspondence between letters and icons and the numbers they denote.All these problems do not confuse historians at all, who confidently read dates from ancient manuscripts. For example, the date in “The Teaching of Knowing to Man the Number of All Years” by Kirik Novgorod is confidently interpreted by historians as 6644 from the creation of the world, i.e. 1136 from the Nativity of Christ, and the entry on the sticker on the inside cover of the Gennadian Bible allows the same historians to confidently date it to 7007 (i.e. 1499) 8.
And yet, it would be nice to make sure that the modern reading of these records corresponds to the understanding that was put into them when they were written.
3) The problem of scale and date reliability.
But even being confident that it was possible to correctly interpret the date recorded in the source, correctly understand the time scale in which the date is recorded, and correctly translate it into the currently accepted chronology, even if all these conditions are met, one cannot be completely sure that the received date has the property of reliability.Firstly, when putting down the date, the chronicler could have made a mistake; secondly, he could have made a deliberate distortion of his own chronological evidence (i.e., his dating evidence must be treated with all the necessary caution); thirdly, he could have used in its chronicle with such a time scale, the reliability of which is doubtful (for example, from the founding of a City or from the inauguration of a certain Pope, the dates of which events cannot be independently verified); fourthly, it was the chronology of the source that could have been distorted during its correspondence-editing-compilation and so on.
That is, when working with dating, it is also necessary to solve the problems of source criticism in full and as comprehensively as possible, and only under this condition can we obtain at least somewhat reliable dates.
2. Methods for resolving attribution issues
and dating
When determining the dates of a work and its editions, you should especially pay attention to the dates in some of them from the time of one or another described event to “our time,” that is, to the time when the author or editor worked. Usually the scribe, who simply rewrote the text, mechanically preserved the date, but the editor who revised the text “updated” it too. Therefore, this kind of countdown of years “before our time” is very indicative, and a textual critic is obliged to give them an explanation.
Dating features are also the mentions in the manuscripts of the names of Russian saints, the time of canonization of which is known, and the titles: Grand Duke, Tsar, Archbishop, Archimandrite, Patriarch. So, for example, if we find the addition of “new Russian wonderworker” to the name of Moscow Metropolitan Alexei, this will mean that the text refers to the time after
1431, when his relics were discovered, but no later than the middle of the 16th century, since the expression “new” could not last long. The title "Grand Duke" appeared in Rus' no earlier than the 13th century. The royal title was approved by a patriarchal charter in 1562. The Patriarch appeared in Moscow in 1589. The Novgorod rulers received the title of archbishop in the middle of the 12th century. In the Solovetsky Monastery, the “archimandrite” was established in 1561. Information of this kind is necessary for a textual critic. Their use makes it possible to date texts with relative certainty 9 .
Dating instructions include information about a particular person as living or dead. Knowing the date of death of this person, it is not difficult to discern in this information indications of the time when the monument could have been created. The same indications can be provided by information about various historical phenomena, the history of culture, the dating of which is known to us.
Chronological calculations within the text of a translated monument for one reason or another also help to calculate the time of its translation into the Slavic language. Sometimes incorrect interpretation of a text or incomplete information about its sources can lead to dating errors.
In some cases, direct indications in third-party monuments are essential for dating the appearance of a particular work.
Traces of the influence of the work under study on other dated monuments are of great dating significance. So, for example, at the beginning of the study of the Prologue, when the question of the time of its translation was unclear even approximately, the indications of I. I. Sreznevsky on traces of acquaintance with it in the Novgorod Chronicle under 1212 were of great interest.
In some cases (especially if the contents of the monument do not provide any clues), it is necessary to resort to very complex considerations to date the monument. Thus, N.A. Baklanova dates the "Tale of Ruff Ershovich" to the end of the 16th century, using the following materials for evidence: she examines the terminology of the trial in the "Tale", reveals a number of old terms, examines the technology of conducting the trial, notes that it was accusatory rather than adversarial, which is typical only starting from
17th century etc. 11
etc.................
The invention relates to a method for obtaining quantitative and qualitative data on material carriers of cultural values, museum items, antiques, antiquities, historical and cultural monuments, environmental objects, collectibles, numismatic and faleristic materials, etc. The attribution method consists of photographing an object from various angles, describing it in the form of text and measuring it. In this case, photographing the object is carried out together with the measuring gauge. A photograph of each angle is imported into a layer of a vector graphic editor, an expert determination of control points and the point of origin of coordinates is made, the distances between control points are determined and overall dimensions are determined by means vector editor. The technical result is to simplify the method and increase reliability. 1 salary f-ly.
To obtain quantitative and qualitative data on material carriers of cultural values, museum items, antiques, antiquities, historical and cultural monuments, environmental objects, collectibles, numismatic and faleristic materials, etc.
Key words: attribution, technical and technological research, identification, model, prototype, object of comparison, caliber, qualitative data, quantitative data.
Relevance of the problem, statement of the problem to solve it
Preamble: There is a special class of material assets - cultural assets, which includes both movable items (cultural assets themselves, antiques, museum items, archaeological finds, items of extraterrestrial origin, etc.) and immovable objects of cultural heritage, monuments history and culture, environmental objects.
These phenomena of the surrounding world are characterized by the uniqueness, complexity of the form of the material carrier and the variety of materials from which they are composed. The time of their existence is often unknown, as is the source of origin or the technology of creation. Most of them can be classified as “mechanical (non-living) systems”, incapable of adapting to external influences. All this imposes a strict condition: under any influence on the object, the condition of unconditional safety of the object must be met, the loss of which will be irreparable. One of the main features (attributes) of a cultural value, a museum item or an object of cultural heritage is the size of their material carriers. Inspections of items from the Museum Fund and cultural heritage sites showed that the size data presented in the accounting documents does not correspond to the actual sizes of the items. The current situation is caused by a complex of reasons.
The results of attribution, technical and technological research or identification of objects are always subjective, since they are performed on a model of a real object, a subject (operator). The use of methods for obtaining quantitative and qualitative data and methods for processing them aims to bring subjective results closer to objective ones, increase their reliability, i.e. reduce the dependence of measurement results on external environmental conditions and increase reliability (reliability - likelihood.).
But even if the methodology for obtaining quantitative and qualitative data is correct, and the measurements are carried out with the proper level of validity, the result will be pseudo-objective, like any result of collective actions of subjects. Increasing the accuracy and reliability of the results of group actions significantly complicates the procedure for obtaining qualitative and quantitative data and increases the cost of the procedures. For a significant part of the hundreds of thousands of cultural heritage objects and millions of objects of the Museum Fund of the Russian Federation, the use of group methods for obtaining quantitative and qualitative data is impossible.
As a result, virtually all objects of the Museum Fund of the Russian Federation and all objects of cultural heritage (monuments of history and culture of the peoples of the Russian Federation) either do not have precise distinctive features or their attributes indicated in the accounting documentation are unreliable.
Problem: obtaining and recording the attributes of cultural values and objects of cultural heritage (historical and cultural monuments) do not meet modern requirements for recording material assets, do not allow them to be identified with the reliability specified by the owner, the attribution process is not standardized, not formalized, and excludes the use of the procedure validation and other control actions.
Task: a method of attribution, technical and technological research and identification of cultural values, museum objects, objects of cultural heritage (historical and cultural monuments) is needed, allowing to obtain a model as close as possible to the real object (subject), which would allow subsequent comparisons, accounting and reconciliation actions of an object (subject) with a model obtained earlier.
Availability of analogues
Preamble: the procedure for attribution of cultural property, museum objects and cultural heritage objects does not meet modern requirements for reliability, accuracy, reliability and verifiability of the results obtained.
Objective: the method should be characterized by ease of use, economic accessibility of tools and software and contain low requirements for the training of personnel (operators).
Types of analogues: all known methods of assigning data when attributing similar groups of material media can be divided into contact and non-contact.
Contact methods are methods of comparing objects with various standards (measuring rulers, gauges, Johanson tiles, etc.) or methods of obtaining data using mechanical instruments (calipers, micrometer, simple meter, etc.). It should be noted that any data acquisition is a comparison of the parameters of the prototype with a certain standard. Disadvantages of contact methods:
1. Methods are not subject to unification due to the exceptional diversity of objects of comparison. Often, obtaining one attribute of a comparison object requires a large number of different measuring instruments.
2. A measuring base of the object is required, i.e. clearly defined axes, planes, points, edges, between which it is necessary to measure the quantitative characteristics of the attribute. The surfaces of the comparison objects must be sufficiently hard. But if we are dealing with a fabric toy doll, a costume, drapery, a ruined object, a landscape area, etc., then there is no basis for obtaining quantitative characteristics of the attribute, since the material of the comparison object is deformed and damaged when touched by a measuring device.
