The figurative system of poetry is always built on the language base of the traditional and the new. For centuries there has existed a specially poetic language, a language for which established formulas, originating in cult tradition, folklore, historically developing and transmitted from one poetic system to another, are of decisive importance. An artistic technique that allows the use of already known formulas, plots and images is widespread in world literature.

At one time, F. Engels wrote to M. Harkness: "You felt * that you can afford to retell the old story, because you are able to make it new by simply telling it truthfully" (117, p. 35). The potential artistic inexhaustibility of "old stories", the possibility of their truthful retelling has long attracted writers, artists and musicians. Alterations of world-famous stories, free translations of works of foreign literature, retellings of ancient myths, paintings different artists on the same, often mythological plot - all these are examples of the creative assimilation of material already known to world culture. Such works, having entered the treasury of the world classical literature, prove | the vitality and validity of updating the "old story", provided that the master is able to "make it new".

And if the reworking of popular stories has long been

I the subject of close study in comparative typological and literary criticism, then examples of the transition artistic image from

I one poet to another remain poorly understood.

In our study, we will trace the transformation of the image of a rose in different creative methods.

The rose is one of the oldest poetic images. Its roots go back to antiquity, folklore, religion. The rose has been loved and sung about since time immemorial. She was worshiped, legends and legends were composed about her. The very first information about the rose is found in ancient Hindu legends. In ancient India, there was a law according to which everyone who brought a rose to the king could ask him for whatever he wanted.

In the symbolism of antiquity, the myth of the death of Adonis, the beloved of Aphrodite, from whose blood, according to legend, the first red roses grew, came to the fore. Thanks to this, they have become a symbol of love and rebirth that conquers death. Participants in the festivities in honor of the god of wine and fun, Dionysus, were crowned with roses, as there was a belief that the effect of a rose cools the heat of wine and prevents drunks from blurting out secrets. As a result, the rose also became a symbol of secrecy, and five-petal roses were willingly cut to decorate confessionals: "Sub rosa", that is, under the seal of silence, literally means "under the rose."

It is interesting to trace the change in the meaning of the rose among the ancient Romans. At first, the rose was the emblem of courage. Wreaths of roses were awarded to Roman heroes. Among the Romans of the first republic, the rose was a tomb decoration. Rich people bequeathed large sums to permanently decorate their graves with rose petals. But at the time of the fall of Rome, the rose becomes a symbol of vice, a flower of drunken orgies and an expression of base feelings. And in the end, the rose loses all meaning: it becomes just an ornament, a whim.

IN ancient greece the rose expressed cheerful joy and deep sadness, and in myths about the gods it symbolized love and beauty.

In Christianity, the red rose was a symbol of the blood shed by the crucified Christ. The "white rose" mentioned in Dante's Divine Comedy expresses heavenly love. The poetry of the troubadours, on the contrary, saw in the rose a tangible symbol of earthly love, and to this day the rose continues to be a symbol of love. In contrast to the above, the white rose in many tales and legends is a symbol of death. Church iconography made the rose as the "queen of flowers" a symbol of the Queen of Heaven Mary and virginity; in the Middle Ages, only virgins were allowed to wear wreaths of roses; The Madonna was willingly portrayed "in the garden of roses". The Capuchin of Brandenburg, Procopius, in a book of sermons of 1667, defined the Virgin Mary herself as "the lady of the roses." And in sermon 132, he points to the double representation of the three parts of the rosary - joy, sorrow and glory - in the symbolism of the rose. On the one hand, they are vividly embodied in the rose bush: the foliage corresponds to a joyful circle, the thorns to the crown of suffering, the rose flower crowns the plant, as the crown of glory crowns mystery. On the other hand, they are also represented in the rose flower itself, in its color possibilities: a white rose means joy, a red one - blood and suffering, a peach, "bodily" ("Ie1bragyge") - heavenly glory.

The rose is also associated with the death-rebirth mythologeme; at the same time, the rose fits into the paradigm of the lost (according to Herder, "withered" (198, p. 13)) earthly and acquired by passing through the thorns-thorns of the heavenly paradise.

In alchemy, the red and white roses are the symbol of the red/white dualistic system, of both sulfur and mercury, and the seven-petalled rose indicates the seven metals and their planetary equivalents. The connection between the cross and the rose leads to the symbol of Rosicrucianism, an evangelical-Christian union of the Renaissance, which represented itself as the "Brotherhood of the Wise Men". The symbol of Rosicrucianism is the five-pointed rose on the cross. The personal seal of Martin Luther is a cross growing from the heart inside a five-petalled rose flower. The emblem of Johann Valentin Andrei (1586 - 1654), whose writings gave birth to the idea of ​​​​the legendary union, was the St. Andrew's cross with four roses in the corners. Masonic symbolism pays great attention to the rose. When a member of the brotherhood was buried, three roses were placed in his grave. "Three roses of John" are interpreted as "light, love, life"; on St. John's Day (June 24) the box is decorated with roses in three colors, and some of the names of the boxes indicate this ("At the Three Roses" in Hamburg - the box in which G.E. Lessing was admitted). Rosicrucian and Masonic symbolism is found in the poem by I.V. Goethe's "Secrets", which tells about the cross entwined with roses:

Who connected the roses with a cross And clothed the rigidity of the tree with a crown on all sides? Silvery clouds, soaring in the heights, Cross and roses in lightness akin. And holy life pours out in a triple beam from a point in the middle

Roses are credited with royal dignity, as they mean pleasure, generosity and secrecy. Red roses at all times carry with them red blood, which everyone is obliged to give for freedom, for the fatherland or the church: just as a red rose, thanks to divine blessing, continuously grows and develops, so a military leader must expect every minute that his blood will be shed; and the rose was then an honor and a military sign, according to which the Romans believed that Mars was descended from the rose.

Many legends and stories are associated with the rose. She was sung in the literature of all states and times. Five hundred of the eighteen thousand volumes of the library of the Chinese emperor deal only with the rose; it was sung by Ovid, Virgil, Homer, Anacreon, Theocritus, Hafiz, Confucius. Sappho called the rose "the queen of flowers". There are many legends about the role of roses in the life of ancient rulers. There were several holidays and customs dedicated to the rose. For example, the holiday of a blossoming rose in Kashmir (Persia), Rose Sunday in the Vatican, a holiday in the French town of Treviso. In France, even the poorest man had to give his daughter a wreath of roses on her wedding day; the Jewish bride always decorated her hair with a scarlet rose, the French baptized babies in rose water.

Thus, over time, there are many different interpretations flower. We know a love flower (for example, a rose in ancient Egypt or Shakespeare), historical (the war of the Scarlet and White roses; the ancient Germans considered the rose a symbol of the sword and a mortal wound), religious (the rose among the Mohammedans and in ancient India). Gradually, the word loses its sacred original meaning. “A rose smells like a rose, even if you call it a rose, even if you don’t,” Shakespeare notes (208, p. 196. - translated by B.

Pasternak). Umberto Eco, in an explanatory note to his novel The Name of the Rose, writes: "The rose as a symbolic figure is so saturated with meanings that it has almost no meaning" (217, p. 598). We can conclude that the image of the rose has become intertextual. It has become entrenched in our everyday life in an infinite number of speech genres.

That is why the rose is one of the most beloved, but also one of the most difficult to read images in world literature, and in particular poetry.

In connection with the well-known terminological uncertainty and ambiguity of the used concept of "image", we consider it necessary to clarify it.

