LINGUO-PRAGMATIC ASPECT OF MEDIA LANGUAGE ANALYSIS
Linguistic pragmatics is a discipline that studies language not “in itself and for itself”, but as a means used by a person in his activity. It is customary to say about natural language that it is the most important means of human communication. However, with the exception of so-called actual communication, i.e. communication for the sake of communication, we use language to solve some other problems through this: to inform about an important event, to induce the addressee to take certain actions or stop them, to express our feelings or evaluate someone's actions. Finally, in a number of cases, the use of language is if
Not the only, but the most basic component of an action that radically changes social reality or individual destiny (cf. the abolition of serfdom, the conclusion of a truce, the pronouncement of a guilty verdict or the award of a state award). Therefore, it is quite justified to study language as an instrument of action. It is from this point of view that linguistic phenomena are considered within the framework of linguistic pragmatics.
Exploring the language of the media from the standpoint of linguistic pragmatics, we must consider the statements produced in this area of speech activity as actions and focus our attention on those linguistic means and techniques, the use of which is designed to provide a planned impact on the consciousness of the addressee.
^ 1. THE THEORY OF SPEECH ACTS AS A FUNDAMENTAL THEORETICAL CONCEPT OF LINGUISTIC PRAGMATICS
The core of the theory of speech acts (hereinafter referred to as SPE) is the ideas set forth by the English logician J. Austin in a course of lectures given at Harvard University in 1955 and published in 1962 under the title "How to do things with words" (in Russian, this course was published under the title "Word as Action", see [Austin 1968]). Subsequently, these ideas were developed by the American logician J. Searle in the monograph "Speech Acts" 1 and in a number of articles (see [Searl 1986a, b, c]). The result was what might be called the standard theory of speech acts, in contrast to the various modifications that came later.
A distinctive feature of TRA in the approach to a linguistic statement is its interpretation as an action. If all previous logical-philosophical interpretations of the use of language were focused on the relation of a linguistic statement to (true or false) reality reflected in it, then in this theory the center of gravity is transferred to what action the speaker performs or tries to perform using the statement, what goals he while striving to achieve. To reflect this or that state of affairs in the world is the goal of only one of the many types of statements, namely statements of the representative or constative type 2 (, messages, descriptions, etc.), usually expressed in declarative sentences. But besides representatives, there are questions, orders, oaths, repentance, congratulations, gratitude, and many other types of speech actions, characterized by completely different goals. One cannot understand the essence of linguistic usage by limiting oneself to the study of the relation of the utterance to reality. It is necessary to include in consideration the relation of the utterance to the speaker and the addressee. (cf. conducted by general semiotics
Distinguishing between the semantic and pragmatic aspects of a linguistic sign in the process of communication.)
Considering language use from this point of view, TRA offered an original view of the structure of speech action, which, with minor changes, can be applied to any communicative acts, and not only to those that are carried out verbally.
^ The structure of a speech communicative act
A single speech act is presented in TRA as a three-level entity. The speech act in relation to the linguistic means used in its course acts as a locutionary act. The speech act in its relation to the goal manifested by the speaker and the conditions for its implementation acts as an illocutionary act. Finally, in relation to the impact that the speech act had on the listener (audience), it acts as a perlocutionary act. Let's explain this with a specific example. When we see on the first page of an opposition newspaper the statement in large type across the entire width of the page, INCREASING PROTEST PRESSURE ON THE AUTHORITIES, we, First of all, we analyze it as a locutionary act, which in turn includes:
a) (in the case of written language) the use of certain graphic symbols (letters, etc.) of a certain size and weight;
b) use of words build up, pressure, on and power with their inherent linguistic meanings in a given context and combining them into a sentence according to the grammar rules of a given language;
c) using these words to refer to certain objects and phenomena of reality - to the social group of potential readers of a given body, to the bodies ruling at a given time in a given country and possible actions of the former, expressing disagreement with the policy pursued by the latter, and aimed at to force them to adjust this policy.
Secondly, we analyze this utterance as an illocutionary act of invocation, with the aim of proposing a certain program of action and inducing the audience to implement this program.
Thirdly, we can analyze this statement as a perlocutionary act, and then we must examine what effect it had on the audience: what part of the readers decided to actively participate in the protests, and what part, perhaps, did not understand what was being said at all.
The ternary structure of speech action finds its correspondence in the idea of three sides of the utterance. Using linguistic means in the course of a locutionary act, the speaker endows his statement locutionary meaning. Manifesting the goal of speaking under certain conditions in the course of an illocutionary act, the speaker informs the utterance of a certain illocutionary force. Causing certain changes in the consciousness (thoughts and feelings) of the addressee during the perlocutionary act, the author, with the help of the utterance, achieves a certain perlocutionary effect. Thus, there are three pairs of interrelated categories of speech act and utterance analysis: locutionary act - locutionary meaning, illocutionary act - illocutionary force (or function), perlocutionary act - perlocutionary effect.
^ Conditions for the success of a communicative act and communicative failures
Since a communicative act is a type of action, its analysis uses essentially the same categories that are necessary to characterize and evaluate any action: subject, goal, method, tool, means, result, conditions, success, etc. The subject of a speech act - a speaker or a writer - produces an utterance, as a rule, calculated on the perception of it by the addressee. (In the case of communication through media channels, the utterance is always addressed to a particular audience.) The utterance acts both as a product of a speech act and as a tool to achieve a specific goal. Depending on the circumstances or conditions in which the speech act is performed, it can either achieve the goal and thus be successful, or not achieve it. To be successful, a speech act must at least be appropriate. Otherwise, the speaker is waiting communication failure 3 .