3. When obtaining quantitative characteristics of attributes, an error caused by the subjectivity of the performer is inevitable. Error reduction procedures, which involve numerous repetitions of measurements by several operators and calculations of the relative measurement error, are complex, time-consuming, require large financial costs, but are easily falsified with low moral standards.
Non-contact methods of quantitative indicators about the shape of a material carrier are based on the application of the postulates of wave theory and differ in the characteristics of the frequency range that is used in a particular method.
We can distinguish the ultrasonic range, the radio wave range, the light range and the X-ray range. Various types of rangefinders and meters are known that allow measurements to be taken at a distance of the operator from the object of comparison up to several tens of meters.
Disadvantages of contactless methods:
1. Relatively low accuracy of quantitative indicators of an attribute (for example, the width of a crystal pendant) when it comes to small (up to a few meters) forms. An additional difficulty is created by the concepts of the beginning and end of the measured value, since the operator needs to position the emitter-receiver at the beginning and create conditions for the reflection of the beam at the end of the segment.
2. The high cost of instruments used to obtain quantitative indicators of attributes, and the availability of special training for operators of these instruments.
3. The instruments used are not universal and are of little use for carrying out measurements on most of the analogues under consideration.
The closest analogue: a photographic measurement method, which is based on shooting an object (object) with subsequent image processing.
The first approach allows you to use the program for processing two-dimensional photographic images Make3D v1.0 in order to obtain three-dimensional volumetric images.
Disadvantages: subjectivity of the principles for selecting parameters (perceived by the operator in a modal form: color, brightness, depth, etc.) by changing the relative properties of squares (superpixels) and the strong indirectness of the topographic scheme from reality. In fact, the quantitative indicators of the attribute are taken from the projection, which is the third derivative of the function from the real object. The first derivative is a photograph, which is a projection of reality onto a plane in a certain light range. The second derivative is a three-dimensional image constructed on the basis of a photograph according to arbitrary and subjective (not always corresponding to reality) principles.
The third derivative is a topographical diagram constructed from a three-dimensional image based on subjective criteria. The error of such a quantitative indicator of a model attribute from the quantitative indicator of a real object cannot be expressed numerically.
The second approach, based on the use of digital photographs, is based on the comparison of obvious geometric combinations of triangles, in which the measurement result is obtained by solving equations with two unknown parameters.
Advantage: ease of use.
Disadvantages: limited accuracy, since the operator needs to measure the distance from the object to the camera, which is not always determined in the production plan. Performance characteristics for optics are taken from tables, and their true values differ from the table ones, which introduces an error.
The third approach is to obtain quantitative indicators of the attribute using a combination of laser scanning and digital photogrammetric surveying techniques.
Advantages: high accuracy, the ability to obtain a three-dimensional model.
Disadvantages: the method is difficult to use, requires expensive equipment and even more expensive software, which is more appropriate to use in design; a less common format for presenting final information.
Description of the method
Using digital photography, a three-dimensional model of an object (prototype) is created, which consists of two-dimensional photographic images of all the necessary angles of the prototype.
The photographic image from each angle is saved as a separate file. The files make up a folder consisting of:
1) photographs of angles of the model with a standard for comparison (caliber), i.e. caliber and model taken together in one photo;
2) photographs of angles of the subject that have undergone pre-processing. Before photographing the angle, a gauge is placed in the frontal plane of the control point and the distance from the camera to the gauge and the control point on the prototype is measured. If necessary, measure the viewing angles and build a diagram of the location of the shooting points. Model files are exported to a universal vector editor.
In the editor, control points, the origin of coordinates, dimensions forms of the material carrier and the boundaries of other characterizing attributive features inherent this class prototype. A raster image transferred to a vector editor sheet and fixed on it acquires additional property. Control points in the image are located in the coordinate system of the vector editor. Each point has its own coordinates, which are attribute parameters.
Using the means of a drawing and graphic editor, they put down dimensions between points and dimensional lines and convert them into the SI system, using known caliber data. A set of coordinates from different angles, combined into a system and calculated using the original program, allows us to obtain a three-dimensional model of the prototype.
Attribution, identification and technical and technological research are subject to the following relationship: if an electronic photographic image - O m (am,bm, cm,... nm) is considered a model of a real-life object (prototype) - O p (a,b, с...n) , then if there is a correspondence between the quantitative indicators of the attributes of the comparison object O ci (a i, b i, c i ..n i), a certain number of attributes (a, b, c...n) of the model O m, the comparison object is given the prototype name O p, where O p (a,b,c…n) - prototype, i.e. an object (object, phenomenon) of the real world that has essential features (attributes) - (a, b, c,...n);
O m (am,bm,cm,... nm) - model O p (a,b,c...n), i.e. a visually perceptible object (layout, drawing, photograph, list) containing a set of quantitative and/or qualitative indicators - (a m, b m, c m,…n m). for which there is compliance: a<=>a m, b<=>b m , s<=>with m ,…,…n<=>nm;
O ci (ai,bi,ci...ni) - object of comparison, i.e. an object of the real world that has quantitative and/or qualitative indicators - (a i, b i, c i ... n).
We assert that obtaining essential features (attributes) from a digital photograph file (model) in the stated way significantly increases the accuracy, reliability, validity and objectivity in attribution, technical and technological research and identification of cultural values and cultural heritage objects.
Since the method involves actions with the projection of the prototype, it should be taken into account that some loss of information about the prototype occurs, which always distorts the idea of reality. In the case of an object of cultural heritage (cultural value), the loss of some essential features (attributes) can lead to incorrect attribution of the object (item), transferring it from the category of original to the category of copy and vice versa. The magnitude of distortions depends on the accuracy of the instruments used in attribution, on the conditions under which attribution is made (technical and technological research or identification of objects), on the qualifications of the operator performing these actions, his mental state and moral attitude.
Areas of application: Museum work, archival work, library work, protection of cultural heritage sites (historical and cultural monuments), restoration work, technological processes of reconstruction and recreation of cultural heritage objects and environmental objects, archeology, customs, forensics and legal proceedings, research, carried out as part of an independent examination, scientific research, trade in antiques and antiques, collecting, educational activities.
The essence of the invention
Attribution: the essence of the attribution method, technical and technological research and identification of cultural values, museum objects, cultural heritage objects (historical and cultural monuments) is that photography of the prototype (O p) is carried out from different angles and in such a way that in the frame next to There was a gauge (L s) with the object, such as a graduated ruler or an object with known dimensions.
The photographing process is preceded by determining the vector from the beginning of the shooting point to the frontal plane of the prototype. The operator places the gauge (L s) in this plane. In the absence of a graduated gauge, any protruding part located in the plane of the prototype (O p) is taken as such. In the case of a separate building, this may be a detail that can be measured with a tape measure and stands out in contrast in the photo (window sill, doorway, window opening, etc.). The size is recorded in the records as gauge.
The photographs taken are processed by any program designed for editing photographs: Photoshop, Photolmpact, etc. . At this stage, the operator performs basic operations to prepare the frame for further use: aligns the frame horizontally,, if necessary, adjusts brightness, contrast and focus, and trims elements of the photograph that are unnecessary for work.
After completing the preparatory steps, the frame is saved as a file in jpg format, given a name and imported into a drawing and graphic editor file.
Using the tools of a drawing and graphic editor, control points are marked on the photographic image (model O m), indicating the overall dimensions of the prototype object (O p) horizontally and vertically, and other control points are indicated that characterize the attribute features characteristic of this type of object. For example, for a sculpture: the length and width of certain parts. For a portrait: eye size, distance between the pupils of the eyes, distance from the earlobes to the edge of the lips. For an object of extraterrestrial origin: points characterizing inclusions or unusual and characteristic protrusions. For buildings, these are points characterizing the dimensions of decorative and applied elements and design features, marked as a subject of protection, etc.
The more control points of the proposed attribute characteristics are selected, the more fully and comprehensively the model (O m) as a two-dimensional projection of three-dimensional reality will reflect the prototype - the real object of the surrounding world (O p).
The final operation is to obtain quantitative indicators of one or more attributes of the projection photographic image and register them as attributes of the standard.
Drawing and graphic editor program in automatic mode will put dimensions between points and dimensional lines. Conventional units of length are converted into SI units.
The result is saved as a file for subsequent attribution, technical and technological research, identification and safety verification.
