CC BY
41
Koziolova E. 1
Postgraduate student, Perm State Technical University
ANALYSIZ OF LANGUGE FEATURES OF ENGLISH ADVERTISMENTS FOR YOUNG PEOPLE (BASED ON PRINTED
MATTER EXAMPLES FOR WOMEN)
Abstract
The main topic of this article is English and American advertisements for female young people. First of all, the author describes the advertisement in common, and then passes to its language and style. The different texts of English and American youth advertisements are taken as a material of analysis and their entire specialty, such as literary, rhetorical, and lexical and syntax features are described. The author gives examples in English. Although short, this article provides a current overview of other similar works and compares it.
Key words: advertisement, language features, young people, English.
Стремительный рост массового производства, международное развитие торговых отношений, глобализация рынка - главные составляющие современного положения дел, где реклама играет одну из важнейших ролей. реклама играет огромную роль в сфере маркетинга экономики и товарно - денежных отношений. Не только внешний вид или красивое оформление рекламных объявлений привлекает внимание потребителей, но и языковые средства и стилистические средства значительно влияют на товара или услуги у потребителей.
Считается, что лондонский предприниматель Девид Огилви по праву является создателем рекламы [1]. Поэтому английский язык можно смело считать «проязыком» современной рекламы, что делает английскую рекламу ещё более привлекательной для изучения, а именно используемые в рекламных текстах средства художественно выразительности, стилистические и лексические особенности. Перечисленные пункты будут подробно рассмотрены в данной статье, на примере рекламных текстов, размещённых в печатных изданиях для женской молодёжной (от 21 до 30-33 лет) аудитории.
В качестве материала исследования, отобраны более 300 примеров рекламных текстов, вышедших в соответствующих англоязычных печатных изданиях. (Cosmopolitan, Glamour, Instyle, Seventeen). Рекламные тексты были на рассмотрены на всех уровнях: слоган, сновная часть, эхо-фраза.
В первую очередь следует отметить, что в молодёжный англоязычном рекламный текст использовано большое количество различных тропов. Наиболее часто встречаются олицетворения (Geox: “Breathing technology”; Venus: “...to your skin’s need”; Cosmopolitan для Zara: “Grab these babies on sale”; bareMinerals: “Be a force of beauty”), метонимия (Tastecard: “...with free smartphone apps for your Iphone, Blackberry and Android.”; Cosmo prize: “Beautiful bags, Louboutin, luxiry facials.”; Cosmo prize: “Win for champagne lifestyle.”) и метафора (Argan Oil: “Unique blend of modern science and the ancient argan oil; Olay: “.pushing the limits of beauty”; L’oreal: “Switch on luminosity.”). Повторы (Maxfactor: “the make-up of make up artists”; Aussie: “More bottle, more shine.”) и сравнения (Ikea: “Sleep like a Princess.”) встречаются реже. Синекдоха, литота антономазию и аллитерацию мы в отобранных рекламных сообщениях не обнаружили. Остальные тропы встречаются очень редко.
Касательно особенностей стилистики в англоязычной рекламе, то чаще в рекламном сообщении встречаются риторический вопрос (Aussie: “Does my Aussie look big in this?”; Chanel: “Wich chance is yours?”; Image Professionals: “Do you love style and fashion?”;) и предложения не полной конструкции (fabody: “Creates a flattering silhouette.”; Clairol: “Designed with colour experts.”; Swarovski: “Sexy, confident and smart.”). Простые (Pantene: “New Shampoo instantly helps to mend split end.”) и сложные (Laser clinic: “When it comes to our credential, we have a proud heritage of treating thousands of satisfied clients over a past 10 years.”) предложения встречаются реже. Другие исследовали англоязычных рекламных текстов (например, О. Сычев) отмечают, что в текстах англоязычной рекламы отсутствует рифма [2]. Но в отобранных текстах, было использовано несколько стилистических приёмов рифмы (Elseve: “This shade, it’s not made to fade.”). Игра слов так же встречается в данной рекламе (bareMinerals: “Pretty is what you are. Beauty is what you do with it.”).
0. Сычев, так же подчеркивает, что в тексте англоязычного рекламного сообщения отсутствуют иностранные слова [2]. Однако в молодежной англоязычной рекламе, можно найти несколько случаев присутствия иностранных слов, в частности французских (Lancom: “Rouge in love”; L’oreal: “Recherche avancee.”).