The conditions that must be met in order for a speech act to be recognized as appropriate are called success conditions speech act. So, let's say that in the heading "Family Consultation" in a women's magazine, a psychologist recommends that, with increasing tension in relations between spouses associated with domestic difficulties that accompany the appearance of the first child: Leave the child in the care of a grandmother for at least a week and go on a trip to feel the joy of communicating with each other far from worries. Thus, he performs a speech act of advice, the purpose of which is to induce the addressee to perform a certain action in his own interests. For this statement to be considered relevant, it is necessary at least that the proposed course of action be in principle feasible for the addressee and that it is in his interests to follow this course. If the magazine
Designed for low-income readers, it is unlikely that both of these conditions will be met. Even if a low-income young couple has a person with whom they can leave the child for a while, they are unlikely to have the funds to buy a tourist package, and if they find the necessary funds, then such an expense will cause too much damage to the family budget , which is fraught with further exacerbation of family problems. Under these conditions, the psychologist's advice is inappropriate, and he will suffer a communicative failure, while losing the trust of the readers.
But even if all the conditions that ensure the relevance of the speech act are met, the result to which it will lead may or may not correspond to the goal set by the speaker. So, in our example, the result of the advice of a psychologist can be both the intention of the addressee to follow him, and ignoring the opinion of a specialist. The refusal to follow the recommendation can be either motivated (for example, unwillingness to expose oneself to at least a minimal risk associated with any trip) or unmotivated. Analyzing the conditions for the success of a communicative act, TRA found that many of these conditions are associated with the addressee 4 . It is not surprising, therefore, that linguistic pragmatics pays great attention to the figure of the addressee.
^ The addressee factor in communication
If the goal of a communicative act is determined by the addresser, then its relevance, and hence success, largely depends on the addressee, who must be a person “suitable” for solving the set communicative task in given communication conditions.
Characterizing the variety of possible addressees of the statement, M.M. Bakhtin wrote that the addressee “may be a direct participant-interlocutor of everyday dialogue, can be a differentiated team of specialists in some special field, can be a more or less differentiated public, people, contemporaries, like-minded people, opponents and enemies, subordinate, boss, inferior, higher, close, alien, etc., it can also be a completely indefinite non-concretized other (with various kinds of monologic statements of an emotional type) - all these types and concepts of the addressee are determined by the area of human activity and life to which this statement belongs "[ Bakhtin 1979, 275]. And then he points out that the selection by the addresser of all linguistic means when generating an utterance is made under the greater or lesser influence of the addressee and his anticipated response [Bakhtin 1979, 280].
So, when planning and implementing a speech act, the addresser must take into account the many different characteristics of the addressee. Some of these characteristics are common to all types of speech acts. These include, for example, the physical ability of the addressee to perceive spoken or written speech; knowledge of the language to be used; the cultural and educational level of the addressee, which determines the knowledge base that is at his disposal for understanding the statements addressed to him. Other characteristics may be specific to one or another type or type of speech action. So, when planning the motivation of the addressee to commit certain actions, one must take into account his social status. When the status of the addressee is higher than that of the addressee, the addressee can either ask or demand that the addressee perform an action, but cannot command or command that he do so. The status of the addressee and the degree of closeness of relations between the participants in the communicative act regulate the choice of one or another degree of politeness, which manifests itself in the choice of the form of address, in the degree of categorical wording, in the tone of voice (during oral communication), in the use of special markers of politeness. And the correct choice of the level of politeness, in turn, is a necessary condition for achieving the planned perlocutionary effect. For the speech act of argumentation, the value system professed by the addressee is fundamentally important. Since all argumentation is based on values, even a logically impeccable argument is doomed to failure if it proceeds from principles and ideals alien to the addressee.
The addressee of mass communication, in contrast to the addressee in a situation of direct dialogic communication, is not a real individual present in the situation of a communicative act, but a potential indefinite set of persons who can pick up a given magazine or newspaper, become listeners of a radio broadcast or viewers of a television program. Therefore, the author of the mass information text himself models his typical addressee, carrying out a communicative act designed for a certain group, distinguished by gender, age, nationality, social, confessional, worldview, etc. signs. For example, a liberal-democratic youth newspaper in Moscow constructs its addressee as a young person who is in fairly close informal relations with the author of the text and is committed to Western values and lifestyle, while the central printed edition of the national-patriotic orientation is addressed mainly to those representatives of the indigenous nationality whose worldview and the value system of which was formed during the years of Soviet power. Naturally, both the tone of the “conversation” with the audience and the strategies of persuasion in these media will differ significantly from each other.
Such a genre of mass communication as an interview has a special specificity in relation to the figure of the addressee. Here, each statement has both a direct addressee - the interviewee or interviewer, and an addressee-observer (the one who reads, listens or
Watch interview.) A number of features of the construction of the interview is due precisely to the presence of the addressee-observer. In particular, the frequency of occurrence of so-called interpretive speech acts, designed to modify the interlocutor's initial statement in such a way that it is more consistent with the goals of exerting the necessary influence on the addressee who is "behind the scenes" (for more details, see [Kobozeva, Laufer 1994]) is increased in interviews.
^ Direct and indirect communicative acts; pragmatic effects of indirection
TRA distinguishes between direct and indirect speech acts. In direct speech acts, the speaker's illocutionary goal is directly manifested with the help of language markers specially designed for this - illocutionary indicators. Thus, the goal of prompting the addressee to action in the speech acts of prompting is directly expressed either by the corresponding performative 5 lexical-syntactic constructions (I order, it is forbidden, (you) are called, I ask etc.), or the imperative form of the semantic verb: Do it; Do not do this etc. The same goal of motivation can be expressed indirectly, i.e. with indicators originally intended to mark other illocutionary goals: expressing a desire for something to be done (I want you to do it) or a question about the future actions of the addressee (Are you getting off at the next stop?) or about his ability to carry out the action (Could you lend me some money until payday?). A well-known figure of speech from rhetoric, called a rhetorical question, is also an indirect speech act, since a rhetorical question is asked not in order to receive any information in response, but in order to state a fact or express an opinion (cf. Can an honest person put up with this? = An honest person cannot put up with this.)