The beginning of the theory of the artistic image can be traced back to Aristotle's doctrine of "mimesis". The term "image" entered literary criticism after the publication of Hegel's works. The philosopher states: "We can designate a poetic representation as figurative, since it puts before our eyes, instead of an abstract essence, its concrete reality" (42, p. 194). Consequently, there are two planes in the image: the plane of expression and the plane of comprehension, understanding, "verbally designated and implied" (220, p. 252). The image reflects the interpenetration of these two plans. The image is able to find the different in the general and the common in the different, the "golden mean" between the two poles. Naturally, the artistic image is inseparable from the content in relation to which it acts as a form. But the study of any material is preceded by its "dismemberment". It in itself presupposes an understanding of the interconnection of the analyzed parts, their place and role in the composition of the whole.

The images with which the poet "thought" are accessible to us only in so far as they have found their embodiment in the words of a real language. Therefore, the originality of the figurative structure of a work of art cannot be fully understood in isolation from that "external form" in which the images find their one and only expression. Theorists have long noted the connection between the image and the word, the main means of creating a poetic image. "Imagery in work of art unthinkable outside of the word, outside of linguistic design. The poetic image outside the word is naked abstractness" (141, p. 95).

Interesting considerations on the issue of figurativeness of literary and artistic speech were expressed by G.O. Vinokur in the article "The Concept of Poetic Language" (37, pp. 388 - 394). Here, as one of the most important and most characteristic properties of poetic language, its poetic function is put forward, which does not coincide with the function of language as a means of ordinary communication, but seems to be its peculiar complication. Poetic language in this sense is what is usually called figurative language.

The figurativeness of the artistic word lies in the fact that its real meaning is never confined to its literal meaning. "The main feature of poetic language as a special linguistic function lies precisely in the fact that this "wider" or "more distant" content does not have its own separate sound form, but instead uses the form of another, literally understood content. Thus, the form content serves here: one content, expressed in sound form, serves as the form of another content that does not have a special sound expression" (37, p. 390).

In another article, G.O. Vinokura "On the study of language literary work”(37, pp. 229 - 256) reveals the essence of his concept of the artistic image much more freely, broadly and more specifically. It is entirely connected with his interpretation of the structure of artistic speech. He believes that in artistic speech or in the language of a literary work, everything is figurative.

V.V. Vinogradov, discussing the nature of the verbal image, notes that "in relation to fiction, the problem of the image turns towards clarifying the specifics of verbal images, that is, images embodied in the verbal fabric of a literary and aesthetic object, created from words and through words" (35, p. 94).

P.V. Palievsky understands the image as a "system of mutual reflections". The image "talks to us. a special model of the world, which selects and pushes together, like old acquaintances, various facets of being, comprehending them in mutual reflection as a whole" (136, p. 80).

M.Ya. Polyakov offered his own definition of an image: “An image is a concept that lies at the intersection of two systems: a direct meaning and a figurative one, creating artistic sense. It is the image that crosses the boundaries of these two semantic fields that make up the system of the work, in which there is a plastic sensual image of the world and a specific semantic structure" (138, p. 69).

In modern literary criticism, the artistic image is understood as "the reproduction of typical phenomena of life in a concrete-individual form" (141, p. 91). Processing the phenomena of real reality, the writer finds something in common in them and embodies this generalized reality in the process of creativity into an image. The purpose of the image

Pass the general through the singular. The image does not realize, but "symbolizes" reality.

But the subject of our analysis are lyrical works, and it is the lyrical image that interests us. And reality, as you know, is given in the lyrics through a specific state of character, artistically generalized experience. In this art system reality itself fades into the background, while the artistic image acquires the dominant importance. And the image in the lyrics is nothing but the feeling and thought of a person. V.E. Kholshchevnikov highlights the binary nature of this term in the lyrics. Firstly, this is an image of a subject-sensual nature (sea, house, rose.), And secondly, it is a word used in figurative meaning(metaphor, metonymy.) (199, p. 9). It seems fair to us to agree with this provision, on which we will rely in our work.

The choice of topic is connected with the possibility of a multifaceted analysis of the semantic movement of the image of a rose and the ways of its expression in the works of poets of different literary movements.

The relevance of the dissertation is determined by the increased last years reader and scientific interest in the analysis of meditative-pictorial images (G.N. Pospelov's term). The problem of the lyrical image-symbol of the rose was not previously the subject of a special monographic study. In addition, the functional significance of the objective image in various creative methods has not yet been considered.

To consider the problem of the symbol, the material of lyric poetry is especially important, since in lyrics the laws and mechanisms of formation symbolic meanings appear more clearly. Therefore, the material for the study was the lyrical texts of German and Russian authors who chose the rose emblem as the main image of their works.

The subject of our analysis is language steel, namely: the style of a particular literary work, general and individual style categories - the genre style of a literary movement, the style of an era.

All of the above allows us to determine the purpose of the study: to give a theoretical and historical-literary analysis of the subject image. At the same time, attention is focused on the structural, stylistic and content aspects of the most significant works of Russian and German literature on this issue. We studied the principles, techniques and laws of constructing verbal artistic texts of various genres in different eras, delimited common patterns, and identified typological artistic techniques. The task of the work is also to reveal the originality of the interpretation of the image of a rose in different creative aesthetics, to consider the method of updating an already known artistic image in all its various manifestations and connections with other visual means, and also to establish the function of the poetic verbal image of a rose.

The main methods of work are structural-semiotic and historical-typological, which allow revealing the meaning of the structural units of the text (the leitmotif of the image) using intertextual analysis. This analysis is carried out at the intra-text level by comparing various variants of leitmotifs, and inter-text links are also established. The dissertation methodology is also based on stylistic commenting, functional and stylistic analysis, and comparative analysis. Stylistic commentary is the initial observation of the figurative system of the work. It consists in considering individual speech facts presented in a literary text. At this level, the idea of ​​the content of the work deepens, the functions of the word are not revealed here. At the level of functional and stylistic analysis, revealing the role of speech means in the transfer of the ideological content of the work, analyzing the functions of units of artistic speech, we identify the typical features of the individual style of each author. Internal norms of a literary text or part of them are examined, decoding is carried out at a deep level. The stylistic originality of this or that author, the originality of any technique is better known by comparing one phenomenon with another. Therefore, comparative analysis plays an important role in the study of a poetic text.

Analyzing any work of the Writer with a capital letter, it is always interesting to dwell on the artistic design of his ideas, embodied in the composition, the language of the author, those artistic techniques, which he chose as distinctive for expressing his thoughts. In order to get a complete textual analysis, it is necessary to illuminate the poem with different sides. Therefore, in addition to the main levels of the text, we will consider the sound instrumentation of the works. Repetition of sounds and sound complexes in poetic text is not random. It has a pragmatic character and is connected with the intention of the poet. The idea of ​​counting sound elements when compiling anagrams was expressed by Saussure (170, pp. 639 - 645). Having accepted the hypothesis about the counting of the elements of the scale by the poet, it would be wrong to deny the possibility of using similar methods when the reader reveals the author's intention. The recoding of the message made by the poet will be positively carried out in this case by the same methods that the poet probably used. Sounds absorb the meaning of the poetic work. This is the main semantic function of sound writing. Reflection of the semantic property of sound A.P. Zhuravlev calls phonetic meaning (74, p. 16). This is the content of the linguistic form at the phonetic level. The repetition of sounds can enhance the semantic coherence of a group of words or, on the contrary, can contribute to the isolation of a semantic unit. That is why we pay great attention to this aspect of the text.

The methodological basis of the dissertation is the works of the classics of literary and versification V. M. Zhirmunsky, M.L. Gasparova, V.E. Kholshevnikova, Yu.M. Lotman concerning the analysis of the composition of a lyrical poem, the semiotic approach to the study of a literary text.

The structure and volume of the dissertation are determined by its objectives. The work consists of an introduction, two chapters and a conclusion, which gives the main conclusions to which the study of the material led us, and outlines the prospects for the topic that emerged as a result of the work done and naturally follow from its solution. The dissertation is accompanied by a bibliography of the main works on the work of the analyzed authors and on the research topic.

