Methodological algorithm for interpreting intertextuality within the orthodox sermon (case study of the english orthodox sermon fragment)

Keywords: methodological algorithm, interpretation, intertextuality, the Orthodox sermon, the English language.


The article represents a methodological algorithm for interpreting intertextuality in the English Orthodox sermon, which contains the following five successive stages. The first stage identifies the scientific and methodological backgrounds of the study of intertextuality, including in interdisciplinary coverage, as well as it traces the evolution of scientific views on notions of “intertextuality”; the diversity of approaches to the typology of intertextual relations have been revealed and the problem of intertextuality functions in modern texts has been outlined. The intertextual fragments have been singled out at the second stage. The types and subtypes of intertextual connections, their systematization and classification, different level means of actualization and marking of intertext in the English sermon, as well as the definition of features of semantic transformation and functional purpose of different types of intertext in the recipient text have been revealed at the third stage. The sources of intertextuality identified and systematized in the previous stages of the study have been divided into nuclear, near-peripheral and far-peripheral at the fourth stage. The functions of intertextuality in the English Orthodox sermon have been determined in view of the compositional-structural, semantic, pragmatic, linguistic and cultural and other aspects at the fifth stage.


Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Olha Liashko, Kyiv National Linguistic University, Ukraine.

PhD in Linguistics, Senior Lecturer of Department of English Philology of Kyiv National Linguistic University, Ukraine.

Yan Kapranov, Kyiv National Linguistic University, Ukraine.

Dc Sc in Linguistics, Associate Professor, Associate Professor of I. V. Korunets Department of English and German Philology and Translation of Kyiv National Linguistic University, Ukraine.

Olesya Cherkhava, Kyiv National Linguistic University, Ukraine.

Dc Sc in Linguistics, Associate Professor, Associate Professor of G. G. Pocheptsov Department of German and Finno-Ugrian Philology of Kyiv National Linguistic University, Ukraine.

Tamara Nasalevych, Bohdan Khmelnytsky Melitopol State Pedagogical University, Ukraine.

PhD in Linguistics, Associate Professor, Associate Professor of Department of German Philology of Bohdan Khmelnytsky Melitopol State Pedagogical University, Ukraine.

Tetiana Riabukha, Bohdan Khmelnytsky Melitopol State Pedagogical University, Ukraine.

PhD in Linguistics, Senior Lecturer of Department of German Philology of Bohdan Khmelnytsky Melitopol State Pedagogical University, Ukraine.


Alfeyev, I. M. (2016). Jesus Christ. Life and Teaching. In 6 books. Book. 2: Sermon on the Mount. Moscow: Sretensky Monastery Publishing House; Eksmo; Church-wide postgraduate and doctoral studies.

Allen, G. (2000). Intertextuality. New York: Routledge.

Arnold, I. V. (2002). Stylistics. Modern English. 5th ed., Corr. and extra. Moscow: Flint: Nauka.

Arnold, I. V., Bukharkin, P. Ye. (1999). Semantics. Stylistics. Intertextuality. St. Petersburg: Publishing house of St. Petersburg. un-ta. Retrieved from

Bakhtin, M. M. (1997). Russian literature. From the theory of literature to the structure of the text. Anthology. In Prof. V. P. Neroznak (Red.). The problem of the text in linguistics, philology and other humanities. The experience of philosophical analysis (pp. 227-244). Moscow: Academy.

Barthes, R. (1977). Image Music Text. S. Heath (Ed.). The death of the author. (p. 32-44). London: Fontana Press.

Barthes, R. (1989). Selected works: Semiotics: Poetics. In G.K. Kosikov (Transl. From French, Comp., General ed. And introductory article). From work to text (paragraphs 413-423). Moscow: Progress.

Barysheva, Ye. L. (2012). Russian Orthodox sermon: the ratio of the canonical and the variative (linguo-personalological aspect), (Doctoral thesis). National Research Novosibirsk State University, Kemerovo.

Beaugrande, R. de, & Dressler, W. (1981). Introduction to Text Linguistics. L.-NY: Longman.

