This study is devoted to the analysis of the concept of the "new normal" and the description of its frame structure in everyday usage within social media discourse. Based on a cognitive-discursive approach, the study examines the transformation of the meaning of the expression "the new normal" from its original economic-political term into a polysemous linguistic tool for expressing evaluation, anxiety, and rejection. Using comments from social media platforms (such as Facebook, Telegram, and LiveJournal), the study identifies frames and thematic groups in which this concept is actualized: the moral and value devaluation, the cultural-civilizational crisis, ideological pressure, the normalization of violence, the mediatization of tragedies, and the social adaptation to post-COVID realities. The analysis shows that the "new normal" functions in media discourse as a marker of normative transformation and a cognitive representation of crisis phenomena. The concept serves as an ironic label, a means of stigmatization, emotional evaluation, and as a tool for expressing identity and describing the "other" amid global and local changes.

The relevance of this paper stems from the rapid development of ecological knowledge, accompanied by the active formation and integration of new specialized terminology. Due to a growing interest in issues of applied ecology, sustainable development, and rational use of natural resources, ecological vocabulary is steadily expanding and becoming established in texts of various genres and functional styles. This dynamism necessitates a linguistic analysis of word formation of new terminology and the use of specialized vocabulary in the context of the environment. The paper examines the specifics of how the term prirodopol'zovanie “use of natural resources” functions in Russian-language texts representing different functional styles such as scientific, official-administrative, and journalistic texts.

Lermontov never hid his enthusiasm for Western literature and especially for Byron’s poetry. The similarity between the two poets’ personalities and certain character types and motifs in their works has already been established in the literature in the 19th century. This paper aspires to prove that there can also be a connection between the narrative poem The Giaour and the novel A Hero of Our Time from the perspective of literary fragmentation, especially omissions and gaps found in narration, structure and chronology in the two texts.

The paper analyzes camp prose as a unique literary phenomenon in 20th century Russian literature, shaped under the extreme conditions of Stalinists labor camps and repressions. The study looks into the effects of imprisonment on the linguistic personalities of both professional writers, such as V. Shalamov and A. Solzhenitsyn, and non-writers like E. Ginzburg and E. Kersnovskaya. The writings of these authors provide key points for analyzing the psychological, social, and individual transformations the authors experienced during incarceration. The use of metaphorical language in shaping their works is a major area of study. The authors succeed in delineating the unspeakable horrors of camp life by using metaphors as both stylistic elements and tools for reinterpretation. The study analyzes how these metaphors reflect the broader themes of dehumanization, endurance, and moral resilience. In addition, the analysis illustrates that camp prose goes beyond documentary testimony, becoming a means of linguistic resistance and creative survival. By exploring the lexical choices and narrative structures of these texts, the present study discusses methods in which authors build a new literary language and process in and of expressing trauma and memory. In doing this, it contributes to a deeper understanding of the interaction between personal experience, linguistic expression, and historical representation in Russian literature.

Sergei Lebedev’s novel Oblivion offers an original reworking of the tradition of Russian camp prose. Its central themes are the legacy of Stalinist terror, the intergenerational transmission of trauma, and the necessity of a conscious resistance to their consequences. This paper explores how Lebedev, drawing on the concept of post-memory, intertwines personal family history with questions of collective memory, highlighting the destructive effects of silencing the past and the absence of accountability for historical crimes. At the core of this interpretation is an analysis of the narrator’s journey through space, time, and self-discovery, structured around the mythological motif of descent (katabasis). The funeral ritual plays a key role in the novel’s initiation structure: the symbolic burial and mourning of victims who vanished without a trace becomes an act of memory restoration, offering the possibility of reconciliation and a new beginning. Lebedev critically engages with contemporary Russian memory politics, stressing the moral imperative to uncover and give voice to the traumatic past.

Trifonov’s short stories are characterised by a direct tackling of moral issues. Tthe story The Winner contrasts social activity and biological longevity. Trifonov does not choose between the two but reflects on both. The conflict between biology and history is one of the main conflicts depicted in his remarkable prose.