Что касается, других лексических особенностей англоязычной молодежной рекламы, то глаголы чаще всего стоят в побудительном наклонении (Tomas Sabo: “Charm up your life.”; Swarovski: “Live big and go for it.”; wella: “express you style.”) и настоящем простом (Pantene: “My hair looks and feels”; bareMinerals: “All the coverage you want.”). Проведшее (Ikea: “Our mattress guide recommended.”) время глаголов встречаются редко. Будущее время мы не обнаружили совсем. Прилагательные в основном использованы в начальной (L’oreal: “Hair looks lominous, shiny.”; geox: “Beautiful and always at ease confident.”) или превосходной (Northern Clinic: “The latest development .”; Wella: “Find your nearest wella salon now.”; Pantene: “.the healthiest it’s ever been”) степенях.
Следует так же отметить, что все слова на уровне слова, предложения или текста носят исключительно положительный эмоциональный окрас.
В заключении следует так же напомнить, что рекламный текст это не совсем обычный текст, потому что его основной функцией является манипулятивная функция, а его основной целью является побудить адресата совершить желаемое для отправителя действие. Внимательно изучив примеры англоязычной молодёжной рекламы, можно сделать вывод, что все стилистические и языковые приёмы направлены на выполнение данной функции.
Литература
1. Роман К. Дэвид Огилви и современная реклама. М.: Эксмо, 2010. — С. 4
2. Сычев О. А. Филологический анализ американской рекламы // Речевое воздействие в сфере массовой коммуникации, Наука, 2007. - С. 53-54.
Малахова В.Л.
Кандидат филологических наук, Белгородский юридический институт МВД России ПРИТЯЖАТЕЛЬНЫЕ НОМИНАЦИИ КАК СРЕДСТВО УПОРЯДОЧИВАНИЯ ПРАГМА-СЕМАНТИЧЕСКОЙ
СИСТЕМЫ АНГЛИЙСКОГО ДИСКУРСА
Аннотация
Статья посвящена анализу особенностей формирования функциональной системности английского дискурса с позиций лингвосинергетики. Автор описывает процесс формирования прагма-семантических планов английского дискурса на примере притяжательных номинаций.
Ключевые слова: лингвосинергетика, система, дискурс, прагма-семантический, притяжательные номинации.
104
Malakhova V.L.
PhD in Philology, assosiate professor, Belgorod Law Institute of the Ministry of the Interior of Russia POSSESSIVE NOMINATIONS AS A MEANS OF STRUCTURING PRAGMATIC AND SEMANTIC SYSTEMITY OF ENGLISH
DISCOURSE
Abstract
The article is devoted to the specificity of the formation of the discourse functional systemity in terms of linguosynergetics. The author describes the process of formation of the English discourse pragmatic and semantic plans and exemplify it with the use of possessive nominations.
Key words: linguosynergetics, system, discourse, pragmatic and semantic, possessive nominations.
The process of cognition implies the emergence of a variety of relationships between a person as an active subject and surroundings -animate and inanimate objects. Among the diversity of such connections, possessive relationships take a significant place.
The notion of possessiveness is rather mixed. Designating a certain relation of an object to another object or person, the category of possessiveness is not reducible solely to possessing. Possessiveness is a complex set of interdependent and interrelated meanings that make up an integrated system of relationships of this type (i.g. see [1, 2, 3]). The principle of formation of a pragmatic and semantic possessive meaning and the role of possessive nominations in structuring of general semantic space of the English discourse can be fully disclosed in the perspective of functional linguosynergetics, i.e. with the use of a dynamic and systemic approach.
As a theory of self-organization, synergetics studies facilities for system self-regulation when it is in the non-equilibrium state and is experiencing an influence from without or from within which may disorder the system. System self-regulation is seen as alternation of phases of stabilization and chaotization. This dynamic process occurs within the system under the influence of the external environment and brings to the emergence of new system properties.
So, linguosynergetics understands any system as a functional dynamic open non-linear non-equilibrium structure and system selforganization as a cumulative interacting of system elements or elementary systems. Such comprehension is applicable to the consideration of a discourse, since it is a multi-dimensional multi-level structure with the complex internal hierarchy which includes small elements and major components that are in interaction and influence each other. Discourse constantly interacts with the environment and undergoes shifts from the equilibrium state to the non-equilibrium one. That is why discourse can be seen as an area of intersection of three (sub)systems - the consciousness of communicants, the language system and the communication situation. These (sub)systems make up the environment for the discourse (for detailed information see [4, 5]).