Necessary conditions for attribution: the number of angles for shooting is determined based on the complexity of the object, on the one hand, and the possibility of accurately reproducing the conditions for repeating the shooting, on the other. In this case, a drawing of a diagram of survey points is created, distances and angles are specified. As a rule, a diagram is drawn up when photographing a separate object and is saved as initial parameters attribution. When working with a turntable, the rangefinder may be redundant, and a necessary condition for reproducing the conditions of the initial shooting are the angles of rotation of the table, which are recorded as the initial attribution parameters. Photographing three-dimensional objects requires a minimum of 6 angles - four frames at 90 degrees and an image of the lower and upper parts of O m. The more repetitions of photo angles, the more complete and rich the description. But in some cases (for example, when the object has the shape of a tetrahedron), three photographs with a difference in photographing angles of 120° are sufficient. Flat-shaped objects (paintings) must contain at least 2 angles: front and back sides. But if the item has outstanding value or special attributes, then a minimum of 6 frames will be required. It is advisable to photograph a circular panorama of the premises with a difference in photoengraving angles of 15° for subsequent combination into one panorama. To photograph free-standing objects, at least 4 shooting angles are required if it is an object of simple design. For a more complex form (church cathedral, ensemble, etc.), the number of angles is determined by the operator.
Technical and technological research: is the scientific study of a material medium. Its implementation requires careful examination of the attributes of the prototype. For these purposes, the model, presented from a number of necessary angles, allows you to study the prototype with more attention and in more comfortable conditions than the object in kind. By applying the magnification scale to the desired area of the model, the operator is able to similarly examine details indistinguishable to the naked eye, recording color, size and other attributes (stamps, inscriptions, patina, stroke directions, etc.). The research results are entered into a table (scientific description card) in xls format. After completing the study, the card is printed, signed by authorized persons, and after scanning, the file with the table is placed in the system layer of the model folder.
Identification: involves photographing the object of identification (O ci) from the same angles from which the prototype was photographed. Photos of the identification object are placed in a file. The image is scaled in such a way that the photographic images of the model (O m), available as confirmation of the dimensions of the prototype (O p), and the new photographic images of the comparison object (O ci) coincide in most possible angles and parameters. The results obtained are compared.
Identification of a cultural heritage object or large-sized object: shooting O m or O ci is carried out from several points No. 1, No. 2, No. 3, No. N, which allows obtaining photographic images of all angles of the object (object). In order to subsequently be able to repeat the survey from the same points, it is advisable to record them with marks on the ground and on the ground plan in polar coordinates. In the polar system, we determine the coordinates of these points on the ground using a theodolite, measure the angles between survey point 1 and survey points 1, 2, N (G1, G2, GN), and measure the distances between survey point 1 and survey points 1, 2, N (L1, L2, L3, LN). We perform further actions in the sequence presented in the attribution and identification sections.
Quantitative accuracy
When obtaining quantitative data on the material carrier of cultural property by several operators, the results usually do not coincide. Errors reach several centimeters.
If we assume that when photographing the distance between the lens and the object is approximately 1 m, then the frontal plane of the prototype (O p) or the comparison object (O ci), normal to the optical axis of the lens, and the plane in which the caliber is located should be separated from each other friend by no more than 2 mm. Whenever it is necessary to obtain accurate data about the shape of the prototype in the depths of the material carrier, i.e. behind the frontal plane, the caliber must be transferred to the plane of the control points with the accuracy indicated above. In fact, the problem of increasing accuracy is solved by manipulating the lengths of vector projections onto the photo plane. By comparing their numerical values, in the presence of a number of angles, it is possible to almost unambiguously identify an object.
The permissible angular error in the alignment of the frontal plane and the caliber plane is 2.5°, i.e. deviations of the planes of the comparison object from the planes of the prototype when photographing should be no more than 2.5°.
With regard to obtaining quantitative data on cultural heritage objects and cultural values that do not have an explicit measurement base, the proposed method has no analogues.
List of required equipment:
1. Digital camera: preferably a SLR or PEN camera with remote control launch.
2. Range finder.
3. Camera tripod.
4. Tripod for lighting fixtures- 2 pieces.
5. Rangefinder tripod.
6. Retractable rod for sources of ultraviolet and infrared radiation.
7. Background screen.
8. External (additional) flash. An external flash must be integrated into the camera's computer and synchronized when determining exposure.
9. Distributed monochrome light sources (used instead of flash).
10. Source of ultraviolet radiation.
11. Source of infrared radiation.
12. A table on which objects will be placed when photographing.
13. The design of the rotary table contains a base and a tabletop - a horizontal plane that can rotate around an axis.
14. Caliber - a standard of length, a ruler, an object, the length of which is recorded in documents.
15. Caliber stand.
16. A device that allows you to obtain a circular panorama (limbo).
Glossary of terms
An attribute is an essential or determining feature expressed in qualitative or quantitative indicators, which complements and expands in a negative or positive direction the meaning of the object to which it belongs.
Probability is a modal or quantitative measure of the possibility of the occurrence of some event.
Qualitative indicators of an attribute are formal data about the type of objects of a numerical and non-numerical nature, characterizing changes in the subject’s perception sensations (spatial, temporal, sound, color, tactile, olfactory, etc.), which are obtained by correlating a homogeneous value of a prototype or object of comparison to another homogeneous quantity (standard), which is taken as a unit.
A book of insurance photographic images is an accounting document containing basic information about photographic images, both printed on material (paper, glass, etc.) media and recorded on magnetic media. Before filling out, the book must be numbered, stitched and sealed with the seal of the organization and certified by the signature of the head with a transcript of the Last Name of the I. O. and the date of certification. Quantitative indicators of an attribute are formal data in the form of numerical indicators obtained by correlating a homogeneous value of a prototype or object of comparison to another homogeneous value (standard), which is taken as a unit. Quantitative characteristics of such attributes as the sizes of objects and objects are presented in accordance with the international measurement system - SI.
A control point is an arbitrary point on the plane of an object (prototype, comparison object). A gauge is placed in the plane of the control point and the distance from the shooting point to the control point is measured. It is advisable to indicate where the control point is located in the description of the conditions under which the photography was taken. Model is a material, visually perceptible object, which is a simplified version of the prototype (object, object, phenomenon), which repeats the essential properties of the prototype, the presence or absence of which in the object of comparison allows us to correlate it or not to correlate it with the prototype. Mode (way of existence) - expressed in modal or quantitative terms, an essential or determining feature of an object (object), capable of fully conveying the original meaning of the expression (text, definition) of the object or object to which it belongs. Mode, as a way of existence, most closely correlates with the model. An object of comparison is an object of the real world that has quantitative and/or qualitative indicators - (a i, b i, c i ... n i).
Determining an attribute is an operation to obtain the ratio of qualitative/quantitative indicators of a prototype or object of comparison to another homogeneous quantity (caliber), which is taken as a unit. The resulting value will be the modal/numeric value of the attribute. The purpose of any attribute definitions is to obtain a formal model, the study of which could, in a certain sense, replace the study of the object itself.
When defining a prototype attribute, attribution-specific control points are set of this type items. Then the coordinates of the projections are determined at various angles when photographing, and a holistic system of essential features (attributes) of the object is created, characterizing it with a certain degree of reliability. The ability to determine an attribute by calculating the linear dimensions of an object is one of the instrumental capabilities of the method, but is not the goal of the method in question.
Determination of an attribute empirically is carried out using various tools and tools and consists of several stages, for example:
1) obtaining coordinates of characteristic features (attributes);
2) comparison of the obtained data with the data of the standard (caliber);
3) transformation into a form convenient for use.
A prototype is an object (object, phenomenon) of the real world that has visually or tactilely felt essential features (attributes) - (a, b, c,...n).
Layer is a term characteristic of set theory. If we take the world around us as a topological space, then it can be presented as a generalization of metric space, in which only the properties of continuity are perceived. According to set theory: a bundle is a continuous surjective mapping between topological spaces: π:X→B, where X is called the space of the bundle (or the total space of the bundle or fibered space); B - the base of the bundle; P - projection of the bundle. Layer formula: dependence F b =π -1 (b) will be considered a layer over b∈B.
Cultural value is a certain objective object, which, being in the possession of a private person, group of persons or state, appears to be a universal (outstanding universal) value, where universal value is a material object (object) in which the content of a spiritual value that is significant for a wide range of subjects is revealed , both individual individuals and various social groups(estates, corporations, religious communities, classes, peoples, nations or all humanity).
Formula of cultural value: CC = ρα, where ρ is the degree of probability of the authenticity of an object, α is its value, expressed in the moral expectations of an expert.
