美国政治对话话语中的非合作策略(基于新闻简报类型)

IF 0.2 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS
A. Chepurnaya
{"title":"美国政治对话话语中的非合作策略(基于新闻简报类型)","authors":"A. Chepurnaya","doi":"10.17223/19986645/79/8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article presents results of analyzing the strategic dimension of dialogic discourse, with focus on non-cooperative communicative strategies employed by dialogue participants. The term \"non-cooperative strategy” in this study is defined in a broad sense, namely, as a communicative strategy associated with a violation of principles underlying successful communicative cooperation, but not necessarily related to hostile rhetoric. In the present research, identifying non-cooperative strategies was based on Grice's cooperative principle and Leech's politeness principle. The analysis of dialogic discourse relied on Baranov and Kreydlin's concept of illocutionary necessitation which characterizes the relationship between utterances in a dialogue and suggests distinguishing between necessitating and necessitated dialogue utterances. Transcripts of press briefings held by Donald Trump and members of the Coronavirus Task Force in April 2020 were used as data for the research. A total of 10 press briefing transcripts were analyzed. The relevance of the study is due to the trend towards \"legitimization” of verbal aggression, noted by some researchers of American political discourse. The article describes the most representative non-cooperative strategies revealed in the discourses under analysis, namely shifting the topic, logorrhea, ignoring, accusation, biting remark, reproach, control over the situation, delegitimization and objection. The study found that the functioning of some of the described strategies has a specific limitation in terms of the utterance type. Thus, the strategies of shifting the topic, ignoring and objection are confined to a necessitated utterance, while the strategies of accusation, biting remark, reproach, control over the situation and delegitimization can be implemented in both necessitating and necessitated utterances. Based on this finding, it is proposed to distinguish between bound and free non-cooperative strategies in dialogic discourse. The results of the study enrich the theory of dialogue by suggesting a typology of strategies for non-cooperative dialogic interaction based on the notion of illocutionary necessitation. Further scientific inquiry into communicative strategies in dialogic discourse will allow clarifying and expanding the conclusions drawn about the functional dependence of dialogic discourse strategies on the utterance type and about the possibility of distinguishing between bound and free strategies in dialogic interaction. © 2022 Tomsk State University. All rights reserved.","PeriodicalId":43853,"journal":{"name":"Vestnik Tomskogo Gosudarstvennogo Universiteta Filologiya-Tomsk State University Journal of Philology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Non-cooperative strategies in American political dialogic discourse (based on the press briefing genre)\",\"authors\":\"A. Chepurnaya\",\"doi\":\"10.17223/19986645/79/8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The article presents results of analyzing the strategic dimension of dialogic discourse, with focus on non-cooperative communicative strategies employed by dialogue participants. The term \\\"non-cooperative strategy” in this study is defined in a broad sense, namely, as a communicative strategy associated with a violation of principles underlying successful communicative cooperation, but not necessarily related to hostile rhetoric. In the present research, identifying non-cooperative strategies was based on Grice's cooperative principle and Leech's politeness principle. The analysis of dialogic discourse relied on Baranov and Kreydlin's concept of illocutionary necessitation which characterizes the relationship between utterances in a dialogue and suggests distinguishing between necessitating and necessitated dialogue utterances. Transcripts of press briefings held by Donald Trump and members of the Coronavirus Task Force in April 2020 were used as data for the research. A total of 10 press briefing transcripts were analyzed. The relevance of the study is due to the trend towards \\\"legitimization” of verbal aggression, noted by some researchers of American political discourse. The article describes the most representative non-cooperative strategies revealed in the discourses under analysis, namely shifting the topic, logorrhea, ignoring, accusation, biting remark, reproach, control over the situation, delegitimization and objection. The study found that the functioning of some of the described strategies has a specific limitation in terms of the utterance type. Thus, the strategies of shifting the topic, ignoring and objection are confined to a necessitated utterance, while the strategies of accusation, biting remark, reproach, control over the situation and delegitimization can be implemented in both necessitating and necessitated utterances. Based on this finding, it is proposed to distinguish between bound and free non-cooperative strategies in dialogic discourse. The results of the study enrich the theory of dialogue by suggesting a typology of strategies for non-cooperative dialogic interaction based on the notion of illocutionary necessitation. Further scientific inquiry into communicative strategies in dialogic discourse will allow clarifying and expanding the conclusions drawn about the functional dependence of dialogic discourse strategies on the utterance type and about the possibility of distinguishing between bound and free strategies in dialogic interaction. © 2022 Tomsk State University. All rights reserved.