舍甫琴科所谓的父亲身份的现代版本

O. Boron
{"title":"舍甫琴科所谓的父亲身份的现代版本","authors":"O. Boron","doi":"10.33608/0236-1477.2022.03.88-99","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The creation of a new scholarly biography of Shevchenko is impossible without testing plausible assumptions and hypotheses prevalent in the mass consciousness. Most of them do not stand up to criticism and miss any detailed analysis, while others seem at first glance so convincing that they are perceived almost as a truth. Shevchenko‘s alleged paternity used to be one of the taboo issues but now it is fervently debated, attracting many — both admirers of his word and ill-wishers. \nIn the media, popular editions, and even outlines of the lessons available on the Internet, the idea that the poet was the father of Hanna Zakrevska’s (1822—1857) daughter, Sofiia Platonivna, married Felen (1845—?), is being replicated. Volodymyr Syrotenko (Verbytskyi), \nCandidate of Technical Sciences, actively defends this view. Another hypothesis belongs to the writer Antonina Tsvyd who tries, in her research paper, to substantiate legendary folk stories about the alleged Shevchenko’s son Fedir whose mother was an unknown resident of Sedniv. \nThe statements and assumptions made in the publications of these authors have been critically verified by comparison with dependable information, which showed that both versions do not have any real basis and contradict properly proven facts and documents. V. Syrotenko presents his conjectures as the purest truth, while A. Tsvyd, trying to find evidence for dubious legends, resorts to assumptions devoid of logic and common sense while leaving well-known circumstances without attention. Memoirs are also misinterpreted, in particular the ones of Oleksandr Chuzhbynskyi, and it once again testifies to the urgent need for a critical edition of a corpus of memoirs about Shevchenko. It is especially unfortunate that V. Syrotenko’s inventions are recklessly picked up by the community of teachers who ‘legalize’ them in publications and the educational process.","PeriodicalId":370928,"journal":{"name":"Слово і Час","volume":"22 17","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"MODERN VERSIONS OF SHEVCHENKO’S ALLEGED PATERNITY\",\"authors\":\"O. Boron\",\"doi\":\"10.33608/0236-1477.2022.03.88-99\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The creation of a new scholarly biography of Shevchenko is impossible without testing plausible assumptions and hypotheses prevalent in the mass consciousness. Most of them do not stand up to criticism and miss any detailed analysis, while others seem at first glance so convincing that they are perceived almost as a truth. Shevchenko‘s alleged paternity used to be one of the taboo issues but now it is fervently debated, attracting many — both admirers of his word and ill-wishers. \\nIn the media, popular editions, and even outlines of the lessons available on the Internet, the idea that the poet was the father of Hanna Zakrevska’s (1822—1857) daughter, Sofiia Platonivna, married Felen (1845—?), is being replicated. Volodymyr Syrotenko (Verbytskyi), \\nCandidate of Technical Sciences, actively defends this view. Another hypothesis belongs to the writer Antonina Tsvyd who tries, in her research paper, to substantiate legendary folk stories about the alleged Shevchenko’s son Fedir whose mother was an unknown resident of Sedniv. \\nThe statements and assumptions made in the publications of these authors have been critically verified by comparison with dependable information, which showed that both versions do not have any real basis and contradict properly proven facts and documents. V. Syrotenko presents his conjectures as the purest truth, while A. Tsvyd, trying to find evidence for dubious legends, resorts to assumptions devoid of logic and common sense while leaving well-known circumstances without attention. Memoirs are also misinterpreted, in particular the ones of Oleksandr Chuzhbynskyi, and it once again testifies to the urgent need for a critical edition of a corpus of memoirs about Shevchenko. It is especially unfortunate that V. Syrotenko’s inventions are recklessly picked up by the community of teachers who ‘legalize’ them in publications and the educational process.