Based on a thorough analysis of the lyrical poems of Russian authors dedicated to the rose, we come to the conclusion that this image, which takes root in antiquity and the Middle Ages, was vividly perceived by Russian literature and received its unique development in it. Initially, Russian poets did not endow the rose with national semantics, but attributed to it those meanings that had come down to their consciousness from antiquity. But already Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin was skeptical about the symbol of the rose. Of course, in his lyrics there are enough hackneyed motifs associated with a rose: ". from merry roses weave a solemn crown for yourself" (146; vol. 3, p. 13), ". your scarlet lips are like a harmonic rose" (146; vol. 3 , p. 149), "near the proud and beautiful rose." (146; v. 2, p. 339). But gradually the traditional qualities of the flower disappear or are supplied with unsightly epithets: 1<Хпадиая красота" и рифмами (розы -навоза). В итоге образ розы заменяется в лирике поэта полевым цветком, непритязательным, негордым и не жаждущим восхищения. Этот цветок приходит в поэзию Пушкина из творчества его учителя. В.А. Жуковский интерпретировал идею-образ немецкого романтизма, новалисовский "голубой цветок", подобрав ей отечественный мифологический аналог: национальная эмблема, раздолье поля синтезирует масштаб пространства с философской локальностью немецкого прецедента. Таким образом, абстрактный "голубой цветок" германцев обретает в русском сознании форму намеренного объекта воспоминания о чувстве. Эту-то традицию и развивает A.C. Пушкин в своём стихотворении «Цветок».

We do not find examples of the national specificity of the image in realism, and if it is used, then in the most ordinary, everyday meanings: "the roses in my soul of happiness withered." (130; tL, p. 269), “roses will appear on the cheeks G (130; vol. 2, p. 210) (NA Nekrasov). But the poetry of pure art, which existed simultaneously with the poetry of the realists, widely used the symbol of the rose. Of course, not all poets of this trend paid equal attention to the flower, but all references to the rose are innovative.It is interesting that in Russian poetry, in contrast to Western European poetry, the use of the image of a rose in the post-romantic era is often associated with romanticism.Obviously, Russian consciousness is less pragmatic, more subjective. The poet is not afraid to get lost in romantic dreams, memories of the past remain good memories, and do not require reflection on philosophical problems (compare with Lenau's poem "Welke Rose"). The rose as a color symbol is found in Russian poetry of the 19th century, true, less and less often, either being a reason for conscious poetic stylizations, or inspiring the mystical searches of the latest lyricists, who revived the color accessible only to a few scholars. ancient symbolism of the early Middle Ages. In this sense, the observations of B.C. Fedin in the book “A.A. Fet (Shenshin). Materials for characterization. In the third chapter (“Flora and fauna in the poetry of Tyutchev and Fet”), he gives, in particular, statistical tables of references to flowers in the lyrics of both poets; from these calculations it turns out that Tyutchev mentioned the rose 15 times, Fet - 89 (186, p. 103); at the same time, metaphors like "roses of the cheeks" were not taken into account. The abundance of roses in Fet to a certain extent reflects his interest in ancient poetry and his erudition in the Russian lyrics of the Pushkin era.

The 20th century creates a new round in the development of the history of the image of the rose. Russian modernism, rich in its trends, ideologies and representatives, is also diverse in visions of the image. Blok and Severyanin, for example, associate this symbol with national history and their own biography: "How good, how fresh the roses will be, thrown to me by my country in the coffin," in a white halo of roses - in front - Jesus Christ "(21, v. 3 , p. 360). As for Gumilyov’s work, we see in him an attempt to reconcile most of the well-known motifs associated with the image of a rose. His roses are simple and at the same time ambiguous, they are mysterious and at the same time easily explainable. Like Rilke, the poet- the acmeist speaks of a rose that exists in eternity, and not in a specific national consciousness. So, the image of a rose on Russian soil is many-sided and interesting. Despite its European affiliation, it receives in Russian poetry some new features characteristic of the national consciousness. Starting with Fet, Russian poets saw in the rose a symbol of absolute beauty and purity, appreciated its divine origin and rich history, admired the beauty of natural flowers. PS are characteristic, it is not seen as depleted or one-sided. It is also not associated with a clichéd perception that has lost its essence behind a multitude of meanings. The rose in Russian aesthetics is a special emblem, and the history of its development does not end with the era of modernism, but the analysis of the work of Russian poets of the 20th century, unfortunately, is not included in the scope of our study.

CONCLUSION

The evolution of flower symbolism, as A.N. Veselovsky, has always been under the simultaneous influence of many very complex factors that did not manifest themselves in the same way in different environments and in different historical conditions. In this study, we have tried to illustrate this position using the example of the flower symbol of the rose. One historical interval of one and a half centuries was taken (the end of the 18th-beginning of the 20th centuries) and two cultures - German and Russian. A single sequence and scheme of analysis were developed. As a result, it turned out that we are dealing with two plans for the development of the image, two spectrums of meanings, with two "destinies", which is undoubtedly motivated by different historical and national conditions. The symbolism of the rose evolved, each century endowed it with new meanings, national cultures were adjusted in accordance with specific aesthetic tasks, because the emblematic image is generated by the efforts of individual experience and culture in accordance with goals and functions - sensory-emotional, intellectual, social.

A lot has been said about the rose. Nevertheless, a rare poet is able to refuse the tempting chance to inscribe his word in the history of this centuries-old symbol. However, the power of traditions is so great that he cannot but provide his rose with the attributes previously given to it by the lyrics. Hence the abundance of similar works, themes and problems; hence the problems of imitation and originality, tradition and innovation; hence the similar steps towards the development of the rose symbol in different aesthetics. In this work, we tried to take into account the numerous variations on ancient, oriental, medieval and Christian themes, as well as the identity of each author.

The study showed that the paths of image development on German (and, more broadly, European) and Russian soils were not independent of each other. Of course, for the most part, German symbolism influenced Russian, but in some cases, for example, in the aesthetics of modernism, one can speak of mutual enrichment.

In the literature of Germany, and in particular poetry, the image of a rose came directly from antiquity. Based on these ancient motifs, German authors of the Renaissance compiled the so-called compendiums of emblems and symbols. Each object in these "dictionaries" of imagery, provided with inscriptions, is enclosed in its own circle of "comprehension": both objects and meanings have already been selected, aesthetically verified and represent general cultural, traditionally consecrated models of the compatibility of objects and their meanings. Naturally, they also include a floral catalog of emblems, where flowers (in the first place, of course, a rose) act as fixed signs in well-known "roles". The heyday of German lyrics of the 11th-15th centuries was marked by the emergence and development of the genre of allegory, and one of the most common, along with chess and love, was a flower allegory (for example, Hans Wintler's "Flowers of Virtue"). In the poetic work of I.V. Goethe's image of the rose comes almost in its original semantics, since in previous eras the possible ancient meanings of the flower were only fixed and affirmed.

In the Russian poetic tradition, the image of a rose is also widespread. In the era of Peter I, collections of emblems and symbols also appeared in Russia. Almost all the artists of the eighteenth century sang of the rose.

Here is “Ode in Praise to the Rose Flower” by V.K. Trediakovsky, and lyrics by A.P. Sumarokova, I.F. Bogdanovich, R.G. Derzhavin, N.M. Karamzin, and the works of many other classical and sentimentalist poets are examples of the textbook type. These roses are filled with ancient semantics (although they are borrowed mainly from secular Western European literature, where the traditions of poetic descriptions of flower beds or their symbolic interpretation dating back to the Renaissance were still alive) and, moreover, are not symbols: the norms of classicism offered only an installation, a sign . The work of these poets is considered the Anacreontic period in Russian literature and correlates with the corresponding period in Western European poetic consciousness. Early Russian romanticism can also be attributed to this period (for example, in the lyrics of V.A. Zhukovsky, E.A. Baratynsky and other sweats of this period, the rose does not become an image, but remains a metaphorical sign).