Universal outstanding value is a cultural value that is significant for the world community (the definition reveals the content of UNESCO terms - universal value and outstanding universal value).
The universal value (CV ∑), identified taking into account the realities of the social structure, can be presented in the form: CC ∑ =αρ+βq+γr (2); where α is the value of the subject (object) for the state, β is the value of the subject (object) for a religious organization, γ is the value (subject) of the object for the corporation (estate, amateur trade union, creative association of citizens, national education of the peoples inhabiting Russian Federation). Signs ρ, q, r - corresponding to the probability of the authenticity of the item.
Expert assessments are expert opinions based on quantitative and qualitative attributes of prototypes, expressed in the form of symbols of a numerical and non-numerical nature.
An exhibition is a collection of cultural values located in a specific place and placed in a certain order.
A standard for comparison (caliber) is a standard used to compare the attributes of objects or items that, for one reason or another, cannot be directly compared with each other, for example, the dimensions of a prototype and the dimensions of a photograph of a prototype. The caliber is graduated measuring tool or an object, the size of which is documented, which is located in the plane of the control point when the image is taken.
CHAPTER I. ON THE HISTORY OF THE CORNELLE-MOLIÈRE PROBLEM.
1.2. Attribution objects.
1.3. Formation of an attribution hypothesis.
1.4. Conclusions.
CHAPTER II. ATTRIBUTION METHODS.
2.1. Subjective and objective methods of attribution.
2.2. Lexical analysis in the study of text stylistics.
2.3. Parsing using graph theory.
2.4. Application of automatic data processing.
2.5 Attribution of texts using the methods of pattern recognition theory.
2.6. Conclusions.
CHAPTER III. ATTRIBUTION OF MOLIERE'S POETRY PLAYS.
3.1. Formulation of the problem.
3.2. Definition of an a priori dictionary of parameters.
3.3. Formation of an a priori alphabet of classes.
3.4. Determination of informative parameters.
3.5. Determination of coordinates of recognized objects and standards of a priori classes.
3.6. Operation of the recognition machine.
3.6.1. Deterministic attribution.
3.6.2. Probabilistic attribution.
3.6.3. Assessment of classification quality.
33.6.3.1. Assessment of the quality of partitioning into classes of a set of attributed objects.
3.6.3.2. Estimation of homogeneity of a priori classes.
3.7. Interpretation of attribution results.
3.8. Conclusions.
CHAPTER IV. DATING OF POETRY PLAYS ATTRIBUTED TO MOLIÈRE.
4.1. On the question of dating the plays attributed to Moliere.
4.2. Methods for dating literary works.
4.3. Mathematical dating method based on style-distinguishing syntactic parameters.
4.4. Dating of plays attributed to Moliere.
4.5. Conclusions.
Recommended list of dissertations
Comparative stylistic analysis of the works of Romain Gary and Emile Azhar 2008, candidate of philological sciences Chepiga, Valentina Petrovna
Attribution of journalistic works attributed to A.S. Pushkin: texts 1830-1836. 2008, candidate of philological sciences Khozyainov, Sergey Aleksandrovich
Attribution of “A Romance with Cocaine”: a linguistic-statistical study 2001, Candidate of Philological Sciences Sineleva, Anastasia Vasilievna
The evolution of farce and farcical forms in the high comedies of Moliere: On the problem of stage text in the comedy theater of the 17th century 2000, Doctor of Art History Dunaeva, Elena Aleksandrovna
Multidimensional quantitative analysis and classification of texts based on linguistic-statistical characteristics 2008, Candidate of Technical Sciences Surovtsova, Tatyana Gennadievna
Introduction of the dissertation (part of the abstract) on the topic “Linguistic methods of attribution and dating of literary works: to the problem of “Corneille - Moliere””
Relevance of the research topic. The problem of attributing a work lies in determining its author, and a work can be understood as any related set of signs, including a film, painting, audio work, writing. The problem of establishing authorship in literature is associated with the existence of anonymous and pseudonymous texts and represents one of the oldest philological problems included in the field of textual criticism.
Until the middle of the 15th century, when printing was invented, all works of literature remained in the form of manuscripts, which only in the most rare cases were autographs or copies reviewed and corrected by the author. Not a single autograph has reached our time from works of ancient literature, and the authorship of the works of Platonagos and Aristotle is very controversial: In medieval literature, almost every work had a complex text history and a number of authors, and often the oldest list that reached us was separated by several centuries from time of creation of the work. For example, the “Song of Roland”, which arose at the end of the 11th century, is represented by only one copy of the end of the 12th century and big amount lists of the XIII-XIV centuries. There are different versions about the author of the greatest monument of medieval Russian literature of the late 12th century, “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” [Zaliznyak, 2007].
After the advent of printing, the problem of attribution of texts persisted, since a significant part of literary works either remains unpublished during the author’s lifetime, or is published with inaccuracies and distortions, both due to negligence and deliberately, for example, due to censorship. The lack of manuscripts, accurate data, and unusual biography give rise to many hypotheses about the “true” authorship of William Shakespeare’s works [Gililov, 2007]. Unpublished works often exist in a number of lists, of which none can be preferred to another in terms of reliability, as is the case with “Woe from Wit” by A.S. Griboedova. Over the years, according to biographical data and stylistic analysis, anonymous works were attributed to M.V. Lomonosov, A.N. Radishchev, N.M. Karamzin.
Resolving the issue of authorship of literary works becomes very important when creating collected works of writers, and journalistic works often become the most controversial. Many questions arose among various researchers when studying the critical and literary creativity of A.S. Pushkina, F.M. Dostoevsky, N.G. Chernyshevsky, V.G. Belinsky.
The controversial works of the 20th century include some works by A.P. Chekhova, V.V. Mayakovsky, M.A. Bulgakov. The attribution of “Quiet Don” by M.A. received great public attention. Sholokhov [In search of the lost author, 2001]. According to one hypothesis, the works of E. Azhar, under whose pseudonym the French writer R. Gary worked, are literary hoaxes.
The question of the authorship of Moliere's comedies was raised at the beginning of the 20th century, and today is widely discussed both in France and abroad. According to existing hypotheses, the possible authors of plays attributed to Moliere include such French playwrights as P. Corneille and F. Kino. The most heated debates flared up around P. Corneille's possible writing of the best comedies in Molière's poems. The hypothesis that the works attributed to Moliere were written by P. Corneille has traditionally been referred to in the works of various researchers as the “Corneille-Moliere” problem. One of the latest studies, the results of which confirm this hypothesis, was the work of D. Labbe, based on an analysis of the lexical composition of the writers’ language. However, analysis of the lexical level alone cannot serve as a sufficiently reliable criterion for the attribution of texts, since it is the lexical composition of the language associated with the theme of the narrative that is best amenable to imitation. Other researchers of Moliere's work over the years have cited various literary and biographical arguments confirming this or that point of view. A situation has arisen when a linguistic problem cannot be solved by methods based solely on philological analysis, or using methods of quantitative description of the lexical composition of texts.
As is known, in order to recognize that a work belongs to a specific author, it is necessary that arguments characterize it from three sides: biographical, ideological and stylistic, while the description and analysis of the individual author’s styles is a necessary stage of any attribution [Berkov, 1958]. The main task when analyzing artistic* works in the attribution process is to identify specific features of the author’s language and compare them with the specific features of all alleged authors., Description of individual author’s styles in order to translate information contained in an unformalized form into! text, in * a formalized artificial language based on mathematical statistics is to identify specific linguistic features of the text and use strict "rules of parameterization. Until the 70s, the practice of attribution was dominated by historical, documentary and philological research methods, largely based on subjective perception and analysis literary work by the researcher. V.V. Vinogradov identified 11 principles of attribution of anonymous and pseudonymous works, dividing them into a group of objective and subjective. He included linguostatistical principles among the objective principles [Vinogradov, 1961]. The mathematical apparatus and, in particular, linguostatistical principles became widely used in the attribution of literary works since the 80s.The history of the development of attribution methods has led to the understanding that an effective method of stylistic analysis for the purpose of determining authorship must cover different levels of the language system and include the use of multidimensional classifications. The description of individual author's styles for the purpose of translating information contained in an unformalized form in the text into a formalized artificial language based on mathematical statistics consists of identifying specific linguistic features of the text and using strict parameterization rules [Morozov, 1915; Vinogradov, 1961; Vashak, 1974; Sevbo, 1981; From Nestor to Fonvizin, 1994; Sidorov, 2002, etc.]. Parameterization of 17th-century poetic texts in French using an a priori dictionary of syntactic level parameters represents a special linguistic task.
