Cпецифіка формування фактологічної бази дослідження інтертекстуальності українського сегмента інтернету

The basics of creating a database for the research of intertextemes used in the texts of theUkrainian Internet segment have been worked out in this article. For this, approaches to the following concepts in modernlinguistics are analyzed: Internet linguistics, Internet discourse, intertextuality, intertextuality marker, as well as a database andsoftware product for displaying and editing information were developed. In addition, the most common models of intertextuality markers are given: as + a verb of speech (as they say, as it is being said etc.) – without indication of authorship;as + a verb of speech ((somebody) says, (somebody) said, (somebody) is saying etc.) – with indication of authorship; as + averb of speech + proverb and a model as + it is known. The factual basis of the research was formed by means of the contentanalysis system Alphateka. The intertextemes search was done by the intertextuality markers (as they say, as (somebody) said,as (somebody) is saying etc.). A complex analysis of the Ukrainian Internet segment intertextuality is planned, which requiresresearch a number of parameters, related to the text in which the intertexteme is used; linguistic personality of the author;formal and qualitative characteristics of intertextemes (the method of typing intertexteme into text, etymology of intertextemeetc.). To investigate the Ukrainian Internet segment intertextuality, a relational database was created. In addition, a softwareproduct for displaying and editing information is developed. Its main task is to automate the intertextemes characteristicsanalysis for their complex research. Developed software will allow you to find correlations between different intertextemescharacteristics. Modern information technologies are used for research, because it enables to process a significant volume ofactual material, to trace correlations between different characteristics of the investigated language phenomenon. The prospectof further researches is a database improvement, in particular its modernization, in light of the language phenomenoncharacteristics detected during the study and the correlation between them.ReferencesAkhrenova, N. A. 2013. “Teoreticheskiye osnovy internet-lingvistiki [Theoretical foundations of Internetlinguistics]”. Filologicheskiye nauki. Voprosy teorii i praktiki philologyi. Theory and practice 10:28.http://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/teoreticheskie-osnovy-internet-lingvistikiBart, Rolan. 1989. Izbrannyye raboty. M.: Progress.Bart, R. 1989. “Ot proizvedeniya k tekstu. P. Bart”. Izbrannye raboty: semiotika: poetika. M.: Progress. 413–423.Bulakh, Mayya. 2012. “Alyuziyi ta reministsentsiyi v suchasnykh ukrayinskykh mas-mediynykh tekstakh”. Aktualni problemy ukrayinskoyi linhvistyky: teoriya i praktyka 24:140–148.Darmoriz, Oksana. 2012. “Intertekstualnist yak rysa informatsiynoyi kultury”. Naukovi zapysky Natsionalnyi universytet “Ostrozka akademiya” 11: 82–90. http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/Nznuoafs_2012_11_10Dayneka, Nadiya. 2016. “Intertekstualnist internet-tekstiv yak katehoriya tekstualnoyi vidkrytosti tadialohichnosti”. Naukovyy visnyk Khersonskoho derzhavnoho universytetu. Seriya: Perekladoznavstvo ta mizhkulturna komunikatsiya 6:59–63. http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/nvxdupmk_2016_6_12Denysyuk, Zhanna. 2016. “Suchasni komunikatyvni praktyky u formuvanni y poshyrenni postfolkloru”.Kultura i suchasnist 2: 3–9.Dzoban, O. P. 2011. “Zasoby masovoyi komunikatsiyi v kulturi suspilstva postmodernu”. Informatsiya i pravo. 3: 93–101.Fateyevа, Nataliya. 