In the era of romanticism in both literary traditions, one can speak of a rose as a symbol of the life-affirming fullness of the feeling of love, beauty, youth, happiness. The philosophical aspect of the image is also indicative. The rose leads to memories and further - to reflection on the eternal (Lenau, romantic allusions in Turgenev's work).

Romanticism is characterized by the motif of the transience of earthly existence, compared with the speed of withering roses - one of the oldest lyrical themes, popular among the Alexandrians and Roman elegiacs. This motif is mainly used by Russian poets. This is the young Pushkin, and Zhukovsky, and others. The German lyric poets of the "aesthetic period" give this theme only hints. So, in Lenau, the transience of the life of roses correlates with the rapidly fading beauty of a woman. The reader should guess that we are also talking about youth, and about life in general.

The image of a girl for romanticism is generally special. She is the bearer of divine revelation, which is understood as the symbolism of life. The romantic demand for "vitality" has little in common with realism and naturalism; life in this case does not have self-sufficiency, but it has symbolism precisely in its real givenness and actual existence. The perception of a girl as a living symbol, a symbolic manifestation, is characteristic of romanticism as a trend in general, comparable with the early F. Schlegel: "A blooming girl is the most charming symbol of pure goodwill" (214, p. 290). The girl's face is like a rose. A.I. Vaskinevich, analyzing the work of the Heidelberg romantics, says that the name Rose, along with Aurora, becomes in romantic aesthetics "the most common name used for female images associated with the meaning of the representation of the divine" (29, p. 51). The girl is divine beauty, eternal life in the sweetest shell. Hence the development of the ancient comparison of a girl and a rose. Here are the roses of the cheeks, and comparison on such grounds as beauty, youth, freshness. A rose is a welcome decoration for a girl, as well as the main gift for her.

It is in romanticism that the oriental plot of the rose and the nightingale finds a second life. It especially attracts European authors, starting with Goethe, running through the work of German romantics and ending with Heine. It should be noted that in German poetry this plot does not go beyond its Eastern interpretation: the rose and the nightingale are used in the same associative series. Both of these images symbolize love, the joys of life. As for Russian poetry, here the oriental tale loses some of its meanings. In the lyrics of the beginning of the 19th century, the rose fades into the background, the attention of the authors is attracted by the nightingale - the singer of love, for example, in the poems of A.C. Pushkin and A.B. Koltsov, and Pushkin gives this vision of images one more, additional meaning: he connects both symbols with the theme of the poet and poetry, with the problem of beauty and its reflection in life). In the second half of the century, however, the concentrations change. Under the pen of A.A. Feta nightingale becomes unimportant, and therefore inaudible; the rose appears in all its richness and beauty.

Realism and naturalism - literary trends that are as close as possible to the truth of life and deny abstract attributes - do not pay any attention to the rose. German naturalism is still making an attempt to breathe new semantics into the rose, using, in particular, a new genre form, but in Russia such aspirations are not even found. Pushkin the realist replaces the rose with a semi-anonymous wild flower, while the realist Turgenev recalls the romantic origins of the image.

Bursting into the 20th century, modernism brings with it a shockingly free treatment of a flower. At the request of the poet, the rose turns into a pathetic, mythological, biblical image, although in its depths it is still the same. Paradoxically, it is the rose of the 20th century that reminds us of the semantic spectrum of the image in antiquity and the Middle Ages. And here we can talk about the mutual influence of German and Russian poetry. How closely related (in content, in a set of symbolic meanings, in figurativeness) are the works, and especially the sonnets of Rilke and Gumilyov, the poem-thing and the acmeistic poem! But one of the principles of acmeism is "thingness"! It seems possible for us to talk about the genre of the poem-thing in the work of Gumilyov and about the acmeist Rainer Maria Rilke.

In the 20th century, the tradition of writing one's own epitaph is revived, as ancient as the image of a rose. It is known that in the era of modernism, the tragic worldview, the awareness of the inevitability of the end of earthly existence, is especially aggravated, therefore Rilke perpetuates in his own epitaph an image that expresses in him the idea of ​​art, beauty, love, life. Severyanin also correlated his poetic purpose with the image of a rose. "There is no need for monuments. Only let the rose bloom in his honor from year to year." - Rilke's words, but isn't this what the Russian futurist poet wants: "How good, how fresh the roses will be, thrown to me by my country in the coffin P.G. Pustovoit believes that in Turgenev's text, the history of which is similar to the history of writing" Classical roses "Severyanina, the author "as if surveys his life and sums up everything he experienced" (142, p. 7). His memory is the only thing he has left. "How good, how fresh the roses were!" Of course, not epitaph, but what the author recalls at the sunset of the life of a rose indicates that eternal images are those that remain alive in the face of death and after death.It seems that Igor Severyanin, given Turgenev's text, is no less than Myatlev's text when creating his work, borrowed this motif.

Thus, the period we are observing can be divided, based on the research problem, into two: before the 20th century and after. In the first case, the image of a rose in Russian poetry developed under the influence of the European tradition, in the second, moments of independent transformation can be traced, although coinciding with similar phenomena in German culture.

So, thanks to its beauty and aroma, variety of varieties and endless variety of color shades, the rose has become the most beautiful and richest symbol in world culture. The rose has an ambivalent semantics: it expresses both the heavenly and the earthly; it is both time and eternity, life and death. Of course, this could not but be reflected in the lyrics of the poet who is sensitive to the word.

In this work, as a result of the analysis of the lyrical works of Russian and German authors late XVIII- the beginning of the 20th century, we came to the conclusion that the image of a rose attracts poets primarily as an opportunity to comprehend in depth the eternal themes. He synthesizes in himself the main philosophical problems: the joys of life and the frailty of being, love and death, "the memory of a tender date" and "a cruel minute of autumn." This iconic image is a capacious poetic metaphor that reveals a different attitude towards eternity and the moment. The rose becomes the emblem of the mystery of life and death.

The most beautiful examples of the poetic embodiment of the image of a rose from antiquity to the present are poetic evidence of the diversity of this flower, which everywhere grows in uncreated fullness like a new miracle.

1. Averintsev S.S. Poets: Virgil, Sirin, Narekatsi, Derzhavin, Zhukovsky, Ivanov, Mandelstam, Brentano, Chesterson, Hesse. -M.: School "Languages ​​of Russian. culture”, 1996. 364 p.

2. Avetisyan V.A. Goethe and the problem of world literature. Diss. for the degree of Ph.D. M., 1987. - 461 p.

3. Alekseev M.P. Once again about Pushkin's poem "Rose" // Russian Literature, 1968, No. 3. p. 91 - 115.

4. Alekseev M.P. Pushkin and world literature. L.: Science. Leningrad. department, 1987. - 613 p.

5. Alekseev M.P. Disputes about the poem "Rose" // Alekseev M.P. Pushkin. Comparative historical research. L.: Science. Leningrad. department, 1972. p. 326 - 377.

6. Apollonova A.B. "Time" in the motive system of A.S. Pushkin in the 1820s // Philological Sciences, 2002, No. 5. p. 22 - 33.

7. Asmus V.F. Questions of the theory and history of aesthetics. Sat. articles. M.: "Art", 1968. - 652 p.

8.A.C. Pushkin: Shk. encycle. words. / Comp. V.Ya. Korovina, V.I. Korovin; Redcall. IN AND. Korovin (responsible editor) and others; Ed. IN AND. Korovin. -M.: Enlightenment, 1999. 776 p.

9. Akhtyrskaya V.N. Late Lyrics by Rainer Maria Rilke: (Problems of Poetics). Diss. for the degree of Ph.D. - SPb., 2002. -251 p.

