What is interpretation and what things can be interpreted

Updated September 18: 54,851 Author: Dmitry Petrov
Hello, dear readers of the KtoNaNovenkogo.ru blog. We have all heard about the interpretation of an actor's role on stage or a piece of music by a pianist. It seems that this word is associated primarily with art and has nothing to do with everyday life.

Meanwhile, each of us constantly interprets , because this process is one of the stages of learning about the world around us.

So, let's understand what interpretation is, how it manifests itself in different areas of human life, and how the meaning of a word varies depending on the field of application.

Definition of the word “Interpretation” according to TSB:

Interpretation - Interpretation (lat. interpretatio) interpretation, explanation, clarification. 1) In the literal sense, the term “I.” used in jurisprudence (for example, the interpretation of a law by a lawyer or a judge is a “translation” of “special” expressions in which this or that article of the code is formulated into “common” language, as well as recommendations for its application), art (I. roles an actor or a musical work by a pianist - an individual interpretation by the performer of the work being performed, which is not, generally speaking, uniquely determined by the author’s intention) and in other areas of human activity. 2) I. in mathematics, logic, methodology of science, theory of knowledge - a set of meanings (meanings) attached in one way or another to elements (expressions, formulas, symbols, etc.) of any natural science or abstract-deductive theory (in In the same cases when the elements of this theory themselves are subjected to such “interpretation,” they also speak of the I. of symbols, formulas, etc.). The concept of "I." has great epistemological significance: it plays an important role in comparing scientific theories with the areas they describe, in describing different ways of constructing a theory, and in characterizing changes in the relationship between them in the course of the development of knowledge. Since each natural science theory is conceived and constructed to describe a certain area of ​​real reality, this reality serves as its (theory’s) “natural” information. But such “implicit” information is not the only one possible even for meaningful theories of classical physics and mathematics. Thus, from the fact of isomorphism of mechanical and electrical oscillatory systems described by the same differential equations, it immediately follows that for such equations at least two different Is are possible. This applies to an even greater extent to abstract-deductive logical-mathematical theories, admitting not only different, but also non-isomorphic I. It is generally difficult to talk about their “natural” I. Abstract-deductive theories can do without “translating” their concepts into “physical language”. For example, regardless of any physical geometry, the concepts of Lobachevsky geometry can be interpreted in terms of Euclidean geometry (see Lobachevsky geometry). The discovery of the possibility of mutual interpretability of various deductive theories played a huge role both in the development of the deductive sciences themselves (especially as a tool for proving their relative consistency) and in the formation of modern epistemological concepts associated with them. See Axiomatic method, Logic, Logical semantics, Model. Lit.: Hilbert D., Foundations of Geometry, trans. from German, M.-L., 1948, ch. 2, § 9. Kleene S.K., Introduction to Metamathematics, trans. from English, M., 1957, ch. 3, § 15. A. Church, Introduction to Mathematical Logic, vol. 1, trans. from English, M., 1960, Introduction, § 07. Frenkel A., Bar-Hillel I., Foundations of set theory, trans. from English, M., 1966, ch. 5, § 3. Yu. A. Gastev. Interpretation of programming languages, one of the methods for implementing programming languages ​​on electronic computers (computers). In I., each elementary action in a language corresponds, as a rule, to its own program that implements this action, and the entire process of solving a problem is a computer simulation of the corresponding algorithm written in this language. With I., the speed of solving problems is usually much lower than with other methods, but I. is easier to implement on a computer, and in many cases (for example, when simulating the operation of one computer on another) it turns out to be the only suitable one.

Interpretation - in a broad sense, it is characterized as an explanation, interpretation, decoding of one system (text, events, facts) into another, more specific, understandable, visual or generally accepted. In a special, strict sense, interpretation is defined as the establishment of systems of objects that make up the subject area of ​​​​meanings of the basic terms of the theory under study and satisfy the requirements of the truth of its provisions. From this perspective, interpretation acts as a procedure inverse to formalization. Strict interpretation has two varieties: theoretical, determined by finding such values ​​of variables in the formulas of the theory under study, in which they turn into true positions; and empirical, associated with solving problems of establishing the correspondence of concepts to empirical objects, searching for empirical meanings of theoretical terms. In the latter case, operational definitions are of great importance, that is, ways of concretizing concepts through experimental situations, with the help of which the characteristics of objects reflected by these concepts are recorded. For example, temperature can be determined through the readings of a thermometer, and distance through the movement of the body and time. The role of operational definitions in sociology is significant, in particular when solving problems of translating concepts into indicators. The very specificity of sociological knowledge is such that its variables must allow empirical interpretation. To the extent that the analysis of sociological data involves the use of theoretical models of the objects under study, theoretical interpretation is also used in sociology. These are, for example, situations of interpreting graphs as sociograms by defining them on the connections between members of small groups or cases of interpreting projective tests in the context of certain theoretical models. The most widespread in sociology is interpretation in a broad sense, that is, the process of interpretation necessary, for example, to clarify the sociological meaning of statistical dependencies. In general, interpretation contributes to the concretization of theoretical systems and provisions, the translation of theoretical statements into factual ones. Interpretation enhances the cognitive value of theoretical concepts and, by reducing abstract terms to concrete ones, opens the way to testing the theoretical constructs under study.

Interpretation of basic concepts is one of the important procedures for developing a sociological research program. It includes theoretical and empirical clarification of concepts. Interpretation of basic concepts - allows you to establish in which areas of analysis the collection of sociological data should be carried out. Theoretical interpretation of basic concepts is understood as: a) clarification of the concept from the point of view of the theory in which it is included, clarification of its place in the structure of this theory and its connection with its other concepts; b) clarifying the relationship of the concept to its use in other theories, fields of knowledge, including journalism. Theoretical interpretation of basic concepts is mandatory for any sociological research, especially in cases where the concepts are not clearly defined. It allows one to reveal the richness of the content contained in them and thus creates the basis for constructing a conceptual scheme of research, formulating its goals, objectives, hypotheses, and selection of materials. However, only a theoretical interpretation of basic concepts is not enough to conduct sociological research. The fact is that, having a good understanding of the problem at the theoretical level, the researcher, as a rule, does not have a clear idea of ​​the specifics of the relationship between the theoretical description of the subject area covered by it (the problem), its inherent contradiction and its manifestation in specific social facts. In order, on the one hand, to obtain such an idea, and, on the other hand, to implement and verify the tasks and hypotheses formulated in terms of a certain sociological theory using the appropriate system of social facts (empirical indicators), it is necessary to carry out an empirical interpretation of the basic concepts, define these concepts operationally, that is, correlate them with the phenomena (elements) of reality so that the latter are covered by their content and thus turn into corresponding empirical indicators and indicators of each concept. But being “representatives” of empirically interpreted concepts and terms, these elements of reality are at the same time indicators of the object being studied. Thus, through certain facts of social reality recorded in the study, the correlation of sociological concepts with their own objective analogues is carried out, acting as empirical characteristics (features, indicators, indicators) of the object under study. In this case, concepts are meaningfully clarified, limited, and the manifested properties of the object are empirically recorded and recognized (identified). In the most general terms, the empirical interpretation of basic concepts refers to certain groups of facts of social reality, the recording of which makes it possible to determine that the phenomenon being studied takes place in it. For example, indicators of whether an employee has a new type of economic thinking can be: readiness for changes in technology, mastering advanced experience; ability to combine professions; participation in team management, in rationalization and inventive activities; the desire to acquire economic knowledge, etc. The researcher should strive for the most complete representation of the concept in the system of indicators and indicators. However, a complete reduction (reduction) of the meaning of a concept to empirical features is fundamentally not feasible, because the finite number of manifestations of the essence of the phenomenon being studied is not identical to this very essence reflected in the theoretical concept. Only a certain part of the content of the concept is in a more or less direct and unambiguous relationship with the empirical base. Moreover, for some concepts this part is much larger than for others. Therefore, some concepts of sociological theory are practically not amenable to direct empirical interpretation, and it is carried out only indirectly, through other concepts that are in logical connection with them. In the empirical interpretation of basic concepts, the researcher’s main attention is directed to the selection mainly of those empirical indicators and indicators that reflect the most significant aspects of the phenomenon under study, are relatively easy to identify and observe, as well as relatively simple and reliable measurement. In the specialized literature (see, for example, Yadov V.A. Sociological research: methodology, program, methods. M., 1987) the following sequence of clarification of basic concepts and interpretation of their meaning through observable empirical indicators is proposed: 1. Determination of the scope of the concept’s content . Initially, it is necessary to obtain the most general idea of ​​the social phenomenon designated by the concept used, to identify the most general components of the content and relationship of both this concept and the phenomenon it reflects, as well as the area of ​​empirical reality with which the sociologist will have to deal. 2. Determination of the continuum of properties of the phenomenon being studied. At this stage, all possible components of a given phenomenon are identified, with the help of which it is possible to establish a correspondence between it and the system of concepts that describe it and were used in the study. Isolating these possible properties is a very complex and time-consuming procedure. Here it is necessary to use a multi-stage analysis of the concept being studied. After identifying the main groups of facts of reality covered by its content, their subgroups are identified until the researcher reaches an empirically fixed and verifiable indicator (group of indicators). When performing a multi-stage analysis of an interpreted concept, the following requirements must be met: the system of concepts and terms adopted to describe the objective content of the interpreted concept at each stage of its analysis must have the same degree of generality; These concepts and terms must be exhaustive and mutually exclusive, and the multi-stage analysis of the concept itself must be based on the general scheme of the phenomenon reflected by this concept. process. This diagram should contain its main elements. 3. The choice of empirical indicators of the interpreted concept occurs on the basis of their significance and accessibility. It is necessary to select a group from among the recorded indicators. which will form the basis for further empirical work (in particular, for measuring empirical indicators. 4. Construction of indices. The results of the corresponding measurements of selected empirical indicators are grouped into certain indices, which are quantitatively expressed qualitative indicators of the selected concepts. The further stage of working with interpreted concepts is the description of what is being studied phenomena in their system. As a result of such a description, the phenomenon appears as a more or less precisely delineated subject of research. Of course, only under this condition can it be studied by searching for ways to solve the problem, the expression of which is the subject of research. Prediction of these methods of solving the problem is carried out in the form of hypotheses. Interpretation of basic concepts is an integral part of the procedure for operationalization of concepts. Operationalization of concepts is a specific scientific procedure for establishing a connection between the conceptual apparatus of research and its methodological tools. It combines into a single whole the problems of concept formation, measurement techniques and the search for social indicators (see Measurement; Social indicator; Interpretation of basic concepts). Operationalization – allows you to establish what sociological data should be collected about. Procedure: 1.Translation of the original concept into indicators. 2. Translation of indicators into variables. 3. Translation of variables into indicators. 4. Determination of methods for collecting the required data. An empirical indicator allows you to: - establish how and in what form data collection should be approached; — correctly formulate questions in various types of tools; — determine the structure of answers to questions (scales, tests). Thus, working with concepts is a procedure for establishing a connection between the conceptual apparatus and the methodological tools of research. The concept - indicator - indicator - source - tools operationalization of the concept of “economic consciousness” indicators variable indicators I. Attitude to work, the development of subjective incentives and practical efforts aimed at self -realization of motives, installation, stereotypes, satisfaction of initiative, quality of work, discipline, earnings 2. Attitude to property Subjective perception Real co-ownership Mine, ours, someone else’s 3. Attitude to production Subjective perception as a source of goods and consumption. Actual work behavior. Understanding, assessments, attitudes, events 4. Relationship between employees The state of group solidarity, socio-psychological microclimate, competition. Generalization, empathy, sympathy, general value orientations, interests, types of behavior. 5. Attitude to management Subjective perception of service-business relations, management style Opinions about the abilities of managers, complicity. The operationalization of concepts is not identical to the operational definition , which is, first of all, a logical procedure, an indication of the empirical meanings of theoretical meanings, one of the rules of empirical interpretation - as a prerequisite for empirical research associated with testing a hypothesis, its confirmation or refutation. The operationalization of concepts involves an experimental situation and is not a logical definition procedure. This is the development of new means of recording data - indices, scales, questionnaires, etc., what can be called a “methodological experiment.” It's really about finding social indicators, not using them. The procedure for operationalizing concepts consists of the same operations as the procedure for constructing a research instrument. So. when constructing an index, the following operations are carried out: translation of concepts into indicators, more precisely into “indicator concepts” (both operational and non-operational definitions are used, for example, descriptive); converting indicators into variables (selecting the type of scale and, if possible, units of measurement); transferring variables into an index (selecting an index construction technique); index assessment (the index is calculated for reliability and validity). The simplest example is the group cohesion index, which is the ratio of the number of mutual positive choices made in a group to the number of all possible choices. The concept of group cohesion is defined through an empirically registered indicator - mutual elections and a means of registration - simple counting. Operationalization of concepts is a prerequisite for constructing a system of social indicators and requires the development and introduction of an intermediate conceptual model, which consists of concepts that form a certain hierarchy and mediate the connection of the original concept with the system of indicators. The translation of the original concept into a system of indicators is carried out by transforming the conceptual model into an operational one, consisting of indicators. Indicators in this case are ideal objects of operation (concepts-indicators), replacing real objects of operation (phenomena-indicators) - fragments of reality, endowed with experimental functions of measuring instruments and “representing” the object under study in a research situation. The operational model can be transformed into a mathematical one consisting of variables. By manipulating an operational and mathematical model during the research process, the sociologist obtains data that allows him to expand conceptual ideas about the object and thereby provide feedback to the original concept. The fact that a concept has been operationalized (and not simply defined, at least operationally, interpreted or explicated, etc.) can only be said if a special methodological toolkit has been developed for studying the social object designated and reflected by it (the concept). In the process of operationalization of concepts, the conceptual model of an object is combined with its instrumental model, i.e., the model that is a priori present in any method that is already available and used for research or newly created. Otherwise, the generated tools (a set of methods, procedures, techniques and techniques) will not be suitable for studying exactly the object whose concept has been operationalized. When studying the operationalization of concepts, various approaches are possible, which is largely due to the complex nature of the concept as a specific form of reflecting reality. A social indicator is, in a broad sense, a transmitter of social information. The degree of information content of a social indicator is the main criterion for its assessment and selection. All social indicators can be divided into three classes: sign-symbolic means; observation and measurement equipment; social phenomena and processes. So, for example, the index belongs to the class of “instruments”-measuring devices, and the indicator – to the class of phenomena-characteristics. In a narrow sense, social indicators are those characteristics of a studied or managed social object that mediate the connection between the unobservable and observable characteristics of the object, and ultimately between the object and the subject of cognition or management. In the process of operationalization of concepts, these characteristics (signs of an object), or more precisely, the concepts that reflect them, occupy an intermediate position between the concept of a high level of abstraction, which reflects an object that is not directly observed and not measured, and the concepts of a low level of abstraction (“indicative concepts”), which reflect the available direct observation and measurement of objects - indicators. Thus, the attitude towards work can be decomposed into a number of characteristics: labor productivity, labor initiative, labor discipline, etc. For a particular characteristic, a corresponding indicator and a means of fixing it are indicated. For example, an indicator of labor initiative is rationalization proposals, and the means of recording them is a simple calculation. Social indicators are used both outside science - in management, planning, forecasting (statistical, economic, demographic and other indicators), and inside science, for example, in sociology. In the latter case, they are called sociological, because they are “tied” to the subject of sociology and include the corresponding scientific tools (scales, indices, questions in the questionnaire, etc.). A system of social indicators that describes a particular social object is a kind of operational model that allows one to record its condition and trend. It is built on the basis of a conceptual model of an object, ideological and methodological principles adopted in one or another social science, and, finally, on the basis of the dominant ideology in society and therefore cannot be ideologically neutral. When determining the nature and function of social indicators, various approaches are used: epistemological, value-normative, semantic, etc.

