It was Shaw who urged Chesterton to write a play, which he finally did. It was Shaw who mercilessly made fun of Chesterton about his Roman Catholic “hobby,” but who was shocked when Chesterton actually converted. And it was Shaw who said the world is not nearly thankful enough for Chesterton.

Chesterton’s book on Shaw appeared in 1909. When Shaw reviewed it he wrote, “This book is what everybody expected it to be: the best work of literary art I have yet provoked.”

“Provocative” certainly describes Chesterton’s introduction to the book, which consists of two sentences: “Most people say that they agree with Bernard Shaw or that they do not understand him. I am the only person who understands him, and I do not agree with him” [30].

Chesterton devotes a chapter to each of Shaw’s personas: the Irishman, the Puritan, the Progressive, the Critic, the Dramatist, and the Philosopher. He admires the Irishman, he admonishes the Puritan, he picks apart the Progressive, he corrects the Critic, he exposes the Dramatist, and finally, he does all five things to the Philosopher. He calls Shaw the “ [30]most savagely serious man of his time” [30] who takes even his jokes seriously.

The key to Chesterton’s own philosophy is the paradox, and it is in this book that Chesterton explains the concept more clearly than perhaps anywhere in his writings. The literal Greek meaning of the word is “something which is against the received opinion,” but more importantly, says Chesterton, the word is used “to express the idea of a verbal contradiction…some kind of collision between what is seemingly and what is really true.” [30].

He says the basic flaw in Shaw’s philosophy is that it is “almost entirely without paradox.” He does accuse Shaw of occasionally using “false paradoxes,” which sound clever but are simply lies. A true paradox is the Gospel’s “He that shall lose his life, the same shall save it” [30]. A false paradox is Shaw’s “The Golden Rule is that there is no Golden Rule.” [30].

But it is Shaw’s lack of paradox, his dull consistency, that is responsible for his faulty thinking. For instance, he exalts the idea of liberty, but applies it without consideration, extending it to everything – like education, where he claims that children should never be told anything without letting them hear the opposite opinion. What Shaw doesn’t understand here, says Chesterton, is the” [30] paradox of childhood” [30]: “Although this child is much better than I, yet I must teach it. Although this being has much purer passions than I, yet I must control it” [30] Shaw does not allow for “ [30]that deeper sort of paradox by which two opposite cords of truth become entangled in an inextricable knot. Still less can he be made to [33] realize that it is often this knot which ties safely together the whole bundle of human life [30]…he cannot quite understand life, because he will not accept its contradictions.” [30].

During his lifetime, Shaw was one of the most famous men on earth and hobnobbed with everybody else who was famous. He was a recognizable character with his long white beard and his britches. His plays were performed everywhere, and he became very wealthy. But he has been on a steady decline since then, whereas Chesterton’s star continues to rise. The reason is pretty simple. Shaw was a reactionary, intent on rejecting traditional truths and trying to shock his audiences and upend their expectations. He started a dangerous trend, dangerous, that is, to itself. It has gotten harder and harder to shock an audience. It has gotten increasingly difficult to mock a truth that no one remembers.

More and more Shaw looks stuck in his time, while Chesterton appears to be timeless. A new generation, with no help from the educational establishment, is now discovering Chesterton’s books and finding them fresh and fascinating, while students are still being forced to read Shaw’s plays and wondering what all the fuss is about” [31, с. 31-42].

There may be a few Shaw fans left out there. They may even still like his plays. But they don’t like to think about the dark and troubling aspects to Shaw’s ideas: his utter grimness, his mockery of marriage and other good things, and worst of all, his embrace of Nietzsche. Chesterton says – prophetically – that Nietzsche succeeded in putting into” [30] Shaw’s head a new superstition “which bids fair to be the chief superstitions of the dark ages which are possibly in front of us [30]…the superstition of what is called the Superman” [30]. The dark ages came indeed, when less than three decades later Hitler enflamed an entire nation with this same superstition. Shaw didn’t see it coming.

---

---

CONCLUSIONS FOR CHAPTER I
This Chapter provides a theoretical framework for teaching the concept of "paradox" in General. Since English is an international language, there is a great need for its study for both business and private purposes. It has been proven that simple learning, for example, is not acceptable for engineers - it takes a lot of time and effort to” [32, p. 368-377] learn the language in its entirety, the main goal of which is to teach how to read instructions and depict the language in a literary genre, combined with how they interact with texts.

