Bondarchuk E.M.

 

The category of purpose in the final book of F. M. Dostoevsky’s The Brothers Karamazov. Pp. 103–115.

UDC 821.161.1-31.09″18″

DOI 10.37724/RSU.2025.89.4.011

 

Abstract. The article discusses issues related to the religious and philosophical views of F. M. Dostoevsky. The purpose of the study is to examine the teleological issues in the novel The Brothers Karamazov. Despite its significance, this aspect of the poetics of the final book has not yet received comprehensive coverage. The author focuses on the category of purpose and the ways of its explication. The key position of the category of purpose is confirmed by the fact that, firstly, it synthesizes the main themes of the novel, defining the ideological content, secondly, it is present as a theme — the main characters and secondary characters address it, and finally, it is realized in the composition of the novel, which is based on the teleological principle. Three ways of marking the category of purpose in the verbal actions of the novel’s heroes are identified. One of them — lexical means — is the object of our consideration. The subject of the study is the conversations of the heroes and the narrator, in which the lexeme of purpose is present. The scientific novelty consists in defining the compositional and content functions of the category of purpose, which is necessary for understanding the author as a subject of aesthetic activity. A distinction is made between the concept of purpose, which refers to the actions of heroes in the objective world, and the concept of telos, which denotes the true, timeless purpose of life, transcendental, external in relation to human consciousness. A fundamental difference is established between the hero’s declaration of the goal in verbal actions and the message about the goal as formulated by the narrator. The connection between the categories of purpose and memory are determined. The results of the study can be used in a special course devoted to the study of F. M. Dostoevsky’s work, in higher educational institutions, as well as in the analysis of artistic texts having complex poetics.

 

Keywords: discourse, memory, profane, sacred, teleology, verbal actions, the script of source-path-purpose, value perspective

 

Bibliography

 