A social sign is an empirically observed characteristic of the social object being studied, which indirectly (through its own structure, etc.) reveals its certain aspect, property, connection, relationship, interaction. The bearers of this characteristic are social phenomena, things, processes that stand objectively to the object they reveal in relation to reflection, correspondence, designation, replacement, representation (representation), measurement, indicator (indicator). A social sign is a manifester of a property (a set of properties), a transformer of information about it. Through a system of signs, a social object appears outside, appears in the form of social facts. Thus, if a social property characterizes a phenomenon directly, then a social characteristic is the features of its (property) manifestation and, through all this, also expresses certain aspects of the object. The property is hidden (latent), not directly observable, but the sign is observable, it is recorded by means of cognition and can be measured and assessed. Only the manifested, recorded and identified property of a social object becomes its sign. As exponents of properties, social characteristics have different abilities, in terms of completeness and depth, to reflect certain aspects of a given social object. Finally, properties determine the qualitative and quantitative boundary of a social object, and signs testify to it. A social feature can be either a constant and unchanging or a non-constant, situational characteristic of an object, i.e., under changed conditions, the same phenomenon or property can be represented by other features. In addition, social characteristics are divided into qualitative and quantitative, direct and indirect, simple and complex, individual, expressing individual properties of a phenomenon, and aggregate, expressing consolidated properties and groups of objects. They can be inherent in all individual phenomena of a group to the same extent or vary, taking on different meanings for individual phenomena, units of the totality.

A social sign is an important concept in sociology, combining the possibility of ontological, epistemological, statistical, value-normative and other interpretations. The ontological interpretation of this concept captures the objective foundations of a social characteristic; it identifies the characteristic with an objective phenomenon, which expresses through itself a certain property of another phenomenon. In the same regard, the social sign, the social indicator and the empirical indicator are identified with each other. Epistemological interpretation is associated with elucidating the possibilities of forming a social indicator based on a given social characteristic (or a set of them). The point is that in sociological research, not every feature of the phenomenon being studied can be taken as the objective basis of its social indicator. To do this, features are selected from the point of view of which of them most fully express certain properties of the object under study and, therefore, to what extent they can become the meaningful basis of an indicator that is built on the basis of certain theoretical concepts and normative assessments of this object. Thus, the epistemological interpretation of a social sign turns it into a social indicator as a special research, cognitive construct that allows the sociologist to compare theoretical ideas about the properties of the object being studied with their empirical expressions-signs, and to clarify these ideas. Finally, the statistical interpretation of the concept of a social characteristic is based on the understanding of a characteristic as a characteristic of a set and is associated with the fact that sociology primarily studies mass phenomena and, like statistics, characterizes them according to various aggregate characteristics. In line with this interpretation, a social characteristic is measured and elevated to numerical forms (indices). This takes into account the availability of the characteristic for measurement, its significance, weight in the characteristics of the phenomenon under study and the ability to become an “element” of the index. By identifying the intensity of manifestation of the characteristic under consideration using statistical means, researchers judge the property of the object reflected in it, the object itself.

A social indicator is 1) the same as a social indicator, 2) a characteristic (sign) of a studied or managed social object that is accessible to observation and measurement (see Social sign). In a research situation, the social indicator is “replaced”; other characteristics of the object are discovered that are usually inaccessible to observation and measurement (latent variables). Thus, by observing a person’s behavior and recording his actions, we can judge his interests. Behavior can be expanded into a specific multidimensional variable, that is, a space of characteristics that can be quantified. If a person regularly visits the theater, then we can assume that he shows interest in it. A necessary condition for choosing a social indicator is the presence of a connection (it does not matter - direct or indirect) between the social indicator (action) and the characteristic that, in the opinion of the researcher, it should detect (interest). A social indicator can be either the characteristic itself, or some of its value, or a measure of change in this value. From a number of social indicators that characterize the object being studied or controlled, the one that “works” better, is more sensitive, and has greater resolution is selected. Thus, as an indicator of the social scientific and technical level of production in a country, one can choose the number of engineers and scientists in it or the number of operating computers, personal computers and launched satellites. However, it is obvious that, other things being equal (scientists and engineers have the same training, computers and satellites are equally advanced in design), the best social indicators will be: the cost of training the former and the cost of producing the latter. Thus, the choice of social indicators requires special scientific justification. Sometimes, for scientific and practical purposes, a combination of indicators is formed - an index. Index (Latin index - list, index, indicator) is an aggregated quantitative indicator that summarizes primary sociological information obtained during measurement using one or more scales. A sociological index, on the one hand, is a way of aggregating, compressing information, presenting it in a form convenient for description and interpretation, on the other hand, it is a way of moving from the theoretical to the empirical level of research, a way of constructing an empirical indicator of a certain theoretical concept. From the point of view of the degree of aggregation, one can, firstly, single out one-dimensional indices obtained by summarizing information collected on the basis of one measurement scale (for example, the index of job satisfaction of employees of a given enterprise, calculated on the basis of data from a direct survey on the degree of job satisfaction), and multidimensional, summarizing information obtained using a number of scales (for example, the same job satisfaction index can be built on the basis of summarizing information about satisfaction with various aspects of work). Secondly, individual indices can be distinguished, describing one respondent or one object in the population, and group indices, characterizing a group of respondents or a group of objects (including aggregate indices, characterizing the totality of respondents or other social objects as a whole). Based on the method of construction, indexes can be divided into two groups. These are indices obtained as a result of the application of mathematical methods of multidimensional information analysis (automatic classification, factorial, latent structural analysis, etc.), and indices constructed on the basis of preliminary meaningful analysis of information using relatively simple aggregation algorithms (logical circuits, conversion tables, selected researcher analytical functions). This division is not strict and reflects the extent to which a priori knowledge and substantive considerations are used in the construction of indices. One of the special types of sociological indices are sociometric indices that characterize the structure of interpersonal relationships in small social groups (see Sociometry. Methods for analyzing sociological information).

Interpretation of research results

To derive a hypothesis and determine the exact meaning of a phenomenon, research is carried out. They are aimed at studying, identifying patterns, and making accurate forecasts. Thus, hypotheses gradually turn into true knowledge, which is scientifically confirmed. And after each study, an interpretation is carried out, that is, an analysis of the data obtained.

Since there are cases when specially organized conditions lead to a different, unplanned result, numerous studies are carried out here to understand what influences the change in results, which is also interpreted and inferred as true knowledge.

