The subject of the study is memorial objects of traditional Chinese culture – temple complexes, pagodas, cave monasteries, imperial necropolises, historical axes of planning, and archaeological zones – as structural dominants of the symbolic space of modern Chinese cities. The focus is on their role in shaping urban identity, maintaining cultural memory, and organizing the semiotic structure of the urban landscape in the context of accelerated modernization and globalization. Using the examples of Kaifeng and Luoyang, the analysis investigates how these objects retain their status as meaningful centers amidst changing socio-economic contexts, as well as how their functions transform from religious and political to cultural-representational, touristic, and image-related. Special attention is given to the mechanisms of integrating memorial complexes into contemporary urban planning and commercial strategies, as well as the nature of their interaction with new architectural structures and mass tourism infrastructure. Thus, the study aims to identify patterns of cultural heritage symbolization within the space of modern Chinese cities. The methodological foundation of the research is based on Yuri M. Lotman's cultural semiotics (concepts of the semiosphere, boundaries, and urban text). Methods of semiotic analysis, comparative-historical correlation, and critical discourse analysis of normative and touristic texts are employed. A strategy of triangulation of empirical data is applied, which includes the analysis of urban planning documentation, statistics on tourist flows, and heritage preservation materials. The scientific novelty of this research lies in the innovative intercultural application of Lotman's theory of spatial semiotics to the unique material of ancient historical Chinese cities. For the first time, a comprehensive model for comparative analysis of mechanisms of cultural symbolization is proposed and tested in two contrasting types of urban semiospheres: a strictly centripetal one, characteristic of Kaifeng's space, and a complex duocentric sacred-landscape one, illustrated by Luoyang. The work convincingly shows that historical memorial objects function not merely as a static architectural heritage of the past but act as active, dynamic boundaries and crucial nodes for recoding cultural meanings. Furthermore, significant differences in contemporary methods of commodifying historical memory are detailed, and specific modes of interaction between traditional sacred and modern touristic discourses in the context of current urban development are analyzed.
Enyu Yang (2026) studied this question.