10. Bakina M.A., Nekrasova E.A. Evolution of Poetic Speech of the 19th and 20th Centuries: Paraphrase. Comparison. -M.: Nauka, 1986. - 191 p.

11. Baran X. Poetics of Russian literature at the beginning of the 20th century. M.: Progress, 1993. - 365 p.

12. Bakhtin M.M. Questions of literature and aesthetics. Researches of different years. M.: "Artist. lit.", 1975. - 500 p.

13. Bakhtin M.M. Aesthetics of verbal creativity. M.: Art, 1979. -421 p.

14. Benediktov V.G. Poems. JL: Owls. writer, 1983. - 814 p.

15. Berezina A.G. Poetry and prose of the young Rilke. J1.: Publishing house Leningrad. un-ta, 1985. - 181 p.

16. Berezina A.G. Creativity P.M. Rilke 1890 1900s and problems of art. Diss. for the degree of Candidate of Philological Sciences - L., 1988.-400 p.

17. Berkovsky N.Ya. Romanticism in Germany. - L .: "Artist. lit.», 1973. -565 p.

18. Becher J.R. Das poetische Prinzip. Mit einem Anhang: Philosophie des Sonetts oder kleine Sonettlehre und "Ein wenig über vier Seiten." Berlin, Aufbau-Verl., 1957,462 S.

19. Biedermann G. Encyclopedia of symbols. Per. with him. M.: Respublika, 1996.-333 p.

20. Block A.A. Twelve // ​​Block A.A. Collected works in 8 vols. M.-L.: Goslitizdat, 1960 - 1963. - Vol. 3, 1960. - p. 347 - 360.

21. Bollnow O.F. Rilke. 2.erw. Aufl. Stuttgart, Kohlhammer, 1956. 35 S.

22. Borges H.L. Yellow rose // Borges H.L. Circles of ruins. St. Petersburg: "Azbuka", 2000. - p. 190 - 191.

23. Botkin V.P. On the use of roses among the ancients // Works of Vasily Petrovich Botkin. T. 1 3. - St. Petersburg: journal. "Pantheon of Literature", 1890-1893.-T. 3, 1893.-246 p.

24. Bragina A.A. Imagery and its linguistic expression // Bragina A.A. Literature on the oral exam. M.: Moscow Lyceum, 1996. -208 p.

25. Butyrin K.M. Problems of the poetic symbol in Russian literary criticism (XIX XX centuries) // Studies in poetics and stylistics. - L.: Nauka, Leningrad. department, 1972. - p. 248 - 260.

26. Bukhshtab B.Ya. A.A. Fet. Essay on life and creativity. L.: Science. Leningrad. department, 1974. - 136 p.

27. Vasilyeva A.N. Artistic speech. M.: Russian language, 1983. -256 p.

28. Vaskinevich A.I. A symbol in the work of the Heidelberg romantics. Diss. for the degree of Ph.D. M., 2000. - 160 p.

29. Vatsuro V.E. Lyrics of Pushkin's time: "Elegiac school" St. Petersburg: Nauka, 1994.-238 p.

30. Verzilin N.M. Through the gardens and parks of the world. L.: Detgiz. Leningrad. Department, 1961.-399 p."

31. Veselovsky A.N. From the poetics of the rose // Veselovsky A.N. Selected articles. L .: GIHL, 1939. - p. 132 - 139.

32. Veselovsky A.N. Historical poetics. M.: Higher. school, 1989. -404 p.

33. Vickery W. On the question of the concept of Pushkin's "Rose" // Russian Literature, 1968, No. 3. p. 82-90.

34. Vinogradov V.V. Stylistics. Theory of poetic speech. Poetics. Moscow: Acad. Sciences of the USSR, 1963. - 255 p.

35. Vinogradov V.V. Pushkin's style. M.: Goslitizdat, 1941. - 620 p.

36. Vinokur G.O. Selected works on the Russian language. - M.: Uchpedgiz., 1959.-362 p.

37. Witkowski E. Rose of Orpheus // Rainer Maria Rilke. Selected writings. Per. with him. - M.: "RIPOL CLASSIC", 1998. - p. 5-28.

38. Gasparov M.L. Selected articles. M.: New Literary Review, 1995. - 480 p.

39. Gasparov M.L. Russian poems of the 1890s - 1925 in the comments: Textbook for universities. M.: Higher. school, 1993. - 272 p.

40. Gasparov M.L. Art. Sonnet // Literary Encyclopedic Dictionary. -M.: Sov. encyclopedia, 1987. p. 411-412.t

41. Hegel. Op. in 14 t. M. Sotsekgiz., 1958. - T.14. Lectures on aesthetics. - 440 s.

42. Heine G. Romantic school // Heine G. Sobr. op. in 10 t. M .: Goslitizdat, 1958. - T. 6. - p. 143 - 277.

43. Heine G. Sobr. op. in 10 t. M .: Goslitizdat, 1958. - T. 5. - 534 p.

44. Goethe I.V. About art. M.: "Art", 1975. - 622 p.

45. Goethe I.V. Faust. M.: Pravda, 1975. - 480 p.

46 Goethe J. W. Faust. L .: Education, 1971. - 200 p.

47 Goethe J.W. Faust. th. 2. Berlin, Borngraber, s.a., 301 S.

48. Goethe. Gedichte. bd. 1 4. Brl., Cräf, 1924 - 1925.

49 Goethe. Gedichte. S-Hirzel-Verlag, Leipzig, 1954, 410 S.

50. Ginzburg L.Ya. About lyrics. M.: Intrada, 1997. -415 p.

51. Gorodetsky B.P. Lyrics of Pushkin. M.-L.: Acad. Sciences of the USSR Leningrad. department., 1962. - 466 p.

52. Gorodetsky S.M. Some currents in modern Russian poetry // Apollo, 1913, No. 1. - p. 46-50.

53. Grekhnev V.A. Lyrics of Pushkin: On the Poetics of Genres. Gorky: Volgo-Vyat. book. publishing house, 1985. - 239 p.

54. Grigorieva A.D., Ivanova H.H. Lyric language of the 19th century: Pushkin, Nekrasov. M.: Nauka, 1981. - 340 p.

55. Grigorieva A.D., Ivanova H.H. The language of poetry of the 19th and 20th centuries: Fet. Modern lyrics. -M.: Nauka, 1985. - 231 p.

56. Grigoryan K.N. Pushkin elegy. L.: Science. Leningrad. department, 1990.-255 p.

57. Grün K. Über Goethe vom menschlichen Standpunkte. Darmstadt, Leske, 1846, 323 S.

58. Gukovsky G.A. Pushkin and Russian Romantics. M.: Intrada, 1995. -320 p.

59. Gumilyov N.S. The legacy of symbolism and acmeism // Gumilyov N.S. "When I was in love." -M.: School-Press, 1994. p. 603 - 607.

60. Gumilyov N.S. Works in 3 volumes. Moscow: Khudozh. lit., 1991.

61. Dmitrieva N.L. To the history of the creation of the poem A.C. Pushkin "There is a marvelous rose: she." // Russian Literature, 1998, No. 1. p. 54-58.

62. Dmitrieva N.L. Rose at Pushkin and Turgenev // Russian Literature, 2000, No. 3, -p. 101-106.

63. Dmitriev I.I. Poems of Ivan Ivanovich Dmitriev. - 6th ed. SPb.: In the printing house of N. Grech, 1823. - 155 p.t

64. Donskaya A.A. Goethe's work and folklore. Diss. for the degree of Ph.D. M., 1999. - 184 p.

65. Eliseeva A.N. Subject symbol in the poetics of I. Annensky (on the material of the lexical-semantic group "flowers". Lily.) // Philological Sciences, 2000, No. 6. - p. 56 67.