The relevance of the research is determined by the problems associated with the development of problems of mathematical modeling of texts using multidimensional classifications and automation of linguistic research. The dissertation includes methods of mathematical modeling and quantitative description. individual author's styles at the syntactic level found their application in solving the Corneille-Molière problem. The work is of particular importance due to the recent increased interest in the problem of “Corneille-Moliere” and the great significance of the question of the true authorship of the comedies attributed to Moliere, both for French literature and for world culture as a whole.
In the case of Moliere's theater, it is impossible to accurately determine the dates of the composition of the plays, since not a single manuscript of Moliere has survived. The time of writing the comedies that make up his theater is established based on information about their first productions, however, the actual sequence of writing the plays that make up Moliere's theater may differ somewhat from the generally accepted one.
When establishing the time of writing of literary works, various techniques related to graphological and lexical analyzes are possible [Likhachev, 2001; Tagapoueku, 1982]. However, today there are no universal dating methods based on a mathematical description of the author's styles. The relevance and novelty of this work is associated with the development of a new mathematical dating method based on style-distinguishing syntactic parameters, taking into account the trend of parameters of the individual author's style, which in this work is understood as the main trend of changes in the parameters of the individual author's style throughout the writer's literary work, cleared of random influences and individual features of individual periods. Using a new dating method, the work dates the poetic plays attributed to Moliere, and tests the hypothesis put forward by the author* about the existence of a trend in the parameters of the individual author's style.
Thus, the dissertation work devoted to the attribution and dating of poetic plays attributed to Moliere corresponds to modern scientific issues and is relevant.
The theoretical basis of the study is the following: The individual author's style is a complex hierarchical system and must be described by a set of style-distinguishing parameters using the multidimensional classification method. The problem of attribution of anonymous and pseudonymous texts is one of the problems of pattern recognition [S. Watanabe, M.A. Marusenko].
Currently, style is considered primarily as a structural-syntactic category [A.I. Efimov, I.P. Sevbo, G.M. Martynenko]. The features of the individual author's style are most clearly manifested in syntax: in the selection of structures, their arrangement and combination into a complex whole.
An individual author's style can change both over the years and depending on the genre [I.P. Sevbo, M.A. Marusenko]. The dating problem can be solved as a task of ranking multidimensional mathematical models taking into account the trend of parameters of the individual author's style.
The object of the study is the characteristics of the individual author's styles of Moliere, P. Corneille and F. Kino.
The subject of research in this work is. establishing “the authorship and dating of controversial works attributed to Moliere.
The dissertation puts forward three hypotheses.
1. Complex attribution hypothesis: the texts of poetic plays attributed to Moliere belong entirely to Moliere (null hypothesis); the texts of the poetic plays attributed to Moliere belong entirely to P. Corneille (the first version of the alternative hypothesis); the texts of the poetic plays attributed to Moliere are the works of P. Corneille, F. Kino and one or more unknown authors (the second version of the alternative hypothesis).
2. There is a trend in the parameters of the individual author’s style, which is expressed in the fact that throughout the writer’s literary work, the values of the parameters change steadily in one direction.
3. The poetic plays included in Moliere's theater were written earlier than expected.
The main goal of the work is to apply the mathematical method of attribution of anonymous and pseudonymous works to solve the Corneille-Molière problem. Another goal of the work is to develop a mathematical dating method and establish the actual sequence of writing of the controversial poetic plays.
Achieving the set goals involves solving the following specific tasks:
1) review the state of the Corneille-Molière problem, select an object of attribution and form an attribution hypothesis;
2) compare and systematize existing linguistic attribution methods in order to justify the use of a mathematical method for attribution of anonymous and pseudonymous works, based on the theory of pattern recognition, in this work;
3) form a priori classes and an a priori dictionary of parameters listing the rules for parameterizing poetic texts of the 17th century in French with examples for each parameter;
4) using specially developed software, determine an informative set of parameters that ensure the division of objects into classes, and create mathematical models of the analyzed texts by describing objects in the language of informative parameters;
5) test the attribution hypothesis;
6) study existing linguistic dating methods and develop a universal dating algorithm for literary works;
7) establish the sequence of writing of the poetic plays attributed to Moliere, using a new method of dating literary works.
The following texts served as the material for this study:
1) 13 comedies in verse attributed to Molière ("L"Étourdi", "Le dépit amoureux", "Sganarelle", "Dom Garcie de Navarre", "L"École des maris", "Les Fâcheux", "L"École des femmes", "La Princesse d"Élide", "Tartuffe", "Le Misanthrope", "Mélicerte", "Pastorale comique", "Les-Femmes savantes");
2) 11 comedies in verse by P. Corneille ("Mélite", "La Veuve", "La Galerie du Palais", "La Suivante", "La Place royale", "Comédie des Tuileries", "L"Illusion comique", "Le Menteur", "La Suite de Menteur", "Don Sanche d'Arago", "Tite et Bérénice");
3) 3 comedies in verse by F. Kino ("Les Rivales", "L"Amant Indiscret", "La Mère Coquette").
Research methods. The work explores the possibilities of applying mathematical and applied methods to the study of language, and uses semiotic and mathematical modeling of natural language based on probability theory and mathematical statistics. In addition, the work uses methods of data processing, stylometry, linguostatistics, a systematic descriptive method, as well as methods of philological analysis, in particular methods of analyzing the composition and structure of a sentence.
Basic provisions submitted for defense.
1. The poetic plays attributed to Moliere are the works of P. Corneille ("Le dépit amoureux", "Sganarelle", "L"École des maris", "Les Fâcheux", "L"École des femmes", "Tartuffe", " Le Misanthrope", "Mélicerte", "Pastorale comique", "Les Femmes savantes"), F. Kino ("L"Étourdi) and an unknown author ("Dom Garcie de Navarre", "La.Princesse d"Élide").
2. The proposed method for determining the values of parameters based on texts of the 17th century in French allows us to solve the problem of determining the authorship of anonymous and pseudonymous texts of this period.
3. There is a trend in the parameters of the individual author’s style, which is expressed in the fact that throughout the writer’s literary work, the values of the parameters change steadily in one direction.
4. The dating method based on style-distinguishing syntactic parameters proposed in the work allows solving problems of establishing the sequence of writing literary texts and can be used in further research.
125. As a result of dating the controversial plays attributed to P. Corneille and F. Kino, the hypothesis about the earlier writing of the poetic plays included in Moliere’s theater was confirmed.
The scientific novelty of the work is as follows:
The attribution of poetic plays attributed to Moliere was carried out using methods of mathematical analysis of texts using the theory of pattern recognition;
Rules for text parameterization have been developed based on texts from the 17th century in* French;
The possibility of automating linguistic research in the field of attribution is shown;
A method for dating literary works has been developed;
A new dating method was used to establish the sequence of writing of the plays attributed to Moliere.
Theoretical significance of the study; is; that it solves the problem of authorship of texts; classics of French literature. The results of the study contribute to the development of mathematical and applied methods of studying language and contribute to the development of the theory and practice of attribution of literary works using image recognition methods, as well as the theory and practice of dating literary works using mathematical methods.
The practical significance of the research lies in the possibility of using the obtained data on the composition of the a priori dictionary of parameters "as an example when drawing up rules for parameterizing texts based on French material. The obtained data on the existence of a trend: parameters of an individual author's style can be used in further work to determine the sequence of writing literary works with for the purpose of dating them.
Data Analysis" and "Linguistic Methods of Attribution of Anonymous and Pseudonymous Works", as well as courses on applied linguistics, quantitative stylistics and the history of French literature.
Approbation of work. The main provisions of the dissertation research were discussed at meetings of the Department of Mathematical Linguistics of the Faculty of Philology of St. Petersburg State University (2005-2007) and were tested in a number of reports read at the XXXV and XXXVI International Philological Conferences (SPbSU, 2006-2007), at the All-Russian scientific conference“Quantitative linguistics: research and models” (Novosibirsk, 2005), All-Russian scientific conference with international participation “ Actual problems theoretical and applied linguistics and optimization of foreign language teaching" (Togliatti, 2005), at the International Scientific Conference "MegaLing" 2007. Horizons of Applied Linguistics and Linguistic Technologies." (Ukraine, Partenit, 2007), and were also reflected in 7 publications with a total volume 2.0 p.l.
