COGNITIVE-SEMANTIC BASES OF EPITHETATION IN THE M. TSVETAEVA’S TEXTS

Epithetation is a process of assigning an attributive meaning to an object represented by a nominal word. The specificity of epithetation is the presence of contextual markers, which leads to the attribution of non-usual, non-systemic attributes from the standpoint of the language norm, but fits into the framework of the individual style, expressing the occasional nature and non-standard thinking of the author. The study of epithetation is transformed from the recognition of regular, systemic variability of the meaning of the attributive word (epithet) to the analysis of the mechanisms of the emergence of the attributive meaning within the epithet complex. This analysis is based on the cognitive-semantic theory of epithetation. It involves the study of the cognitive dependence between the components of the epithet complex, the unity of the defined object and its definition, attribute, as well as the identification of the mechanisms of the formation of a new meaning of this complex, based on the transfer of a attribute from one mental sphere to another. The blending theory of epithetation, as we see it, has the greatest heuristic power. It consists in the analytical description of the mechanisms of formation of mixed cognitive structures, in which the main role is played by attribute words. Epithetation appears as a complex cognitive-semantic and cognitive-metaphorical process of penetration of an attribute into an adjacent (metonymic logic), similar (metaphorical logic) mental zone or as a multi-stage comprehension by various cognitive mechanisms (metaphtonymic logic). The M. Tsvetaeva’s texts provide rich material for observation of the cognitive mechanisms of epithetation. The productivity of the blending model of attribution is proved using the example of the analysis of epithetation of abstract entities. A conclusion is made about the demand for epithetation in the poet's idiostyle, about the frequency of appeals to its metonymic logic, about the complexity of interpreting many attributive constructions without relying on the logic of poetic thinking and context.