Problems of Discourse Typology in Linguistics

When defining the term Discourse, the difference between its content and structure converges on the basis of speech, the presentation of one's own thoughts. Social activity requires consideration of discourse in the context of communicative activity, taking into account its inseparable socio-psychological characteristics. In linguistic science, even in the context of the structure of discourse, the vision of scientists-researchers in the general solution has not been formed. Nevertheless, it is obvious that there is a certain system of steps of organized communication and the structure of the exchange of speech actions. In the article, some typology sections are conventionally named “typology”, “structural typology”, “comparative typology”, “regional typology”, “counterlinguistics”, “linguistic universals”, “translation grammar”, “comparative typological linguistics” and others. The terms “matching” and “comparison method” are often synonymous. Such a proliferation of terms shows that linguistic typology is not yet firmly established as a science. In linguistics, it includes the discipline of each section and all types of linguistic typology, the juxtaposition of comparative and typological methods, the typological description of related and unrelated languages, characteristic and uncharacteristic studies, etc. To determine such contradictory views, these studies were and are necessary. On the one hand, modern journalistic discourse is characterized by an abundance of template forms of Moderna, ready-made blocks, turns and speech stereotypes. On the other hand, journalism is full of methods and forms that are not fixed in the language sphere and created in a certain speech situation with a certain communicative purpose. Among the many media typical of Moderna discourse, the main focus is on influencing the information and emotions of the addressee and achieving a positive communicative result. These concepts are also significantly disclosed in the article.