Metaphorical Models with the HUMAN Subjective Zone in the Poetry of A. Mariengoff and S. Yesenin

Tyumen State University Herald. Humanities Research. Humanitates


2021, Vol. 7. № 2 (26)

Metaphorical Models with the HUMAN Subjective Zone in the Poetry of A. Mariengoff and S. Yesenin

For citation: Kupchik E. V. 2021. “Metaphorical Models with the HUMAN Subjective Zone in the Poetry of A. Mariengoff and S. Yesenin”. Tyumen State University Herald. Humanities Research. Humanitates, vol. 7, no. 2 (26), pp. 23-41. DOI: 10.21684/2411-197X-2021-7-2-23-41

About the author:

Elena V. Kupchik, Dr. Sci. (Philol.), Professor, Department of Russian Language and General Linguistics, University of Tyumen;


This article analyzes the metaphorical models with the subject “human” and “part of the body” in the poetry of A. Mariengof and S. Yesenin. The object of the research is comparative paths in which metaphorical models are realized. Based on the consideration of metaphors and comparisons, metaphorical models are isolated and characterized, reflecting the connection between two conceptual areas. The comparison of metaphorical models in the poetry of A. Mariengof and S. Yesenin is carried out, the features of similarity and difference are highlighted. It was revealed that both poets pay considerable attention to a person as a subject of figurative comparisons. The model “human — being” is represented by comparisons with different representatives of the fauna, the semantics of images of which in poetic systems do not coincide. The most important for the authors figurative correspondences of a person, the most significant for each poet, subjects and objects of comparison are determined. The model “human — plant” occupies an important place in the figurative world of S. Yesenin, A. Mariengof mainly uses comparisons with objects of inanimate nature. Models with the subject “part of the body” are characterized by a variety of comparison subjects, especially in the poetry of A. Mariengof. The somatic vocabulary which is used by the authors is considered. Cases of combination in the realizations of metaphorical models of high and low are noted. Figurative correspondences through which poets characterize themselves are identified.


  1. Gudkov D. B., Kovshova M. L. 2007. The Corporal Code of Russian Culture: Materials for the Dictionary. Moscow: Gnosis. 288 p. [In Russian]

  2. Esenin S. A. 1977. Collected Works in Three Vols. Moscow: Pravda. [In Russian]

  3. Zankovskaya L. V. 2005. “The big is seen at a distance …”. S. Yesenin, V. Mayakovsky and B. Pasternak. Moscow: Litera. 292 p. [In Russian]

  4. Isaev G. G. 2014. “Comparison and Metaphor in A. Mariengof’s Idiostyle”. Humanitarian Research, no. 2, pp. 77-88. [In Russian]

  5. Kulchitskaya L. V. 2013. “Cognitive metaphor — conceptual metaphor — metaphorical model: ontological status of concepts”. Personality. Culture. Society, vol. 15, iss. 1 (77), pp. 117-124. [In Russian]

  6. Lakoff J., Johnson M. 2004. The Metaphors We Live By. Translated from English. Edited with a foreword by A. N. Baranova. Moscow: Editorial URSS. 256 p. [In Russian]

  7. Mariengof A. B. 2019. Small Collected Works. St. Petersburg: Azbuka, Azbuka-Atticus. 608 p. [In Russian]

  8. Mugu R. Yu. 2003. “Polysemantism of somatic vocabulary (based on the material of the Russian and German languages)”. Cand. Sci. (Philol). diss. abstract. Maykop. 15 p. [In Russian]

  9. Novikova M. V. 2016. “The nature of the musical image in the work of A. Mariengof”. Bulletin of the Voronezh State University, no. 3, pp. 74-77. [In Russian]

  10. Novikova M. V. 2018. “Ecphrasis in the poetic practice of the imagists (V. Shershenevich, A. Mariengof, S. Yesenin)”. Cand. Sci. (Philol.) diss. Voronezh. 231 p. [In Russian]

  11. Popova L. V. 2011. “Nominal predicates with the meaning of comparison as a means of expressing imagery in a literary text (based on the novel by Mariengof A. B. ‘Cynics’)”. Bulletin of the Northern Federal University, no. 2, pp. 104-109. [In Russian]

  12. Prilepin Z. 2008. “Magnificent Marienhof”. Russian Life, pp. 11-13. [In Russian]

  13. Remizov V. A., Irkhen I. I. 2018. “The human body as a sociocultural phenomenon”. Knowledge. Understanding. Skill, no. 1, pp. 90-103. [In Russian]

  14. Samodelova E. A. 2005. “Moscow imagism ‘in the mirror’ of one document”. Russian Imagism: History, Theory, Practice, pp. 96-135. [In Russian]

  15. Sukhov V. A. 2012. “The evolution of the image of Moscow in the works of A. B. Marienhof”. Izvestia RSPU Named After V. G. Belinsky, no. 27, pp. 402-406. [In Russian]

  16. Huttunen T. 2007. Imagist Marienhof: Dandy. Installation. Cynics. Moscow: New Literary Review. 272 p. [In Russian]

  17. Istomina M. A. (ed.) 2003. Encyclopedic Dictionary of Symbols. Moscow: AST: Astrel Publishing House. 1056 p. [In Russian]