CC BY
66ЯЗЫКОЗНАНИЕ. ТЕОРИЯ ЯЗЫКА
LINGUISTICS. LANGUAGE THEORY
Научная статья Филологические науки
УДК 1751 https://doi.Org/10.26907/2658-3321.2022.5.1.46-54
КОНЦЕПТ «ВЕЖЛИВОСТЬ» В ПОЛИТИЧЕСКОМ ДИСКУРСЕ И КОММУНИКАТИВНЫЕ СТРАТЕГИИ ВЕЖЛИВОСТИ
7 2
А.А. Абдрахманова , Е.М. Колпакова
Казанский (Приволжский) федеральный университет, Казань, Россия 1zaliya@mail. ru, http://orcid. org/0000-0002-9453-8981 2kolpackowak@yandex. ru
Аннотация. Статья посвящена изучению регулятивного концепта «вежливость», реализуемого в политическом англо- и русскоязычном дискурсе. Кроме того, понятие «вежливость» изучается и в более широком смысле, как с философской точки зрения, так и в обыденной реальности. Реализуемый концепт рассматривается не только как категория речевого этикета, но и как составляющая национальной концептосферы, отдельная коммуникативная категория, выражающая себя через различные языковые и экстралингвистические средства в каждом языке. Описание этой коммуникативной категории выходит за рамки понимания «вежливости» как культурного феномена, поскольку исследование демонстрирует реализацию категории в политическом дискурсе и позволяет проследить формирование определенного паттерна поведения и способа выражения мыслей носителей конкретного языка. Концепт в данном случае реализуется вербально и отчетливо прослеживается в процессе общения (при реализации ассоциативного потенциала). В данном случае изучение категории «вежливость» невозможно переоценить, так как ее рассмотрение через призму когнитивной лингвистики делает возможным изучение репрезентации действительности и восприятия картины мира, а ее рассмотрение в политическом дискурсе изучает способы прямого воздействия на аудиторию.
Ключевые слова: концепт; вежливость; политический дискурс; лингвистическая культура; концептуальная картина мира
Для цитирования: Абдрахманова А.А., Колпакова Е.М. Концепт вежливость в политическом дискурсе и коммуникативные стратегии вежливости. Казанский лингвистический журнал. 2022;5(1): 46-54. (In Eng.) https://doi.org/10.26907/2658-3321.2022.5.1.46-54
Original article Philology studies
https://doi.org/10.26907/2658-3321.2022.5.1.46-54
THE CONCEPT OF "POLITENESS" IN THE POLITICAL DISCOURSE AND THE STRATEGIES OF COMMUNICATIVE POLITENESS A.A. Abdrakhmanova, E.M. Kolpakova
Kazan (Volga region) Federal University, Kazan, Russia [email protected], http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9453-8981 [email protected] Abstract. This article is devoted to the study of the regulatory concept of "politeness", implemented in the political English-and Russian-language discourse. In addition, the concept of "politeness" is also understood in a broader sense from a philosophical point of view, as well as everyday reality. The implemented concept is considered not only as a category of speech etiquette but
also as a component of the national concept sphere, a separate communicative category that expresses itself through different linguistic and extra-linguistic means in each language. The description of this communicative category goes beyond the understanding of "politeness" as a cultural phenomenon since, in the current study, the concept of "politeness" in political discourse allows us to trace the formation of certain behavior and way of expressing the thoughts of native speakers of a certain language. The concept, in this case, is verbal and can be traced more clearly in the process of communication (using the associative potential). In this case, the study of the category of "politeness" cannot be overestimated, since its study through the prism of cognitive linguistics makes it possible to represent reality and a realizable picture of the world, and its consideration in political discourse studies the ways of direct influence on the audience.
Keywords: concept; politeness; political discourse; linguistic culture; conceptual picture of the world
For citation: Abdrakhmanova A.A., Kolpakova E.M. The Concept of "Politeness" in the Political Discourse and the Strategies of Communicative Politeness. Kazan Linguistic Journal. 2022;5(1): 46-54. https://doi.org/10.26907/2658-332L2022.5J.46-54
Introduction
In modern realities, effective communication is the key to the implementation of certain events. In the 21st century all disciplines that provide a communicative impact on a person are extremely popular [1].
This article refers to the study of communicative options, the implementation of the concept of "politeness" through the prism of political discourse, considered in the framework of the English and Russian languages. The increased attention of a person to the nature of speech utterances and their peculiarities leads to new linguistic studies, and in particular to the increased attention of linguists to the consideration of a special product of language activity - a discourse that reveals language utterances from different sides.
