The article examines the issues of imagology as a literary discipline. It defines the parameters of the image of the “Other,” which exhibits features of an archetype and can be interpreted as an ethnostereotype. The interrelation of the categories “self – other,” mentality, and national character is analyzed in the context of forming a literary image. Special attention is paid to the modern understanding of imagology within the framework of comparative studies and interdisciplinary humanities research.

image, imagology, archetype, ethnostereotype, worldview, comparative studies, mentality.

Papilova E. V. Imagology as a Humanitarian Discipline // Rhema. — 2011. — No. 4.

Sadokhin A. P., Grushevitskaya T. G. Ethnology. — Moscow: Academia; Higher School, 2000. — 288 p.

Stepanov Yu. S. Constants. Dictionary of Russian Culture. — Moscow: Languages of Russian Culture, 1997. — 824 p.

Leerssen J. Imagology: The Cultural Construction and Literary Representation of National Characters. // Image [&] Narrative. — 2007. — Vol. 7(1). — P. 1–14.

Leerssen J. National Stereotypes and Literary Imagination. — Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2016. — 295 p.

Van Doorslaer L. Imagology Meets Translation Studies. // The Routledge Handbook of Translation and Culture. — London: Routledge, 2018. — P. 229–240.

Wiersma N. Imagology and the Study of Cross-Cultural Representation. // Between: Journal of Literature and Thought. — 2019. — Vol. 9(18). — P. 45–59.

Beller M., Leerssen J. (eds.). Imagology: The Cultural Construction of National Stereotypes. — Amsterdam: Rodopi, 2007. — 428 p.