In a broad sense, any communicative act, both verbal and non-verbal, whose real purpose is not explicitly expressed, can be called indirect. With this interpretation, the rise of one of the interlocutors from the table can be considered as an indirect communicative act of informing the addressee that the conversation is over. In this sense, indirect speech acts include hints, allusions, insinuations, and similar methods of indirect information (for more details, see [Kobozeva, Laufer 1988]).
What is the use of indirect speech acts instead of direct ones, or what are the pragmatic effects of indirectness? Firstly, indirectness "frees the hands" of the author of the statement, allowing him, if necessary, to say that he meant only the literal meaning of what was said. Second, the indirect form
Implementation, as a rule, increases the etiquette of a communicative act, since one of the main principles of politeness is to provide the addressee with a greater degree of freedom to respond.
^ The principles of communicative interaction, the rules (postulates, maxims) that ensure their observance and the effects caused by the violation of these rules
In addition to TRA, the conceptual apparatus of linguistic pragmatics includes the principles of communicative interaction, as well as the rules (postulates, maxims) that ensure their observance. First of all, like any expedient activity, communicative activity is subject to the principle of rationality, or the principle of economy of effort, which consists in the fact that, wanting to achieve a certain goal, a person chooses an action that will allow him to achieve this goal faster and with minimal effort and resources. . The most important special principle underlying purposeful communication is the principle of communicative cooperation, formulated by the American logician Paul Grice in his famous work among linguists "Logic and speech communication". This principle states: “Make your contribution to the conversation at this stage in such a way as is required by the accepted goal or direction of the conversation in which you participate” [Gries 1985]. And although this principle was formulated for conversation, i.e. oral communication between a specific addressee and addressee in a single time interval, it can easily be extended to the case of mass communication, since the media also enter into communicative interaction with various social groups in order to ultimately contribute to the solution of various problems that arise in the process of functioning of modern society . Therefore, the principle of communicative cooperation and the rules that support it, which Grice calls maxims, also apply here. These are the maxims of the amount of information (report no more and no less information than is required at a given stage in the development of the communicative process); maxims of the quality of information (report only what you consider true and for which you have sufficient evidence); relational maxim (what is reported must be relevant, i.e. at least related to the problem under discussion); maxims of the method (the statement must be clear, unambiguous, concise in form and consistent). Since the audience expects the media to comply with these rules, their conspicuous violation generates implicatures- speculation of information that is not expressed explicitly.
^ 2. LINGUISTIC MODEL OF TEXT FORMATION
In recent years, the ideas of cognitive linguistics have penetrated into linguistic pragmatics, proclaiming as its goal the modeling of human speech and thought activity, taking into account the data of cognitive psychology 6 . A number of models of text formation have been proposed, in which the speech action is presented as a phased transition from the speaker's intention to its embodiment in the word, called the process of text formation or verbalization.
The intention of the speaker or, in the terminology of M.M. Bakhtin, speech design is a concept that has not yet received a strict definition in linguistics, but in one form or another, under one name or another - for example, “(actual) meaning”, “thought”, “(subjective) meaning of the speaker” - present in all models of speech activity. It is clear that in a speech plan it is necessary to distinguish at least two components - intentional (the goal of the speaker in a given speech act, formed taking into account the specifics of the current communicative situation) and propositional (reflecting one or another fragment of reality, as a rule, external in relation to the communicative situation and becoming the topic, the content of the statement). This dual conditionality of the speech intention underlying any statement (discourse, text) is reflected in the general scheme of text formation proposed by A.E. Kibrik [Kibrik 1992, 289]:
This scheme is also applicable to mass communication. So, the propositional part of the intention of any informational message is some event reflected in the consciousness of the author of the message in a certain way, and the intentional part of the intention is the goal of introducing information about the event presented in this way into the consciousness of the addressee.
^ Stages of the process of verbalization (text formation)
“When we build our speech, we are always presented with the whole of our statement: both in the form of a specific genre scheme and in the form of an individual speech plan. We do not string words together, we do not go from word to word, but, as it were, we fill the whole with the necessary words” [Bakhtin 1979, 266].
So, having some communicative goal (for example, to inform the addressee about the opening of an art exhibition), the author, depending on the type of communicative situation, first chooses a speech genre from the repertoire of speech genres,
Used in this type of communicative situations, corresponding to this goal (let's say this is a journalist from the culture department in a newspaper, and he chooses the genre of a short message, which involves the transfer of only the most basic information about the exhibition without any comments). The choice of a genre already sets the macrostructure (composition) of the created text, i.e. a set of content blocks that it should consist of, and their order (in the case of an exhibition, these should be blocks about the opening of the exhibition, about the authors represented at it, the genres of works, the time of their creation, the venue and the time of the exhibition). Turning to the verbalization of individual blocks of text content, the author begins to build sentences-statements corresponding to a given stage, reflecting situations (states of affairs) identified in accordance with the speech genre and intention in the corresponding fragment of reality.
According to one of the hypotheses, during the verbalization of the intention underlying a separate sentence-statement 7, its semantic structuring first occurs, adapting the integral, non-discrete mental content to the needs of discrete language design. In this process, it is possible to single out certain aspects of the "adaptation" of thought to language, of which we will focus on only two, since they more often than others serve as a source of variable interpretation of reality.
First, the linguistic expression of a thought, always richer and more complex than anything that can be expressed in a single statement, necessarily presupposes a selection. So, out of all the richness of impressions about the exhibition, stored in the memory of a journalist who visited the opening day, he will be able to verbally reflect in his text only a part, regardless of whether it will be a short informational message or a detailed review. Secondly, verbalization involves the categorization of a fragment of reality reflected in the mind, i.e. assigning it to some conceptual category. Since objectively one and the same piece of reality can be considered in different aspects and from different points of view, bringing it under one category or another, the author already at this stage carries out a certain interpretation of reality 8 . So, depending on the point of view on world politics, the same actions can be summed up either under the category manifestations of separatism or under the category struggle for national self-determination. In addition, the same situation can be subsumed under categories of varying degrees of specificity/generalization. So, in the construction of a new plant, one can see not only the situation plant construction, but also situations creation of new jobs, solution of demographic problems, environmental pollution etc.
