Invited speaker
Vladimir Leopoldovich

Academic Degree:  PhD (Geography)

Country:  Russia

City:  Moscow

Affilation:  Institute of Geography, Russian Academy of Sciences

Position:  Senior Researcher

Brief biography:  Soviet and Russian geographer and scientist. Author of more than 300 scientific and scientific-journalistic works. The main areas of research are: Theoretical Geography, the territory zoning theory, the theory of regions delimitation, theory of limes, the hermeneutics of Russian cultural and post-Soviet landscapes.Participant of interdisciplinary research and traveler. Author of a number of special courses at Moscow State University, Higher school of Economics and other higher educational institutions.

Brief paper description: 

For most people, the landscape has an attribute of the visual aspect, that can be visually observed. Its essential component is color. Landscape presentation of culture is "colored" - textual presentation is colorless – monochrome. The text pole of an ordinary cultural presentation is devoid of the color attribute. Here color is only marginal - it is found in illustrations, children's and educational literature, and etc. The cartographic presentation of the landscape is in color. In addition, there are sophisticated ways to convey its semantic equivalent in black and white printing. In this regard, we can conclude that the symbolism and semantics of color are obviously essential.
It is possible that the symptomatic use of color in many spatially iconic, graphic means (languages) is their fundamental feature associated with all the specifics of professional expert activity. At the same time, it is equally important to present the monochromaticity of the main part of regular linear text in one color. It is also worth noting a possible connection between the heuristicity of iconic means and its "polychromy"; probably, self-made maps of phase spaces/subject areas are neutral in meaning and functionally helpless because they are either literally colorless or the color doesn’t have a meaning.
Usually, it’s common to glue or mix several different though interrelated differences that relate to semiotic systems (generalized texts):
• "linear - non-linear",
• "discursive - non-discursive",
• "temporal - spatial",
• "sign - iconic",
• "discrete - continuous",
• "discontinuous - solid",
• "off-scale - having scope"
• "devoid of color - colored".
By combining these oppositions, we get two poles: the usual text (linear discursive etc.) and its full antonym, the opposite pole is a cartographic image / representation (of the landscape and not only). It is essential that a sophisticated user reads a good geographical map (especially special or thematic) as a landscape, and a landscape as a good map: the color load of such maps conveys a deep (often implicit) professional knowledge. Then two poles (there are more of them) of semiotic systems in a wide sense are revealed.