The growing scientific interest in the consideration of the linguocognitive, linguopolitological and linguoculturological orientation of scientific knowledge, as well as the idea of the anthropocentricity of language, which reveals from a new perspective the process of functioning and implementation of concepts within the framework of political discourse, determines the relevance of the topic.
A certain picture of the world requires the assimilation of a certain concept. This concept (in our case, the concept of "politeness") finds certain ways of expression in the studied languages (Russian and English), which hypothetically determines a partially similar linguistic consciousness of native speakers. The object
of the study is the socio-political discourse. The subject of the research is the communicative strategies of politeness, as well as the implementation of the concept of "politeness" in the Russian-speaking and English-speaking socio-political discourse.
Methods
The purpose of this work is to identify the features of the functioning of strategies and tactics of verbal influence, so the following methods were used: descriptive analysis, contrastive and comparative analysis, content - analysis, discursive analysis.
Results
The central of the term of "political linguistics" is political discourse, which is a special kind of discourse and has as its goal the conquest and retention of political power. Political discourse also considers verbal interaction, where the communicative influence on the opponent directly depends on speech behavior, planning, communication and tactics, namely, on the verbalization of certain concepts.
The study of the concept of "politeness" from the position of cognitive linguistics provides an opportunity to understand reality with the identification of value-based collective and individual pictures of the world. Consideration of the features of the concept verbalization within the framework of political discourse allows us to contribute to the researching of the ways how to influence the audience.
The focus of attention of scientists who consider the influence of certain categories on the linguistic consciousness is human activity that contributes to the perception of the world, its practical development, and understanding of the mechanisms of the processes occurring in it [2]. Thus, the concept is undoubtedly the key link in linguopolitical and cultural linguistics.
The concept is an extremely complex component - therefore, it still does not have a clear definition. For the first time in Russian linguistics, the definition of the term "concept" was given by S. A. Askold in the first half of the 20th century. According to him, a concept is a mental formation that includes an indefinite set of objects, thoughts, and actions of the same kind in the process of thought [3; 4]. It is
considered to be that the main definition of the concept is given by M. V. Pimenova, who under the term of "concept" implies a representation of a part of the world that has a complex structure and defined by means of features that are implemented in a variety of linguistic ways or means [5; 6]. Concepts are presented as multi-sided «idealized formations» [7], which contain a conceptual, figurative and value component [2].
A concept is a form of perception. It implements the expression of national and social and personal self-knowledge, determines the attitude of a person to the world. The concept has a verbal and non-verbal form, is involved in the process of communication and is used both in the professional and in the household sphere and realized in process of receiving feedback, which expands the associative potential of the concept based on images, memories, symbols and motives. The most important role in the formation of the concept is played by the type of activity and experience of a person, as well as the overall perception of his environment. Thus, the concept is the basis of a person's mental and speech activity. Numerous variants of the definition of this concept allow us to single out some of the generally accepted by the linguists' features: it is a unit of the mental level; the edge of the human mentality and extra-linguistic reality; realization of a world's picture of a certain nationality; verbalization through various linguistic means.
In this article we discuss the features of the concept of "politeness" - one of the central categories of communicative behavior, theoretical aspects of studying the concept of "politeness", the content and functioning of the category in the English-language political discourse, the problem of category formation among native speakers.
The category of "politeness" is traditionally understood as a behavioral moral category of speech etiquette. Consideration of the category "politeness" from the point of view of belonging to the conceptual sphere proves that this category is a full-fledged communicative category and manifests itself in various linguistic and extra-linguistic means. The concept of "politeness" is not limited to the description of the moral category of behavior and the sociocultural concept [4]. In the modern
world, it is considered that a polite person is a person who respects the feelings of others, a person who has impeccable manners and meek behavior. However, the polite attitude of a person can be combined with his low goals and lack of respect for the interlocutor.
That is why in English "politeness" is revealed by two lexical expressions: polite as "polite" and polite as "courteous and gentle", where the first meaning implies external demeanors and the second is a combination of external manners, coupled with a kind-hearted attitude [8]. For the British, "politeness" is a demonstration of manners and attention to others. In the Russian language, the word "politeness" was originally polysemantic, and a polite person was considered a "knowledgeable and reasonable" person. In the course of historical development, the word "politeness" acquires the additional meaning of "obeying the rules of decency". It is the second meaning of the word that becomes the main one. Here we can note that in different cultures the concept of "politeness" may have a different vector of direction and attitude.
"English courtesy" is aimed at the object; "Russian politeness" is the prerogative of the subject. According to the generally accepted opinion, the British, unlike the Russians, are true connoisseurs of etiquette, gallant, courteous, tactful and even somewhat prim people, but on the other hand they are characterized by restraint, silence, equanimity and some indifference.