Scope and structure of work. The dissertation research contains 183 pages of typewritten text, it consists of an introduction, four chapters with conclusions at the end of each, conclusion, bibliography, including 128 titles, of which 46 foreign languages, and a list of sources. The main results of the study are summarized in 41 tables and 1 figure. As an appendix, tables are given that describe the composition of the theaters of Moliere, P. Corneille and F. Kino.
Similar dissertations in the specialty "Applied and Mathematical Linguistics", 02/10/21 code VAK
Early dramaturgy of A.N. Ostrovsky and the traditions of the comedy genre 2013, Candidate of Philological Sciences Muzalevsky, Nikita Evgenievich
Mathematical and information support for methods of processing literary texts based on formal grammatical parameters 2002, Candidate of Technical Sciences Sidorov, Yuri Vladimirovich
Introductory components as a means of expressing and establishing the authorship of the text 2002, candidate of philological sciences Mukhin, Nikolai Yurievich
The plot of Psyche and Cupid in Western European and Russian literature of the 17th-18th centuries. 2005, candidate of philological sciences Osokin, Mikhail Yurievich
Narrative and dramatic in the works of M.A. Bulgakov 2012, candidate of philological sciences Trukhachev, Evgeniy Valerievich
Conclusion of the dissertation on the topic “Applied and mathematical linguistics”, Rodionova, Elena Sergeevna
4.5. conclusions
The results obtained allow us to talk about the possibility and feasibility of using a dating method based on style-distinguishing syntactic parameters, taking into account the trend of parameters of the individual author's style. The results of its application confirm our hypothesis about the existence of a trend in the parameters of the individual author's style. The method has shown high efficiency in the analysis of F. Kino's comedies.
In general, the new dating method seems very promising and can be used in further studies of the trend in the parameters of an individual author's style and in solving similar problems related to the dating of literary works.
CONCLUSION
During the dissertation research, the following results were obtained.
1. The study of documentary historical facts and philological analysis data made it possible to form a complex attribution hypothesis that describes the possibility of writing controversial plays attributed to Moliere, P. Corneille, F. Kino and unknown authors. The class of attributed objects consisted of 13 comedies in verse attributed to Moliere.
2. A review of the history of the development of scientific thought in the field of parameterization of the author’s style allows us to highlight the following main trends: the transition from one-dimensional classifications to the description of objects in a multidimensional feature space, the increasingly widespread use of computer data processing, as well as the interest of researchers in the use of syntactic analysis that has arisen in recent decades when describing the author's style. Effective method Stylistic analysis for the purpose of determining authorship involves the use of multidimensional classifications, determination of the characteristics of the text, and not of an individual sentence, and description of the text at different levels of the language system, taking into account both the lexical composition of the text and its structure. All these requirements are met by the mathematical method of attribution of anonymous and pseudonymous works, based on the theory of pattern recognition.
3. The paper presents the experience of using mathematical attribution methods based on the theory of pattern recognition in the attribution of texts in French. The proposed methodology for determining the values of parameters using the material of 17th-century texts in French made it possible to solve the problem of determining the authorship of controversial plays attributed to Moliere. The a priori dictionary of parameters consisted of 51 parameters. Two a priori classes - ^(CorpeShe) and 02(C)itai11;) - made up 11 comedies in verse by P. Corneille and 3 comedies in verse by F. Kino, respectively.
1674. The attribution confirmed the high information content and style-differentiating capabilities of the syntactic level parameters. The informative set of parameters consisted of 5 parameters: X02 (number of elementary sentences), X04 (number of composed sentences), X21 (number of conjugated forms of the verb), X31 (number of subjects), X32 (number of subject pronouns). At the stage of selecting informative parameters, the work shows the possibility of automating linguistic research in the field of attribution.
5. As a result of the work of the deterministic algorithm, the authorship of six of the thirteen analyzed objects was determined: the plays "Le dépit amoureux", "L"Ecole des maris", "Les Fâcheux", "L"Ecole des femmes", "Tartuffe" , "Les Femmes savantes" were attributed to P. Corneille with a probability greater than 0.95. As a result of the work of the probabilistic recognition algorithm by F. Kino, the play “L”Étourdi” was attributed, and the plays “Sganarelle”, “Le Misanthrope”, “Mélicerte”, “Pastorale comique” were attributed to P. Corneille with varying degrees of probability (from 0. 63 to 0.73).The results of the probabilistic algorithm were adjusted during the procedure for assessing the quality of the classification. Two plays, "Dom Garcie de Navarre" and "La Princesse d"Élide", constituted the posterior class. As a result of the study, a variant of the alternative hypothesis (Ha) was confirmed: the texts of the plays attributed to
Moliere, are the works of P. Corneille, F. Kino and one unknown author.
6. The review of existing methods for dating texts showed the absence of universal mathematical methods for establishing the sequence of writing texts. The application of the proposed dating method based on style-distinguishing syntactic parameters showed the feasibility of this approach, and also made it possible to establish the possibility of mathematically assessing the trend of the parameters of the individual author's style throughout the writer's literary work.
1687. As a result of dating the plays attributed to P. Corneille and F. Kino, the hypothesis about the earlier writing of the poetic plays included in Moliere's theater was confirmed.
Prospects for further research consist in developing the problems of describing individual author's styles and dating literary works using the mathematical dating method proposed in this work.
List of references for dissertation research Candidate of Philological Sciences Rodionova, Elena Sergeevna, 2008
1. Admoni V. G. Theoretical grammar of the German language: the structure of the modern German language Text. : textbook manual for teachers Institute / V. G. Admoni. M.: Education, 1986. - 333 p.
2. Alekseev P. M. Quantitative typology of text Text. : textbook manual for the special course / P. M. Alekseev. - L.: Leningrad. state ped. Institute, 1988.-76 p.
3. Babaytseva V.V. Syntax. Punctuation Text. : textbook manual for students / V. V. Babaytseva. M.: Education, 1981.-271 p.
4. Bally S. General linguistics and issues of the French language Text. / S. Bally. -M. : Editorial, 2001.-416 p.
5. Bektaev K. B. Mathematical methods in linguistics Text. : textbook manual / K. B. Bektaev, R. G. Piotrovsky. Alma-Ata: KazGU, 1973. - Part 1: Probability theory and modeling of language norms. 281 p. 1!
6. Bektaev K. B. Mathematical methods in linguistics Text. : textbook manual / K. B. Bektaev, R. G. Piotrovsky. Alma-Ata: KazGU, 1974. - Part 2: Mathematical statistics and text modeling. - 334 p.
8. Great Soviet Encyclopedia: in 30 volumes Text. / ch. ed. A. M. Prokhorov. Ed. 3rd, t. 21. M.: Soviet Encyclopedia, 1972. - 546 p.
9. Bongard M. M. Problems of recognition Text. / M. M. Bongard. - M.: Nauka, 1967. 320 p.
10. Bravermann E.M. Structural methods for processing empirical data Text. / E. M. Baverman, I. B. Muchnik. M.: Nauka, 1983. -464 p.
12. M. Vasilevich A. P. Color names as a characteristic of the writer’s language Text. / A. P. Vasilevich // Scientific notes of Tartu State University. Tartu, 1981. - Issue. 585: Text linguistics and stylistics. - P. 42-51.
13. Watanabe S. Estimation and selection of parameters in pattern recognition problems Text. / S. Watanabe, P. Lambert // Automatic analysis of complex images / edited by E. M. Braverman. M.: Mir, 1969. - P. 234-309.
14. Vashak P. Word length and sentence length in texts of one author Text. / P. Vashak // Questions of statistical stylistics / ed. B. N. Golovina. Kyiv: Naukova Dumka, 1974. - P. 12-31.
16. Vinogradov V.V. History of words Text. /V.V.Vinogradov; RAS, Inst. rus. language -M. : Tolk, 1994. 1138 p.
17. GakV. G. Theoretical grammar of the French language Text. / V. G. Gak. M.: Dobrosvet, 2000. - 832 p.
18. Gililov I.M. The Game about William Shakespeare, or the Mystery of the Great Phoenix Text. / I. M. Gililov. M.: International. relations, 2007. -536 p.
19. Gerasimovich A.I. Mathematical statistics Text. : textbook allowance / A. I1 Gerasimovich. 2nd ed., revised. and additional - Minsk: Higher School, 1983.-279 p.„
20. Glikman I. D. Moliere. Critical-biographical essay Text. / I. D. Glikman. M.; L.: Fiction, 1966. - 279 p.
21. Gorelik A. L. Methods of recognition Text. : textbook manual for universities / A. L. Gorelik. M.: Higher. school, 1984. - 208 p.