The following types of research are distinguished:

1. Genetic – when the evolution of the genetic component is studied over a long period of time.
2. Structural – when the structural components of a subject are explained. Long-term observations are made here to detect various changes.
3. Functional – when the dynamics of the development of a phenomenon are observed in order to determine connections with the environment, influence, etc.
4. Complex - when the subject is studied at various levels.
5. Systemic – when individual components that make up a single system are studied.

Stages of interpretation

In the interpretation of any information, as a rule, there is a certain sequence of actions:

• assumptions;
• determining the reliability of information;
• reflection and penetration into information, which often reflects the personal position of the prospector, is considered a consequence of standards, bias, etc.;
• organization of information;
• comparison with data from other sources, with other situations and conditions;
• direct multidimensional analysis;
• identifying root cause and effect;
• synthesis;
• final conclusions;
• evaluation of information to prove or refute a research hypothesis.

What it is?

Translated from Latin, the word interpretatio means explanation, interpretation).

This definition of the term gives us an explanatory philosophical dictionary. In humanitarian knowledge, it is used in a meaning close to the word “understanding”

Synonyms for interpretation:

1. interpretation;
2. a comment;
3. clarification of meaning;
4. transcript.

Perceiving information from the environment, each person analyzes it in his own way. Of course, there are ideas and concepts that are common to everyone, but since all people have individual thinking, the same phenomena are interpreted differently.

Often this process occurs unconsciously (at the level of sensations, moral norms, rules of behavior laid down in childhood, and worldview). When a person uses his knowledge to decipher any data, the interpretation is directional in nature (for example, translations of texts from foreign or complex scientific languages ​​into a native or easier to understand language).

You can interpret anything: information, events, dreams, laws, musical and literary works, films and even analyses.

What is interpretation?

By the term interpretation, the online magazine psytheater.com understands the interpretation of a phenomenon. Naturally, this process occurs in all spheres of human life. People engage in interpretation in literature, psychological research, mathematics, and philosophy. Even medical professionals who conduct diagnostic examinations of patients are involved in the interpretation of the results that are obtained when displaying a picture on a monitor or when examining a body particle under a microscope.

A man sees something. Now he needs to interpret it, that is, explain it in such a way as to understand what it is, what properties it has, how dangerous it is, how one can interact with it, etc. We can say that for the first time a person began to study the world around him only for achieving two goals:

1. Understand for yourself what could be a danger to him.
2. Understand how you can provide yourself with everything you need: shelter, food, warmth, etc.

A person proceeds solely from his own needs when he begins to study the world around him. First, he must protect himself, so he carefully studies all the phenomena and objects that surround him. Then he is puzzled by the question of satisfying his basic needs. Here he must, with minimal effort, use the world around him in such a way that he can feed himself, clothe himself, provide him with a home and warmth.

When basic needs are satisfied, a person can set other goals for himself, which he may not achieve (they will not affect his life expectancy), but will significantly enrich his existence. Here a person sets various goals that can be combined into one big concept - happiness.

One goes to drink beer, and the second condemns him. She goes to a nightclub to dance, and he thinks she is a flighty woman. He goes out with friends, but she doesn’t let him in because she thinks that he will cheat on her. Someone had an interesting time at the bowling club, and an angry relative is waiting for him at home, ready to tell him how bad and expensive his hobby is.

You see, it turns out that a person is having fun. This person could be you, a loved one, a child, a relative or a friend. But there are always people around him who are dissatisfied with the method of his entertainment that he has chosen for himself. “Grown women should not go to nightclubs”, “A man should bring money to his family, and not spend it with friends on gatherings over beer”, “A woman should raise children, and not communicate with her friends all day long”, etc. Do you see how a person’s wings are cut off? He has fun, makes himself happy, but his loved one does not understand him, beginning to impose on him his idea of ​​​​how he should have fun.

“An adult woman should go to theaters or museums if she wants to have fun”, “A man should enjoy being at home all day with his family”, “A woman should enjoy her children and communicate with them, and not with older ladies, just like her,” etc. A close person begins to impose his opinion on the “reveler” regarding how he should have fun. That is, his way of having fun does not suit the person, so he is trying to tell him how to have fun. But, excuse me, if something else makes you happy, it doesn’t mean that all people should have the same fun! Moreover, each person has his own understanding of what can cheer him up. And if sitting at home every day makes you happy, then it can simply kill another person mentally.

Different understandings of what makes a person happy lead to numerous quarrels. A man drinks beer and a woman drinks him. What if in this way a man makes himself a happy person? It turns out that his beloved woman is depriving him of happiness with her own hands and threats.

“You love it! Don't say you don't love me. I know that you love,” this is the meaning of the words conveyed by those people who begin to condemn the leisure time of their loved ones and say how they need to rest. “If you don’t like going to the theater, then we’ll force you,” “If you don’t like being a teetotaler, then we’ll intimidate you into loving it,” “If you don’t like sitting with children, then we’ll shame you so that you feel bad about how you’re having fun.” - this is what people do who do not understand the hobbies and entertainment of their loved ones.

It's not your sadness to live someone else's life. This is a slight paraphrase from the proverb “It’s not your sadness to rock other people’s children.” Just as it is none of your business how other parents raise their children, it is none of your business how another person amuses himself. If you can’t cheer him up, then let him have fun the way he wants. Your hobbies may not excite the other person. Your fun may not please your loved one. Understand this. Otherwise, when you start having fun, this person will deservedly begin to condemn your leisure time, imposing his opinion.

People are constantly interpreting. And since they still have the habit of imposing their understanding of the world on other people, this causes numerous conflicts and quarrels.

The interpretation can be called:

1. By paraphrasing.
2. An explanation.
3. Interpretation of the meaning.
4. An explanation or clarification.

Interpretation is a way of transforming information that is given to a person into a meaning that is understandable to him, which he can then use in the direction he needs.

Interpretation of this in literature

In literature, interpretation of a text is needed in order to interpret its meaning as intended by the author, clarify hidden connections and describe their meaning.

The same text can be interpreted many, many times in different ways, so objectivity in interpretation is not very significant. The interpretation of a work is greatly influenced by the personality of the interpreter; the entire significance of the interpretation may depend on his prejudices and attitudes. The era to which it belongs also matters.

Because of this, the interpretation of the text is always relative.

Examples of text interpretation: the person who interpreted the text lived in the old century, and he was influenced by social and historical events that left their mark on the very understanding of the text; contemporaries look at the same work in a completely different way; they interpret it through their understanding in the modern sense. They could see a meaning in the text that their predecessor had no idea about, but at the same time they could not fully understand his thoughts. In what historical era, no matter what influence the person interpreting was under, the true meaning that was intended by the author can never be comprehended by anyone.

Interpretation of literature has its own characteristics in different historical periods.

In antiquity, interpretation was used to reveal the meanings of allegories and metaphors that permeate literary works. Not only the text in general was interpreted, but also the connections between elements in the text.

In the Middle Ages, interpretation, as a fundamental method for understanding a text, was mainly applied to the interpretation of Holy Scripture and biblical texts.

In the modern era, the meaning of interpretation became even broader, it acquired a more philosophical direction and began to be applied in different directions.

Interpretation is the awareness of the underlying meaning in the author’s work, where it is the main source of the idea of ​​the given text. And in order to better understand what the author meant, it is necessary to know his personality. Studying the author's biography will make it possible to feel what influence he was under, what might have bothered him at that time, such a transfer contributes to high-quality interpretation.

Interpretation also began to be understood as deciphering a text code, which is represented by the structural components of the text. In this case, the meaning does not come from the personality of the author and his attitudes. The text is quite self-sufficient and has an objective structural character; these characteristics contain real meaning.

Interpretation in the postmodern approach was understood as a technique through which a literary text is filled with meaning. In this approach, the work itself is not intended by the author; its meaning is not determined by any structural components or characteristics of the text. The meaning of a work is understood in the process of reading, that is, the reader himself fills the text with a meaning that he personally understands through the prism of his personal characteristics and life experiences, which influence understanding and awareness of the meaning. But this meaning is true only at the moment when the reading process occurs, because, in essence, there is no single meaning in the work if it changes from one reader to another. Coming from all such different meanings of interpretation, it is difficult to reduce it to a single scientific meaning and create a definition.

Interpretation is an individual perception of a literary work, providing it with meaning, thanks to the intellectual capabilities of what is being read. Sometimes one text is so often interpreted in many ways that, on the one hand, it interferes with its perception, since some thoughts of previous interpreters have betrayed their influence, but on the other hand, it means the richness of the text, its interest and meaning.

Based on the above, the concept of interpretation as a scientific method is not defined in the literature. It is simply understood as a way through which meaning is interpreted through the interpreter’s own value system, who himself picks the field of interpretation.

We are on Telegram! Subscribe and be the first to know about new publications!

Meaning of the word interpretation

(lat.

interpretatio)

☼ interpretation, explanation, clarification of any cultural object - literary text, philosophical thought, objects of archaeological excavations, etc.

1)

contain a general scientific method with fixed rules for translating formal symbols and concepts into language. knowledge;

2)

in the humanities, interpretation of texts, meaning-making and meaning-reading operations, studied in semantics and epistemology of understanding;

3) a way of being, which exists by understanding.

By highlighting themselves. chapter dedicated to I. in the foundation. study “Human. knowledge, its sphere and boundaries,” B. Russell emphasized that the question of information was undeservedly treated with disdain. Everything seems definite, undeniably true as long as we remain in the field of mathematics. formulas; but when it becomes necessary to interpret them, the illusory nature of this certainty, the very accuracy of this or that science, is revealed, which requires a special study of the nature of interpretation. For Russell, I. (empirical or logical) consists of finding the most accurate possible, def. meanings or their systems for a particular statement. In modern physico-mathematical disciplines of theory in a broad sense can be defined as the establishment of a system of objects that make up the subject area of ​​meaning of the terms of the theory under study. She appears as logical. procedure for identifying the denotations of abstract terms, their “physical. meaning." One of the common cases of I. is contained. presentation of the original abstract theory on the subject area of ​​another, more concrete, empirical one. the meanings of the cut are established. I. occupies the center. place in deductive sciences, theories of which are built with the help of axiomatic, genetic. or hypothetico-deductive methods. In cognitive sciences, which study the phenomenon of knowledge in the aspects of obtaining, storing, processing, clarifying questions about what types of knowledge and in what form a person has, how knowledge is represented and used by him, knowledge is understood as a process, result and installation in their unity and simultaneity. I. relies on knowledge about the properties of speech, human. language in general (presumption of interpretability of a specific expression); on local knowledge of the context and situation, global knowledge of conventions, rules of communication and facts that go beyond the boundaries of language and communication. The I. procedure includes putting forward and verifying hypotheses about the meaning of a statement or text as a whole, which presupposes, in the terminology of cognitive science, “objects of expectation”: I. text, internal. the world of the author (according to the interpreter), as well as the interpreter’s idea of ​​his own inner. the world and the author’s idea of ​​internal. the world of the interpreter (the interpreter’s doubly refracted idea of ​​his own inner world). Personal and interpersonal aspects are significant for I.: interaction between the author and the interpreter, decl. interpreters of the same text, as well as between the intentions and hypotheses about the intentions of the author and the interpreter. The interpreter's intentions regulate the course of interpretation and ultimately affect its depth and completeness.