In the end categorization involves a lexical choice for expressing thoughts about a certain state of affairs. In this case, the word acts as a means of activating in the mind of the addressee not just a separate concept, but an integral system of representations, of which this concept is a part (semantic field, frame, scenario, stereotype). In addition, in the semantics of a word, a concept (significative meaning) often turns out to be stably associated with a number of additional representations called associations or connotations. At the same time, emotional and evaluative connotations that appeal to the emotions of the addressee, his interests and values are especially important for providing the desired impact on consciousness. It is no coincidence that words often coexist in the language, denoting essentially the same phenomenon, but built into different systems of representations, contrasted according to the evaluative features of "friend - foe", "good - bad", "right - wrong", etc. , cf. couples like scout versus spy, dreamer versus liar, hooliganism versus prank. The loading of a word with evaluative connotations sometimes forces one to look for new means to express the same idea, but with a different evaluative meaning. So, when changing the ideological value priorities of the word a prostitute and bandit with the negative connotations assigned to them are beginning to be replaced in the language of the media fulfilling the social order with borrowings synonymous with them confused and racketeer, which, instead of the negative connotations of "crime", have rather the positive connotations of "foreign chic".
Categorization is associated with the action of lexico-syntactic mechanisms of variable interpretation of reality, which allow presenting the described situation in a certain perspective, bringing some of its participants to the fore and relegating to the background or not mentioning others at all. This possibility is ensured by the existence in the language of verbs that correspond to the same category of situations (for example, COMMERCIAL ACT), but differently ranking its participants. So, choosing a verb buy, we emphasize the importance of that participant in the situation who acquires the goods by giving money, since this verb ascribes the role of an agent - an active initiator of the situation to this participant in the commercial act (Xbought fromY-a-ZbehindW); choosing a verb sell, we give priority to the participant who sells the goods (YsoldX-yZbehindW); choosing a verb cost or get by, we will imagine the same situation, but the product will be brought to the fore, and the seller will generally be “behind the scenes” (Z costX-y Lived Z costX-y inW).
In addition to the choice of a lexeme denoting the type of situation and serving as a predicate of a sentence-statement, the variability of the perspective in which information is presented is also provided by purely syntactic means and techniques: the choice of voice (active vs passive), filling in or omitting the optional syntactic valences of lexemes.
The creators of media texts (consciously or unconsciously) choose the means and methods of verbalization that are most
The degrees correspond to the view of the event that the journalist wants to form in the audience. This position is well illustrated by the following selection of newspaper headlines devoted to the same event - the shooting of a demonstration of the black population in what was then Southern Rhodesia 9 :
(1a) PoliceeshotdeadAfricans.
"The police shot the Africans."
(2a) Africans shot dead by the police.
(3a) African shot dead.
(4a) African died.
(5a) ... deaths...
(6a) Factionalismcauseddeaths.
"Factionalism has led to casualties."
If (1) is the most direct and objective reflection of a real event, then in (2) “police officers” are relegated to the background through the transformation of passivation, although they remain as performers of the action, in (3) they are also brought out through the omission of the agentive indirect object beyond the scope of the description, (4) generally mentions only the death of Africans (change of state) without specifying its cause, (5) no longer mentions the Africans who suffered from police actions, and finally, in (6) a pseudo-cause of death is introduced, which fundamentally changes the assessment of the denoted situation.
^ 3. EXPLICIT AND IMPLICIT INFORMATION IN THE COMMUNICATION; DIFFERENCES IN THE WAYS OF THEIR IMPACT ON CONSCIOUSNESS
The information encoded in the utterance with the help of linguistic means is not uniform in terms of the degree of ease and awareness of its decoding. Some of the information in the statement is expressed explicitly, i.e. with the help of linguistic means specially designed for its direct expression. It is on this part of the content of the utterance, according to the intention of its author, that the consciousness of the addressee should be concentrated. Explicit information is perceived by the addressee as the thought for the sake of expressing which this statement was used. But in addition to explicit information, almost any statement contains implicit information, which is characterized by
Reduced communicative significance and indirectness of coding. This information is also transmitted to the addressee, but unlike explicit information, it is controlled to a lesser extent by his consciousness, which is focused on explicit information. This property of implicit information is often used for the purpose of manipulating consciousness: dubious ideas are “smuggled” precisely in this, less controlled part of the content of the statement 10 .
Linguistic semantics distinguishes several types of implicit information in a statement, of which such types of information as presupposition, initial assumption (setting) of the question, introductory component and implicature of discourse are especially important for the analysis of the media language.
Presuppositions
In any statement, regardless of its illocutionary type (message, question, demand, etc.), one can single out the statement contained in it, or assertion - what, in fact, the speaker reports, asks or requires, and presuppositions - those background aspects of the content of the statement, which are presented as self-evident and beyond doubt. The criterion for the presuppositivity of one or another part of the information transmitted by a sentence is its preservation when this sentence is transformed into a negative or interrogative one. So, the content of the subtitle of one article in the newspaper "Soviet Russia" (la):
(1a) Railroad workers keep stealing–
(1b) Railroad workers have stolen before.
To check if this is the case, you need to construct an appropriate (la) negative sentence (1c) or an interrogative sentence (1d) and make sure that information (1b) is not negated or questioned in it:
(1c) Railroad workers don't continue(= stopped) steal.
(1d) Are railroad workers still stealing?
