O conceito de fronteira na semiótica de Iúri Lotman

http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/2176-457326361 The Concept of Border in Yuri Lotman’s Semiotics / O conceito de fronteira na semiótica de Iúri Lotman Ekaterina Vólkova Américo ABSTRACT This article1 aims to introduce the concept of semiotic border in the oeuvre of the Russian semiotician Yuri Lotman (1922-1993) as well as the process of assimilation of foreign texts that occurs precisely in the border area. Based on this theoretical approach, we analyze cultural interrelations, such as the presence of the French language in Leo Tolstoy’s novel War and Peace and the impact of jeans in Soviet culture. KEYWORDS: Yuri Lotman; Semiotics of Culture; Semiosphere; Border RESUMO O presente artigo tem por objetivo apresentar o conceito de fronteira na obra do semioticista russo Iúri Lotman (1922-1993), bem como o esquema de assimilação de textos alheios que ocorre justamente na zona fronteiriça. Com base nessas colocações teóricas abordamos as inter-relações culturais, como a presença da língua francesa no romance Guerra e paz de Liev Tolstói e o impacto da calça jeans na cultura soviética. PALAVRAS-CHAVE: Iúri Lotman; Semiótica da cultura; Semiosfera; Fronteira  Universidade Federal Fluminense – UFF, Niterói, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil; The present article is based on the lecture Multilinguism in Iúri Lotman’s Semiosphere, given during the 2nd Conference of LABPEC (Laboratório de Pesquisa em Estudos de Contato Linguístico [Laboratory of Research in Contact Language Studies]). The Conference, entitled B/Orders in motion: práticas e migrações [B/Orders in motion: practices and migrations], was held at Universidade Federal Fluminense [Fluminense Federal University] from 12 to 14 November 2015. 1 6 Bakhtiniana, São Paulo, 12 (1): 6-21, Jan./April 2017. Introduction Lotman’s semiotics of culture was established in the context of teaching and research at the University of Tartu (Estonia). Lotman was the leader, although not officially, of the Tartu–Moscow Semiotic School, the main context in which studies on it were conducted. One of the main features of the School was its bicentrality, which reflects its own name. The presence of two centers, in fact, is characteristic of the Russian culture. The coexistence of Kiev and Novgorod in Ancient Russia and of Moscow and Saint Petersburg (Petrograd, Leningrad) during Russian Empire and in Modern Russia is a good example of it. As to language and literary studies, it is possible to mention the concomitant existence of the Moscow Linguistic Circle (1915-1924) and OPOIAZ [Society for the Study of Poetic Language] (1916-1926) in Petrograd. In the context of the Semiotic School, the center in Tartu was represented by Lotman, his wife Zara Mints, a researcher of Russian Symbolism, and Borís Egórov, the author of Lotman’s posthumous biography. The center in Moscow, on the other hand, was composed of a considerably larger group of people, among whom were young and beginning researchers who became renown later on. Indologist Alexander Piatigorsky, linguist and philologist Vladimir Toporov, brothers Boris and Vladimir Uspensky (the latter was also a mathematician), philologist Mikhail Gasparov, linguist Vyacheslav Ivanov, mythologist Yeleazar Meletinsky, folklorist Sergei Nekliudov (the latter three have been to Brazil) are some of them. Thus, the second important feature of the School is the interdisciplinarity of the studies they conducted. The third guiding feature of the School is its explicitly apolitical nature. Similar to the other participants of the School, Lotman belonged to intelliguênstia [intelligentsia], a stratum of Russian society made up of intellectuals, whose rigorous model of ethical and moral conduct sharply diverged from the Soviet ideology. Unable to express their true views, the Russian semioticians avoided political issues, which in a way is also a form of resistance. However, they prompted reflections on the Soviet regime through their research, constituting it as a type of Aesopian language. Thus, when it is necessary to define Lotman’s and the School’s historical and national affiliation, a terminological problem inevitably arises: although historically belonging to the Soviet period, neither the School nor Lotman can be called “Soviet” (MACHADO, 2015). Besides, as Lotman’s family was Jewish, calling him a “Russian” semiotician would not be totally accurate. Bakhtiniana, São Paulo, 12 (1): 6-21, Jan./April 2017. 7 Therefore, the most plausible solution to this issue is to closely connect him to Russia’s historical and cultural context. In general, it is possible to state that, in its first stage (mainly from the 1960s to the 1970s), Lotman’s Semiotics of Culture is still in early development and under a great influence of the School. At that time, in the 1960s, the main concepts were formulated, and semiotics was defined as a new science. In the next two decades, as the School’s activities were almost over, Lotman’s semiotics took an independent course. The concept of “text” is no longer applied solely to make a difference between “linguistic text” and “literary text” (as in The Structure of the Artistic Text);2 it is broadened so as to include the manifold manifestations of human culture, resulting in the consolidation of the notion of “text of culture.” It is exactly during this period of his work that he develops the core concept of his Semiotics, viz., semiosphere. In it, border plays a fundamental role. 1 The Semiotic Borders Lotman suggests calling the semiotic space semiosphere. The concept stems from the notions of biosphere and noosphere, the latter being used for the first time in the work of philosopher, biologist and geologist Vladimir Vernadsky (1863-1945). According to Vernadsky, noosphere encompasses the universe of human thinking, which represents an increasingly powerful “geological force” that can transform the planet and even the universe (VERNÁDSKI, 1993, pp.188-303). As to Lotman’s concept of semiosphere, it encompasses the whole universe of senses and is brought close to the notion of culture: […] culture organizes itself in the form of a special “space-time” and cannot exist without it. This organization is realized in the form of the semiosphere and at the same time comes into being with the help of the semiosphere (2009, p.133).3 2 LOTMAN, Y. The Structure of the Artistic Text. Translated by Gail Lenhoff and Ronald Vroon. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 1977. 3 LOTMAN, Y. The Notion of Boundary. In: _______. Universe of the Mind: A Semiotic Theory of Culture. Translated by Ann Shukman. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 2009, pp.131-142. 8 Bakhtiniana, São Paulo, 12 (1): 6-21, Jan./April 2017. Another significant precursor of Lotman’s semiosphere is Voloshinov’s concept of “ideological sign” (MACHADO, 2007, p.282), whose existence is only made possible if individuals are socially organized. For Lotman, “all semiotic space may be regarded as a unified mechanism (i (...truncated)