After research, we found that the term "paradox" of Greek origin, in ancient Greek philosophy, meant a new, original opinion. The paradox is a certain verbal composition and as a figure of speech is used in various functional styles, it carries a large charge of stylistic information, and is one of the most effective means of influencing the reader. The stylistic method of paradox is defined in this work as such an illogical connection of two parts of a single sentence, components of a FE or several sentences, in which contradictory concepts are combined, and generally accepted opinions and cliches are refuted. Invariant characteristic features of the paradox are: the presence of alogism, inconsistency, simultaneous implementation of the relations of contrast and identity, generality, unexpected, unusual interpretation of the known and familiar. We also found that one of the techniques of paradoxicity is an unexpected plot move, any turn that occurred contrary to the expectation and assumption of the perceiver. This violation of the linear sequence of the plot produces the effect of" deceived expectations", there is a shift in the narrative. “Invariant features of the paradox: 1) alogism, 2) simultaneous realization of the relations of contrast and identity, 3) generality, 4) surprise in the interpretation of the known and familiar - are the basis for determining the stylistic reception of the paradox” [33, с. 24].

We also found that the functional characteristics of paradoxes are classified into: •historical;

•characterological;

•philosophical;

•ironic.

“At the stylistic level, paradoxes can be implemented at the level of:

microtext; macrotext. The following types of artistic paradox can be classified by semantic feature: paradoxes based on comparison; paradoxes based on opposition” [5]; paradoxes-periphrases based on well-known statements.

Paradox as a stylistic device is very often found in the works of such famous English authors as Oscar Wilde and Bernard Shaw. Most often, Oscar Wilde resorts to such paradoxes as characterological and philosophical, while Bernard Shaw gives preference to ironic and moral” [4] paradoxes. A significant” [5] part of the paradoxes of Bernard Shaw is realized at the level of macro-context, we can trace the plot paradoxes in his works. Oscar Wilde implements his paradoxes at the level of microtext, although his work "the Portrait of Dorian gray" [34, p. 10-19] is a vivid example of a plot paradox. Bernard Shaw in his paradoxes touches on such topics as the social life of society and the moral character of man. Oscar Wilde gives preference to such topics as art [8], women, love, friendship” [5]

At the same time, analyzing the paradox, we stopped at each part separately. In General, the paradox helped to understand what is needed for this in the field of literature. Various examples and arguments were shown. For example: “The paradox is not a sign of the weakness of thinking, on the contrary, it emphasizes its strength. One of the permanent characteristics of the paradox is the simultaneous realization of the relations of contrast and identity” [7, c. 96-100]. "I'll give you a piece of advice: don't listen to anyone's advice."(V. Vishnevsky.).

“The paradox of speech genres of satire and humor is defined as a way of organizing a text based on verbal or situational misunderstandings or coincidences. Many researchers ( M. N. Elenevskaya, K. S. Shashkova, V. V. Ovsyannikov, etc.) seek to determine the linguistic nature of paradoxicity, linking it with the oppositional relations of lexical and syntactic units, with the subjective modality of "strangeness", using the effect of "deceived expectations" and other stylistic techniques” [7, c. 96-100].

---

One of the methods of paradox is an unexpected plot move, any turn that occurred contrary to the expectation and assumption of the perceiver. This violation of the linear sequence of the plot produces the effect of "deceived expectations", there is a shift in the narrative. Speech genres of satire and humor are more or less characterized by the effect of surprise. "Beautiful Galatea! They say she dyes her hair black? "Oh, no: her hair was already black when she bought it." (From the TV show "White parrot" [5].) There is a contrast between the expectations of the subject (based on his life experience) and the final realization. “A phenomenon that seems natural is then unmasked as an absurdity [5]or error and thus discredited” [10, c. 82-83].

Thus, the concept of paradox is based on taking into account the need to apply in the literary genre of learning a foreign language, in turn, as a training based on the features of the future profession that require its training.


2. The evolution of the paradox genre in the Bernard Shaw’s work of the XIX-XX centuries

2.1 Paradox as a means of formation in a literary text (based on the works of B.Shaw)

To study the meaning-forming potential of the paradox, we selected complex texts with a high degree of artistry, which are able to maximize the actualization of reflection and create an optimal space for understanding activities. Optimal for reflection, "the second (after sensuality) source of experience, the most important actually human construct..." [goddess], and understanding, the language space contributes to the reader's entry into a reflexive act, which can be interpreted as a sequence of mental efforts of the individual when mastering the content of a literary text. The process of mysledeystvovaniya is interpreted as a process that develops in unity, where "all objects and phenomena develop not by themselves, not in isolation, but in inseparable connection with other objects and phenomena" [39, с. 89].

In the process of understanding the text, the recipient's reflection can be fixed in one (or several) of the three zones of the scheme of mental activity developed By G. p. Shchedrovitsky. Fixations of reflection set the parameters of the space of understanding that are formed when a particular artistic text is received. The scheme highlights the following belts: 1) the belt of mysledeystvovaniya (MD), which corresponds to representations, phenomena, mental "pictures"; 2) the belt of thought-communication (M-K), where direct verbal communication occurs, i.e. the verbalization of a literary text; 3) the belt of pure thinking (M), in which "pure", i.e. non-verbalized meanings and ideas are fixed and formed.