In the humanities, information is a fundamental method of working with texts as sign systems. Text as a form of discourse and an integral functional structure is open to the variety of meanings that exist in the system of social communications. It appears in the unity of explicit and implicit, non-verbalized meanings, literal and secondary, hidden meanings; an event in his life “always develops at the boundary of two consciousnesses, two subjects” (M. Bakhtin). Making sense and reading the meanings of a text are traditionally designated by two terms - understanding and interpretation. Understanding is interpreted as the art of comprehending the meaning of signs transmitted by one consciousness to another, while interpretation, respectively, as the interpretation of signs and texts recorded in writing (P. Ricoeur). In the 19th century the transition from specific hermeneutics to a general theory of understanding aroused interest in the question of the multiplicity of types of information represented in all the humanities. Grammar and psychological were highlighted. and history I. (Schleiermacher, Beckh, Droysen), discussion of the essence and correlation of which has become the subject of both philologists and historians. Grammar I. was carried out in relation to each element of the language, the word itself, its grammatical structure. and syntactic. forms in the conditions of time and circumstances of use. Psychological I. was supposed to reveal the ideas, intentions, and feelings of the reporter caused by the content of the reported text. Histor. I. assumed the inclusion of the text in real relationships and circumstances. Droysen in “The Historian” is one of the first to consider the methodology of constructing understanding and history as the defining principles of history as a science. He distinguishes four types of interpretation: pragmatic, based on “remnants of action. once circumstances"; I. conditions (space, time and means, material and moral); psychological., which has the task of revealing “the volitional act that caused a given fact,” and I. ideas, “filling those gaps that are left by psychological. AND.". According to Shpet, psychological. moments in Droysen’s reasoning, in fact, are not such, since the historian himself emphasizes that a person as a person is realized only in communication and thereby ceases to be psychological. subject, but becomes a social and historical object. Those who understand I., directed at him, cease to be psychological and become historical; the nature of the latter, however, remains undisclosed by Droysen.

A significant enrichment and development of the concept of philosophy occurred in philosophy. context, where problems other than those in philology and history were posed, and new meanings and meanings of I. Not belonging to hermeneutics were identified. direction, Nietzsche used the concept of I. for a fundamentally different approach to understanding the world, which he called “perspectivism.” Viewing knowledge as the will to power, he assumes that our needs apply logic, interpret the world through “schematization for the purpose of mutual understanding,” and this makes it accessible to formulation and calculation. This approach explains to us why many interpretations are possible. There is always a “gap” between what the world is—infinitely changing and becoming—and stable, “understandable” patterns and logic. It is always possible to offer new meanings, “perspectives” and ways to “place phenomena according to definition.” categories", i.e. not only texts, but reality itself is open to endless ideas, and “rational thinking is interpretation according to a scheme, from which we cannot free ourselves.” A person “puts perspective”, i.e. constructs the rest of the world from itself, measures it with its strength, touches it, shapes it, evaluates it, and the value of the world turns out to be rooted in our I. The relationship between I. and values ​​was also considered by M. Weber

, for which the interpretation of the linguistic “meaning” of the text and its interpretation in the sense of “value analysis” are logically different. acts. Making a “value judgment” about a specific object, in turn, cannot be equated to logical. operations of subsuming a generic concept. It only means that the interpreter occupies a def. conc. position and realizes or brings to the consciousness of others the uniqueness and individuality of this text. For history texts, the difference between axiological and causal information is significant, since the correlation with value only poses tasks for causal research, becomes its prerequisite, but should not replace the identification of history itself. causes, causally relevant components as a whole. The question of I. worldview (Weltanschauung) is considered as a special problem in the sociology of knowledge of Mannheim, who pointed out the difficulties arising in connection with the need to translate non-theories. experience into the language of theory, “unfreezing authentic experience in the freezing stream of reflection.” The impression remains that with such an I. worldview, theor. the categories turn out to be inadequate, distorting the direct authentic experience on which they are superimposed.

I. was developed most thoroughly as the basic concept of hermeneutics (see Hermeneutics), starting with the rules of I. texts, the methodology of the spiritual sciences and ending with the ideas of understanding and I. as fundamental ways of human beings. being. Dilthey, combining the general principles of hermeneutics from Flacius to Schleiermacher and developing the methodology of history. knowledge and cultural sciences, showed that the connection between experience and understanding, which lies at the basis of the spiritual sciences, cannot fully ensure objectivity, therefore it is necessary to turn to artificial and systematic methods. It was precisely this systematic understanding of “long-term imprinted life discoveries” that he called interpretation or I. Understanding of part of history. process is possible only thanks to its reference to the whole, and universal history. reviewing the whole presupposes understanding the parts. According to Shpet, one of the first to implement history. an outline of hermeneutics, the problem of understanding appears as a problem of rationalism, on the basis of which the place, role and significance of any rational-objective information, and questions about the types of information, incl. history and psychological lie in this problem. Heidegger gave brilliant examples of I. philol. and philosopher texts by Anaximander, Descartes, Kant and many others. etc., guided, in particular, by the principle known to Kant “to understand the author better than he understood himself.” At the same time, he committed an “ontological turn,” deduced the hermeneutic. I. beyond the analysis of texts into the sphere of “existential prestructure of understanding”; distinguished between primary pre-reflective understanding as the very way of human being, that horizon of pre-understanding from which one can never free oneself, and secondary understanding that arises at the reflexive level as philosophy. or philol. I. Secondary I. is rooted in primary preunderstanding; Every interpretation that contributes to understanding already has an understanding of what is being interpreted. Hence the special significance of pre-knowledge, pre-conception for I., which was fully realized later by Gadamer, who argued that “legitimate prejudices” reflecting history. tradition, form the initial orientation of our perception, are included in the “fulfillment of traditions”, and therefore are a necessary prerequisite and conditions for understanding and understanding. In general, in hermeneutics, as it becomes philosophical, the “field” of information is expanding, the edges are now not reduced only to the method of working with texts, but deals with fundamental human problems. being-in-the-world. The identity of the elements of language and words has also changed its nature, since language is not considered as a product of the subjective activity of consciousness, but, according to Heidegger, as a “house of being,” as something to which one must “listen,” being itself speaks through it. For Gadamer, language appears as a universal environment, in which preconceptions and prejudices are deposited as “schematisms of experience”, it is here that understanding is realized and the method of this implementation is I. The time distance between the text and the interpreter is considered by him not as a hindrance, but as an advantage of the position, from this you can give new meanings to the author’s messages. The possibility of a plurality of information poses the problem of truth, “correctness,” and hypothetical nature of information; it turns out that the question of truth is no longer a question of method, but a question of the manifestation of being for an understanding being. Noting this point, Ricoeur, whose ideas lie in the vein of “ontological. turn,” offers such an interpretation of I., which connects truth and method and realizes the unity of the semantic, reflexive and existential plans of I. He believes that the plurality and even conflict of I. are not a disadvantage, but an advantage of the understanding that expresses the essence of I. , and we can talk about textual polysemy by analogy with lexical one. In any I., understanding presupposes explanation to the extent that explanation develops understanding. Habermas, ch. arr. in the work “Knowledge and Interests”, critically examined hermeneutic. approaches to information and sought to reveal the nature of interpretive research in the social sciences. Agreeing with Gadamer that social analysts are imbued with cultural history. context and tradition, he criticizes the dogmatic acceptance of the power of traditions in social history. If we rely on “critical” (reflexive) theory or ideology, aiming at discovering hidden, unconscious structures in the course of history, then hermeneutics can become a scientific form of history, claiming to discovery of meanings in the pre-scientific context of traditions. The problem of I. was also discussed in the discussion (Paris, 1981) of Gadamer and Derrida, behind whom stand two radically different ones. “interpretations of interpretations,” texts, language itself - like “two faces of Socrates” (J. Risse). Derrida back in 1967 in Art. “Structure, sign and play in the discourse of the humanities,” which is prefaced by Montaigne’s words: “The interpretation of interpretations is a more important matter than the interpretation of things,” characterizes two ways of interpreting interpretation, structure, sign and play. The first method: the desire to decipher some truth or principle, “subject neither to the game nor to the discipline of the sign,” when the very need to interpret appears as a sign of “exile.” The second method ignores the beginning, the game claims, trying to stand “beyond man and humanism”; follows the path indicated by Nietzsche, and does not seek to see in ethnography (see Ethnography) some kind of “inspiration of a new humanism.” Both of these methods of interpretation, despite the fact that their simultaneity and a certain “ambiguous symbiosis” are felt, divide the field of the humanities between themselves. Their mutual irreconcilability is intensifying, but the time has not yet come to choose between them, since we are still in historicity, and it is also necessary to find common ground for them, as well as “the difference underlying their irreconcilable difference.” Subsequently, the epistemology of history, at the intersection of humanitarian knowledge and hermeneutics, developed in the direction of clarifying the canons of history, its validity and uncertainty, and its relationship with criticism and reconstruction. The canons were, in particular, the principle of autonomy of the object, its reproduction in the integrity of the internal. connections and in the context of the intellectual “horizon” of the interpreter (E. Betty). The theory of justification was proposed by E. Hirsch, based on the work of linguists, hermeneutics, and philosophers of science. Speaking “in defense of the author,” he revealed the most acute aspects of this problem: if the meaning of the text changes not only for the reader, but even for the author himself, then can we consider that “expulsion” of the author’s meaning of the text is a normative principle of literature; if the textual meaning can change in any respect, then how to distinguish justified, correct I. from erroneous; Is it possible to believe that the meaning intended by the author does not matter, and therefore only what his text “says”? The last problem is especially difficult to solve, because the author's meaning is not fully accessible, and the author himself does not always know what he had in mind and wanted to say when creating a specific concept. text. In support of this, Hirsch recalls a famous passage from the Critique of Pure Reason, where Kant, reflecting on Plato, noted that we sometimes understand an author better than he does himself if he did not define a concept precisely enough and because of this “said or even thought contrary to his own intentions.” Traditions are critically interpreted. psychological problem and history I. meanings, the legitimacy of the positions of “radical historicism”, based on the belief that only our own “cultural essences” have authentic immediacy for us, therefore we cannot correctly understand and interpret the texts of the past, we essentially re-create them “ we invent, we construct. Without accepting this argument, Hirsch argues that the entire understanding of “cultural essences” not only of the past, but also of the present, their understanding is, to one degree or another, a creation, a construction, therefore we can never be sure that we have correctly understood and interpreted how texts of the past and present, they always remain open. Understanding the nature of validity of I. presupposes preliminary solution of such methods. problems such as the relationship between understanding, information and criticism; principles of justification, its logic, as well as methods, canons, rules, objectivity of I., whose vision was proposed by Hirsch. Meaning of methodol. principles increases if we turn to a narrower sphere - scientific or scientific-philosophical. text subject to I. historian. Thus, Vizgin, understanding I. as giving a clear meaning to a text that is “silent” without interpretation by the historian, identifies three levels of comprehension and, accordingly, three classes of I. text, differing in methodol. features. The first level of comprehension is understanding the text as an element of a system of author’s texts, its unified concept, which constitutes the task of systematically AND.; second level - external and internal. history I., taking into account the context and conditions, the evolution of the author’s texts, their connection with the texts of other thinkers; the third level of comprehension and information is based on “extra-textual realities”, extra-scientific data, practical events and meanings associated with cultural, social and economic. institutions, politics, religion, philosophy, art. This is schematic. I., reading into a scientific text “extra-textual” and extra-scientific meanings of practice and culture that underlie generalized schemes of subject activity. An appeal to the concept of a scheme developed by Kant as “an idea of ​​the general way in which the imagination delivers an image to a concept” can be fruitful for understanding the legitimacy and objectivity of I. The scheme gives subject-activity content to the abstractions of the theory, thereby contributing to objective I. The idea of ​​schemes can help in analysis of difficulties that arise when interpreting texts that cannot be eliminated by ordinary traditions. methods of understanding them, including systematically. and history I. In this case, the meaning of individual authorship seems to recede into the background, they contain. structures of knowledge turn out to be not so much a direct personal invention, but rather patterns of culture and activity; they have the character of relatively stable working hypotheses and are not a product of individual psychology. empirical individuals. The synthesis of all three levels of comprehension and, accordingly, classes of information, reflecting the genesis and history of knowledge, can be the basis of the methodology and “technique” of information as a logical. reconstruction of concrete humanitarian text.