66. Zhirmunsky V.M. Introduction to Literary Studies. St. Petersburg: Publishing House of St. Petersburg University, 1996. - 438 p.

67. Zhirmunsky V.M. Goethe in Russian Literature. L., "Science". Leningrad. department, 1982. - 560 p.

68. Zhirmunsky V.M. Composition of lyrical poems. - Pb.: "OPOYAZ", 1921.-110 p.

69. Zhirmunsky V.M. Metaphor in the Poetics of Russian Symbolists // New Literary Review, 1999, No. 35. p. 222 - 249.

70. Zhukovsky V.A. Complete works in 12 volumes. St. Petersburg: Marx, 1902.

71. Zhuravlev A.P. Sound and meaning: Book. for out-of-class reading (VIII X class). -M.: Enlightenment, 1991. - 160 p.

72. Zhuravlev A.P. phonetic meaning. L .: Publishing house Len. un-ta, 1974. -150 p.

73. Zolotnitsky N.F. Flowers in legends and traditions. M. Firm "T-Oko", 1992.-362 p.

74. History of German literature in 3 volumes. M .: "Rainbow", 1986. - T. 2. - 344 p.

75. History of Russian and Soviet Art / Ed. D.V. Sarabyanov. M.: Higher. school, 1979. - 380 p.

76. Karelsky A.B. About Rilke's lyrics // Reiner Maria Rilke. Gedichte. M.: Progress, 1981.-p. 5-38.

77. Kasatkina V.N. "Here the heart will be pleased.": Poetry V.A. Zhukovsky. -M.: Obshchina, 1995. 182 p.

78. Kasatkina V.N. The poetic worldview of F.I. Tyutchev. - Saratov: Sarat Publishing House. un-ta, 1969. 254 p.

79. Kibrik JI.E. N. Lenau. Diss. for the degree of Ph.D. L., 1970.-416 p.

80. Kozhinov V.V. How poetry is written. On the laws of poetic creativity. -M.: Enlightenment, 1970. 237 p.

81. Kozhinov V.V., Rodnyanskaya I.B. Art. Artistic image // Literary encyclopedia in 9 volumes. M .: Soviet encyclopedia, 1962 - 1975. - T. 5., 1968. - p. 363 - 369.

82. Kozin A.A. Ballads I.-V. Goethe in the context of the German literary ballad of the late 18th and early 19th centuries. Diss. for the degree of Ph.D. -M., 1996. - 231 p.

83. Kolesnichenko T.V. The evolution of the aesthetic understanding of nature in Russian poetry in the 40-50s of the XIX century (N.A. Nekrasov, I.S. Nikitin, A.A. Fet). Diss. for the degree of Ph.D. - Dnepropetrovsk, 1987. - 190 p.

84. Kormilov S.I. Sonnets N.S. Gumilyov // Philological Sciences, 1999, No. 4.-p. 11-20.

85. Korovin V.I. Poets of Pushkin's time. M.: Enlightenment, 1980. -160 p.

86. Korovin V.I. Russian poetry of the 19th century. M.: Knowledge, 1983. - 128 cm

87. Korff H.A. Geist der Goethezeit. Versuch einer ideellen Entwicklung der klassisch-romantischen Literaturgeschichte. In 5 Bde, 6. Aufl., Leipzig, Koehler & Amelang, 1966.

88. Korff H.A. Geistesgeschichte der Goetheschen Lyrik. Berlin, Akad-Verl., 1963.26 S.

89. Korff H.A. Goethe im Bildwandel seiner Lyrik. bd. 1-2. Leipzig, Koehler & Amelang, 1959.

90. Krasukhin G.G. Let's Trust Pushkin: An Analysis of Pushkin's Poetry, Prose and Dramaturgy. M.: Flinta: Nauka, 1999. - 400 p.

91. Krupchanov JI.M. Art. Metaphor // Dictionary of literary terms. M.: Enlightenment, 1974. - p. 208.

92. Krupchanov JI.M. Art. Comparison // Dictionary of literary terms. M.: Enlightenment, 1974. - p. 371 - 372.

93. Krupchanov JI.M. Art. Epithet // Dictionary of literary terms. M.: Enlightenment, 1974. - p. 470.

94. Kurilov A.S. Classicism, Romanticism and Sentimentalism (On the concept and chronology of literary and artistic development) // Philological Sciences, 2001, No. 6. p. 41 - 49.

95. Larin B.A. Aesthetics of the word and the language of the writer. Fav. articles. L.: Artist. lit., Leningrad. department, 1974. - 285 p.

96. Lebedeva O.B., Yanushevich A.S. Germany in the mirror of Russian verbal culture of the 19th and early 20th centuries. Koln; Weimar; Vienna, 2000, 274 S.

97. Lenau H. Poems. Jan Zizka. M.: Artist. lit., 1956. - 208 p.

98. Lenau, Nikolaus. Sämtliche Werke und Briefe. bd. 1-3. Leipzig, InselVerl., 1970.

99. Lilienkron Detlev von. Gesammelte Werke. In 8 Bde, Verlag bei Schuster & Löffler in Berlin, B.2. Gedichte, 6. Auflage, 1917, 400 S.; B.3.

100. Gedichte. 5. Auflage, 1916, 428 S.

101. Litvinets H.C. Creativity Rilke 20-ies. Diss. for the degree of Ph.D. M., 1975. - 232 p.

102. Literary manifestos of Western European romantics. Ed. A.C. Dmitriev. M.: Publishing House of Moscow. un-ta, 1980. 639 p.

103. Lommatzsch E. Blumen und Früchte im altfranzösischen Schriftum, Mainz, 1967-27 S.

104. Losev A.F. Sign. Symbol. Myth: Tr. in linguistics. M.: Publishing House ^ Moscow State University, 1982.-479 p.

105. Losev A.F. The problem of the symbol and realistic art. Moscow: Art, 1976. 366 p.

106. Lotman Yu.M. Analysis of the poetic text. The structure of the verse. Leningrad: Enlightenment, Leningrad. department., 1972. - 270 p.

107. Lotman Yu.M. In the school of the poetic word: Pushkin, Lermontov, Gogol: book. for the teacher. M.: Enlightenment, 1988. - 548 p.

108. Lotman Yu.M. Symbol in the system of culture // Symbol in the system of culture: works on sign systems. XXI. Tartu: Tartus. un-t, 1987.-p. 10-21.

109. Lotman Yu.M. Theater and theatricality in the structure of culture of the early XIX century // Lotman Yu.M. Articles on semiotics and typology of culture // Lotman Yu.M. Selected articles in 3 volumes - Tallinn: Alexandra, 1992-1993.-T. 1, 1992.-p. 269-286.

110. Mandelstam A.I. Silver Age: Russian Fates. St. Petersburg: t

111. Entrepreneur Gromov Alexey Alexandrovich, 1996. 320 p.

112. Mandelstam O.E. On the nature of the word // Mandelstam O.E. "Save my speech." M .: School-Press, 1994. - p. 390 - 404.

113. Mandelstam O.E. Morning of acmeism // Mandelstam O.E. "Save my speech." M .: School-Press, 1994. - p. 381 - 386.

114. Mann Yu.V. The dialectic of the artistic image. M.: Sov. writer, 1987. - 317 p.

115. Mann Yu.V. Dynamics of Russian romanticism. M.: Aspect-press, 1995.-380 p.

116. Mann Yu.V. Poetics of Russian romanticism. Academy of Sciences of the USSR, Institute of World Literature. A.M. Gorky. - M.: Nauka, 1976. - 375 p.