Cherkhava, O. O. (2017). Reconstruction of the theolinguistic matrix of religiously popular discourse (based on the English, German and Ukrainian languages): monograph. Kyiv: Vyd. tsentr KNLU. Retrieved from

Chernyavskaya, V. Ye. (2014). Linguistics of the text: Polycode, intertextuality, interdiscursiveness. Moscow: Direkt-Media. Retrieved from

Chouliaraki, L. & Fairclough, N. (1999). Discourse in Late Modernity. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

Denisova, G. V. (2003). In the world of intertext: language, memory, translation. Moscow: Alphabet.

Dzera, O. (2017). Biblical intertextuality and translation: English-Ukrainian context: monograph. Lviv: Vyd-vo Lviv. a-u im. I. Franka. Retrieved from

Eko, U. (2006). To say almost the same thing. Experiments on translation. St. Petersburg: Symposiom.

Fairclough, N. (2003). Analysing Discourse: Textual Analysis for Social Research. London: Routledge.

Fateyeva, N. A. (2006). Intertext in the World of Texts: The Counterpoint of Intertextuality. Moscow: Komkniga.

Feodosiy, yep. Polotskiy i Glubokskiy. Obispo de Polotsk y Glubokoe Theodosius (1999). Homiletics: Theory of Church Preaching. Sergiev Posa. Moscow: Dukhov. acad. Retrieved from

Genette, G. (1997a). Palimpsests: literature in the second degree. (Ch. Newman & C. Doubinsky, Trans.). L; Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.

Istomina, I. A. (2013). Contemporary Orthodox preaching: stylistic and pragmatic specificity (Doctoral dissertation). Ural Federal University named after the first president of Russia B. N. Yeltsin, Yekaterinburg.

Itskovich, T. V. (2007). Orthodox sermon as a type of text (Doctoral dissertation). A. M. Gorky Ural State University. Yekaterinburg: UGU. Retrieved from

Kapranov, Y., Cherkhava, O., Gromova, V., & Reshetnyk, O. (2021). Methodological procedure of diagnosing behavioural stereotypes resilience of different language cultures representatives. Amazonia Investiga, 10(39), 186-193.

Kapranov, Y., Korolyova, A., Tolcheyeva, T., & Vasko, R. (2020). Human Language as a Natural Artifact of Planetary-Noospheric Mind: Coevolutionary-Macromutational Reinterpretation. Amazonia Investiga, 9(34), 17–23.

Karaulov, Yu. N. (1986). The role of precedent texts in the structure and functioning of a linguistic personality. Scientific traditions and new directions in the teaching of the Russian language and literature. Moscow: Art.

Karaulov, Yu. N. (1987). Russian language and linguistic personality. Moscow: Science.

Komarova, Z. I. (2012). Methodology, method, technique and technology of scientific research in linguistics: textbook. Yekaterinburg: Publishing house Ur-FU. Retrieved from

Kosikov, G. K. (2000). French Semiotics: From Structuralism to Poststructuralism. In G.K. Kosikov (Transl. From French, comp., Introductory article). Moscow: IG Progress. Retrieved from

Krasnykh, V. V. (2003). "Own" among "strangers": myth or reality? Moscow: ITDGK "Gnosis".

Kristeva, Yu. (1993). Bakhtin, word, dialogue and novel. Dialogue. Carnival. Chronotope. Dialog. Karnaval. Khronotop. Retrieved from

Kristeva, Yu. (2004). Selected Works: The Destruction of Poetics. Moscow: ROSSPEN.

Krylova, I. A. (2005). Contemporary Orthodox preaching in a functional and stylistic aspect (Doctoral dissertation). St. Petersburg State University. Sankt-Peterburg. Retrieved from

Kuklev, V. V. (2012). Sermon in Homiletics and Linguistics. Izvestia PGPU im. V.G. Belinsky, 27, 302-307.

Kuzmina, N. A. (1999). Intertext and its role in the evolution of poetic language: Monograph. Yekaterinburg: Ural Publishing House. University, Omsk: Omsk. state un-t.

Lakoff, G. (1990). Women, fire, and dangerous things. What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago & London: The University of Chicago Press. Retrieved from

Lepakhin, V. V. (2012). Icon in Russian literature and culture. Digest of articles. Moscow: Pilgrim.