22. Grammar of the Russian language: in 2 volumes. Text. / answer ed. V.V. Vinogradov M.: Publishing house Acad. Sciences of the USSR, 1960. - T. 2: Syntax. Part 1. - 783 p.
23. Grammar of the Russian language: in 2 volumes. Text. / ed. V. V: Vinogradova - M.: Publishing House Acad. Sciences USSR, 1960. T. 2: Syntax. Part 2. - 440 p.
24. Greenbaum O. N. Computer aspects of stylometry Text. / O. N. Grinbaum // Applied linguistics: textbook / ed. L. V. Bondarko; L. A. Verbitskaya, A. S. Gerd. - St. Petersburg. : St. Petersburg. state univ., 1996.-S. 454-464. "
25. Grishunin A. L. Experience in examining the use of language doublets for attribution purposes Text. / A. L. Grishunin // Questions of textual criticism: collection. articles / replies ed. V. S. Nechaeva. M: : Ed. Academician Sciences of the USSR, 1960. - Issue. 2: Questions of textual criticism. - P. 28-41.
26. Derffel K. Statistics in analytical chemistry Text. / K. Derffel; translation with it L. N. Petrova. M.: Mir, 1994. - 267 p.
27. Enyukov I. S. Methods, algorithms, programs for multivariate statistical analysis: PPSA package Text. / I. S. Enyukov. M.: Finance and Statistics, 1986. - 231 p.
29. Likhachev D.S. Issues of attribution of works of ancient Russian literature Text. / D. S. Likhachev // Proceedings of the Department of Old Russian Literature / USSR Academy of Sciences. -M.; L., 1961.-No. 17.-S. 37-59.
30. Likhachev D. S. Textology based on the material of Russian literature of the X-XVII centuries Text. / D. S. Likhachev; RAS, Institute of Rus. lit. 3rd ed., revised. and additional - St. Petersburg: Aletheia, 2001.-758 p.
31. Mantzius K.-Moliere. Theaters, audiences, actors of his time Text. / K. Mantzius; lane from fr. F. Kaverina. -M. : Gosizdat, 1922. 172 p.
32. Markov A. A. About one application of the statistical method Text. /A. A. Markov // News of the Imperial Academy of Sciences. Ser. 6. -1916.-T. 10, No. 4. -WITH. 239-242.
33. Martynenko G. Ya. Multidimensional syntactic analysis of literary prose Text. / G. Ya. Martynenko // Structural and applied linguistics: interuniversity. collection / ed. A. S. Gerda. - L.: Publishing house Leningr. University, 1983. Issue 2. - P. 47-61.
34. Martynenko G. Ya. Fundamentals of stylometry Text. / G. Ya. Martynenko. -L. : Publishing house Leningr. Univ., 1988. 173 p.
35. Marusenko M. A. On measuring the connection of industry terminology systems with the use of computers Text. / M. A. Marusenko // Scientific notes of the University of Tartu. - Tartu, 1981. - Issue. 7. - pp. 74-81.
36. Marusenko M. A. Attribution of anonymous and pseudonymous literary works by image recognition methods Text. / M. A. Marusenko. - L.: Publishing house Leningr. Univ., 1990. 164 p.
37. Meyer D. Theory of relational databases Text. / D. Meyer; lane from English M.K. Valieva et al. M.: Mir, 1987. - 608 p.
38. Meshchaninov I. I. Ergative construction of sentences in languages of various types Text. / I. I. Meshchaninov. L.: Nauka, 1967. - 248 p.
39. Mirkin B. G. Analysis of qualitative attributes and structures = Analysis of qualitative attributes and structures Text. / B. G. Mirkin. - M.: Statistics, 1980. 319 p.
40. Ozhegov S.I. Dictionary of the Russian language Text. / S. I. Ozhegov; edited by Shvedova N. Yu. M.: Rus. lang., 1984. - 797 p.
41. From Nestor to Fonvizin. New methods for determining authorship Text. / L. V. Milov, L. I. Borodkin, T. I. Ivanova, etc. M.: Progress, 1994.-443 p.
42. Porshneva O. S. On the issue of attribution of texts of recordings of soldiers’ conversations S. 3. Fedorchenko Text. / O. S. Porshneva, S. V. Porshnev // Information bulletin of the Association “History and Computer” / resp. ed. L.I. Borodkin. M., 2002. - No. 30. - P. 31-44.
43. Svyatets Yu. A. Surprises of ergodic theory Text. / Yu.A. Svyatets // Newsletter of the Association “History and Computer” / resp. ed. L.I. Borodkin. M., 2002. - No. 30. - P. 147-149.
44. Sevbo I. P. Study of the relationship between the length of a phrase and the number of levels in the Text column. / I. P. Sevbo, S. M. Aleshkipa // Structural and mathematical linguistics / resp. ed. F. A. Nikitina. - Kyiv: Vishcha School, 1974. Vol. 2. - pp. 101-179.
45. Sevbo I.P. Graphic representation of syntactic structures and stylistic diagnostics Text. / I. P. Sevbo. - Kyiv: Naukova Dumka, 1981.- 192 p.
46. Seseman V. E. “Linguistic spectra” by Mr. Morozov and Plato’s question Text. / V. E. Seseman // News of the Department of Russian Language and Literature of the Imperial Academy of Sciences. - 1918. - T. 22, book. 2.-S. 21-34.
47. Sineleva A. V. Attribution of “A Romance with Cocaine”: a linguistic and statistical study Text. : author's abstract. dis. . Ph.D. Philol. Sciences: 02.10.21 / Sineleva Anastasia Vasilievna; St. Petersburg State univ. St. Petersburg: St. Petersburg State University Publishing House, 2001. - 22 p.
48. Modern Russian language Text. : textbook for philol. specialist. higher education institutions / V. A. Beloshapkova, E. A. Bryzgunova, E. A. Zemskaya [and others]; edited by V. A. Beloshapkova. M.: Azbukovnik, 1999. -928 p.
49. Handbook of probabilistic calculations Text. / G. G. Abezgauz, A. P. Tron, Yu. N. Kopenkin and others. M.: Voenizdat, 1970. - 407 p.
50. Tarnopolskaya I. O. Digram entropy of text and attribution of anonymous texts: results of testing the Text methodology. / I. O. Tarnopolskaya // Association newsletter
51. History and computer” / resp. ed. JI. I. Borodkin. M., 1998. - No. 23. - P. 65-68.
52. V. N. Vladimirov, I. M. Garskova. M., 2000. - No. 26. - P. 29-35.
53. Terekhina A. Yu. Data analysis using multidimensional scaling methods Text. / A. Yu. Terekhina. M.: Nauka, 1986. - 166 p.
54. Timashev A. N. Attribute // Textology.gi Electronic resource. -2002. Access mode: http://www.textology.ru/atrresum.html. - Cap. from the screen.
55. Tomashevsky B.V. Stylistics Text. : textbook allowance /
56. B.V. Tomashevsky. JI. : Publishing house Leningr. University, 1983-. - 288 p. /
57. Tuldava Yu. A. Problems and methods of quantitative-systemic research of vocabulary Text. / Yu. A. Tuldava. Tartu: Tartu State. univ., 1987.-203 p.
58. Fuchs V. According to all the rules of art: exact methods in the study of literature, music and fine arts Text. / V. Fuchs // Art and Computers / ed. R. X. Zaripova. M.: Mir, 1975. - P. 134356.
59. Khetso G. Who wrote “Quiet Don”? : (the problem of the authorship of “Quiet Don”) Text. / G. Hetso, S. Gustavsson, B. Beckman. - M.: Book, 1989. - 192 p.
60. Khetso G. Belonging to Dostoevsky: on the issue of attribution to F. M. Dostoevsky of anonymous articles in the magazines “Time” and “Epoch” Text. / G. Khetso. Oslo: Solum Forlag A.S., 1986. - 82 p.
61. Khmelev D.V. Linguistic analyzer Electronic resource. M., 2002. - Access mode: http://www.rusf.ru/books/analysis/. - Cap. from the screen.
64. Chepiga V.P. The problem of “Romain Gary Emil Azhar”: attribution of novels published under the pseudonym Emil Azhar Text. /
65. V. P. Chepiga // News of the Russian State pedagogical university them. A. I. Herzen. 2007. - No. 19.1. pp. 284-290.
66. Shapir M.I. The Batenkov phenomenon and the problem of mystification Text. / M. I. Shapir // Philologica. 1997. - T. 4, No. 8 / 10. - P. 85-134.