117. Marx K., Engels F. Op. in 56 volumes. 2nd ed. - M.: Gospolitizdat., 1955 - 1980, - T. 37, 1965. - 599 p.

118. Meilakh B.S. Pushkin and his era. M.: Goslitizdat, 1958. - 698 p.

119. Meilakh B.S. Pushkin and Russian Romanticism. M.-JI.: Acad. Sciences of the USSR, 1937.-294 p.

120. Meilakh B.S. Pushkin's artistic thinking as a creative process. -M.-JL: Acad. Sciences of the USSR, 1962. 249 p.

121. Metaphor in language and text. M.: Nauka, 1988. - 174 p.

122. Mythological Dictionary, ed. Meletinsky E.M. M.: Sov. encyclopedia, 1999. - 736 p.

123. Myths of the peoples of the world. Encyclopedia in 2 volumes. Ch. ed. S.A. Tokarev. -M.: Sov. encyclopedia, 1987.

124. Mikhailov A.B. Goethe and the reflection of antiquity in German culture at the turn of the 18th - 19th centuries. // Context 1983. Literary and theoretical studies. - M.: Nauka, 1984. - p. 113 - 148.

125. Mikhailova N.I. "Vitiystva is a formidable gift.": A.C. Pushkin and Russian oratorical culture of his time. - M.: Rus. Way, 1999. 412 p.

126. Mörike E. Gesammelte Werke in 2 Banden. C. Bertelsmann Verlag, 1957, Bd. 1.576S.

128. Muryanov M. The symbolism of the rose in Blok's poetry // Questions of Literature, 1999, No. 6. p. 98 - 129.

129. Myatlev I.P. Full composition of writings. T. 1 2. St. Petersburg: Fedorov, 1857.

130. Nekrasov H.A. Complete collection of works and letters in 9 volumes. Under total ed. V.E. Evgenyeva-Maksimova, A.M. Egolin and K.I. Chukovsky. M.: OGIZ State. ed. thin lit., 1948 - 1950. - T. 1 - 2, 1948.

131. Nepomniachtchi B.C. Pushkin. Russian picture of the world. M.: Heritage, 1999.-542 p.

132. Neusykhin A.I. The main themes of Rilke's poetic work // Rainer Maria Rilke. New poems. New poems the second part. M.: Nauka, 1977. - p. 428 - 443.

134. Ortega y Gasset X. Two great metaphors // Theory of Metaphor. M.: Progress, 1990. - p. 68 - 81.

135. Pavlovets M.G. The formation of the artistic system of B.L. Pasternak and the work of P.M. Rilke. - Diss. for the degree of Ph.D. M., 1997. - 238 p.

136. Palievskiy P.V. The internal structure of the image // Theory of literature book. 1 .. M .: Publishing house Acad. Sciences of the USSR, 1962. - p. 72 - 114.

137. Pankratova O.V. The evolution of images-symbols in the poetic heritage of N.S. Gumilyov. Diss. for the degree of Ph.D. -M., 1997.-117 p.

138. Polyakov M.Ya. Questions of poetics and artistic semantics. - M .: “Owls. writer”, 1978. 446 p.

139. Pospelov G.N. Lyrics. among literary genres. M.: Publishing House of Moscow. un-ta, 1976. - 206 p.

140. Poetics of genre and image. Tartu: Tartus. un-t, 1990. - 105 p.

141. Pustovoit P.G. From word to image. Kyiv: "Radyansk school", 1974. -192 p.

142. Pustovoit P.G. Late Turgenev: harmony of the grieving lyre // Philological Sciences, 2001, no. 5. p. 3 - 12.

143. Pustovoit P.G. Word and image in a work of art. M.: "Knowledge", 1963. - 32 p.

144. Pustovoit P.G. The word style is image. - M.: Knowledge, 1980. - 64 p.

145. Pustovoit P.G. The romantic beginning and its evolution in the work of I.S. Turgenev // Pustovoit P.G. I.S. Turgenev is an artist of the word. -M.: Publishing House of Moscow State University, 1987. - p. 47 - 63.

146. Pushkin A.S. Full composition of writings. T. 1. 17. L.: Acad. Sciences of the USSR, 1837 - 1859.

147. Drunk M.F. "Silver Age" of Russian poetry // Silver Age. Petersburg poetry of the late 19th early 20th centuries. - L .: Lenizdat, 1991.-p. 511-523.

148. Rapatskaya L.A. Art of the Silver Age. - M.: Enlightenment: "Vlados", 1996. 192 p.

149. Rapatskaya L.A. Russian art of the XVIII century: ("Dawn on the Neva"): Book. for students. -M.: Education, Vlados, 1995. 191 p.

150. Ratgauz G.I. Rainer Maria Rilke (Life and Poetry) // Rainer Maria Rilke. New poems. New poems the second part. - M.: Nauka, 1977. p. 373 - 419.

151. Rehm W. Orpheus. Der Dichter und die Toten. Selbstdeutung und Totenkult bei Novalis Hölderlin - Rilke. Düsseldorf, Schwann, 1950, 704 S.

152. Rilke R.M. Gesammelte Werke. bd. 16. Insel-Verlag, Leipzig, 1927.

153. Rilke R.M. Selected writings. Per. with him. - M.: "RIPOL CLASSIC", 1998. - 704 p.

154. Rilke R.M. Poems: Collection / Comp. V. Kupriyanov. M.: OAO Raduga Publishing House, 1998. - In German with a parallel Russian text. - 320 s.

155. Ronen O. The Silver Age as intent and fiction. (= Materials and research on the history of Russian culture. Issue 4). M.: OGI, 2000. - 152 p. Translation from English.

156. Rosen: Texte aus der Weltliteratur. Hrsg. von Anne Marie Frohlich. Zürich, Manesse Verlag, 1997, 464 S.

157. Rudnitsky M.L. Lyrics by Rainer Maria Rilke 1890-1910s. On the problem of the formation of poetic style. Diss. for the degree of Ph.D. M., 1976. - 264 p.

159. Russian verse: Metrics. Rhythm. Rhyme. Strophic: In honor of the 60th anniversary of M.L. Gasparov. M.: Russian. state humanit. un-t, 1996. - 336 p.

160. Connection of times. The problem of continuity in Russian literature of the late XIX - early XX centuries. - M.: Heritage, 1992. - 376 p.

161. Severyanin, Igor. Works. Tallinn: Eest raamat, 1990. - 541 p.

162. Semenko I.M. Poets of Pushkin's time. M.: "Thin. lit.», 1970. -292 p.

163. Skvoznikov V.D. Creative method and image // Theory of literature book. 1 .. M .: Publishing house Acad. Sciences of the USSR, 1962. - p. 149 - 185.

164. Word and image (collection of articles). Comp. V.V. Kozhevnikov. M.: "Enlightenment", 1964. -288 p.

165. Smelkova Z.S. Literature as an art form. A book for teachers and students. 2nd ed., M.: Flinta, Nauka, 1998. - 280 p.

166. Sozina E.K. Theory of the symbol and the practice of artistic analysis. -Ekaterinburg: Ural Publishing House. state un-ta im. A.M. Gorky, 1998. - 128 p.

167. Sokolova N.K. The Word in Russian Lyrics at the Beginning of the 20th Century (From the Experience of Contextual Analysis). Voronezh, Publishing House of the Voronezh University, 1980. -160 p.

168. Solodub Yu.P. Text-forming function of a symbol in a work of art // Philological Sciences, 2002, No. 2. -p. 46-55.

169. Sorensen V.A. Symbol und Symbolismus in den ästhetischen Theorien des 18. Jahrhunderts und der deutschen Romantik. Kopenhagen, Munksgaard, 1963, 332 S.

170. Saussure Ferdinand de. Works on linguistics. M.: "Progress", 1977.-695 p.

171. Seward B. The symbolic Rose. N.Y. - Columbia University press., 1960. -233 p.

172. Stepanov N.L. Lyrics of Pushkin. Essays and studies. 2nd ed. - M .: “Thin. lit.", 1974. - 368 p.

173. Thalmann M. Zeichensprache der Romantik. Heidelberg, 1967, 115 S.

174. Theory of metaphor: Collection: Per. from English, French, German, Spanish, Polish. lang. -M.: Progress, 1990. 512 p.