The I. procedure is considered as basic in ethnomethodology (see Ethnomethodology), where hidden, unconscious, unreflective mechanisms of communication are identified and interpreted as a process of exchange of meanings in everyday speech. Communication between people contains a larger volume of significant information than its verbal expression, since it must also contain tacit, background knowledge, hidden meanings and meanings implied by the participants in communication, which is what the special requires. interpretation and I. These features of the object of ethnography are taken into account, in particular, by G. Garfinkel in his “Studies in Ethnomethodology” (1967), where he seeks to substantiate ethnomethodology as a general methodology of the social sciences, and considers I. as its universal method. At the same time, social reality becomes a product of interpretative activity using schemes of everyday consciousness and experience. In search of an “interpretative theory of culture,” K. Geertz believes that culture should be analyzed not by experimental science, busy with identifying laws, but by interpretive theory, busy with searching for meanings. In the work of an ethnographer, the main thing is not so much observation as explication and even “explication of explications,” i.e. identifying the implicit and its I. The ethnographer is faced with many complex conceptual structures, mixed and superimposed on one another, disordered and unclear, the meaning of which he must understand and adequately interpret. The essence of anthropology. And. consists in the fact that it must be carried out based on the same positions from which people themselves interpret their experience, from what the informants themselves mean, or what they think they mean. Anthropol. and ethnographic the work appears, therefore, as I., and I. of the second and third order, since the first I. can only be created by a person directly belonging to the culture being studied. A serious problem in this case becomes the verification or assessment of information, the degree of persuasiveness of the cut is measured not by the volume of uninterpreted material, but by the power of scientific imagination, which reveals to the scientist the life of a foreign people. Such a significant and fairly free activity of the subject-interpreter, not only in ethnography, but also in all other areas where information is widely used, causes a critical attitude towards it, to which books are even dedicated. Modern Amer. writer and cultural researcher S. Sontag in the collection of essays “Against Interpretation” (1966), in the essay that gave the title to the entire book, negatively assesses the role of history in art and culture. Her position: a work of art should be shown for what it is, and not explained what it means; it is necessary to strive for “pre-theoretical simplicity”, when art does not need to justify the interpreter. One of the reasons for the appearance of I. is to reconcile ancient texts with “modern” texts. demands: the rough features of Homer's Zeus and his violent clan were transferred to the plane of allegory; Philo of Alexandria interpreted the story. Bible stories as “spiritual paradigms”; forty years of wandering in the desert - an allegory of liberation, suffering and salvation; carried out Talmudic and Christian “spiritual” interpretations of erotica. "Songs of Songs." I. appears as a radical strategy for preserving an old valuable text, striving to build a respectful allegorical one over the literal text. Modern I.’s style is to unearth what is “behind” the text, to find the true subtext. Famous and influential. doctrines - Marxist and Freudian - are “developed systems of hermeneutics, aggressive, shameless theories of I.”. Observed phenomena are taken into brackets, it is necessary to find the true content underneath them, the hidden meaning means to interpret, reformulate the phenomenon, find its equivalent. I.'s assessment must be historical: in some cultural contexts it will liberate. act, in others it is a reactionary, cowardly and suffocating activity. It is the latter, according to Sontag, that dominates today, “interpretive fumes around art poison our perception,” I. “tames” the work, makes art “tame, cozy,” and adapts it to the tastes of the average person. “Difficult” authors, like Kafka, Beckett, Proust, Joyce and others, “are surrounded by interpreters like leeches,” “covered with a thick plaster of I.”, I. turns the work into an object for use, for placement in the scheme of categories. In modern a culture undermined by hypertrophy of the intellect, interpretation is the revenge of the intellect on art, on the world, because to interpret means to dry up and impoverish the world, to turn it into a “ghostly world of meanings.” The desire to escape from I. gave rise to hostility towards the content of his traditions. understanding, hence abstract art, symbolism, formalism, etc. Sontag sees the way out in the purity, spontaneity, and transparency of works of art. “Transparency means experiencing the light of the thing itself, the thing as it is.” Respectable, but naive and utopian. Sontag's desire to “eradicate” I. seems to be akin to the faith of a naive-realist. philosophy into the ability to know a thing “as it really is.” But unlike knowledge, where it is impossible to free yourself from the “shadow” of the person who knows, in art there is always salvation - turning to the work itself without intermediaries-interpreters. They are required only in the case of scientific-theoretical. research into works of art, as in scientific knowledge in general. Here I. texts and hermeneutics as its theory turn out to be very fruitful, which is confirmed today by research in the field of arts. intelligence and the role of the computer in cognition. Thus, T. Winograd and F. Flores proceed from the fact that interpretive activity permeates our entire life and that in research. program “Artificial Intelligence” (AI) to realize what it means to think, understand and act, it is necessary to recognize the role and understand the nature of AI. Based on the ideas of Heidegger and Gadamer, which were developed by hermeneutics. I.’s idea went beyond the analysis of texts and included it in the fundamentals of human. cognition, they study AI in the context of the tasks of the AI ​​program, which determines the relevance and universal synthetic. the nature of this fundamental method.

Lit.

: Bakhtin M.M. Aesthetics of verbal creativity. M., 1986; Gadamer H.-G. Truth and method: Fundamentals of philosophical hermeneutics. M., 1988; Weber M. Critical. Research in the field of logic of cultural sciences // Culturology. XX century Anthology. M., 1995; Shpet G. G. Hermeneutics and its problems // Context. Lit.-theor. research. M., 1989-1992; Ricoeur P. Conflict of interpretations. Essays on hermeneutics. M., 1995; Kubryakova E.S., Demyankov V.3. and others. A brief dictionary of cognitive terms. M., 1996; Sontag S. Thought as passion. Favorite essays from the 1960s and 70s. M., 1997; Heidegger M. Being and time. M., 1997; BoeckhA. Encyklopadie und Methodologie der philologischen Wissenschaften. Lpz., 1877; Birt Th. Kritik und Hermeneutik. Nebst Abriss des antiken Buchwesens. Munch., 1913; Mannheim K. Essays on the Sociology of Knowledge. L., 1952; Droysen JG Historik. Vorlesungen fiber Enzyklopadie und Methodologie der Geschichte. Munch., 1960; Hirsch E. Validity in Interpretation. New Haven; L., 1967; Garfmkel H. Studies in Ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, NY, 1967; Habermas J. Erkenntnis und Interesse. Fr./M., 1968; Geertz C. The Interpretation of Cultures. NY, 1973; Winograd T., Flores F. Understanding Computers and Cognition: A New Foundation for Design. Norwood, New Jersey. 1987.

L.A. Mikeshina.

Cultural studies of the twentieth century. Encyclopedia. M.1996

Step-by-step instructions for performing interpretation

1. Study well the work whose interpretation you need to write. As you study, record more important and interesting points in the test that can help you with your analysis. Quotes from the work of art must be included in the interpretation, therefore, in order not to waste time on a repeated search, it is better to record them immediately.

2. Therefore, you need to build a visual plan for your work, which will include the theme of the text, the writer’s idea, the idiostyle features of the writer, the characteristics of the images of the main characters and compositional features. Due to the genre specificity, parts of the plan may be subject to change, decrease in volume or be replaced by others. For example, if you need to interpret a text about nature, then, of course, the characterization of the images of the main characters will be absent in your plan.

3.Next, carefully check each aspect of the analysis. Try to split your analysis into parts as little as possible. Do not make sharp transitions from topic to idea, from idea to composition features, and so on, you should have smooth logical transitions.

4. When highlighting a topic, do not make hasty and unambiguous conclusions. Think carefully, justify your point of view, because you can make a very big mistake. After all, fiction deals with many different topics that are very important for a particular time.

5. Also, a difficult task will be to determine the author’s intention. It happens that famous literary scholars who have devoted many years to studying the work of a writer cannot come to the same opinion regarding the idea of ​​a particular work. Most often this occurs due to the writer’s lifetime contradictory messages and ambiguous interpretation of the literary work.

6. If your work is related to such a controversial text, then it is better to first note the views and words of the author on this issue, and then give your personal opinion.

7. To judge the features of a composition, it is first necessary to identify the standard structure of the composition, which should include: exposition, development of actions, plot, denouement, climax. Also, an epilogue and a prologue will be optional, but very significant elements.

8. You can rely on the absence or presence of a specific component of the composition. You can also focus on the role each part plays.

9. To describe the characteristics of the main characters, you can rely on the principle of their complete difference from each other or any similarity (antihero - hero).

10

When describing the idiostyle features of the author, you can pay attention to the specific vocabulary that he used, intentionally complex or, quite the opposite, simple syntactic structure, reference to folklore, and so on. Your goal is to display all the individuality and peculiarity of the creative manners of a particular writer

Interpretation of this in psychology

Interpretation in psychology is a procedure through which a psychologist (in psychological counseling) explains to the client the meaning of his actions.

Examples of interpretation in psychoanalysis: interpretation of dreams, associations and deep human instincts. The dream definitely makes sense, it can be explained if you trace the person’s current activities, experiences and feelings. All these relationships can be displayed in a symbolic image in a dream, and only through correct interpretation can their deeper meaning be understood. Associations that are caused by sleep are also interpreted. You can check the correctness of the analyst’s interpretation of the dream if a certain reaction occurs in response, corresponding to the interpretation of the psychologist’s words.

Interpretation is especially relevant in psychological studies, where there is complexity in the meaning of a phenomenon. It is based on the exchange of values, meanings and information between sciences, concepts and theories, the use of different types of knowledge, different forms of ideas about the phenomenon under study and its development.

