Proverbs, Memes, and Epistemology. An Interview with Elena Zhigarina
EDN: UTWAAW
Abstract
This article and commented interview with Elena Evgenievna Zhigarina, a specialist in structural paremiology and folklore studies, offers an analytical reflection on methodological principles for recording and studying proverbs, bywords, sayings, and other paremiological units in contemporary urban discourse. The work examines the variability and polyfunctionality of paremias, the dynamics of the Russian paremiological fund in the twenty-first century, and the shifting boundaries of paremiological space across generations. It reveals methodological approaches to participant observation in field collection of paremias, discusses practical and ethical complexities of such methodology, and analyzes phenomena of occasional paremiological transformations and the ephemerality of contemporary paremiological material. Central to the interview is the question of how traditional folklore adapts and transforms in the age of internet culture and digital memes. The conversation critically addresses epistemological questions about knowledge production and researcher reflexivity — specifically, the tension between the “scholarly voice” and the “personal voice” in documenting and interpreting contemporary folklore. The work emphasizes the importance of thick description and intersubjectivity in folklore research. The study makes a significant contribution to contemporary debates in folklore studies, digital ethnography, and linguistic pragmatics, illuminating how traditional paremias persist, hybridize, and evolve within the context of contemporary collecting practices.
About the Authors
N. V. Petrov
Russian Academy of National Economy and Public Administration;
Russian State University for the Humanities
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Nikita V. Petrov
Moscow
E. E. Zhigarina
Russian State University for the Humanities
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Elena E. Zhigarina
Moscow
References
1. American Folklore Society. (2021). Position Statement: Human Subjects. Retrieved from https://www.americanfolkloresociety.org/ethics-human-subjects
2. Belorussova, S. Yu. (2021). Cyberethnography: Methodology and technology. Etnografiya, 2021(3), 123–145. (In Russian).
3. Bickford, J., Nisker, J. (2015). Tensions between anonymity and thick description when “studying up” in genetics research. Qualitative Health Research, 25(2), 276– 282.
4. Braun, V., Clarke, V. (2023). Toward good practice in reflexive thematic analysis. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 20(3), 1063–1082.
5. Bredis, M. A., Lomakina, L. V., Adzinova, T. A. (2020). Paremias in modern linguistics: Approaches to study, text-forming and linguocultural potential. RUDN Journal of Language Studies, Semiotics and Semantics, 11(3), 469–492. (In Russian).
6. Briggs, C. L., Bauman, R. (1992). Genre, intertextuality, and social power. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology, 2(2), 131–172. https://doi.org/10.1525/jlin.1992.2.2.131.
7. Cherednikova, M. P. (2003). Hospital ward folklore. In A. Belousov, I. Veselova, S. Neklyudov (Eds.). Contemporary Urban Folklore, 280–282. Moscow: Rossijskij gosudarstvennyj gumanitarnyj universitet. (In Russian).
8. Fedorova, N. N. (2007). Modern transformations of Russian proverbs (Doctoral dissertation). Pskov. (In Russian).
9. Geertz, C. (1973). Thick description: Toward an interpretive theory of culture. In C. Geertz. The interpretation of cultures: Selected essays, 3–30. New York: Basic Books.
10. Geertz, C. (1983). Common sense as a cultural system. In C. Geertz. Local knowledge: Further essays in interpretive anthropology, 73–93. New York: Basic Books.
11. Gillespie, A. (2009). Intersubjectivity: Towards a dialogical analysis. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 39(1), 19–46.
12. Golovnev, A. V., Belorussova, S. Yu., Kisser, T. S. (2018). Web-ethnography and cyber-ethnicity. Ural’skii istoricheskii vestnik, 2018(1), 100–108. (In Russian).
13. Gorelov, I. N., Sedov, K. F. (2001). Fundamentals of psycholinguistics: Textbook. Moscow: Labirint. (In Russian).
14. Holmes, A. G. D. (2020). Researcher positionality: A consideration of its influence and relevance for rigorous research. Shanlax International Journal of Education, 8(4), 1–10.
15. Howard, A., Mawyer, A. (2015). Ethnography in the digital age. In Emerging Trends in the Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1–15. John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118900772.etrds0119
16. Hufford, D. J. (1995). The scholarly voice and the personal voice: Reflexivity in belief studies. Western Folklore, 54(1), 57–76. https://doi.org/10.2307/1499911.
17. Kalda, M. (2014). Review of: Shifman, L. Memes in Digital Culture. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2013. Folklore: Electronic Journal of Folklore, 58(2014), 216–220.
18. Kamlongera, M. I. (2023). An autoethnography of navigating multiple researcher positionalities. Qualitative Research, 23(3), 679–696.
19. Kolozaridi, P., Markham, A. (2021). How to understand what is happening during the pandemic by studying oneself and others. Interview with Annette Markham by Polina Kolozaridi. Neprikosnovennyi zapas. Debaty o politike i kul’ture, 2021(6), 49–61. (In Russian).
