The dissertation is devoted to the study of the cognitive dominant of contrast as a system-forming principle of René Char’s poetics and the system of means used for its verbal representation at different levels of poetic text organization. The relevance of the research is determined by the cognitive and post-cognitive trends in contemporary humanities, within which language, culture, and text are interpreted through the mechanisms of human thinking, perception, and conceptualization of experience. The aim of the study is to provide a comprehensive analysis of the cognitive dominant of contrast in René Char’s poetics and to identify the means and mechanisms of its verbal representation at all levels of poetic text organization. To achieve this aim, the theoretical foundations of the cognitive dominant are outlined and its role in the organization of artistic space is determined; the subjective and objective factors shaping René Char’s worldview are identified; the system of cognitive oppositions organizing the poet’s individual worldview is established and the hierarchical relationships between them are defined; the means of verbalizing the cognitive dominant of contrast at the verbal and symbolic-imagery levels of the poetic text are analyzed; and the fundamental principles of Char’s poetics determined by the cognitive dominant of contrast are identified and characterized. The scientific novelty of the dissertation lies in substantiating the concept of the cognitive dominant of contrast as a linguocognitive category and defining its place within the system of conceptual mechanisms of poetic thinking; identifying the cognitive
dominant of contrast as the organizing principle of René Char’s individual worldview; establishing the interdependence between the cognitive-semantic foundation of a literary text, the structural organization of the author’s worldview, and the system of linguistic and aesthetic means of its verbalization; and revealing the mechanism of the dialectical transformation of a binary opposition into a cognitive unity through a system of tropes and stylistic figures, which constitutes a distinctive feature of Char’s poetic thinking. The research material comprises 408 poetic and prose-poetic works by René Char included in the collections Fureur et Mystère and Les Matinaux. The study employs the method of continuous sampling, linguostylistic analysis, conceptual analysis, interpretative analysis, and descriptive methods. The cognitive dominant is defined as a specific mental construct that ensures the conceptual unity of both an individual literary text and the entire body of works created by a particular author, reflecting the author’s worldview. Contrast functions as a fundamental mechanism of highlighting, opposing, and organizing semantic fields. It consists in the sharply expressed opposition of textual elements, forms, or images in order to enhance expressiveness, intensify artistic effect, and ensure the structural coherence of a literary work. Through contrast, key concepts are formed that organize the perception of the text and create a cognitive dominant – a central conceptual structure that concentrates the reader’s attention and directs the process of interpretation. The cognitive dominant of contrast is realized at all linguistic levels: at the verbal level through antonyms (both direct and contextual), enantiosemic lexemes, and binary conceptual pairs; at the symbolic-imagery level through metaphor, oxymoron, metonymy, personification, symbols, and epithets; and at the syntactic level through parallelism, antithesis, anaphora, ellipsis, and aphoristic sentences. At the same time, contrast in René Char’s poetry is not a simple opposition of two poles. These poles do not negate one another; rather, they interpenetrate and mutually define each other, creating a dynamic tension without achieving a final synthesis. The cognitive dominant of contrast constitutes the fundamental principle of René Char’s poetics. It organizes his worldview in such a way that no opposition is eliminated and neither pole prevails over the other. Opposites coexist simultaneously in a state of permanent tension, and it is precisely this tension that serves as the source of meaning in his poetry.
