МУЛЬТИМОДАЛЬНОСТЬ, ГИБРИДИЗАЦИЯ, КАРНАВАЛИЗАЦИЯ В ОРГАНИЗАЦИИ ТЕКСТА И УПЛОТНЕНИЕ ИНФОРМАЦИОННОГО ПОТОКА

Abstract

This article analyzes manifestations of the most relevant trends in the organization of text structure. Special attention is paid to creolization as the tendency in the organization of the text, as it provides the producer of the text with varying ways of compression of information flow. The functional potential of individual textual mechanisms of verbalization of heterogeneous information about the world is described by looking at some examples of methods of semantic, formal and functional organization of the text generated by means of different cultural codes. The influence of heterogeneous factors, external and internal to the generated text, on the organization of the text is analyzed. The paper offers an interpretation of the reasons leading to a consistent increase in the degree of multimodality of texts of various types, which is noted by researchers in relation to different communicative environments and different communication formats. The author also describes individual techniques of textual organization which are intensively used by native speakers of the language and members of a culture when generating texts of different types. Such clearly manifested trends in the organization of texts of various types as multimodality (or creolization), hybridization, carnivalization, etc., are analyzed as complementary, as accounting for and supporting each other, as well as contributing to the consolidation and structuring of the information flow not only in specific interaction between communicants, but also in the implementation of political, media and public agenda both in a shared cultural space and in different cultural spaces. An explanation of the paradox expressed in the desire to optimize the communicative process as much as possible due to intensive use of secondary nominative means is proposed. This paradox is facilitated by minimizing the communicative and cognitive efforts of communicants who more or less consciously choose certain means of implementing a particular discursive strategy in interaction. In existing formats of communication, text producers prefer to select secondary nominative means from numerous and diverse isofunctional means when solving various nominative tasks, not without reason assuming a greater degree of effectiveness of the impact on the recipient of secondary nominative means due to their expressiveness, emotivity and informational density. Compression and structuring of the information flow, i. e., rapid, productive and effective comprehension of the information perceived by the recipient is obviously stimulated by the coactivation of heterogeneous, heterosubstrate, heterochronous information about the world expressed by secondary nominative means.