Written with an ecocritical perspective, the present paper is devoted to the analysis of affinities and differences between two major works of Russian literature of the second half of the 20th century, Proshchanie s Materoy [Farewell to Matyora, 1976] by Rasputin (1937–2015) and Zona zatopleniya [The Flood Zone, 2015] by Senchin (b. 1971). Forty years later, these novels enter a dialogue, starting from some key themes and the common subject: the real flooding of several Siberian rural villages due to the construction of dams and hydroelectric power plants. The first part of the paper introduces and contextualizes the construction of what has been called “great dams”, outlining their main aims and characteristics, as well as the environmental consequences for neighbouring territories and populations. The second section focuses on the parallelisms between the two literary texts, examining, in particular, the image of nature and the peculiar “Siberian chronotope” which emerges from them. In both novels, in fact, the conflict between humans and nature plays a central role. The last part of the study provides a comparison between the contents and the main thematic issues of the narratives, taking into account the traumatic psychological impact of evacuation and resettlement on the characters. The rather marked stylistic differences between the works of the two authors make it possible to propose some final reflections on the profound relationships entertained by their literary works which go beyond a mere ‘remake’ or actualization. 

This paper examines the relevance of G. G. Bagautdinova's book Poetics of I. A. Goncharov’s non-novel prose, which is undeniable and is due to a range of reasons indicated in the paper. First, it reviews the holistic understanding of I. A. Goncharov's creative path in his so-called "essay" works. The scholarly novelty of the monograph is analyzed point by point parallel to the constructed structure of the book. In this regard, the following so far little-studied and unexplored aspects are examined: the framework text, the cumulation of folklorism, "ornamental prose", the rhythm of prose, and the poetics of repetition. The unconditional discoveries of this work are the conclusions in terms of the objective results achieved.

The present review analyzes the monograph of A. Y. Sorochan, published in 2024. The author is a philologist, a professor at Tver State University who specializes in the history and theory of literature. He defended his doctoral dissertation titled “Motivation in the Russian Historical Novel of the 1830s–1840s”, which focuses on a unique combination of historical and literary approaches. This monograph is thematically close to Sorochan's dissertation and consists of three parts: in the first the author speaks generally about travel literature; the second section is devoted to works of Russian literature; and the third section contains reviews of books on travel literature. In this critical article, the specificity of historical and imagological approaches in Sorochan's work on travel literature is analyzed.

This review discusses the Festschrift published in honour of Professor Árpád Kovács’s 80th birthday. Professor Kovács is an eminent Hungarian scholar whose research on Russian Literature (mainly on Dostoevsky’s oeuvre) and innovations in literary theory are well-known, respected and followed by the Slavic studies specialists throughout the world. The volume consists of 30 papers written by Professor Kovács’s friends, colleagues and admirers. In the high standard and innovative approach of each paper, the volume is undoubtedly worthy of Professor Kovács’s legacy and represents the unique approach to literary texts which he established during his career.

The review examines a new book by Hungarian researcher Annamária Vass on paradigm shift in Russian literature. The volume analyses in detail the literary and cultural changes that began in the mid-1980s, shedding light on how socialist realism was transformed into postmodernism. Annamária Vass focuses on understanding the characteristics of postmodernism and provides a fascinating historical overview of how socialist realism gradually lost its dominance. By analysing the works of Yevgeny Popov and Vasily Aksyonov demonstrate the specific characteristics of postmodern literature. The volume provides an excellent overview of this chaotic period of Russian literature.

Jangfeldt's book Us and Them: History of the "Russian idea" was published in Hungarian translation in 2024. The author is a Swedish writer and translator from Russian, associate professor of Slavic languages ​​at Stockholm University. The aim of the review is to show what ideological and philosophical currents Jangfeldt's book discusses, and how all of these have influenced Russian history and culture in the past 300 years.

Ferenc Gregor, the most prominent Hungarian researcher of the Slovak language, did not live to see the publication of his magnum opus. The present review has two goals: on the one hand, to commemorate an outstanding scholar who persevered on his own path in the pursuit of scholarly value, accepting all the difficulties of a lonely struggle, and whose efforts were crowned with success, albeit posthumously, thanks to the next generation of scholars; and, on the other hand, to draw attention to the significant linguistic and cultural influence that Hungarian dialects have had on the language of the Slovaks living in the northern region of the historical Kingdom of Hungary. This influence manifested itself in several waves and in several geographical regions and took on different thematic characteristics depending on the historical situation. Using a wide range of written sources, Ferenc Gregor identified nearly 1,000 Hungarian lexemes in the vocabulary of local variants of the Slovak language. Since Gregor accurately documented all cases where the Hungarian words in question also entered other Slavic languages of the Carpathian Basin, his work is significant not only for its outstanding value in contact linguistics, but also from an areal linguistic perspective.