175. Timofeev L.I. Verse word - image // Questions of Literature, 1962, No. 6.-p. 76-89.

177. Tomashevsky B.V. Pushkin. Works of different years. M.: Book, 1990. -670 p.

178. Toporov V.N. Myth. Ritual. Symbol. Image: Studies in the field of mythopoetic: Selected works. M.: Publishing group "Progress" - "Culture", 1995. - 624 p.

179. Reeds M. The image of a rose in the context of Faustian culture // Poetology. M.:, 1997. - p. 166 - 180.

180. Turgenev I.S. Complete works of I.S. Turgenev in 12 volumes. St. Petersburg: Marx, 1898.

181. Tynyanov Yu.N. History of literature. Criticism. St. Petersburg: Azbuka-klassika, 2001. - 512 p.

182. Tynyanov Yu.N. Literary fact // Tynyanov Yu.N. Poetics. History of literature. Cinema. M.: Nauka, 1970. - p. 255 - 270.

183. Tynyanov Yu.N. Problems of poetic language. Articles. M.: Sov. writer, 1965. - 302 p.

184. Tynyanov Yu. N. Pushkin and his contemporaries. M.: Nauka, 1968. - 423 p.

185. Tyutchev F.I. Complete collection of poems. T. 1 2. - L .: Soviet writer, 1939.

186. Fedin B.C. A.A., Fet (Shenshin). Materials for characterization. -Pgr.:, 1915.-280 p.

187. Fedotov O.I. Introduction to Literary Studies: Textbook. M.: Publishing Center "Academy", 1998. - 144 p.

188. Fedotov O.I. Fundamentals of Russian versification. Metrics and rhythm. M.: Flinta, 1997. - 336 p.

189. Fedotov O.I. Sonnet of the Silver Age: Russian sonnet of the late 19th - early 20th centuries. M.: Pravda, 1990. - 767p.

190. Fet A.A. Air City: Poems 1840 1892 / Ed.-stat. I.A. Kuramzhin. -M.: Center-100, 1996. - 352 p.

191. Fet A.A. Selected Poems. Berlin: Efron, b. g. - 213 p.

192. Fried, Jochen. Die Symbolik des Realen. Über alte und neue Mythologie in der Frühromantik. Munich, 1985, 306 S.

193. Khalizev B.E. Theory of Literature. Textbook, 2nd ed. M.: Higher. school, 2000. - 398 p.

194. Hecker J. Das Symbol der Blauen Blume im Zusammenhang mit der Blumensymbolik der Romantik. Jena and Frommann, 1931, 91 S.

195. Heine H. Die Gedichte. Volksverlag Weimer, 1960, 848 S.

196. Heine H. Gedichte. Aufbau-Verlag Berlin und Weimar, 1978, 3. Auflage, 744 S.

197. Heine H. Gesammelte Werke. bd. 1 6. Brl., Aufbau-Verl., 1951.

198. Herder J. G. v. Samtliche Weke. 9. Teil. Stuttgart and Tübingen, 1828.464 S.

199. Kholshevnikov B.E. Analysis of the composition of a lyric poem // Analysis of one poem: Interuniversity coll. / Under the editorship of V.E. Kholshevnikov. L .: Publishing house of Leningrad State University, 1985. - p. 5-44.

200. Kholshevnikov V.E. Fundamentals of versification: Russian versification: Textbook. St. Petersburg: Publishing House of St. Petersburg University, 1996. -184 p.

201. Holz A. Gedichte. Verlag Neues Leben Berlin, 1981, 32 S.

202. Holz A. Das Werk. Bd 1 10. Brl., Dietz, 1924 - 1925.

203. Khrapovitskaya G.N. Dual World and Symbol in Romanticism and Symbolism // Philological Sciences, 1999, No. 3. p. 35-42.

204. Artistic text as a complexly constructed meaning. "How good, how fresh the roses were." // Vartanyants A.D., Yakubovskaya M.D. Poetics. -M.: JSC "Aspect-press", 1994. p. 8 - 12.

205. Chernukhina I.Ya. General features of the poetic text. Voronezh: Publishing House of the Voronezh University, 1987. - 158 p.

206. Chubukova E.V. Pushkin's poem "Rose" (to the question of literary continuity in lyceum lyrics) // Problems of the history of the relationship between Russian and world culture. Interuniversity collection. 4.II. Ed. Saratovsk. un-ta, 1983. - p. 93 - 107.

207. Shansky N.M. Linguistic analysis of the poetic text. - L .: Education, 1990. - 414 p.

208. Shakespeare V. Romeo and Juliet // Shakespeare V. Complete works in 10 volumes. Per. from English. Comp. A.N. Shakhmaikin. M .: Alkonost, Labyrinth, 1994. - T. 3. Tragedies. - from. 161 - 278.

209. Shelestyuk E.V. Symbol Versus Trope: A Comparative Analysis of Semantics // Philological Sciences, 2001, No. 6. pp. 50 - 57.

210. Shengeli G. On lyrical composition // Poetics. Reader on questions of literary criticism for students of the university. Comp. B.A. Lanin. -M.: ed. Russian Open University, 1992. pp. 41 -51.

211. Shervinsky C.B. rhythm and meaning. To the study of Pushkin's poetics. Moscow: Acad. Sciences of the USSR, 1961.-272 p.

212. Shervinsky SV Flowers in Pushkin's poetry // Poetics and stylistics of Russian literature. L .: Nauka, 1971.-e. 134 - 140.

213. Schleiden M.J. Die Rose. Geschichte und Symbolik in ethnografischer und kulturhistorischer Beziehung. Lpz., 1873, 322 S.

214. Schlegel F. Fragments // Schlegel F. Aesthetics. Philosophy. Criticism. In 2 vols. M .: Art, 1983. - T. 1. - p. 280 - 316.

215. Shmelev D.N. Word and image. M.: Nauka, 1964. - 120 p.

216. Ackerman I.P. Conversations with Goethe in the last years of his life. - M, -L .: "Academy", 1934. 961 p.

217. Eco U. Notes on the margins of the “Name of the Rose” // Eco U. The Name of the Rose. Novel. Marginal notes for The Name of the Rose. Essay. Per. from Italian. E. Kostyukovich. Foreword Author. Afterwords by E. Kostyukovich, Y. Lotman. St. Petersburg: Symposium Publishing House, 1997. - p. 596 - 644.

218. Eliot T.S. Purpose of poetry. M.: Perfection, 1997. - 350 p.

219. Encyclopedia of symbols, signs, emblems (Compiled by V. Andreeva and others). -M.: Lokid; Myth, 2000. 576 p.

220. Epstein M.N. Art. Image // Literary Encyclopedic Dictionary. M.: Sov. encyclopedia, 1987. - p. 252 - 257.

221. Epstein M.N. Nature, world, secret of the universe.: The system of landscape images in Russian poetry. M.: Higher. school, 1990. - 320 p.

222. Etkind E.G. Prose about poetry. St. Petersburg: "Knowledge", 2001. - 448 p.

223 Jurgensen, Manfred. Symbol als Idea. Studien zu Goethes Asthetik. Francke Verlag Bern und München, 1968, 146 S.224., Language as creativity. Collection of articles dedicated to the 70th anniversary of V.P. Grigoriev. -M.: "IRYA RAN", 1996. 365 p.

224. Jacobson R. Works on poetics. M.: Progress, 1987. - 460 p.

225. Yastrebov A.L. Word: embodied being. A guide for high school students. M.: Interpraks, 1994. - 240 p.