When using empirical data, provisions, patterns, knowledge taken from other sciences, it is necessary to explain their meaning, and also to identify the psychological meaning of this provision. Comparing these two obtained meanings allows us to correctly use the conclusions in psychology and also other sciences. Sometimes it happens that the process of exchanging conclusions and provisions between sciences is very complex, since there are categories that are called the same, but each science gives them different meanings, because of this the true meaning of the concept is lost. Also, the interpreted object already has its primary meaning, and the imposition of another or some meanings on it greatly complicates its perception.

In psychological and pedagogical research, knowledge acquired from other sciences and used in the interpretation of a phenomenon should be of a more humanitarian nature for its better perception and interpretation of their true meaning, which is of immediate significance.

In psychological interpretation, it is necessary to constantly compare scientific knowledge and the empirical experience of each person. Scientific laws cannot fully reveal the full meaning of the phenomenon under study without taking into account the subjective influence of a person.

The use of tests by psychologists in individual counseling is subject to criticism, precisely because the interpretation that is the only one in the test may not fully express all the characteristics of a person.

The interpretation of test results must be clear to the client; for this purpose, one of the interpretation methods can be used.

Descriptive interpretation of test results describes information regarding the current state of the test taker.

Genetic interpretation explains how the subject arrived at the current level of development.

Predictive interpretation focuses on predicting the future.

The evaluative interpretation contains the interpreter's recommendations.

In psychology, the interpretation of a drawing is a frequently used technique; a drawing tells about a person’s deep, hidden feelings. A drawing is a projection of a person’s world outward, in this case onto paper. He can tell about a person’s character, his current experiences, and personal characteristics. The use of drawing in psychology is called the projective technique and is of particular importance among other techniques, since with its use the characteristics of a person are better revealed.

The interpretation of the drawing has two types of indicators, which the psychologist draws attention to in the description. The first is what exactly is drawn, the general composition, the second is how it is drawn, the structural elements of the drawing, the method of drawing

By studying the drawings of one person, then by the way he draws, by style, you can recognize between other drawings.

The interpretation of the drawing attaches great importance to such indicators that do not depend on the overall plot of the drawing. Such structural elements are: location of the drawing, proportions, coloring style, pressure, severity of lines, frequency of erasing, highlighting of details and other components of the drawing that are depicted.

Interpretation and presentation of the results of practical research

The presentation of research results directly depends on the chosen form: text, graph, table.

All text data must comply with the general requirements for the project: font, font size, location on the page, indents, etc. It is important to correctly format all borrowed fragments, quotations, links, footnotes and bibliography.

Graphs and drawings should be clear and understandable, preferably in black and white. If color printing is used, the shades should be restrained.

Example drawing

Each drawing or graph must be numbered and have a short and succinct title that emphasizes the essence and purpose of the material. The number and title of the drawing are placed below it.

Tables must also be properly designed: positioned across the width or center of the page, with the font allowed to be reduced (up to 10-12 pt). The number and name of the element are written in front of it.

Example table

Under each graphic or tabular material, it is advisable to conduct an analysis that will highlight the identified trends. In the text, it is appropriate to mention on what data the analysis was carried out (figure, table, etc.), highlight key aspects (as evidenced by the changes, what affected the object, etc.).

Regardless of the form in which the results are presented, all materials must be understandable and concise. It is advisable to move all bulky files to the “Applications” section. The analysis and conclusions should contain a maximum of useful information and a minimum of “water”. There is no need to analyze each indicator (there can be a lot of them in the table, up to 20-30 pieces). It is enough to identify the most serious changes and deviations, noting them in the appropriate conclusion.

Formulate results and conclusions correctly. Avoid overly complex constructions and unclear terms. Express your thoughts simply and clearly.

Let's turn to poetry

It is difficult to say what is more difficult: interpreting a poetic text or working with prose. A feature of the literary language is the polysemy of words, which significantly complicates understanding: the same concept can be interpreted in completely different ways, especially if it is a word that has changed its lexical meaning over time, for example, “C student” in the modern understanding is a student, getting not the best grades, whereas in the texts of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries we will talk about a coachman who drives three horses.

Another problem in interpreting a poetic text is tropes. Allegories, metaphors and epithets, which are not always understandable to the common man, become a real disaster, especially for a modern schoolchild, to whom many concepts of classical literature are alien. In addition, people perceive phenomena differently, so it is impossible to say with absolute certainty that the interpretation of a poetic text will be correct given the possibility of individual interpretation of concepts.

Exact sciences

In mathematics and other sciences, some interpretation is always implied. Any mathematical theory is based on things that do not need explanation or proof from the very beginning. The simplest example of such a logical structure is Euclidean geometry, which bases its entire base of theorems on several axioms. Each subsequent theorem builds on the previous one. Such a ladder clearly shows the interpretation of theoretical constructs characteristic of modern science in general. The simplicity of the discoveries of the late Renaissance is a thing of the past - since the 19th century, any mathematical discovery began with some assumption that did not require proof. This is how the geometry of Lobachevsky and Riemann arose. Nowadays, interpretation is the operating principle of applied mathematics, which, acting on specified principles, is capable of solving problems of a very high order.

Interpretations in literature

Phraseologisms, polysemantic words, epithets, metaphors and other means of artistic expression of language can make it difficult to understand literary works. The same word can be interpreted in different ways (especially if it has changed its lexical meaning over time).

For example, now the word “factor” is understood as the driving force of a process. But in the 19th century texts it was about a printing house worker: “The factor explained their gaiety by admitting to him that the typesetters were dying of laughter typing Gogol’s book.” Now such a text would cause bewilderment: how can a factor explain something?

Works of art in a foreign language need interpretation. Often translations by different authors differ from each other and do not always accurately reflect the idea contained in the original. Differences arise not only due to the individual or professional qualities of the translator, but also due to unaccounted for national characteristics, regional aspects of the language characteristic of a particular area.

Goethe's poem “The Traveler's Night Song” has been translated into 130 languages. It was translated into Russian by Lermontov, Bryusov, Annensky and Pasternak. Each translation has its own characteristics. No translation is alike.

Correct interpretation of a text can be called an art. A striking example of real mastery is the translations of Shakespeare's sonnets by S. Marshak and B. Pasternak.

The same sonnet is translated differently by writers, and some researchers note that their translation turned out to be more imaginative than the original texts, thanks to the lexical richness of the Russian language.

Who coined the term interpretation

In fact, the authorship was never established. The term came into Russian as a translation of the English word “interpretation”. And that, in turn, was formed from the Latin “interpretatio” (explanation, interpretation). What is known is that the word “interpretation” began to be used in the Middle Ages. Since the 14th century, to be more precise. It was used by interpreters of New Testament and Old Testament texts. The first theory of interpretation in the field of literary criticism was the work of Friedrich Schleiermacher. He introduced the concept of the “hermeneutic circle” only in the 18th century.

@Wikipedia

Formula No. 10.9

If β is equal to zero, this means that the original sample (its histogram) is symmetric: β=0

If β is greater than zero, then the sample is said to have positive or right skewness, that is, a wider range of values ​​is located to the right of the sampling mode: β>0

If β is less than zero, then the sample is said to have negative or left skewness, that is, a wider range of values ​​is located to the left of the sampling mode: β<0

Excess!

One of the measures of variability is kurtosis, which allows us to characterize the degree of peakedness (sharpness) of the distribution of sample elements, that is, an analogue of a histogram. Typically kurtosis is denoted (γ -sigma) and is calculated using the following formula:

Formula No. 10.10

If gamma is greater than zero, then the original data are said to correspond to a peak distribution: γ>0.

If gamma is less than zero, then the original data are said to correspond to a flat top distribution: γ<0.

If gamma is equal to zero, then the original data are said to correspond to the mean-vertex distribution (the normal distribution has this property): γ=0.

If β equals zero, then this means that the original sample (its histogram) is symmetric: β=0 If β is greater than zero, then the sample is said to have a positive or...

Concept of text interpretation

Literary text is one of the most important types of artistic linguistic communication. Hermeneutics deals with questions about the perception and understanding of a text, from the point of view of which understanding is the process of comprehending the meaning of a text, that is, it is a kind of dialogue between the one who speaks and the one who listens, between the one who writes and the one who reads. In the process of this dialogue, the meaning of the text is deobjectified. Such a dialogue can be considered as a process of collision between the worldviews of the author of the text and the interpreter, since the understanding of a work of art is determined by a whole complex of factors of a cultural, linguistic and socio-psychological nature. For each reader there is only what he knows, what is given only to him and the question that arises specifically for him. While reading a text, the reader strives to understand the meaning that the author intended in his work. In other words, the reader is looking for points of contact between the author’s worldview and his own.

As for the perception of facts of a foreign language culture in a text, it is characterized by differences of a nationally specific nature that exist between native and foreign cultures. In this case, the problem of understanding is especially acute, since existing differences cause difficulties in the process of perceiving a foreign language text, and this in turn can lead to an incorrect interpretation of a foreign culture.

Understanding the text consists of separate levels, each of which performs its own function:

• Perception
• Recognizing and understanding the general meaning of a text in a given language
• Understanding the meaning of the text in the context of a given culture
• Dialogical understanding of the meaning of the text, coinciding with its formation.

Based on the concept of M. M. Bakhtin, understanding the text requires going beyond the literal reading. Comprehension can be defined as the interpretation of a text by relating it to other texts and other cultural contexts.

In order to reveal the meaning, and therefore understand a literary text, it should be interpreted accordingly. The interpretation process consists of the following steps:

• Guess, hypothesize, guess
• Drawing conclusions and comparing them with already known data
• Coordination of the first and second stages, as a result of which the meaning of the text is comprehended.

Note 1

Interpretation of a text is the interaction between the inner world of the work and the inner world of the reader.

During interpretation, the reader constructs his own projection of the text. In this projection, in addition to the image of an ideal literary text and mechanisms for comparing the ideal text with the proposed one, there are mechanisms of axiological interpretation that allow the reader to give some kind of integral assessment of the text. The reader brings into the literary text his ideas about life values ​​and life in general. As a result of such an active role of the reader, the existence of several interpretations of one text becomes possible. This is also explained by different levels of readiness for understanding and different characteristics of linguistic individuals. And based on interpretation, you can assess the depth of understanding of the text by the reader.

Interpretation technique in psychological counseling

An interpretation is any statement made to the client that goes beyond what he has said or is aware of. Through interpretation, the counselor attempts to change the client's behavior or perception by actively offering new meanings, reasons, or explanations for behaviors, thoughts, feelings, and defense mechanisms so that the client can see problems in a new way.

This is a technique that introduces the client to a new theoretically based system of views, helps the consultant make clarifications directly during the presentation, and direct the client’s thoughts in the right direction. Interpretations may help the client make connections between seemingly isolated statements about events, may indicate themes or patterns, or may offer a new structure for understanding. Interpretation can be used to help a client focus on a specific aspect of their problem, introduce new meanings, meanings, goals and perspectives, or even provide insight into an underlying problem. A provocative form of interpretation is the technique of confrontation.

Purpose of the technique

The purpose of interpretation is to make accessible and understandable to the client what was previously not realized by him.