Thus, the content side of the concept of "politeness" in the Russian consciousness belongs to: sociability, refusal of formality, decency, tact, expression of respect for all, observance of the rules of decency [9]. In the English mind, the concept of "politeness" is revealed through well-feigned indifference, refinement of manners, courtesy and symbolically conditional respect for a person, the ability to present oneself in society [8].
The study of the "politeness" phenomenon from the perspective of cognitive linguistics is quite popular, a number of studies are devoted to the consideration of the category of politeness in the works of N. P. Savoyskaya, T. V. Larina, T. S. Medvedeva, P. Brown, S. Levinson, I. Hoffman, etc.
Within the framework of this article we will present the most popular options for polite communication that can be considered from the point of view of political discourse. The development of the first strategy of politeness belongs to I. Hoffman. First of all, Hoffman considers the question of mutual influence of communication participants during direct contact (face to face interaction). According to his theory, in the process of communication, two types of interpersonal rituals are defined [10]: a representation ritual (actions that demonstrate the speaker's attitude to others) and a ritual of avoidance (respectful forms of distance from the recipient). For example, instead of the imperative "Make adjustments to the project", you can use "let's make adjustments to the project". Hoffman believes that interpersonal rituals always contain a certain degree of politeness and respect, at least to the extent that others deserve it.
The theory of "linguistic politeness" reveals the work of P. Brown and S. Stevenson that was based on the basic principles of I. Hoffmann. According to their understanding, politeness is the ability to keep a face and the competent use of communication strategies so that the communicants do not have to feel awkward in the process of communication. It is Brown and Stevenson who introduce the terms of "positive face" (positive attitude and desire to be accepted) and "negative face" (expression of a personal point of view, regardless of the impression made, unwillingness to feel pressure from others) [11]. It should be noted that in the process of communication it is also possible that a "threat" arises, directed at the opponent.
Given all of the above we see that in this case politeness is a certain sequence of speech acts that contains a possible threat to the "positive" and "negative face" of the interlocutor. Therefore, linguists have identified two types of politeness: negative and positive. The first is intended to express the desire of the interlocutor to abstract, to have the right to have a freedom for action and to be independent. The second strategy is focused on the negative face, designed to emphasize the lack of pressure. Examples of this type are evasive conversation (Could you tell me what time it is?); a request (Will you pick me up after meeting?); an understatement of inconvenience and obligation (I just wanted to ask if you would lend me a piece of paper?).
Positive politeness is aimed at maintaining a harmonious dialogue and hiding threats [6, p. 216]. Here one of the objects of communication respects the desire of the interlocutor to have a "positive face". Display of solidarity (Of course I understand, how can I help you?), friendly expressions, (I'm so sorry to hear it), desire for cooperation (It's enough for today. Let's have a coffee break), expressions of hope (I hope you'll help me) are strategies of positive politeness. All of these strategies are aimed at making a person feel respected from the outside: the addressee cares about his own interests.
In addition to the positive and negative types of politeness, which are responsible for different communicative characteristics, linguists also distinguished the formal, neutral and informal categories of politeness according to the stylistic principle. The highest frequency of use belongs to the so-called neutral politeness.
Discussion
Thus we note that this article reflects the views of linguists regarding the definitions and nature of concepts, discloses the structure of the concept of "politeness" and notes the specific features of the perception of this category according to Russian and English national consciousness. According to the above categories, one can testify to the discrepancy between the conceptual picture of the world in the communicative consciousness of the Russians and the British, however, based on the results obtained, it cannot be concluded that one nation is more polite than another.
The role of the above-mentioned concept is also important in political discourse. The implementation of the chosen concept in political discourse, which is characterized by the tactics of persuasion, ignorance and manipulation let us trace the basis for establishing the methods of linguistic understanding of reality to identify the priority values of the collective and individual pictures of the world. Through positive and negative politeness, a person is able to reveal the whole essence of human communication, based on the comparison of actions performed in the process of verbal communication. In other words, this process is a kind of balance core in human communication, due to the observance of measures and balance in the dialogue between people. Both of these types are firmly connected in oral speech, and
it is on their interaction that the linguocultural tradition of not only the English language, but other currently existing languages is formed.
Список литературы
1. Почепцов Г.Г. Теория коммуникаций. М.: Рефл-бук, К.: Ваклер; 2001.
2. Карасик В.И. Оценочные доминанты в языковой картине мира. Единство систем и функциональный анализ языковых единиц. Белгород; 1999.
