<p>У раду је представљен целокупни књижевни опус заборављеног писца Павла Марковића Адамова, једног од зачетника српске реалистичке приповетке и оснивача и првог уредника Бранковог кола &ndash; листа за забаву, поуку и књижевност, у циљу превредновања његовог књижевног дела, како би Адамов, коначно, добио место које му припада у историји српске књижевности.</p> / <p>U radu je predstavljen celokupni književni opus zaboravljenog pisca Pavla Markovića Adamova, jednog od začetnika srpske realističke pripovetke i osnivača i prvog urednika Brankovog kola &ndash; lista za zabavu, pouku i književnost, u cilju prevrednovanja njegovog književnog dela, kako bi Adamov, konačno, dobio mesto koje mu pripada u istoriji srpske književnosti.</p> / <p>The thesis represents the complete literary corpus of the forgotten author Pavle Marković Adamov, one of the pioneers of the Serbian realism short stories and the founder and first editor of ᾽Brankovo kolo᾿ - a paper for fun, learning and literature. The aim of the thesis is to bring his literary works back to light and give them proper appreciation, so that Adamov will finally be given the spot that he deserves in the history of Serbian literature.</p>

The thesis pictures mutual relations of Croats and Serbs in the Dalmatian inland region (in the period from the Second World War until present) in selected novels of two Croatian and one Serbian novelist. To be specific, the thesis analyses following writings from the second half of the 20th century - Anđeli lijepo pjevaju (1953) from Vojin Jelić, Kostolomi (1960) and Klačina (1970) from Jozo Laušić and Braća po materi (1987) from Jovan Radulović. It also focuses on each of the authors' position towards respective theme and compares problematic facts associated with this culturally specific Croatian region. The thesis deals with denial of recognition of nationality and belonging to other culture and it aims on denial of certain problems of Serbian authors of Dalmatia. The thesis takes into account other Serbian and Croatian authors as well and includes them in the analyses. The thesis mentions for example Vladan Desnica, Vjekoslav Kaleb, Dinko Šimunović, Mirko Božić and Ivan Raos, whose writings describes co-existence of both nationalities, studied region and its people as well. However, those authors and their titles are not to be considered as the core of this final thesis. When analyzing the novel of Radulović Braća po materi, this part of the thesis also concerns the film processing together...

Le nombre d’études consacrées au problème de l’espace, y compris dans la littérature, est en nette progression depuis plusieurs décennies et surtout ces dernières années. Certains parlent d’un « tournant spatial » de l’ensemble des disciplines humanistes. Malgré cet intérêt accru, l’équivocité traditionnellement attachée à la notion d’espace demeure. Si le langage courant réserve le terme aux faits géographiques, urbains ou encore astronomiques, on a souvent mis en évidence le fait qu’il désigne à la fois un « contenu » et une « forme » (E. Husserl), une réalité en même temps « obscure » et « objective » (A. Einstein). Cette thèse tient compte de la complexité de la notion d’espace et la met à profit pour analyser ce qu’il convient d’appeler la spatialité dans la littérature. Elle porte sur un corpus diversifié qui comprend des œuvres narratives écrites par Jean Echenoz, François Bon, Radoslav Petković, David Albahari, V.S. Naipaul et Martin Amis. Telle qu’elle est étudiée ici, la spatialité pose un large ensemble de questions « formelles » et « thématiques » : la scénographie urbaine et non urbaine, la « polarisation » de l’espace (centre/périphérie, local/global, familier/étranger), l’écriture de la frontière, la toponymie, la topographie, le « balisage » de l’espace (à l’aide de pronoms, verbes et adverbes), l’espace-image et le sens autoréflexif de l’espace. À chacun de ses différents niveaux, elle se révèle profondément dynamique, composée d’éléments en interaction et en opposition, autrement dit « en mouvement ». / In various fields, including literature, much work has been done on the question of space over the last few years and decades. Some refer to a “spatial turn” in humanities and social sciences. However, in spite of a considerable general interest in this topic, the notion of space remains equivocal. The term is commonly used to denote basic facts in geography, urbanism and astronomy, but the concept is also often said to be rather complex. Husserl claimed that space was both a “content” and a “form”, while Einstein believed that its genuine nature was at the same time “obscure” and “undeniably objective”. In this thesis, we take into account the complexity of the space itself and challenge the notion of spatiality in literature. The corpus consists of novels and narratives written by V.S. Naipaul, Martin Amis, Jean Echenoz, François Bon, Radoslav Petković and David Albahari. Spatiality, such as defined here, brings us to examine both content- and form-related issues, including urban and non-urban space, spatial “polarization” (“centers” and “peripheries”, “local” and “global”, “known” and “unknown” places), border, toponymy and topography. The use of some terms specifying spatial location (such as deictics) is also analyzed, as well as the iconographic representations of space referred to in the texts and, finally, different forms of self-reflexive discourse inherent in the writing of space. The analysis reveals that every level of spatiality has an essentially dynamic, non-static quality, as the elements that it is composed of are in constant opposition and interaction.

<p>У раду је представљен најзначајнији део<br />књижевног опуса Николаја Тимченка,<br />књижевног историчара и критичара, есејисте<br />и филозофа и указано је на вредност,<br />домете и актуелност његове мисли о српској<br />књижевности 20. века.</p> / <p>U radu je predstavljen najznačajniji deo<br />književnog opusa Nikolaja Timčenka,<br />književnog istoričara i kritičara, esejiste<br />i filozofa i ukazano je na vrednost,<br />domete i aktuelnost njegove misli o srpskoj<br />književnosti 20. veka.</p> / <p>The work presents the most important part of<br />the literary opus of Nikolai Timchenko, literary<br />historian and critic, essayist and philosopher,<br />and points to the value, reach and actuality of his<br />thought on Serbian literature of the 20th century.</p>

<p>Ауторка је у раду систематизовала и представила слике, представе и стереотипе које су канонизовани песници српског романтизма у својим делима&nbsp; конструисали о Србима и Другима, проблематизовала је и истражила везу и утицај канона на креирање слика и представа и њихову међусобну условљеност.</p> / <p>Autorka je u radu sistematizovala i predstavila slike, predstave i stereotipe koje su kanonizovani pesnici srpskog romantizma u svojim delima&nbsp; konstruisali o Srbima i Drugima, problematizovala je i istražila vezu i uticaj kanona na kreiranje slika i predstava i njihovu međusobnu uslovljenost.</p> / <p>In this work, the author systematized and presented the images, notions and stereotypes that the canonized poets of Serbian romanticism have constructed in their works about Serbs and Others, questioning and researching the relationship and the influence of canons on creation of images and notions and their mutual conditionality.</p>