\",\"PeriodicalId\":370928,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Слово і Час\",\"volume\":\"22 17\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Слово і Час\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.33608/0236-1477.2022.03.88-99\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Слово і Час","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33608/0236-1477.2022.03.88-99","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

如果不检验大众意识中普遍存在的貌似合理的假设和假设,创作舍甫琴科的新学术传记是不可能的。其中大多数经不起批评,也没有进行任何详细的分析,而另一些乍一看似乎令人信服,几乎被认为是真理。舍甫琴科所谓的父亲身份曾经是禁忌话题之一,但现在却引发了激烈的争论,吸引了许多人——既有他的崇拜者,也有不希望他这么做的人。在媒体、大众版本,甚至互联网上的课程大纲中,诗人是汉娜·扎克雷夫斯卡(Hanna Zakrevska, 1822-1857)的女儿索菲亚·柏拉图尼芙娜(sofia Platonivna)的父亲的想法正在被复制,她的女儿嫁给了费伦(Felen, 1845 - ?)技术科学候选人Volodymyr Syrotenko (Verbytskyi)积极捍卫这一观点。另一个假说来自作家Antonina Tsvyd,她试图在她的研究论文中证实关于所谓舍甫琴科的儿子Fedir的传说,他的母亲是一个不知名的Sedniv居民。这些作者在出版物中所作的陈述和假设已与可靠的资料进行了严格的比较,这表明这两个版本都没有任何真正的根据,并且与经过适当证明的事实和文件相矛盾。V. Syrotenko将他的猜想作为最纯粹的真理呈现出来,而A. Tsvyd试图为可疑的传说寻找证据,诉诸于缺乏逻辑和常识的假设,而对众所周知的情况置之不理。回忆录也被误解,特别是那些的亚历山大Chuzhbynskyi,它再次证明了迫切需要一个关于舍甫琴科的回忆录语料库的关键版。尤其不幸的是,V. Syrotenko的发明被教师群体肆无忌惮地采纳,在出版物和教育过程中“合法化”。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
MODERN VERSIONS OF SHEVCHENKO’S ALLEGED PATERNITY
The creation of a new scholarly biography of Shevchenko is impossible without testing plausible assumptions and hypotheses prevalent in the mass consciousness. Most of them do not stand up to criticism and miss any detailed analysis, while others seem at first glance so convincing that they are perceived almost as a truth. Shevchenko‘s alleged paternity used to be one of the taboo issues but now it is fervently debated, attracting many — both admirers of his word and ill-wishers. In the media, popular editions, and even outlines of the lessons available on the Internet, the idea that the poet was the father of Hanna Zakrevska’s (1822—1857) daughter, Sofiia Platonivna, married Felen (1845—?), is being replicated. Volodymyr Syrotenko (Verbytskyi), Candidate of Technical Sciences, actively defends this view. Another hypothesis belongs to the writer Antonina Tsvyd who tries, in her research paper, to substantiate legendary folk stories about the alleged Shevchenko’s son Fedir whose mother was an unknown resident of Sedniv. The statements and assumptions made in the publications of these authors have been critically verified by comparison with dependable information, which showed that both versions do not have any real basis and contradict properly proven facts and documents. V. Syrotenko presents his conjectures as the purest truth, while A. Tsvyd, trying to find evidence for dubious legends, resorts to assumptions devoid of logic and common sense while leaving well-known circumstances without attention. Memoirs are also misinterpreted, in particular the ones of Oleksandr Chuzhbynskyi, and it once again testifies to the urgent need for a critical edition of a corpus of memoirs about Shevchenko. It is especially unfortunate that V. Syrotenko’s inventions are recklessly picked up by the community of teachers who ‘legalize’ them in publications and the educational process.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
OLD UKRAINIAN MYTHOLOGY IN OLEH OLZHYCH’S LYRICS DUBIA TEXTS IN THE ACADEMIC EDITION OF TARAS SHEVCHENKO’S WORKS: THE PROBLEM OF AUTHORSHIP ROMA AS A MATRIX OF THE ‘OTHER’IN THE PROJECTION OF ORIENTALISM, RACE, AND NATION IN THE WORKS BY OLHA KOBYLIANSKA THE MYTHOLOGICAL SPACE OF GOOD AND EVIL IN “THE YELLOW PRINCE” BY VASYL BARKA JENS PETER JAKOBSEN'S NOVELLA “MOGENS” TRANSLATED BY OLHA KOBYLIANSKA: TEXT AND CONTEXTS
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1