2000. Kontrapunkt intertekstualnosti, ili Intertekst v mire tekstov. M.: Agar.Goroshko, E. I. 2007. Teoreticheskiy analiz Internet-zhanrov: k opisaniyu problemnoy oblasti. Zhanry rechi. Saratov.Hayna, H. A. 2005. Osnovy proektuvannya baz danykh. K: KNUBA.Hurduz, A. 2007. “Intertekstualnist i hipertekst: problemy teoriyi i praktyky”. Ukrayinskka mova y literatura v serednikh shkolakh, himnaziyakh, litseyakh ta kolehiumakh 4:67–72.Ilchenko, O. A. 2011. “Movnostylistychni modyfikatsiyi presy ХХІ st.: pryroda y naslidky”. Linhvistychnidoslidzhennya 31:157–161.Kompantseva, L. F. 2008. “Internet-lingvistika kognitivno-pragmaticheskiy i lingvokultorologicheskiy podkhod”. [Internet-linguistics: cognitive-pragmatic and linguocultural approaches]. Lugansk: Znanie Publ.Kristeva Yulia. 2000. “Bakhtin, slovo, dialog i roman”. Frantsuzskaya semiotika: ot strukturalizma kpoststrukturalizmu. M.: Progress. 427–457.Kristeva Yulia. 1974. La Revolution du langage poetique. Paris: Eitions du Seuil.Levchenko, Olena. 2013. Intertekstualnist ukrayinskoho dyskursu ta sposoby yiyi markuvannya.Linhvokulturolohichnyy ta linhvoekolohichnyy pidkhid do vyvchennya odynyts movy i movlennya: Monohrafiya. Olomouts–Ostroh: Vydavnytstvo Natsionalnoho universytetu «Ostrozka akademiya».Levchenko, Olena. 2015. “Intertekstualnist ukrayinskoho internet-dyskursu porevolyutsiynoho periodu”. Lyudyna. Kompyuter. Komunikatsiya. Lviv: Vydavnytstvo Lvivskoyi politekhniky 60–65.Masimova, L. H. 2012. “Intertekstualnist yak osoblyvist suchasnoho mediatekstu (na prykladi analizupublikatsiy hazety “Den”)”. Masova komunikatsiya: istoriya, sohodennya, perspektyvy 1:104–107.Mokiyenko, V., Sidorenko, K. 2004. Slovar krylatykh slov i vyrazheniy Pushkina. SPb.Ponomarenko, M. 2017. “Intertekstualnist u suchasnykh ukrayinskykh ZMI: na shlyakhu do natsionalnoyi samoidentyfikatsiyi”. Rossica Olomucensia 56(1):55–70.Potyatynyk, U. O. 2007. “Intertekstualnyi kharakter suchasnoho mediynoho dyskursu”. Naukovi Zapysky. Ser. «Filolohichna». Ostroh. 8:39–45.Potyatynyk, U. O. 2008. “«Aktyvna» i «pasyvna» intertekstualnist u media-dyskursi”. Naukovyy visnykVolynskoho derzhavnoho universytetu im. Lesi Ukrayinky. Lutsk: RVV «Vezha» VDU im. Lesi Ukrayinky3:111–115.Povetyeva, Elena. V. 2013. “Intertekstualnost v blogosfere i internet-kommunikatsii: retvit i repost”.Filologicheskiye nauki. Voprosy teorii i praktiki.Tambov. 3:126–129.P’ege-Gro, N. 2008. Vvedenie v teoriyu intertekstualnosti. M.: LKI.Riffater, M. 1980. “Kriterii stilisticheskogo analiza.” Novoye v zarubezhnoy lingvistike. Moskva. 69–91.Rudenko, L. S. 2010. “Ukrayinska zhurnalna publitsystyka v paradyhmi postmodernizmu (80-ti rr. XX st. – pershe desyatylittya XXI st.)”. PhD diss., Zaporizhzhya: Klasych. pryvat. un-t.Ryabinina, O. K. 2008. “Intertekstualnist u dyskursi suchasnoyi ukrayinskoyi presy: linhvistychnyy aspekt”. PhD diss., Kharkiv: Khark. nats. un-t im. V. N. Karazina.Sidorenko, Konstyantin. 2005. “Ot krylatogo slova k interteksteme (mezhurovnevaya proyektsiya)”. Grani slova. Moskva. 143–148.Sunko, N. O. 2011. “Intertekstualnist ta pretsedentnist yak reprezentanty publitsystychnoho dyskursu (na materiali zaholovkiv anhlomovnykh statey)”. Visnyk Zhytomyrskoho derzhavnoho universytetu imeni Ivana Franka 58: 208–212.Tyapkina, N. I. 2011. “Intertekstualnist televiziynoho dyskursu. Naukovi zapysky Instytutu zhurnalistyky”. Kyiv: KNU imeni Tarasa Shevchenka 42: 6–8.Ulman, Dzh. 1983. Osnovy system baz danykh. Moskva: Finansy i statystyka. Vasina, O. O. 2009. “Transformatsiya yavyshcha intertekstualnosti v internet-novynakh”. Visnyk Kharkivskoho nats. un-tu 1(874): 14–18.Yakymenko, L. M. Postmodernyy zriz intertekstualnosti v media-tekstakh. http://nauka.zinet.info/28/ yakymenko.phpYampolsky, M. V. 1993. Pamyat Tiresiya: intertekstualnosti kinematograf. Moscow: Kultura Publ.Zhenett, Zh. 1998. Figury. M.: Izd-vo im. Sabashnikovykh.https://alphateka.com/