Thus, presuppositions form a condition for the meaningfulness of an utterance. Since the addressee proceeds from the presumption of the meaningfulness of what passes through the media channels, he is inclined to uncritically accept the presuppositions
statements without questioning them. A detailed linguistic analysis of presuppositions and other types in comparison with other types of implicit information in an utterance is given in [Paducheva 1985].
^ Initial guess of the question
For interrogative statements, in addition to presuppositions, another type of implicit information is characteristic, called the initial assumption or question setting. This component of the semantics of a question can be defined as information that is the consequence of any valid answer to this question, except for a negative one. Thus, question (2a), which serves as the title of the above-mentioned article, has as an implicit component the initial assumption (2b):
(2a) ^ How are the "hares" sheared?
(2b) "Hares" are somehow sheared.
Since the addressee proceeds from the presumption that the author will not ask a baseless question that can be answered in the negative (in our case They don't cut at all.) he will be inclined to take for granted the underlying assumption of the question without questioning it.
^ Introductory Components
Another type of implicit information in a statement is formed by introductory components expressed with the help of introductory (parenthetic) constructions. The implicitness of the introductory information lies in the fact that it is supplied by the author of the text and should be perceived by its addressee as a side, lying aside from the question that serves as a direct topic of discussion. The reduced communicative status of the introductory construction makes it a convenient means of expressing the information on which the author does not want to focus the attention of the addressee, either because of its really not so significant nature, or because of its dubiousness. Wed example (3) from the newspaper "Arguments and Facts" 11:
(3) ^ The student will take two liters (because girls only look at these guys who have a bottle sticking out of each pocket) –we will learn about the future from the police protocols.
In the clause of reason, framed as an introductory sentence, the author implicitly expresses an opinion with which one can and should argue, but, enclosed in brackets as an optional explanation, it most likely will not catch the reader's attention. Since the explanatory function usually uses judgments whose truth is obviously more obvious than the truth of what they explain, the addressee will accept this implicit information as a well-known truth about girls.
^ Discourse Implicatures
Discourse implicatures are inferences made by the addressee of the statement, based on the maxims (rules) of verbal communication, which were discussed in Section 2. Based on the presumption that the author of the statement observes the principle of communicative cooperation and all the maxims supporting it, the addressee mentally completes the content of the statement in such a way that to reconcile what has been said with the principle of communicative cooperation. Implicatures are widely used in the media, in particular in advertising. Let us show by one example how the relevance maxim generates the implicatures. In [Pirogova 2000, 102], this rule in relation to advertising is interpreted as follows: the information contained in the advertisement must be related to the product and product category; otherwise, there is no reasonable reason why the author included it in this post. Moreover, if an advertisement says that a product does not have a feature, the only reasonable reason for doing so would be the fact that competing products have that feature. Thus, an advertisement for a Phillips TV with the Matchline system (4a) generates an implicature (4b):
(4a) To enjoy the eye without getting tired.
(4b) Other TVs tire the eyes.
The basis for this type of inference is the maxim of relevance, coupled with the inherent tendency of many to jump to conclusions.
LITERATURE
Baranov A.N. Dispute of metaphors: language metaphor as a means of argumentative influence // Advertising text. Semiotics and Linguistics. M., 2000. [S. 132–135.]
Baranov A.N. Is language an instrument of lies or a means of clarifying the truth? // Advertising text. Semiotics and Linguistics. M., 2000. [S. 159–161.]
Baranov A.N., Parshin P.B. Linguistic Mechanisms of Variable Interpretation of Reality as a Means of Influencing Consciousness // The role of language in mass media: Sat. reviews. M., 1986.
Bolinger D. Truth is a linguistic problem // Language and modeling of social interaction. M., I987.
Borisova E.G. Sign levels in political advertising // Advertising text. Semiotics and Linguistics. M., 2000. [S. 209–214.]
Borisova E.G., Pirogova Yu.K. Implicit information in advertising and propaganda // Implicitness in language and speech. M., 1999. [S. 145–151.]
Bakhtin M.M. Aesthetics of verbal creativity. M., 1979.
WeinrichX. Linguistics of lies // Language and modeling of social interaction. M., 1987. [S. 44–87.]
Gorodetsky B.Yu., Kobozeva I.M., Saburova I.G. On the typology of communicative failures // Dialogue Interaction and Knowledge Representation. Novosibirsk, 1985. [S. 64–78.]
Grice P. Logic and speech communication // New in foreign linguistics. Issue. 16. M., 1985. [S. 217–237.]
Dijk T.A., van. Analysis of news as discourse // Dijk T.A., van. Language. Cognition. Communication. M, 1989. [S. 113–136.]
Kibrik A.E. Essays on general and applied questions of linguistics. Ch. 19. Sketch of the linguistic model of text formation. M., 1992. [S. 287–301.]
Kobozeva I.M. Theory of speech acts as one of the variants of the theory of speech activity // New in foreign linguistics. Issue. 17. M., 1986. [S. 7–21.]
Kobozeva I.M., Laufer N.I. Interpreting speech acts // Logical analysis of language. Language of speech actions. M., 1994. [S. 63–71.]
Kobozeva I.M., Laufer N.I. On one method of indirect informing // Izvestiya AN SSSR. Ser. lit. and yaz. 1988. No. 5. [S. 462–470.]
Kubryakova E.S., Demyankov V.3., Pankrats Yu.G., Luzina L.G. A short dictionary of cognitive terms. M., 1996.
Austin J. Word as action // New in foreign linguistics. Issue. 17. M., 1986. S. 22–129.]
Paaucheva E. V. Statement and its relationship with reality. M., 1985. [S. 19–78.]
Parshin P.B. Speech impact: main areas and varieties // Advertising text. Semiotics and Linguistics. M., 2000. [S. 55–75.]
Pirogova Yu.K. Implicit information in advertising // Advertising text. Semiotics and Linguistics. M., 2000. [S. 95–108.]