Liashko, O. V. (2019). Paratextuality in the Orthodox Sermon. Science and Education: A New Dimension. Philology, VII (63), 212, 32-35.

Liashko, O. V. (2020). Intertextuality of the Orthodox Sermon: Taxonomy and Functions (a Case Study of the English, Russian and Ukrainian Languages): Qualified scientific work on the rights of the manuscript. Kyiv National Linguistic University. Kyiv: KNLU Publishing House. Retrieved from

Lotman, Yu. M. (1981) Text in text. Transactions in signaling systems, 14 (567), 3-18.

Mollard, T. metr. (2017). Official Statements, Speeches, Addresses, and Sermons. The Resurrection of Christ 2017. Retrieved from

Nasalevich, T. V. & Linnik, A, S. (2020) Linguostylistic expressive means in the image creating of Martin Eden in J. London's novel “Martin Eden”. Priority Directions of Science Development. Retrieved from

Orr, M. (2003). Intertextuality: Debates and Contexts. Cambridge: Polity.

Pevnitsky, V. F. (1908). Church eloquence and its basic laws. St. Petersburg: I. L. Tuzov. Retrieved from

Prokhvatilova, O. A. (2000). Speech organization of sounding Orthodox sermons and prayers (Doctoral dissertation). St. Petersburg State University, Volgograd. Retrieved from

Piege-Gro, N. (2008). Introduction to the theory of intertextuality. In G.K. Kosikov (Translated from French, General editorship and introductory article). Moscow: LKI Publishing House.

Riabukha, T. V., Tarasenko, T. V., Kulykova, L. A., & Hostishcheva, N. O. (2019) Methodological principles of preparation of philology teachers for the implementation of intercultural communication. Science Visnik Melitopol'skoho sovereign pedanonically to the University named after Bohdan Khmelnitskoho. Series: Pedanonic, 1(22). Retrieved from

Riffaterre, M. (1987). The Intertextual Unconscious. Critical Inquiry. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Vol. 13 (2), p. 371-385.

Rosch, E. (1978). Principles of Categorization. E. Rosch, & B. B. Lloyd (Eds.). Cognition and Categorization (р. 27-48). Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Salakhova, A. G.-B. (2013). Confessional linguistic personality: communicative strategies and tactics: monograph. Chelyabinsk: Encyclopedia.

Savin, G. A. (2009). Communication strategies and tactics in the speech genre of modern Orthodox preaching. (PhD Thesis). Peoples' Friendship University of Russia, Moscow. Retrieved from

Selivanova, O. O. (2008). Modern linguistics: directions and problems: textbook. Poltava: Dovkilla-K.

Shchirova, I. A., & Goncharova, Ye. A. (2007). Multidimensionality of the text: understanding and interpretation: textbook. St. Petersburg: LLC "Book House".

Smirnova, M. S. (2016). Sermon in the religious Orthodox discourse of the twentieth century: a linguopragmatic aspect (PhD Thesis). Mariupol State University, Mariupolʹ. Retrieved from

Taushev, A. (arkhiyep.). (2001). A guide to homiletics. Moscow: Pravoslav Publishing House. St. Tikhon. divine in-that.

Taylor, J. R. (1995). Linguistic categorization: prototypes in linguistic theory. Оxford: Сlarendon press.

The Orthodox Church in America. (2019). His Beatitude Metropolitan Tikhon to preside at the 51st Annual Saint Herman Pilgrimage in Alaska. Retrieved from

Vorobyova, O. P. (1993a). Linguistic aspects of the targeting of a literary text (monolingual and interlingual communication) (Doctoral dissertation). Moscow State Linguistic University. Moscow. Retrievef from

Vorobyova, O. P. (1993b). Text categories and addressee factor. Kyiv: Vishcha school. Retrieved from

Yampolsky, M. B. (1993). Memory of Tiresias: Intertextuality and Cinematography. Moscow: RIK "Culture".
How to Cite
Liashko, O., Kapranov, Y., Cherkhava, O., Nasalevych, T., & Riabukha, T. (2021). Methodological algorithm for interpreting intertextuality within the orthodox sermon (case study of the english orthodox sermon fragment). Amazonia Investiga, 10(43), 123-132.