67. Shakhmatov A. A. Syntax of the Russian language Text. / A. A. Shakhmatov. -M. : Editorial URSS, 2001. 620 p.
68. Schwartz G. Sampling method: a guide to the use of statistical estimation methods Text. / G. Schwartz; lane with him. J. S. Pappered. M.: Statistics, 1978. - 213 p.
69. Yakubaitis T. A. Probabilistic attribution of text type based on several morphological features Text. / T. A. Yakubaitis, A. N. Sklyarevich. Riga: IEVT, 1982. - 53 p.
70. Arrivé M. La grammaire Text. / M. Arrivé, J.-Cl. Chevalier. Paris: Klincksieck, 1970.-425 p.
71. Boissier D. L "Affaire Molière, la grande supercherie littéraire" Text. / D. Boissier. Paris: Jean-Cyrille Godefroy, 2004. - 315 p.
72. Brondal V. Théorie des prépositions. Introduction à une ■ Sémantique rationelle Text. / V. Brondal. Copenhague: Munksgaard, 1950.
73. Brunet E. Où l "on mesure la distance entre les distances Electronic resource. / E. Brunei // Texto! mars 2004. - Mode of access: http://www.revue-texto.net/Inedits/Brunet/ BrunetDistance.html -, Text on screen in French - Caption from screen.
74. Bruno F. La pensée et la langue, méthode, principles et plan d "une théorie nouvelle du langage appliquée au français Text. / F. Bruno. - Paris: Masson et Cie, 1965. 984 p.
75. Burrows J. F. Not Unless You Ask Nicely: the Interpretative Nexus Between Analysis and Information Text. /J.F. Burrows // Literary and Linguistic Computing / ed. G. Leitner. - Oxford University Press, 1992. -Vol. 7.-P. 91-109.
76. Campbell L. The Sophisties and Polilicus of Plato Text. / L. Campbell. -Oxford: Clarendon, 1867. 170 p.
77. Cardinne-Petit R. Pierre Louys, inconnu Text. / R. Cardinne-Petit. Paris: L"Elan, 1948.-256 p.
78. Dubois J. Grammaire structurale du français: nom et pronom Text. / J. Dubois. Paris: Larousse, Langue et langage, 1965. - 192 p.
79. Dubois J. Elements de linguistique française: Syntaxe Text. / J. Dubois, F. Dubois-Charlier. Paris: Larousse, 1970. - 294 p.
80. Duchêne R. Molière Text. / R. Duchene. Paris: Fayard, 1998. - 790 p.
81. Garde-Tamine Y. La stylistique Text. / Y. Garde-Tamine. Paris: Colin, 1992.-630 p.
82. Galichet G. Grammaire structurale du français moderne Text. / G. Galichet.- Paris: Larousse, 1970. 285 p.
83. Goujon J.-P. Pierre Louys, une vie secrete 1870-1925 Text. / J.-P. Goujon-Paris: Fayard, 1988. 872 p.
84. Grammaire d'aujourd'hui. Guide alphabétique de linguistique française Text. /Ed. M. Arrivé, F. Cadet, M. Galmiche. Paris: Flammarion, 1986. -380 p.
85. Grammaire Larousse du français contemporain Text. /Ed. J. C. Chevalier, C. Blanche Benveniste, P. Arrive Paris: Larousse, 1964. - 495 p.
86. Grevisse M. Le bon usage. Grammaire française Text. / M. Grevisse.- Ed. A. Goosse. Paris and Louvain-la-Neuve: Duculot, 1993. - 1806 p.
87. Gutmann R.-A. Introduction à la lecture des poètes français Text. / R.-A. Gutmann Paris: R. Lacoste, 1961. - 394 p."
88. Henkels R. M. Using computer generated concordanca to analyze and document stylistic devices in Robert Pinget's fable Text. / R. M. Henkels, E. R. Egea // Computer and the Humanities. 1977. - Vol. 11. - P. 56-73.
89. Holmes, D.I. The Evolution of Stylometry in Humanities Scholarship Text. / D. I. Holmes // Literary and Linguistic Computing / ed. M. Deegan,
90. S. Lee. London: Oxford University Press, 1998. - Vol. 13. - No. 3. -P. 111-117.
91. Hupert P. Vocabulary richness. Text. / P. Hupert, D. Labbé // Lexicometrica. 1997. - No. 0. - P. 164-178.
92. Julaud J.-J. La Littérature française pour les nuls Text. / J.-J. Julaud. Paris: Jean-Joseph Editions, 2005. - 660 p.
93. L'affaire Corneille-Molière Site. 2006. Mode of access: http://www.comeille-moliere.org. - Text on the screen in French - Caption from the screen.
94. Labbé S. Inter-textual distance and authorship attribution Corneille and Molière. Text. / S. Labbé, D. Labbé // Journal of Quantitative Linguistics.-2001.-Vol. 8.-No.3.-P. 213-231.
95. Labbé C. La distance intertextuelle. Text. / S. Labbé, D. Labbé // Corpus. - 2003. - No. 2. P. 95-118.
96. Labbé D. Corneille dans l "ombre de Molière. Histoire d"une recherché Text. / D. Labbé. Paris ; Bruxelles: Les Impression nouvelles, 2003. -144 p. 1
97. Lewino F. Corneille Molière. L "affaire rebondit Text. / F. Lewino // Le Point. - 2003. - No. 1595. - P. 102.
98. Louys P. Corneille est-il "auteur d" Amphitryon? Reply Text. / P. Louys // L "Intermédiare des chercheurs et curieux. 1919. - No. 1505. - P. 123.
99. Louys P. Textes fondateurs de Pierre Louys Electronic resource. / P. Louys // L "affaire Corneille-Molière 2006. - Mode of access: http://corneille-moliere.org/pageshtml/iextesdepien-elouvs.htm - Text on the screen in French - Caption from the screen.
100. Louys P. Le Problème Corneille-Molière vu par P. Louys (contribution au dossier définitif) Text. / P. Louys // Broutilles, recueillies par Frédéric Lachèvre. Paris, 40, rue Beaujon, 1938. - 103 p.
101. Merriam T. An Application of Authorship Attribution by Intertextual Distance in English Text. / T. Merriam // Corpus. 2003. - No. 2. - P. 142168.
102. Mallet F. Molière Text. / F. Mallet. Paris: Grasset, 1986. - 478 p.
103. Muller C. Principles et méthodes de statistique textuelle Text. / S. Muller -Paris: Hachette, 1977. -478 p.
104. Plan P.-P. Molière et ses œuvres Text. /P.-P. Plan // Mercure de France. 1919. - Vol. CX1II. - No. 505. - P. 43-46.
105. Poulaille, H. Corneille sous le masque de Molière Text. / H. Poulaille. Paris: Grasset, 1957. - 400 p.
106. Taranovsky K. The Rhythmical Structure of the Notorious Russian Poem Luka Text. / K. Taranovsky // International Journal of Slavic Linguistics and Poetics / ed. D. S. Worth, E. Stankiewicz. Columbus, Ohio, 1982. - vol. XXV/XXVI - P. 429-432.
107. Vergnaud F. Appendice II Text. / F. Vergnaud // Wouters H., de Ville de Goyet C. Molière ou l "auteur imaginaire? Bruxelles: Complèxe, 1990.-P. 131-150.
108. Vidal P. Molière-Corneille, les mensonges d'une légende Text. / P. Vidal. Paris: Lafon, 2001. - 211 p.
109. Visé de J. D. Molière jugé par ses contemporains Text. / J. D. Visé de, M. Brécaut de, L. Grange. Paris: Isidore Liseux, 1877. - 148 p.
110. Voltaire. Vie de Molière Text. / Voltaire. Amsterdam: Catuffe, 1739.-347 p.-182127. Wilmet M. Grammaire critique du français Text. / M. Wilmet.
111. Paris; Bruxelles: Duculot, 1998. 704 p. 128. Wouters H. Molière ou l "auteur imaginaire? Text. / H. Wouters, de G. de Ville. -Bruxelles: Complèxe, 1990. - 151 p. list of sources
112. Quinault Ph. Le théâtre de Mr Quinault, contenant ses tragedies, comédies et opéras. - 5 Vol. /ed. par G. Boffrand. Paris: la Compagnie des Libraires, 1739. - Vol. 1: 543 p. ; Vol. 2: 516 p. ; Vol. 3: 399 p. ; Vol. 4: 407 p. ,; Vol. 5: 482 p.
Please note that the scientific texts presented above are posted for informational purposes and were obtained through recognition original texts dissertations (OCR). Therefore, they may contain errors associated with imperfect recognition algorithms. IN PDF files There are no such errors in the dissertations and abstracts that we deliver.