Rakhilina E.V. Basic Ideas of Cognitive Semantics // Fundamental Directions of Modern American Linguistics / Ed. A.A. Kibrika, I.M. Kobozeva, I.A. Sekerina. M., 1997. [S. 370–389.]
Sakhno S.L."Own - someone else's" in conceptual structures // Logical analysis of language. cultural concepts. M., 1991. [S. 95–101.]
Searle J.R. What is a speech act? // New in foreign linguistics. Issue. 17. M., 1986a. [S. 151-169.]
Searle J.R. Indirect speech acts // New in foreign linguistics. Issue. 17. M., 19866. [S. 195–222.]
Searle J.R. Classification of illocutionary acts // New in foreign linguistics. Issue. 17. M., 1986B. [WITH. 170-194.]
Chafe U. Memory and verbalization of past experience // New in foreign linguistics. Issue. 12. M., 1983.
Chenky A. Semantics in Cognitive Linguistics // Fundamental Directions of Modern American Linguistics / Ed. A.A. Kibrika, I.M. Kobozeva, I.A. Sekerina. M., 1997. [S. 340–369.]
^ TEST QUESTIONS
1. What is a speech work from the point of view of linguistic pragmatics?
2. What levels are distinguished by the theory of speech acts in the structure of speech action?
3. What factors influence the success of a speech action?
4. What are the main language mechanisms of the variable interpretation of reality?
5. What types of implicit information can be used for the purposes of linguistic manipulation?
6. What is a speech work from the point of view of linguistic pragmatics?
7. What levels are distinguished by the theory of speech acts in the structure of speech action?
8. What factors influence the success of a speech act?
9. What are the main language mechanisms of the variable interpretation of reality?
Opinion modality as an illocutionary modality (based on Russian and English journalistic texts) // Proceedings of the international seminar "Dialogue" 2002 "on computational linguistics and intellectual technologies. M., 2002.
Graduated from the Department of Structural and Applied Linguistics of the Faculty of Philology of Moscow State University in 1972 with the qualification "linguist, specialist in structural and applied linguistics", was left in graduate school at the Department of Structural and Applied Linguistics, in 1975 she was hired at the same department as a junior researcher, then transferred to the position of senior researcher, and later - associate professor.
Qualification works
Diploma:
"Estimated value of the offer"
Scientific supervisor - Ph.D. philol. Victor Vitalievich Raskin, currently professor at Purdue University (USA), editor-in-chief of the international magazine Humor.
PhD thesis:
What means cognitive in linguistics. // International Conference "Cognitive Modeling in Linguistics". Collection of reports (Text processing and cognitive technologies no. 5). M., 2001, p. 19-28.
(co-authored with P. V. Grashchenkov) Multidimensional computer database of Russian adjectives EDGE as a tool for analyzing the lexico-grammatical category. // Russian language: historical destinies and modernity. International congress. Proceedings and materials. M.: Publishing House of Moscow State University, 2001.
2000
Linguistic semantics: Textbook for universities. M.: URSS, 2000. 350 p.
1999
1998
1997
Representation of knowledge about physical objects for systems of the type "FIGURE - TEXT". // Categorization of the world: space and time. Materials of scientific conference. M.: Dialogue-MSU, 1997, 117-123.
1996
How we describe the space we see: types and ranks of objects. // Proceedings of the International Seminar Dialogue "96 on Computational Linguistics and its Applications. M., 1996, 146-153.
1995
How we describe the space we see: the problem of choosing a landmark. // Proceedings of the International Seminar Dialogue"95 on Computational Linguistics and Its Applications. Kazan, 1995, 146-153.
1994
(co-authored with N. I. Laufer) Interpreting speech acts. // Logical analysis of the language. Language of speech actions. M.: Nauka, 1994, p. 63-71.
1993
Thought and idea against the background of categorization of mental names. // Logical analysis of the language. mental actions. Moscow: Nauka, 1993, 95-104.
(co-authored with P. B. Parshin) An analysis of selected language categories in US and Soviet national security discourse in the cold war era. // Working papers of the Center for Social Change, no. 180, Wachington, 1993, 1-27.
Problems of description of particles in research in the 80s. // Pragmatics and semantics. M.: INION AN SSSR, 1991, 147-176.
1991
(co-authored with N. I. Laufer) Meaning of modal predicates of obligation in Russian. // Russistik, 1991, no. 1, 68-76.
"Meaning" and "meaning" in naive semiotics. // Logical analysis of language: cultural concepts. M.: Nauka, 1991, 183-186.
1990
(co-authored with N. I. Laufer) Linguistic anomalies in A. Platonov's prose through the prism of verbalization. // Logical analysis of the language. Inconsistency and anomaly of the text. Moscow: Nauka, 1990.
1988
Russian modal particles and their agreement with the illocutionary function of the utterance. // Linguistische Arbeitsberichte, B. 70, 1988, 38-47.
Negation in sentences with propositional predicates. // Logical analysis of the language. Knowledge and change. M.: Nauka, 1988, 82-98.
On the semantic interpretation of cumulative negation in Russian. // Problems of structural linguistics 1984. M.: Nauka, 1988, 80-94.
1987
(co-authored with A. N. Baranov) Metalinguistic means of describing the semantics of a sentence. // Linguistic support of information systems. M.: INION AN SSSR, 1987, 169-206.
1986
The theory of speech acts as one of the variants of the theory of speech activity. // New in foreign linguistics. Issue. XVII. M.: Progress, 1986, 7-21.
Some rules for choosing a type in the synthesis of a sentence expressing a given meaning. // Topical issues of structural and applied linguistics (under the editorship of V. A. Zvegintsev) M:: MGU, 1980, 91-103.
Qualification works
Diploma
"Estimated value of the offer"
Scientific supervisor - Ph.D. philol. Victor Vitalievich Raskin, currently professor at Purdue University (USA), editor-in-chief of the international magazine Humor.
