Archetype and archetypal image: the problems of terminology in cultural studies

Abstract

Purpose of the research. The study of the archetype as a cultural universal in the context of the conceptual apparatus of modern cultural studies is supposed to draw attention to the problem of the unjustified widening of the "archetype" concept interpretation, as well as the frequent mixing of the concepts "archetype" and "archetyical image". The ideas put forth in this work are designed to prevent the incorrect understanding and use of C.G. Jung’s terms by researchers referring to his theory and to facilitate the identification of archetypes and their differentiation from phenomena that are similar to them. The methodology of the study consists in the use of semantic and terminological analysis of text in order to identify semantic patterns of terms and main ideas; comparative and historico-logical methods
of analysis were also used. This methodological approach allows us to analyze, reveal and recall the meaning of the terms of the author of the archetype theory. The scientific novelty of this work lies in improvement of the epistemological apparatus of the humanities by creating concise in form, yet comprehensive in content characteristic features of an archetype as conceived by C.G. Jung and in improving scientific definitions of such phenomena as "archetype" and "archetypal image". Conclusions. The concept of an "archetype" is considered to be a basic, universal category of culture, which still requires specification of semantic boundaries in the humanities. Only the phenomena that
meet the criteria developed by C.G. Jung can be considered archetypes. We consider further expansion of the term "archetype" unreasonable and inappropriate, as this leads to reduction of the universality of the "prototype", the "elementary image", which served as a basis for the "archetypical image" of C.G. Jung.