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43853,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Vestnik Tomskogo Gosudarstvennogo Universiteta Filologiya-Tomsk State University Journal of Philology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Vestnik Tomskogo Gosudarstvennogo Universiteta Filologiya-Tomsk State University Journal of Philology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17223/19986645/79/8\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vestnik Tomskogo Gosudarstvennogo Universiteta Filologiya-Tomsk State University Journal of Philology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17223/19986645/79/8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文介绍了对话话语的策略维度的分析结果,重点是对话参与者使用的非合作交际策略。在本研究中,“非合作策略”一词被定义为广义的交际策略,即与成功交际合作的基本原则相关联的交际策略,但不一定与敌对修辞相关。在本研究中,非合作策略的识别基于Grice的合作原则和Leech的礼貌原则。对话性话语的分析依赖于Baranov和Kreydlin的言外必要概念,该概念描述了对话中话语之间的关系,并建议区分必要和必要的对话话语。唐纳德·特朗普和冠状病毒工作组成员于2020年4月举行的新闻发布会的文字记录被用作研究的数据。共分析了10份新闻发布会记录。这项研究的相关性是由于一些美国政治话语研究人员注意到的言语攻击“合法化”的趋势。文章描述了所分析话语中最具代表性的非合作策略,即转移话题、语带、忽视、指责、尖刻、指责、控制局面、去合法性和反对。研究发现,所描述的一些策略的功能在话语类型方面具有特定的局限性。因此,转移话题、忽视和反对等策略只能在必要话语中使用,而指责、尖刻评论、责备、控制局面和去合法化等策略则可以在必要话语和必要话语中使用。基于这一发现,我们提出了在对话语篇中区分约束和自由非合作策略。本研究的结果丰富了对话理论,提出了一种基于言外必要性概念的非合作对话互动策略类型学。对对话语篇中的交际策略进行进一步的科学研究,将有助于澄清和扩展对话语篇策略对话语类型的功能依赖,以及区分对话互动中束缚策略和自由策略的可能性。©2022托木斯克国立大学版权所有。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Non-cooperative strategies in American political dialogic discourse (based on the press briefing genre)
The article presents results of analyzing the strategic dimension of dialogic discourse, with focus on non-cooperative communicative strategies employed by dialogue participants. The term "non-cooperative strategy” in this study is defined in a broad sense, namely, as a communicative strategy associated with a violation of principles underlying successful communicative cooperation, but not necessarily related to hostile rhetoric. In the present research, identifying non-cooperative strategies was based on Grice's cooperative principle and Leech's politeness principle. The analysis of dialogic discourse relied on Baranov and Kreydlin's concept of illocutionary necessitation which characterizes the relationship between utterances in a dialogue and suggests distinguishing between necessitating and necessitated dialogue utterances. Transcripts of press briefings held by Donald Trump and members of the Coronavirus Task Force in April 2020 were used as data for the research. A total of 10 press briefing transcripts were analyzed. The relevance of the study is due to the trend towards "legitimization” of verbal aggression, noted by some researchers of American political discourse. The article describes the most representative non-cooperative strategies revealed in the discourses under analysis, namely shifting the topic, logorrhea, ignoring, accusation, biting remark, reproach, control over the situation, delegitimization and objection. The study found that the functioning of some of the described strategies has a specific limitation in terms of the utterance type. Thus, the strategies of shifting the topic, ignoring and objection are confined to a necessitated utterance, while the strategies of accusation, biting remark, reproach, control over the situation and delegitimization can be implemented in both necessitating and necessitated utterances. Based on this finding, it is proposed to distinguish between bound and free non-cooperative strategies in dialogic discourse. The results of the study enrich the theory of dialogue by suggesting a typology of strategies for non-cooperative dialogic interaction based on the notion of illocutionary necessitation. Further scientific inquiry into communicative strategies in dialogic discourse will allow clarifying and expanding the conclusions drawn about the functional dependence of dialogic discourse strategies on the utterance type and about the possibility of distinguishing between bound and free strategies in dialogic interaction. © 2022 Tomsk State University. All rights reserved.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
50.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Tomsk State University Journal of Philology was established with the aim of: - publishing the papers and reviews on the topical issues of modern philology: linguistics, literary studies, communication studies; - promoting the development of theoretical and practical research in the field of socio-humanitarian knowledge; - forging links among scholars from different regions of Russia and other countries. Tomsk State University Journal of Philology is an independent research journal that welcomes submissions from across the world.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信