Like other linguistic phenomena, possessive nominations can have an impact on organization or chaotization of the pragmatic and semantic plans of the English discourse. On the other hand, the dependence of the possessive meaning formation on the certain discursive space, i.e. on complex mechanisms of linear and non-linear interaction between elements and systematic properties of the discourse, is also obvious.
The usage of a functional synergistic approach to the study of possessiveness shows that formation of a pragmatic and semantic possessive meaning in the English discourse is a non-linear process. It means that due to even minor impacts on the system of discourse, there can be spontaneous emergence of new semantic and pragmatic meanings, which could seem not to have initially formed in the space of the discourse. For example:
I waited, crouched in the position for some time. But then I started to think: if a woman did come out, how would I know it was Daniel’s flat she had come out of and not one of the other flats in the building? What would I do? Challenge her? Make a citizen’s arrest? [6, p. 234].
Thus, the linear perception of the possessive meaning formed in the above abstract by a possessive construction N’s + N implies its comprehension as “action of a person’s detention”. As a consequence, there can be an impression that the action expressed by the noun arrest and being the object of the possessive relationship is directed at the subject of the relationship expressed by the noun citizen - arrest (of whom?) of the citizen. However, in the general functional and semantic plans of this discourse, a non-linear effect arises - the action is directed not at the object of the possessive relationship but it is the action of the subject - the detention of a person by a civilian. Such specification of the possessive meaning is possible due to the interaction of components What would I do? and Challenge her?, on the one hand, and to the usage of the expression make arrest, on the other. As a result, the formed possessive meaning changes the vector of the action orientation (it shifts from the external object to the very doer of the action). This, in turn, enriches the semantic plan of the text fragment and strengthens the pragmatic meaning of possessiveness.
At the same time, the nature of the semantic and pragmatic possessive meaning in this case is up to the selection of the linguistic means for its expression. In other words, the functionally effective discourse formation and reaching of the communicative goals depend on the linguistic means properly selected to form the exact possessive meaning. If in this abstract instead of the construction N’s + N was used, say, the construction N1 of N2 (the arrest of a citizen) or a unit of the lexical level (e.g., her arrest), there would be a shift of the pragmatic meaning of possessiveness as in this case in the basis of the formed possessive meaning there is an action directed at the subject of the possessive relationship. Consequently, the functional meaning of a discourse, its pragmatic effect, is dependent on the choice of the strategy and tactics of speech, linguistic means, syntactic structure, etc. The proper understanding of the semantic and pragmatic possessive meaning is possible due to the ability of the communicants to perceive the important elements of the semantic plan of the English discourse. If the exchange of information between the discourse and the consciousness of the addressee is distorted in some way, there could be disruption of formation of the possessive meaning and distortion of its pragmatics.
So, thanks to functional interaction of the elements of the discourse space and an external influence on it (the consciousness of the communicants), there can be formed such a semantic system in which the dynamics of semantic and syntactic relations causes the emergence of new, spontaneous, pragmatic meanings. Depending on the general discourse, possessive nominations form pragmatic and semantic possessive meanings which obtain certain connotations. Specifying of such connotations is possible due to the functional synergetic analysis of discourse, i.e. due to the usage of a functional synergistic approach to the study of possessiveness.
References
1. Seiler H. Possession as an operational dimension of language. - Tubingen: Gunter Narr Verlag, 1983. - 320 p.
2. Bondarko A. V. Introductory statements // The theory of functional grammar. Location. Existence. Possessiveness. Conditionality. - St. Petersburg: “Nauka”, 1996. - P. 99-100.
3. Seliverstova O. N. Transactions on semantics. - Moscow: Languages of the Slavonic Culture, 2004. - 960 p.
4. Ponomarenko E. V. Systemity of functional relations in the modern English discourse: Diss. of Doctor of Philology. - Moscow, 2004. - 447 p.
5. Borbotko V. G. Principles of discourse formation: From psycholinguistics to linguosynergetics. - Moscow: KomKniga, 2007. -
288 p.
6. Fielding H. Bridget Jones’s diary. - London: Picador, 2001. - 310 p.
105