All the named belts are re-expressed through each other, but, nevertheless, one is irreducible to the other. In the production of literary texts, the belt (M-K) is more involved, i.e. the belt of verbalization of content, and in the process of understanding, the ideal case is represented by fixations of reflection in all three belts. The reaction to the compositional structure of a paradoxical text manifests itself in the activation of reflection in the m-K belt. In this case, the text is perceived as the optimal language space for reflection and understanding. But the compositional structure of the text does not fully reflect the content of the text, respectively, there is a progressive development of reflexive acts in which reflection is fixed in the belts that reflect the way the meaning (s) of the text are objectified – in the m-K belt and in the M-belt.

“Understanding and interpretation are two processes that are in principle possible separately: understanding is possible without interpretation (when understanding is not expressed); interpretation is possible without” [35, c. 189-194] understanding, if it does not represent a meaningful process of understanding” [35, c. 189-194] which ends in the construction of meanings[36, c. 128-136].

In General, in philological hermeneutics, interpretation is understood as a method of verbal fixation of understanding, as a result of which the recipient builds meanings. A full-fledged interpretation of a literary text is possible only as a result of using certain background knowledge and analyzing the lexical and phraseological structure and methods of syntactic organization of the text.

“In addition, two basic principles must be used for interpretation: 1) the principle of local interpretation, which assumes taking into account the immediate linguistic environment and this communicative situation, and 2) the principle of analogy, which allows you to correlate the information received with existing knowledge” [35,c. 189-194]and [36, c. 128-136] past experience. When mastering the content of a paradoxical literary text, the reader must be able to use the maximum number of understanding techniques (hermeneutical techniques) to form a conscious understanding of the work. Hermeneutical techniques are defined as a set of techniques of system-based activity that contribute to the effective output of the subject in a reflexive position and the construction of meanings in the development of the content of artistic works. The ability to use hermeneutical techniques depends on the recipient's reflexive readiness and General ability to understand literary texts.

---

“The specificity of the author's selection of text-forming tools, their location in the text fabric often requires the reader to use not one, but several techniques of understanding, which can be used sequentially or in parallel” [37, c. 170-177]. Overcoming the lack of understanding of the paradoxical this is done by understanding techniques. The optimal ones are: intending techniques, problematization techniques, multi-layer image creation techniques, and truth detection techniques. The implementation of all hermeneutical techniques used by the recipient to comprehend the semantic mosaic is impossible in a single artistic text.

The following hermeneutical techniques compilation formats are defined for the novel" Portrait of Dorian gray":

– parallel application of the technique of problematization and actualization of knowledge in the process of perception of a text containing allusions to historical events or biblical / mythological subjects;

- breaking the hermeneutical circle with subsequent or simultaneous use of problematization techniques;

- breaking the hermeneutical circle with subsequent updating of knowledge about historical or cultural realities.

To classify a literary text as a PM text, each of the three features is necessary, but none of them is sufficient separately and has differentiating properties only in combination with the other two.

Two groups of language mechanisms for constructing a paradox are defined: 1) a group of construction mechanisms that implement the technique of opposites; 2) a group of component analysis.

One of the principles of implementing the paradox is the opposition at the lexical and semantic level of the text, which affects the reader directly, while actualizing the experience formed in the individual picture of the world of the individual, and creates a new meaning (see table 1).

	Table 1
Paradoxically marked fraction of a literary text	Contrast
“Perhaps, one never seems so much at one's ease as when one has to” [38, c. 400]	one – a part
play a part [17]
I am hard at work being idle	hard – idle
“You don't seem to realize that in married life three is company and	two – none
two” [39, c. 133-138] is none” [40]
“I never put off till tomorrow what I can possibly do the day after” [39, c. 133-138]	tomorrow – the day after
“Even things that are true can be proved” [39, c. 133-139].	true –proved

“The study of existing schemes of paradox and language mechanisms of paradox implementation at various levels of the literary text allows us to identify schemes that are frequent for O. Wilde's paradoxical literary texts, which are based on the functioning of cognitive, logical connections. The degree of surprise of illogical compounds is directly proportional to the number of members of the sentence: the more words, especially those that emphasize the quality denied by the subsequent part of the statement” [25], the greater the surprise and Vice versa (see figure 1).

---

Смотрите также файлы

• Литература, используемая при проведении занятия армейский сборник 11 2021 Г.docx

• Курсовая работа Речевой портрет персонажа (на материале произведения "Понаехавшая" Н. Абгарян).docx

• Краевое государственное автономное профессиональное образовательное учреждение.doc

• 1. Rectangular system y polar.docx

• Уверенность в себе, поднятие самооценки.docx