Interpretations can help change the client's way of thinking or acting.

When is the technique used?

• The use of interpretations is inappropriate at the beginning of counseling, since at this stage the main thing is to establish trust and contact with the client, and interpretation sometimes causes a negative reaction from the client.
• Interpretation is typically used when the client needs to find alternative ways of thinking or behaving.
• Interpretation is used to reveal underlying feelings.
• The purpose of using hypothesis interpretation is to convey to the client that there are multiple explanations for behavior
• The consultant wants to test his own guesses to make sure they are correct.

Differences in various psychotherapeutic paradigms:

• Interpretation is a central technique of psychoanalysis and other psychodynamic approaches in which the achievement of insight and new understanding is considered therapeutic. In these areas of counseling, almost any action of the client can be interpreted.
• In humanistic and existential therapy, direct interpretations are not used, so as not to relieve the client of responsibility for the process and not to offer the client the consultant’s meanings, instead of searching and developing their own.
• In Gestalt therapy, instead of being interpreted by the consultant, the client is encouraged to interpret his own behavior, taking responsibility for himself.

Interpretation technique

The basis of the technique is repeating after the client part of his story in the psychologist-consultant’s own interpretation. The following forms of interpretation are used:

• Comment is an interpretation or presentation from a new perspective of what was said or demonstrated by the client.

For example: “I would be interested to know if you noticed how tense your body became when you started talking about your boss? This could probably be due to some strong feelings you may have about this person.”

• Generalization is a change in the scale of perception of a situation or a reduction of a number of phenomena into one logical system.

For example:

“The symptoms you described may suggest that such a person may be convinced that the world around him is a scary and dangerous place.”

“What if your anxiety when you're outside, your panic attacks, your avoidance of driving could be linked to an accident you had as a child?”

• Conclusion - emphasizing the cause-and-effect relationships between phenomena.

For example: “It is possible that I have an idea that your feelings of disappointment may be associated with a lack of opportunity for self-fulfillment at your job.”

• Analogies are used when, with the help of a vivid image or metaphor, it is possible to suggest ways to independently find ways to solve problems.

For example : “You described yourself as being caught in a strong whirlwind, which whirled and spun you, and from which you could not get out. Perhaps this description reflects how scared, alone and trapped you feel.”

Main types of interpretations in counseling

• Establishing certain logical connections between those facts and events that, at first glance, are completely unrelated.
• Emphasizing the characteristics of the client’s emotions, feelings, reactions and behavior.
• Analysis and indication of the types of psychological defense and resistance demonstrated by the client during the consultation process.
• Interpretation of transference: explaining to the client that some of the feelings that he experiences towards the consultant and the characteristics of his behavior with him are actually due to relationships with significant others from the past or present life.
• Finding connections between external events of the present and the client’s past experiences.
• Giving the client a different perspective on their problem that they had not considered before.
• Changing the client’s destructive psychological attitudes that he received from others without critical reflection.

Interpretation process

• It is necessary to avoid specific interpretations, giving them tentatively and with empathy.

For example, “You may feel disappointed because you didn’t get a phone call from someone important to you on your birthday.”

• It is necessary to avoid focusing on the underlying problem by giving a leading interpretation. Careful wording is important when using this technique. It is better to formulate the interpretation roughly:

“Could it be that this feeling arises in you in connection with...”

"Is it possible that..."

• Interpretations must be used sparingly - without overusing them in the counseling process.
• The counselor reframes the problem from different perspectives to clarify the problem as clearly as possible and to bring the client to awareness of the key underlying problem.
• Failure to accept an interpretation does not mean that the client is resisting or that the counselor is wrong in his or her interpretation.
• When giving an interpretation, the consultant tries to establish what is relevant to the main problem, emphasizing the most important aspects.

For example: “Of all the things you talked about today, I think the thing that bothers you the most is...”

• By providing interpretation, the counselor encourages the client to view their experience in a more positive way by offering alternative ways of viewing their experience.

For example, “Could it be that even though you may be away from home for a long time, you might enjoy the prospect of meeting new places and people? If I understand correctly, the new appointment will provide you with significant opportunities for career growth and improvement of your financial situation.”

Client's response to interpretation

• The counselor must be able to understand how to decipher the client's emotional reactions to the interpretation in order to determine whether his hypothesis is correct and whether it has achieved its goal. Vivid positive or negative emotions of the client, as well as feigned indifference, usually indicate that the interpretation achieved has achieved the goal.
• Insight from the correct interpretation can take place both in the advisory space and at another time, in another place.
• If the client continues to adhere to his model of interpretation of the problem, the consultant can either refuse the interpretation or offer it later.
• A hostile reaction to an interpretation most often means that it is correct, but to say that it was provided to the client too early, or the insight has not yet occurred.

If it may be difficult for you to cope with existing problems on your own, you can always seek professional psychological help.

Andrey Demkin

What is interpreted in psychology

This concept also has its meaning in psychology.

If you give a person the opportunity to explain the meaning of his experiences, you can interpret the problem simultaneously from the conscious and unconscious. Sometimes people become hostage to their stereotypes, because of which they cannot see the forest for the trees.

Many psychologists work with drawings and tests. Based on the results obtained, conclusions are drawn about the patient’s mental health state.

Attention is paid to details, which are drawn differently for each client.

Dream interpretation is a rather complex method that belongs to the field of social psychoanalysis. To correctly interpret the meanings of sleep, the help of a specialist is necessary. Its decoding allows us to expand our understanding of the sphere of unconscious perception of the surrounding world.

How to analyze research results?

Analysis of the research results is a fundamental point that allows us to evaluate not only the innovative abilities of the author, but also the level of his professionalism and competence. It is the conclusions of the analytical work that lead the researcher to substantiate his hypothesis and the need to test it.

Analyzing the research results

Analysis of the results of the practical research involves the following activities:

• Comparison of initial data with the obtained experimental data (the results of actions taken during the experiment) to determine dynamics, deviations, etc.;
• Comparison of current indicators with standards and current restrictions in order to identify deviations;
• Diagnosis of a real problem based on a specific object, comparison of theoretical and real “symptoms”, forms of its manifestation;
• Evaluation of the research methods used: which of them are the most effective and which require replacement or adjustment, the speed of obtaining results. Optimization of the initial action plan, etc.;
• Determining the correctness of calculations, inaccuracies and errors;
• Statement of the completeness and reliability of the data to obtain guarantees: the research results can be used in practice (how and where), they can change the activities of the object for the better;
• Formation of recommendations for solving the problem, taking into account the current situation and the capabilities of the object.

An analysis of the results obtained should not only emphasize the presence of contradictions and an urgent problem, but also emphasize the practical significance of the work, the possibility of applying the results in life and the changes that they will bring.

Understanding. Meaning of the text

Understanding is the central concept of hermeneutics. According to G. G. Gadamer, understanding is achieved primarily through speech. Understanding is non-mechanical, non-rational and holistic. Understanding is interpersonal in nature and requires “the cognitive talent of the individual.” understanding occurs in direct communication between several people, most often two. This aspect of understanding is primary and most important. Hermeneutics focuses on understanding, which is carried out on the basis of texts, mainly written ones. Thanks to this, hermeneutics is close to philology.

Understanding, according to the judgments of G. G. Gadamer, is not reduced only to the rational sphere, to analysis and logical operations, to the activity of the human intellect. Therefore, understanding is more like artistic creation than scientific work.

Understanding constitutes the unity of two principles. Firstly, there is an intuitive comprehension of the subject directly on the basis of understanding. Then interpretation arises, which is designated by the term “interpretation.” It is thanks to the interpretation of the text that the incompleteness of the initial understanding is overcome, but at the same time, understanding is also misunderstanding.

Interpretation is a secondary component of understanding.

Note 3

The meaning of a text is not only what is put into it by the speaker, consciously or intentionally; the meaning of the text is also what the reader extracts from it.

According to L. S. Vygotsky, the meaning of a word is the totality of what it evokes in human consciousness. Meaning is dynamic, complex, and has several zones of varying stability. That word network in a new context easily changes its meaning. Therefore, statements have many meanings, they can be explicit and hidden, conscious and unconscious. Therefore, the text turns out to be capable of being modified and enriched in various contexts of perception, in particular, in multiple interpretations.

Philosophical Encyclopedia - interpretation

aspect of understanding aimed at the semantic content of texts.
I. as the practice of extracting meaning from texts took place in antiquity (“allegorical” interpretation of texts), in the Middle Ages (biblical exegesis), and in the Renaissance (“text criticism,” “grammar,” lexicography). The provisions of biblical exegesis received theoretical development in romantic aesthetics: F. Schelling pointed out the infinite multiplicity of meanings contained in a work and newly formed in the mind of the reader. I. received categorical status from F. Schleiermacher, who distinguished between the objective (“grammatical”) and subjective (“psychological” or “technical”) sides of I. Both sides of I. determine a single process of understanding: I. of a text from the subjective side presupposes a certain an idea about the author, but this idea can only be formed on the basis of some objective information about his texts. “Grammatical” I. is carried out through the comparative method of comparative analysis of the various meanings of a word in order to establish its meaning in a given context. “Psychological” I. follows a divinatory path, “guessing” the meaning of a word based on studying the spectrum of its meanings, which is specific to a given author. In Dilthey's hermeneutics, I. comes down to comprehending the meaning of a text by switching it into the psychological and cultural context of the author and reconstructing this context within the experience of the interpreter. Husserl argued that the phenomenon of consciousness includes pre-indication, i.e. horizontal consciousness (later called by him the “life world” and essentially acting as a context), which points to further attributes of the object that are outside experience in the proper sense. This is “already a kind of interpretation... we find ourselves involved in a diversity that points to possible new perceptions... and clearly reveals and realizes itself in a series of images and representations.” The phenomenological method proceeds from the fact that the specific integrity of a work (and the corresponding act of direct, undifferentiated perception) arises as a result of the interaction of a number of ontological “layers”, as well as dynamic “phases” of the unfolding of the text. The task of the interpreter is to make these layers and phases explicit.

I., within the framework of the phenomenology of consciousness, usurps independence outside of its presented content and makes it virtually unlimited. M. Heidegger, moving from the phenomenology of consciousness to phenomenological hermeneutics, pointed out that the point is not in tracing, observing and looking back at some point of the self (“I”), but in the understanding grasp of the full disclosure of “being-in-the-world” through essential moments his arrangement. I. turns out to be secondary in relation to the ontologically pre-established understanding, being the moment of its development. That which is understood, which is grasped in intention, becomes conceptually comprehensible through interpretation. The utterance, according to Heidegger, is a secondary mode of interpretation. He identifies three meanings of a statement: 1) a statement as a revelation that shows what exists from itself, not limited to our idea of ​​it; 2) a statement as a predication containing a definition of the subject through a predicate (Heidegger believes that the definition narrows the “view”, closing it on only the emerging object as such, obscuring the fullness of existence); 3) the statement as a message is directly related to the statement in the first and second meaning. Being “common,” it can be shared with the speaker and others, even if they do not have this identified and determined entity within their sight. What is said can be passed on and retold. G. Gadamer translates Heidegger's ontology of understanding into the theory of interpretation of a text as a carrier of cultural tradition, asserting the unity of understanding, interpretation and “application”. Understanding is always “interpretive,” and interpretation is “understanding,” but the final understanding is achieved as a result of “application,” i.e., correlating the content of the text with the mental experience of modern culture. Understanding, according to Gadamer, is aimed not at extracting the author's meaning, but at revealing the content of the “case” revealed in the text.