3. Аскольдов С.А. Концепт и слово. Русская словесность. От теории словесности к структуре текста. М.: Академия; 1997. с.267-279.
4. Карасик В.И. Культурные доминанты в языке. Языковая личность: культурные концепты: сборник научных трудов. Волгоград; Архангельск: Перемена; 1996. с.3-16.
5. Пименова М.В. Концептуализация чувства в русской языковой карте мира. Мир человека и мир языка. Кемерово: Комплекс Графика; 2003. с.58-120.
6. Goffman E. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life [Text]. Social Sciences Research Centre; 1959. p.251
7. Ляпин С.Х. Концептология: к становлению подхода. Концепты. Выпуск 1. Архангельск; 1997. с. 16.
8. Алтунин А.А. Функциональный аспект концепта «вежливость» в английской лингвокультуре. Вестник Адыгейского государственного университета. Сер. Филология и искусствоведение; 2009. с.81-85.
9. Богданова А.Г. Объективация концептуальных признаков важности в русскоязычной картине мира. Новое в славянской филологии; отв.ред Пименова М.В. Севастополь; 2009. с.295-311.
10. Goffman E. Interaction Ritual: Essays in Face-to-face Behavior. Aldine Publishing Company; 1967. p.19-40.
11. Brown R., Levinson S. Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge [Text]. p.312-318.
References
1. Pocheptsov G.G. Communication theory. M.: Refl-buk, K.: Vakler; 2001. (In Russ.)
2. Karasik V. I. Evaluative dominants in the linguistic picture of the world. Unity of systems and functional analysis of language units. Belgorod; 1999. (In Russ.)
3. Askoldov S.A. Concept and word. Russian literature. From the theory of literature to the structure of the text. M.: Academia; 1997. p.267-279 (In Russ.)
4. Karasik V. I. Cultural dominants in the language. Linguistic personality: cultural concepts: collection of scientific papers. Volgograd; Arkhangel'sk: Peremena; 1996. p.3-16. (In Russ.)
5. Pimenova M.V. Conceptualization of feeling in the Russian language map of the world. The world of man and the world of language. Kemerovo: Kompleks Grafika»; 2003. p.58-120. (In Russ.)
6. Goffman E. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life [Text]. Social Sciences Research Centre; 1959.
7. Lyapin S.H. Conceptology: towards the formation of an approach. Concepts. Vypusk 1. Arkhangel'sk; 1997. (In Russ.)
8. Altunin A.A. The functional aspect of the concept of "politeness" in English linguoculture. Vestnik Adygeyskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Ser. Filologiya i iskusstvovedenie; 2009. p.81-
85. (In Russ.)
9. Bogdanova A.G. Objectification of conceptual signs of importance in the Russian-speaking picture of the world. Novoye v slavyanskoy filologii; otv.red Pimenova M.V. Sevastopol'; 2009. p.295-311. (In Russ.)
10. Goffman E. Interaction Ritual: Essays in Face-to-face Behavior. Aldine Publishing Company; 1967. p.19-40.
11. Brown R., Levinson S. Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge [Text]. p.312-318.
Авторы публикации
Абдрахманова Алия Альбертовна —
кандидат филологических наук, доцент Казанский федеральный университет Казань, Россия E-mail: z_aliya@mail. ru http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9453-8981
Колпакова Екатерина Михайловна —
магистрант
Казанский федеральный университет Казань, Россия
E-mail: kolpackowak@yandex. ru
Раскрытие информации о конфликте интересов
Автор заявляет об отсутствии конфликта интересов.
Информация о статье
Поступила в редакцию: 22.01.2022 Одобрена после рецензирования: 28.02.2022 Принята к публикации: 7.03.2022
Автор прочитал и одобрил окончательный вариант рукописи.
Информация о рецензировании
«Казанский лингвистический журнал» благодарит анонимного рецензента (рецензентов) за их вклад в рецензирование этой работы.
Authors of the publication
Abdrakhmanova Aliya Albertovna —
PhD in Philology, Associate Professor
Kazan Federal University
Kazan, Russia
E-mail: [email protected]
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9453-8981
Kolpakova Ekaterina Mikhailovna —
Student of master program Kazan Federal University Kazan, Russia
E-mail: kolpackowak@,yandex. ru
Conflicts of Interest Disclosure
The author declares that there is no conflict of interest.
Article info
Subbmitted: 22.01.2022
Approved after peer reviewing: 28.02.2022
Accepted for publication: 7.03.2022
The author has read and approved the final manuscript.
Peer review info
Kazan Linguistic Journal thanks the anonymous reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.
