Theoretical Aspects of the Conceptualization of Geographical Space

Abstract

The conceptualization of the geographical space is a systematic cultural innovation aimed at creating a new geographical picture of the world. Conceptualization is associated with a conscious desire to transform space by creating by creating ideologically and / or status-new places.

In the twentieth century, Russia and the countries of the Near Abroad experienced two waves of conceptualization of space – Soviet and post-Soviet. Different countries are distinguished by a different orientation and intensity of modern processes of “reconfiguration” of space. However, desovetisation (and in some cases, de-Russification) of space, with its active saturation with national and religious components, is characteristic of all.

The basic element of the conceptualization of space is a geoconcept: it represents a new, innovative, “name of a place”, which has connotative meanings that reflect a certain idea or reveal an associative image of a place.

There are two main mechanisms for conceptualizing space – renaming a place and raising the social status of a place (while maintaining the same geographical name). Therefore, we called this mechanism of conceptualization of space status sublimation of a toponym.

The types of geoconcepts (sacral, political-ideological, ethno-historical, ethno-cultural) are considered, each of which forms its own space and its network structure.

References

1. Berezovich Ye.L. 2000. Russkaya toponimiya v etnolingvisticheskom aspekte [Russian toponymy in the ethnolinguistic aspect]. Yekaterinburg, Izd-vo Ural’skogo un-ta. (In Russ.)

2. Danilevskiy N.YA. 2008. Rossiya i Yevropa [Russia and Europe]. M., In-t russkoy tsivilizatsii. (In Russ.)

3. Kalutskov V.N. 2012. Geokontsepty v geografii [Geoconcepts in Geography]. Kul’turnaya i gumanitarnaya geografiya, t. 1, no.1, pp. 27–36. (In Russ.)

4. Kalutskov V.N. 2016. “Imya” v geografii: ot toponima k geokontseptu [“Name” in geography: from toponym to geoconcept]. Izvestiya RAN. Seriya geograficheskaya, no. 2, pp. 100–107. (In Russ.)

5. Kalutskov V.N. 2018. Grattez le Russe et vous trouverez le Tartare, ili O sud’be odnoy mifologicheskoy strany [Grattez le Russe et vous trouverez le Tartare or the fate of one mythological country]. Vestn. Mosc. un-ty. Ser. 19. Linguistics and intercultural communication, no. 1, pp. 93–105. (In Russ.)

6. Klyuchevskiy V.O. 1987. Sochineniya: v 9 tomakh. Tom 1: Kurs russkoy istorii. Chast’ 1 [Works: in 9 volumes. Volume 1: The course of Russian history. Part 1]. M., Mysl’. (In Russ.)

7. Pavlovskiy I.V. 2013. Vremya i prostranstvo v yevropeyskoy i russkoy kartine mira [Time and space in the European and Russian picture of the world]. Vestn. Mosc. un-ty. Ser. 19. Linguistics and intercultural communication, no. 2, pp. 119–133. (In Russ.)

8. Savitsky P.N. 1997. Geograficheskiy obzor Rossii–Yevrazii [Geographical survey of Russia – Eurasia]. Kontinent Yevraziya. Moscow, “Agraf” Moscow, pp. 279–294. (In Russ.)

9. Somov V.P. 2015. Poeticheskaya geografiya: Istoricheskaya, mifologicheskaya, bibleyskaya i literaturno-skazochnaya [Poetic geography: Historical, mythological, biblical and literary fabulous]. Kul’turologicheskiy slovar’. Moscow, B.S.G.-Press. (In Russ.)

10. Shchepanskaya T.B. 1995. Krizisnaya set’ (traditsii dukhovnogo osvoyeniya prostranstva) [Crisis network (traditions of spiritual mastering of space)]. Russkiy Sever. K probleme lokal‘nykh grupp. SPb, Indrik, pp. 110–178. (In Russ.)

11. Bassin M. 1991. Russia between Europe and Asia: The Ideological Construction of Geographic Space. Slavic Review, vol. 50, no. 1, pp. 1–17.

12. Šakaja L., Stanić S. 2011. Other(ing), self(portraying), negotiating: the spatial codification of values in Zagreb’s city-text. Cultural Geographies, no. 18(4), pp. 495–516.