  1. Arutyunova N. D. Discourse.Lingvisticheskiy entsiklopedicheskiy slovar. Gl. red. B. N. Yartseva. [Linguistic Encyclopedic Dictionary. Ed. by B. N. Yartseva]. Moscow, Sovetskaya Encyclopediya, 1990, 682 p. Available at: https://web.archive.org/web/20140701071456/http://tapemark.narod.ru/les/136g.html (accessed: 25.08.2025). (In Russian).
  2. Bakhtin M. M. Problemy poetiki Dostoyevskogo. 1963. Raboty 1960-kh. — 1070-kh gg. [Issues of Dostoevsky’s Poetics. Works of the 1960s — 1970s.]. Moscow, Russkie slovari, Yazyki slavyanskikh kultur, 2002, vol. 4, 505 p. (In Russian).
  3. Berdyaev N. A. Otkroveniye o cheloveke v tvorchestve Dostoyevskogo. [Revelation about man in Dostoevsky’s works]. Moscow, T8 Rugram, 2018, 102 p. (In Russian).
  4. Bragina N. G. Pamyat v yazyke i kulture. [Memory in language and culture]. Moscow, Yazyki slavyanskikh kultur, 2007, 520 p. (In Russian).
  5. Belknap, R. L. Struktura “Bratyev Karamazovykh”. [The Structure of “The Brothers Karamazov”]. Petersburg, Academicheskiy Proekt, 1997, 144 p. (In Russian).
  6. Wittgenstein, L. Culture and Value. Filosofskiye raboty. [Philosophical Works]. Moscow, Gnosis, 1994, pt. 1, pp. 407–492. (In Russian).
  7. Volkov V. V., Volkova N. V. Spiritual realism as the unity of the secular and the sacred in the poetic works of Hieromonk Roman (Matyushin-Pravdin). Vestnik slavyanskikh kultur. [Bulletin of Slavic Cultures]. 2022, vol. 63, pp. 234–246. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37816/2073-9567-2022-63-234-246. (In Russian).
  8. Deleuze G. The logic of meaning. Logika smysla. M. Fuko Theatrum philosophicum. [The Logic of Meaning. Foucault, Theatrum philosophicum]. Moscow; Yekaterinburg, Raritet: Delovaia kniga, 1998, pp. 10–437. (In Russian).
  9. Jackson R. L.The passing of sentence on Fyodor Pavlovich Karamazov. M. Dostoyevskiy. Materialy i issledovaniya. [F. M. Dostoevsky. Materials and Research]. Leningrad, Nauka, Leningrad Department, 1976, vol. 2, pp. 137–144. (In Russian).
  10. Dostoevsky F. M. The Brothers Karamazov: a novel. PSS F. M. Dostoyevskogo: v 30 t. [Complete Works of F. M. Dostoevsky: in 30 volumes]. 1972–1990. Leningrad, Nauka, Leningrad Department, 1976, Vol. 24, Books 1–10. 511 p.; 25, Books 11–12: Epilogue. Handwritten editions. 624 p. (In Russian).
  11. Dostoevsky F. M. The writer’s diary for 1876, November–December. PSS F. M. Dostoyevskogo:
    v 30 t. 1972–1990. [Complete Works of F. M. Dostoevsky: in 30 volumes. 1972–1990. Vol. 24]. Leningrad, Nauka, Leningrad Department, 1982, vol. 24. 519 p. (In Russian).
  12. Zubets O. P. On the ethical meaning of the concept of ἀρχή. Eticheskaya mysl. [Ethical Thought]. 2019, vol. 19, iss. 1, pp. 49–62. (In Russian).
  13. Zykhovskaya N. L. Leitmotif among other general semiotic concepts. Vestnik Chelyabinskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. [Bulletin of Chelyabinsk State University]. 2000, vol. 2, iss. 1, pp. 87–96. (In Russian).
  14. Isupov K. G. Metafizika Dostoyevskogo. [Dostoevsky’s Metaphysics]. Moscow, St. Petersburg, Center for Humanitarian Initiatives, 2016, 208 p. (In Russian).
  15. Catteau J. Space and time in Dostoevsky’s novels. Materialy i issledovaniya. [Materials and Research]. Leningrad, Nauka, Leningrad Branch, 1978, vol. 3, pp. 41–53. (In Russian).
  16. Kasatkina T. A. Dostoyevskiy kak filosof i bogoslov: khudozhestvennyy sposob vyskazyvaniya. Otv. red. Ye. A. Takho-Godi. [Dostoevsky as a philosopher and theologian: an artistic mode of expression. Ed. by E. A. Takho-Godi]. Moscow, Vodoley, 2019, 336 p. (In Russian).
  17. Kasatkina T. A. “Notes from the Underground” and “Masha is Lying on the Table…”: slow close reading in the immediate context. Dostoyevskiy i mirovaya kultura. Filologicheskiy zhurnal. [Dostoevsky and World Culture. Philological Journal]. 2018, iss. 1, pp. 121–147. (In Russian).
  18. Kashina N. V. Chelovek v tvorchestve F. M. Dostoyevskogo. [Man in F. M. Dostoevsky’s works]. Moscow, Khudozhestvennaya Literatura, 1986, 318 p. (In Russian).
  19. Likhachev D. S. In search of reality. Materialy i issledovaniya. [Dostoevsky. Materials and Research]. Leningrad, Nauka, Leningrad Branch, 1974, vol. 1, pp. 613–621. (In Russian).
  20. Likhachev D. S. Time of chronicles in Dostoevsky. Poetika drevnerusskoy literatury. [Poetics of Old Russian Literature]. Leningrad, Khudozhestvennaya literatura, Leningrad. Branch, 1971, pp. 347–363. (In Russian).
  21. Nepomnyashchy V. S. Izbrannyye raboty 1960-kh — 1990-kh gg. [Selected Works, 1960s–1990s]. 2: Pushkin. The Russian Picture of the World. Moscow, Moskovskiy uchebnik, 2001, 492 p. (In Russian).
  22. Ovchinnikov A. G. “Miracle” and “paradox” in the ontotheology of F. Dostoevsky and S. Kierkegaard. Evolyutsiya form khudozhestvennogo soznaniya v russkoy literature (opyty fenomenologicheskogo analiza): sb. nauch. tr. [The evolution of forms of artistic consciousness in Russian literature (experiences in phenomenological analysis): Collection of research papers]. Yekaterinburg, 2001, pp. 164–197. (In Russian).
  23. Radzievskaya T. V. Semantics of the word “goal”. Logicheskiy analiz yazyka. Modeli deystviya. [Logical Analysis of Language. Models of Action]. Moscow, Nauka, 1992, pp. 30–35. (In Russian).
  24. Sukhikh O. S. Two Miscarriages of Justice (Fyodor Dostoevsky’s “The Brothers Karamazov” and T. Dreiser’s “An American Tragedy”). Uralskiy filologicheskiy vestnik. Ser. Russkaya klassika: dinamika khudozhestvennykh sistem. [Ural Philological Bulletin. Series: Russian Classics: Dynamics of Artistic Systems]. 2015, iss. 3, pp. 195–204. (In Russian).
  25. Skaftymov A. P. Thematic composition of the novel “The Idiot”. Nravstvennyye iskaniya russkikh pisateley. [Moral Quests of Russian Writers]. Moscow, Khudozhestvennaya Literatura, 1972, pp. 23–87. (In Russian).
  26. Scanlan J. R. Dostoyevskiy kak myslitel. [Dostoevsky the Thinker]. Petersburg, Academichesky Proekt, 2006, 256 p., p. 9. (In Russian).
  27. Tarasov B. N. Tertium non datur: On the place and significance of F. M. Dostoevsky’s work in the global historical and cultural process. Russkaya klassicheskaya literatura v mirovom kulturno-istoricheskom kontekste. Pod red. A. Yesaulova, Yu. N. Sytinoy, B. N. Tarasova. [Russian Classical Literature in the Global Cultural and Historical Context. Ed. by I. A. Esaulov, Yu. N. Sytina, and B. N. Tarasov]. Moscow, Indrik, 2017, 488 p. (In Russian).
  28. Khalizev V. E. Drama kak yavleniye iskusstva. [Drama as an Art Phenomenon]. Moscow, Iskusstvo, 1978, 240 p. (In Russian).
  29. Farino E. Onions and cucumbers. Kultura i tekst. [Culture and Text]. 2017, iss. 4, pp. 7–72. (In Russian).
  30. Frishman, A. On S. Kierkegaard and M. Bakhtin “with constant references to Socrates”. Russkiye i datskiye interpretatsii tvorchestva S. Kyerkegora. [Russian and Danish Interpretations of S. Kierkegaard’s Work]. Moscow, Ad Marginem, 1994, pp. 102–122. (In Russian).
  31. Chudakov, A. P. Materialy i issledovaniya. [Dostoevsky’s World of Objects]. Leningrad: Nauka, Leningrad. Publishing House. 1980, Vol. 2, pp. 96–105. (In Russian).
  32. Shchennikov, G. K. M. Dostoyevskiy. Materialy i issledovaniya. [Dostoevsky’s Thoughts about Man and Structure of a Character]. Leningrad, Nauka, Leningrad Branch, 1976, vol. 2, pp. 3–10. (In Russian).
Uncategorized