20. Kozioł-Chrzanowska, E. (2017). Well-known Polish proverbs in internet memes. Proverbium, 34(2017), 179–204.
21. Kul’kova, M. A. (2013). Application of pragmalinguistic approach to the study of paremias (based on folk omens in Russian and Tatar languages). Vestnik Kazanskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta kul’tury i iskusstv, 2013(5), 97–101. (In Russian).
22. Levin, Yu. I. (1984). Proverbial space. In G. Permyakov (Ed.). Paremiological Studies, 110–117. Moscow: Nauka. (In Russian).
23. Manaenkova, A. A. (2016). Paremia as a meme in the aspect of translation from English into Russian. Derzhavinskij forum, 3(11), 109–111. (In Russian).
24. Markham, A. N. (2005). The methods, politics, and ethics of representation in online ethnography. In N. K. Denzin, Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.). The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research, 793–820. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
25. Muktupāvela, R. (2018). University Students’ Humour in Digital Environment: Internet Memes as a Folklore Genre. Culture Crossroads, 12(1), 4–18.
26. Neklyudov, S. Yu. (2008). To understand and comprehend (on the problem of “mishearings” and lexical distortions in oral tradition). In V. Toporov (Ed.). Man as Word: Collection in Honor of Vardan Ayrapetyane, 123–132. Moscow: Yazyki slavyanskoi kul’tury. (In Russian).
27. Nikitina, T. G., Rogaleva, E. I. (2015). Russian proverbs in modern sociocultural context: On the composition of paremiological minimum. Mezhdunarodnyi nauchno-issledovatel’skii zhurnal, 2015(10), 61–63. (In Russian).
28. Nitecki, J. Z. (1987). In search of sense in common sense management. Journal of Business Ethics, 6(8), 639–647. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00705780
29. Norman, B. Yu. (2006). Playing on the edges of language. Moscow: Flinta: Nauka. (In Russian).
30. Permyakov, G. L. (1970). From saying to fairy tale (Notes on the general theory of clichés). Moscow: Nauka. (In Russian)
31. Petrov, N. V. (2015). “Everyone tells me: ‘You look like a Jewess!’”: Individual interview in the system of knowledge about tradition. In S. Amosova (Ed.). Lepel: Memory of a Jewish Shtetl, 68–80. Moscow. (In Russian).
32. Saunders, B., Kitzinger, J., Kitzinger, C. (2015). Anonymising interview data: Challenges and compromise in practice. Qualitative Research, 15(5), 616–632.
33. Shapin, S. (2001). Proverbial economies: How an understanding of some linguistic and social features of common sense can throw light on more prestigious bodies of knowledge, science for example. Social Studies of Science, 31(5), 731–769.
34. Shehata, S. (2015). Ethnography, identity, and the production of knowledge. In D. Yanow, P. Schwartz-Shea. Interpretation and Method. Ethnography, Political Violence, and the Social Construction of Crime, 121–141. Routledge.
35. Shifman, L. (2014). Memes in Digital Culture. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
36. Sokolovskii, S. V. (2021). Methodology and principles of digital anthropology. Sibirskie istoricheskie issledovaniya, 2021(1), 6–30. (In Russian).
37. Szpila, G. (2017). Polish paremic demotivators: Tradition in an internet genre. Journal of American Folklore, 130(517), 305–334.
38. Tosina Fernández, L. J. (2017). Proverbs in present-day media: An analysis of television fictions and internet memes and their contribution to the spread of proverbs. Proverbium, 34(2017), 369–406.
39. Vasil’eva, K. N. (2022). Paremia-transforms in internet communication: Structure, semantics, thematic groups (Doctoral dissertation). Moscow. (In Russian).
40. Voyakina, E. Yu. (2023). Evolution of folk word: From paremia to internet meme. Vestnik Moskovskogo gosudarstvennogo oblastnogo universiteta. Seriya: Russkaya filologiya, 2023(4), 99–108. (In Russian).
41. Yip, S. Y. (2024). Positionality and reflexivity: Negotiating insider-outsider status in qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 23(2024), 1–13.
42. Zhigarina, E. E. (2003). From a collector’s diary. In A. Belousov, I. Veselova, S. Neklyudov (Eds.). Contemporary Urban Folklore, 283–300. Moscow: Rossijskij gosudarstvennyj gumanitarnyj universitet. (In Russian).
43. Zhigarina, E. E. (2006). Contemporary existence of proverbs: Variability and polyfunctionality of texts (Doctoral dissertation abstract). Moscow. (In Russian).
Review
For citations:
Petrov N.V., Zhigarina E.E. Proverbs, Memes, and Epistemology. An Interview with Elena Zhigarina. Urban Folklore and Anthropology. 2025;7(4):162-204. (In Russ.) EDN: UTWAAW
Views:
47
Email this article 