PhD thesis
Doctoral dissertation
"Intentional and cognitive aspects of the meaning of the statement", 2003 (scientific report on published works, 10/15/2003)
Scientific and pedagogical activity
Semantics
The main field of study is general and Russian semantics.
General courses
At OTiPL he reads general courses “Theory of Language. Semantics" and "Semantics of the modern Russian language" according to their own author's programs (see "Curriculum and programs of the Department of Theoretical and Applied Linguistics". M .: MGU, 1997). The first of them was also read for students of the Russian department of the faculty and students of the Institute of Asian and African countries of Moscow State University. Together with S. G. Tatevosov, he reads a course in general semantics for graduate students of the Faculty of Philology.
Special courses
- "The concept of presupposition in linguistics",
- "The Semantics of Negation",
- "Semantics of sentence and utterance",
- "Metaphor: Theories, Problems, Solutions".
The textbook on semantics for students of philological specialties "Linguistic semantics" and a number of other publications are devoted to the semantics of the sentence (statement) and lexical semantics.
Pragmatics
Another area of research and teaching activity of Kobozeva is linguistic pragmatics.
Special courses on pragmatics
I read special courses at the Faculty of Philology and at the ISAA MSU:
- "Introduction to linguistic pragmatics",
- "Communication Models".
Reviews on pragmatics
Kobozeva is one of the compilers of the collection of translations "The Theory of Speech Acts" (New in foreign linguistics, issue XVII, M .: Progress, 1986), which first introduced wide circles of domestic linguists to the mainstream of modern linguistic pragmatics. He is also the co-author of the preface to this collection.
Artificial intelligence
One of the areas of constant interest of I. M. Kobozeva is the linguistic (semantic and pragmatic) aspects of artificial intelligence associated with automatic analysis and synthesis of text in natural language.
He is a member of the Russian Association of Artificial Intelligence, the International Association of Creators and Users of Intelligent Systems, and the Russian Association of Computational Linguistics and Intelligent Technologies.
Text Linguistics and Poetics
In addition, I. M. Kobozeva has a number of works in the field of linguistic analysis of a literary text (A. Platonov, N. V. Gogol) and political discourse (analysis of the language of the modern press).
Reviews of American and French linguistic theories
I. M. Kobozeva also conducts pedagogical and publishing activities aimed at familiarizing domestic scientists with the achievements of American and French linguistics. She was the first to read to philologists of Moscow State University a special course on the Theory of Principles and Parameters of N. Chomsky - one of the dominant linguistic theories of our time. As a member of the editorial board of the journal “Bulletin of Moscow State University. Philology”, maintains the heading “School of Modern Linguistic Theory”, in which the topical theoretical works of N. Chomsky, R. Langaker, L. Talmi, R. Jakendoff, A. Cuglioli and others are published in Russian for the first time. He is co-editor and co-author collection of reviews "Fundamental trends in modern American linguistics" (Moscow: Moscow State University, 1997; 454 p.). Translator and editor of translations of many linguistic works from English, author of reviews on topical problems of linguistics published in the Collections of reviews INION and abstracts published in the Russian Journal of Social Sciences Abroad.
Logical language analysis
Participated in projects carried out within the framework of the problem group "Logical analysis of language".
International scientific cooperation
Participates in international scientific cooperation: the Soviet-American project "National Security Discourse" (1992-1993); Russian-German scientific cooperation on the topic "Formal description of the Russian and German languages" (within the framework of an agreement between Moscow State University and the University of Leipzig (1995-2000); Russian-German project "Worlds of cultural representations. A contrastive study of metaphorical models in the Russian and German press "(2001-2002).
Publications
Over 100 printed works, including:
1976
- 1976: Syntactic substantiation of the rule of Transference of Negation in Russian. // Ceskoslovenska rusistika, 1976, no. 2, 54-62.
1980
- 1980: Some rules for the choice of form in the synthesis of a sentence expressing a given meaning. // Topical issues of structural and applied linguistics (under the editorship of V. A. Zvegintsev) M:: MGU, 1980, 91-103.
1981
- 1981: Experience in pragmatic analysis -then and someday pronouns. // Izv. Academy of Sciences of the USSR. Ser. lit. i yaz., 1981, no. 2, 165-172.
1983
- 1983: (co-authored with A. N. Baranov) Semantics of general questions in Russian. // Izv. Academy of Sciences of the USSR. Ser. lit. i yaz., 1983, no. 3, 263-274.
1984
- 1984: (co-authored with A. N. Baranov) Introductory words in the semantic structure of a sentence. // System analysis of significant units of the Russian language (edited by T. V. Shmeleva). Krasnoyarsk: KGU, 1984, 83-93.
- 1984: On the semantic interpretation of cumulative negation in Russian. // Problems of structural linguistics 1984. M.: Nauka, 1988, 80-94.
1985
- 1985: On the boundaries and internal stratification of the semantic class of speech verbs. // Questions of linguistics, 1985, no. 1, 95-103.
1986
- 1986: Verb performativity and its lexical meaning. // Linguistische Arbeitsberichte, B. 54/55 1986, 29-33.
- 1986: The theory of speech acts as one of the variants of the theory of speech activity. // New in foreign linguistics. Issue. XVII. M.: Progress, 1986, 7-21.
1987
- 1987: (co-authored with A. N. Baranov) Metalinguistic means of describing the semantics of a sentence. // Linguistic support of information systems. M.: INION AN SSSR, 1987, 169-206.
- 1987: On the primary and secondary functions of interrogative sentences.
1988
- 1988: (co-authored with A. N. Baranov) Modal particles in response to a question. // Pragmatics and problems of intensionality M.: IVAN SSSR, 1988, 45-69.
- 1988: On the semantic interpretation of cumulative negation in Russian. // Problems of structural linguistics 1984. M.: Nauka, 1988, 80-94.
- 1988: Negation in sentences with propositional attitude predicates. // Logical analysis of the language. Knowledge and change. M.: Nauka, 1988, 82-98.
