<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>
<article xmlns:ali="http://www.niso.org/schemas/ali/1.0/" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" article-type="research-article" dtd-version="1.2" xml:lang="ru"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">kaspy</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title xml:lang="ru">THE CASPIAN REGION: politics, economics, culture</journal-title></journal-title-group><issn publication-format="electronic" /><issn publication-format="print">1818-510X</issn><publisher><publisher-name xml:lang="ru">Астраханский государственный университет им. В. Н. Татищева</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">884</article-id><title-group xml:lang="ru"><article-title>Frontier as a cultural paradigm</article-title></title-group><title-group xml:lang="en"><article-title>Frontier as a cultural paradigm</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author"><name-alternatives><name xml:lang="ru"><surname>Yakushenkov</surname><given-names>Sergey N.</given-names></name><name xml:lang="en"><surname>Yakushenkov</surname><given-names>Sergey N.</given-names></name></name-alternatives><email>shuilong@mail.ru</email><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1689" /></contrib></contrib-group><aff-alternatives id="aff1689"><aff><institution xml:lang="ru">Astrakhan State University</institution></aff><aff><institution xml:lang="en">Astrakhan State University</institution></aff></aff-alternatives><pub-date date-type="pub"><year>2015</year></pub-date><issue>1</issue><fpage>288</fpage><lpage>298</lpage><history /><self-uri xlink:href="https://kaspy.asu-edu.ru/en/archive/2015/issue/1/article/884">https://kaspy.asu-edu.ru/en/archive/2015/issue/1/article/884</self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="https://kaspy.asu-edu.ru/storage/kaspy/archive/1(42)/288-298.pdf" content-type="pdf">https://kaspy.asu-edu.ru/storage/kaspy/archive/1(42)/288-298.pdf</self-uri><abstract xml:lang="ru"><p>The article analyzes the main approaches to the study of Frontier Theory. In various examples, the author shows the diversity of frontiers as a special cultural model. A special attention is paid to the analysis of frontier model developed by a Siberian scientist I. P. Basalaeva. It has been shown the complexity of the definition of the frontier through the prism of the allocation of a number of markers that may be correct for a number of frontier types, and are not correlated with other historical frontiers. In his argument, the author relies mainly on the American frontier, as a reference, as it is the history of the American frontier that formed the basis Frontier Theory. As an alternative criteria, the author offers a number of new frontier markers, which could form the basis for the typology of the frontier. The main criteria for the frontier, according to the author of this article, is its heterotopia, which is the result of a meeting with new natural and cultural landscapes, what invariably leads to the transgression of all actors of frontier relations and a formation of new cultural phenomena.</p></abstract><abstract xml:lang="en"><p>The article analyzes the main approaches to the study of Frontier Theory. In various examples, the author shows the diversity of frontiers as a special cultural model. A special attention is paid to the analysis of frontier model developed by a Siberian scientist I. P. Basalaeva. It has been shown the complexity of the definition of the frontier through the prism of the allocation of a number of markers that may be correct for a number of frontier types, and are not correlated with other historical frontiers. In his argument, the author relies mainly on the American frontier, as a reference, as it is the history of the American frontier that formed the basis Frontier Theory. As an alternative criteria, the author offers a number of new frontier markers, which could form the basis for the typology of the frontier. The main criteria for the frontier, according to the author of this article, is its heterotopia, which is the result of a meeting with new natural and cultural landscapes, what invariably leads to the transgression of all actors of frontier relations and a formation of new cultural phenomena.</p></abstract><kwd-group xml:lang="ru"><kwd>фронтир</kwd><kwd>фронтера</kwd><kwd>граница</kwd><kwd>теория</kwd><kwd>критерии</kwd><kwd>типологизация</kwd><kwd>культурная парадигма</kwd><kwd>культурная модель</kwd><kwd>Frontier</kwd><kwd>Frontera</kwd><kwd>borderline</kwd><kwd>theory</kwd><kwd>criteria</kwd><kwd>typology</kwd><kwd>cultural paradigm</kwd><kwd>cultural model</kwd></kwd-group><kwd-group xml:lang="en"><kwd>фронтир</kwd><kwd>фронтера</kwd><kwd>граница</kwd><kwd>теория</kwd><kwd>критерии</kwd><kwd>типологизация</kwd><kwd>культурная парадигма</kwd><kwd>культурная модель</kwd><kwd>Frontier</kwd><kwd>Frontera</kwd><kwd>borderline</kwd><kwd>theory</kwd><kwd>criteria</kwd><kwd>typology</kwd><kwd>cultural paradigm</kwd><kwd>cultural model</kwd></kwd-group><funding-group xml:lang="ru"><funding-statement /></funding-group><funding-group xml:lang="en"><funding-statement /></funding-group></article-meta></front><body /><back><ref-list /></back></article>