Transgression as Factor. Discursive Situation of Subject in the Space of Industrial Production (Social Semiotics Approach)

Abstract 
The article investigates modes of becoming of subject of work of Russian industrial engineers. Based on the data  of a qualitative sociological survey of workers at Siberian industrial enterprises (the first series of focused interviews), it was concluded that the main modus for the becoming of engineers as subjects of labor is professional self-improvement through overcoming their specific institutional constraints in working life: outdated equipment, lack of spare parts, non-core tasks and lack of time. A common social practice, in line with which this development is procedurally unfolding, is the design of new products and spare parts largely for the needs of the production itself at the enterprise, rather than for the product market, from improvised, old and used materials and aggregates, which leads to downtime and reduced productivity, and at the structural level is expressed in maintaining the status quo situation in the enterprise – the productive force of the staff is spent on extensive maintenance of production capacity , is used  idle – part of it is directed to the development of production, its modernization and increase of qualitative and quantitative indicators of products, the production of new types of products of labor. The situation is characterized by the asynchronous nature of the mechanism of production functioning at enterprises: while improving personal professional qualities at the expense of ingenuity and resourcefulness, engineers, nevertheless, are not able to eliminate the technological lag of production from the needs of industry in the volume and quality of goods. The mechanism of becoming a subject is studied through the prism of a semiotic analysis of the speech practices of the subjects of labor as  a discursive designation by engineers of the real sphere of production relations in a language. The institute of labor is considered as an aggregate discourse space about production relations. The subject is represented as originating at the intersection of two main social institutions – language and labor – as becoming subject in the space of shifting and transition “from temptation of the real – through the symbolic – to the phantasmic” and back. 

Keywords 
subject of work, focused interview, becoming, socio-semiotics, development, transgression 

Funding 
The research was carried out with plan IEIE SB RAS project XI.179.1.3 “The society on the move: institutional environment, structures, practicians and subjects of social changes” АААА-А17-17022250126-1

Read article


References

1. Kombarov V. Yu. The Agency of Workers at Industrial Enterprises in Siberia: A Post-Structuralist Analysis and the Construction of a Typology. Universe of Russia, vol. 24, no. 3, p. 88–107. (in Russ.) 
2. Strauss A., Korbin J. Osnovy kachestvennogo issledovaniya: obosnovannaya teotiya, protsedury i tekhniki. Moscow, 2001. (in Russ.) 
3. Patton M. Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods. Thousand Oaks, 2002. 
4. Brentano F. O proiskhozhdenii nravstvennogo poznaniya. Prilozhenie k almanakhu «Meta- fisicheskie issledovaniya». St. Petersburg, Aleteya Publ., 2000. (in Russ.) 
5. Saussure F. de. Kurs obshchei lingvistiki. Moscow, Editorial URSS Publ., 2004. (in Russ.) 
6. Lakan J. Seminary. Obrazovanie bessoznatel’nogo. 2nd ed. Moscow, Gnosis, Logos Publ., 2018, vol. 5. (in Russ.) 
7. Kristeva Yu. Znamenie na puti k sub’ektu. In: Intenzional’nost i tekstual’nost. Filosofskaya misl Frantsii XX veka. Tomsk, Vodoley Publ., 1998, p. 289–297. 
8. Kristeva Yu. Semiotika: Issledovaniya po semanalizu. Moscow, 2013.
9. Thibault P. J. Social semiotics as praxis: Text, social meaning making, and Nabokov’s Ada. Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Press, 1991. 
10. Barthes R. Mifologhii. Moscow, Akademicheskij proekt Publ., 2010. (in Russ.) 
11. Baudrillard J. Simvolicheskij obmen i smert’. Moscow, Dobrosvet Publ., 2009. (in Russ.) 
12. Lotman Yu. M. Struktura khudozhestvennogo texta. Moscow, Iskusstvo Publ., 1970. (in Russ.) 
13. Derrida J. In Bolshoy philosofskij slovar. Eds. David Jerry, Julia Jerry. Moscow, AST, Veche Publ., 1999. (in Russ.) 
14. Virno P. Saggio sulla negazione. Per una antropologia linguistica. Temi, Bollati Boringhieri, 2013. 
15.  Loos V. G. Promishlennya psichologhiya. Kiev, Technika Publ., 1980. 
16. Žižek S. Schekotlivij sub’ekt: otsutstvuyuschij zentr politicheskoj ontologhii. Moscow,Delo Publ., 2014. (in Russ.) 
17. Webster F. Teorii informazionnogo obscestva. Moscow, Aspekt-Press, 2004. (in Russ.) 
18. Deleuze G., Guattari F. Kapitalism i shizophreniya. Anti-Edip. Tisyacha plato. Ekaterinburg, U-Factoriya Publ., 2010. (in Russ.)