According to L. Wittgenstein, a statement is an expression of thought. Thinking means operating with patterns, but a thought is not the same as a pattern, because a thought does not need translation, but a pattern does. The scheme (without its I.) corresponds with a certain sentence that translates it into a statement. How can you tell if someone has understood a pattern or order? Wittgenstein believes that he can show his understanding only by translating it into other symbols. Thus, understanding is a translation into other symbols or into action, and therefore it is associated with I.

There is also a positivist understanding of information, which leads to the establishment and discovery of “objective” reasons for the generation of a text. The historical-genetic approach is opposed by both hermeneutics and semiology. Within semiology, there are two areas of structural and textual analysis. The first direction seeks to develop a single narrative model from all existing narratives, with the help of which it will be possible to analyze each specific narrative in terms of deviation. The second direction considers every narrative as a text, which is understood as the space where the process of formation of meanings takes place. The task of textual analysis is not to describe the structure of the narrative, but to produce a flexible structuring of the text (changing depending on the reader's perspective and historical context) and to penetrate into the semantic volume of the work, into the process of signification. Therefore, it is necessary to distinguish between structural and textual analyzes and not view them as mutually exclusive.

In hermeneutics, information is aimed at revealing the meaning of a text as a message addressed to a possible reader; in semiotics, it is aimed at deciphering the code. R. Barth relates code to the sphere of culture: “Codes are certain types of what is already visible, already read, already done; the code is the concrete form of this “already” that constitutes all writing.” The structuring of the text is facilitated by such cultural codes as the “scientific code”, based, for example, on the rules of experimental science; “rhetorical code” that explains all social rules of speaking: coded forms of narration, coded forms of speech; Metalinguistic utterances also belong to this code; “chronological code”: “dating”, which seems to be taken for granted, objectively given, is in fact a practice deeply conditioned by cultural rules (for the purpose of dramatization, scientism, achieving the effect of reality); a “sociohistorical code” that allows us to connect a statement with the entire amount of knowledge about our time, society, and country acquired from birth; “action code” or “actional code” that supports the plot frame of the narrative: actions or statements that denote them are organized into chains; and finally, the “riddle code.” Barthes emphasizes that in classical narrative there are two codes that support the vectorial orientation of structuration: this is the actional code (based on logical-temporal ordering) and the riddle code (the question is crowned with an answer); This creates the irreversibility of the story. It is this principle that Derrida’s deconstruction encroaches on, trying to make the text partially reversible, calling into question the possibility of expressing the logic of behavior with an action code, and “truth” with the code of a riddle.

The tendency to overcome the opposition between hermeneutics and semiotics can be found in P. Ricoeur, who considers “understanding” and “explanation” as components of a single process: the first involves the reproduction of the structuring of the text, the second clarification of the codes of the reader participating in this process. In this regard, the importance of the figure of the interpreter increases. The interpreter is the person who carries out I. Every sign presupposes the presence of an interpreter. The perceptual type of semiotic communication requires two separate interpreters of the sender and the addressee. Their difference lies in the fact that the first one carries out the encoding operation, and the second one carries out the decoding operation. R Jacobson identified two most important linguistic factors. The first of these factors is selection. It relies on equivalence, similarity and difference, synonymy and antonymy. The second factor is a combination that regulates the construction of any sequence. It is “contiguity based.” When encoding, the addressee selects elements before combining them into a single whole. Carrying out the decoding operation, the addressee must first of all grasp the whole; This is the deep difference between the status of the listener (reader) and the status of the speaker (writer) in verbal communication (text). The decoding partner of a speech act refers to probabilistic decisions much more often than the encoding partner. Thus, for the addresser there is no problem of homonymy, because he knows the meaning implied by it, while the addressee, while he does not have support for the context, struggles with homonymy and is forced to resort to probabilistic tests of his decisions. The unity of the code for all members of the speech community, proclaimed by F. de Saussure, in fact does not stand up to criticism. As a rule, each individual simultaneously belongs to several speech communities with different “radii of communication” (Sapir). Any general code is a set made up of various subcodes, one of which is chosen by the speaker in accordance with the function of the message, its addressee and the nature of the relationship between the interlocutors. Subcodes allow you to transmit and perceive information with varying completeness from high explicitness to different degrees of ellipticity.

Writing (text) provides greater stability and accessibility of the message for an addressee remote from the addressee in time and/or distance. There is a sufficient difference between the listener and the reader, consisting in the transfer of a speech sequence from time to space, which weakens the one-way property characteristic of the speech flow. The listener synthesizes the sequence even when its elements have ceased to exist, but for the reader the words are preserved, and he can return from subsequent parts of the message to the previous ones. Inner speech unites the addresser and the addressee in one person, and the elliptical form (incomplete expression) of intrapersonal communication cannot be reduced to verbal signs alone. The mnemonic knot on a handkerchief, serving as a reminder of an important task, is a typical example of internal communication between the past and subsequent states of one person.

A system of conventional symbols, decoded by the recipient of a message in the absence of an addresser who would have the intention of sending this message, is used in various forms of fortune telling. Thus, astrological predictions, as a traditional code of fortune-telling, allow the diviner to extract information about human destiny, which plays the role of the signified, from the observed variations in the movement of the planets. Among index signs (indications), there is a wide range of signs that are interpreted by their recipient, but do not have an explicit sender. Animals do not intentionally leave traces for hunters, but nevertheless, for the latter they are signs that allow them to determine the type of game, as well as the direction and duration of the animal’s movement. The symptoms of diseases are similar, indicating the disease and clarifying its nature. There is every reason to believe that unintentional indices are a type of sign, for they are interpreted as entities that serve to express the existence of other entities. In this case, it is necessary to distinguish between communication that implicates a real or alleged addresser, and information, the source of which cannot be considered the addresser of those signs that are interpreted by their recipient. The importance of the interpreter is enhanced in the case of interlingual translation, because in it there is usually no complete equivalence between code units, but the messages in which they are used can serve as adequate interpretation of code units or entire messages. When translating from one language to another, it is not the substitution of some code units for others, but the replacement of one whole message with another. The translator recodes and transmits the message he received from some source. Like any recipient of a verbal message, a translator is an interpreter. It is impossible to interpret a single linguistic phenomenon without translating its signs into other signs of the same system or into signs of another system. In this case, the interpreter is a person who facilitates the translation of one sign into another, in order to clarify the essence of what is understood.

S. A. Azarenka

In painting

Works of painting are always considered as a subject of interpretation

It is necessary to take into account the difference between two pictures of the world - the artist and the contemplator:

1. the first draws a work based on the reality around him, his worldview and feelings;
2. the second can only guess what the author wanted to say with his painting, whether his perception (what is it?) corresponds to the artist’s idea.

The works of abstract artists (W. Kandinsky, K. Malevich, P. Picasso) perhaps need this most of all.

When painting in this style, the master uses a visual language of shapes, lines, contours and colors to interpret the subject. This is very different from traditional painting styles, in which objects are interpreted closer to generally accepted ideas.

Interpretation of research results

At the final stage of any research, the analysis and interpretation of the research results occurs. The data obtained must be correctly interpreted. The task of interpretation is to identify the meanings of the results obtained and their application in theory and practice, determine the level of their novelty and practical significance, as well as efficiency in use.

The most difficult interpretations are results that do not meet the conditions and expectations of the hypothesis. To avoid misinterpretation, you can double-check the results, revise the conceptual beginning, after which the analysis and interpretation of the research results are carried out again using any of the methods. There are several of them.

The genetic method of interpretation is a way of explaining phenomena through the prism of their ontogenetic and phylogenetic development. The genetic method helps to identify the connection between the studied phenomena and time, to trace the process of development from the lowest level to the highest form of development. Most often used in longitudinal studies.

The structural method of interpretation is focused on determining and describing the structure of the phenomena under study. During the study, the current state of the object is first described, its permanent deep properties are studied, and connections between objects are studied. Thus, the structure of the object is created with all the possible relationships in it at different levels of the organization. This method shows the state of an object very well; you can easily understand its structure at all levels of the organization and its individual elements.

The functional method of interpretation describes the connections between an object and its environment, studies the functions of these phenomena and their meaning, and gives each individual element a function. From this it follows that the object consists of functional units and acts as a full-fledged mechanism.

Complex interpretation method - describes the object of study using different methods in order to study it from all sides, all its components and give each component significance. Often, when describing a subject, methods are used that are used not only in the field of science being studied, but also in other various sciences.

The systems method considers each individual component of the phenomenon under study as a system and explains the connections between these systems in a single organism. Thus, the phenomenon being studied becomes a large and complex system that interacts with the environment. The integrity and coherence of the system is determined by the complexity of the processes of all structures and subsystems that form the systematic nature of the object. But the entire system does not act as the sum of the influences of elements, it synthesizes them in such a way as to achieve a coordinated action in which all subsystems will interact, and in the process of these connections functions will be produced. The systems method helps to see the system as a combination of subsystems, or, on the other hand, a subsystem of a complex system.

How to reflect the results of practical work in research?

It is important not only to carefully plan, organize and implement an action plan, but also to correctly present it in scientific work. Reflection of the results obtained in the study may be as follows:

What does scientific research consist of?

• Text form. This option is used primarily when creating characteristics of the research object for the purpose of describing: what it does, how long it has been operating on the market, a description of the overall picture (organizational and production structure, etc.). Also, using the text, the author can present an analysis of the data obtained, noting key points: what has changed, what this indicates, etc.
• Graphic method. This option is suitable for reflecting certain trends and comparing data. Most often it is used in the analysis of indicators (analysis of their dynamics), forecasting results, etc.
• Tabular form. This option is appropriate for reflecting calculations. Not a single author presents detailed calculations; it is enough to reflect their results in small tables. It is advisable to present the initial data in them, then determine the dynamics (absolute deviation, growth rate, etc.).

In the description of the practical part, the author can reflect not only the results obtained, but also the problems and difficulties that he encountered during the organization and implementation of certain moments.

Any difficulties?

Need teacher help?

We are always happy to help you!

master's theses

The results of practical research are subject to detailed description directly in the research work, as well as in such sections as testing results and conclusion.

If the volume of graphic and tabular materials is large, then it is advisable to place them in the “Appendices” section, in the description (according to the structure of the project) note its number (for example, according to Appendix 1).

Results

Let's return to our interpreters. The word “interpretable” is also used in modern colloquial speech. This concept is interpreted as “becoming clear to understanding.” It is in this sense that the word is used in everyday communication. Even the profession of “interpreter” appeared. This is an engineer who analyzes the entire array of data necessary to control mining. Such a varied use of a well-known word may lead to the emergence of other meanings of the word “interpreter”. But how far the new values ​​will be from the initial ones - the future will show.