- 1988: Russian modal particles and their agreement with the illocutionary function of the utterance. // Linguistische Arbeitsberichte, B. 70, 1988, 38-47.
1990
- 1990: Reconstruction of the inner world of communicants based on dialogue data. // Research on artificial intelligence. Tartu: TSU, 1990.
- 1990: (co-authored with N. I. Laufer) Linguistic anomalies in A. Platonov's prose through the prism of verbalization. // Logical analysis of the language. Inconsistency and anomaly of the text. Moscow: Nauka, 1990.
1991
- 1991: "Meaning" and "Meaning" in Naive Semiotics. // Logical analysis of language: cultural concepts. M.: Nauka, 1991, 183-186.
- 1991: (co-authored with N. I. Laufer) Meaning of modal predicates of obligation in Russian. // Russistik, 1991, no. 1, 68-76.
- 1991: Problems of particle description in research in the 80s. // Pragmatics and semantics. M.: INION AN SSSR, 1991, 147-176.
1993
- 1993: (with P. B. Parshin) An analysis of selected language categories in US and Soviet national security discourse in the cold war era. // Working papers of the Center for Social Change, no. 180, Wachington, 1993, 1-27.
- 1993: Thought and idea against the background of categorization of mental names. // Logical analysis of the language. mental actions. Moscow: Nauka, 1993, 95-104.
1994
- 1994: (co-authored with N. I. Laufer) Interpretive speech acts. // Logical analysis of the language. Language of speech actions. M.: Nauka, 1994, p. 63-71.
1995
- 1995: How We Describe the Space We See: The Problem of Landmark Selection. // Proceedings of the International Seminar Dialogue'95 on Computational Linguistics and its Applications. Kazan, 1995, pp. 146-153.
- 1995: German, English, French and Russian: Revealing the Stereotypes of National Characters through an Analysis of the Connotations of Ethnonyms. // Bulletin of Moscow State University. Philology, 1995, no. 3.
1996
- 1996: How we describe the space we see: types and ranks of objects. // Proceedings of the International Seminar Dialogue'96 on Computational Linguistics and its Applications. M., 1996, 146-153.
1997
- 1997: How We Describe the Space We See: Compositional Strategies. // Proceedings of the International Seminar Dialogue'97 on Computational Linguistics and its Applications. M., 1997, 132-136.
- 1997: Representation of knowledge about physical objects for "DRAWING - TEXT" type systems. // Categorization of the world: space and time. Materials of scientific conference. M.: Dialogue-MSU, 1997, 117-123.
1998
- 1998: (co-authored with L. M. Zakharov) On hidden and displaced questioning. // Proceedings of the International Seminar Dialogue'98 on Computational Linguistics and its Applications. M., 1998.
1999
- 1999: On two types of introductory constructions with a parenthetic verb. // E. V. Rakhilina, Ya. G. Testelets (ed.). Typology and theory of language: From description to explanation. To the 60th anniversary of A. E. Kibrik. M., 1999, pp. 539-543.
- 1999: On the criteria for the illocutionary independence of parts of a complex sentence. // Proceedings of the International Seminar Dialogue'99 on Computational Linguistics and its Applications. M., 1999.
2000
- 2000: The problem of identification and syntactic representation of Russian complex sentences with illocutionary-independent subordinate clauses. // Linguistische ArbeitsBerichte 75 (3. Europaische Konferenz "Formale Beschreibung Slavische Sprachen", Leipcig 1999). Institute fuer Linguistik, Universitaet Leipzig, 2000.
- 2000: Grammar of space description. // Logical analysis of language: Languages of space. M., 2000.
- 2000: Two Faces of Speech Content: Meaning and Meaning. // Language about language. M., 2000, p. 303-359.
- 2000: How we describe the space we see: the shape of objects. // Proceedings of the International Seminar Dialogue'2000 on Computational Linguistics and its Applications. T. 1. Protvino, 2000.
- 2000: Linguistic semantics: Textbook for universities. M.: URSS, 2000. 350 p.
2001
- 2001: (co-authored with P. V. Grashchenkov) Multidimensional computer database of Russian adjectives EDGE as a tool for analyzing the lexico-grammatical category. // Russian language: historical destinies and modernity. International congress. Proceedings and materials. M.: Publishing House of Moscow State University, 2001.
- 2001: Semantic problems in the analysis of political metaphor. // Bulletin of Moscow State University. Series 9: Philology, 2001, no. 6.
- 2001: What does cognitive mean in linguistics. // International Conference "Cognitive Modeling in Linguistics". Collection of reports (Text processing and cognitive technologies no. 5). M., 2001, p. 19-28.
2002
- 2002: National Stereotypes: Connotations of Ethnonyms in Russian. // Sprachen des europaischer Nachbarn (Bielefelder Schriften zu Linguistik und Literaturwissenschaft). Bielefeld: AISTHESIS-Verlag, 2002.
- 2002: Toward a formal representation of metaphors within the cognitive approach. // Proceedings of the International Seminar Dialogue'2002 "Computer Linguistics and Intelligent Technologies". M.: Nauka, 2002, pp.188-194.
2003
- 2003: The theme of speech etiquette in the immortal poem by N. V. Gogol. // Moscow Linguistic Almanac. M.: RGGU, 2003.
- 2003: Toward the recognition of the intentional component of the meaning of an utterance (theoretical premises). // Proceedings of the international conference Dialogue'2003 "Computer Linguistics and Intelligent Technologies". M.: Nauka, 2003, p.267-271.
2004
- Kobozeva I.M. Linguistic semantics. Ed.2, URSS, 2004.
2009
- Kobozeva I.M. Linguistic semantics. Ed.4, URSS, 2009.
SEMANTIC PROBLEMS
ANALYSIS OF POLITICAL METAPHOR
The phenomenon of metaphor has been studied since the time of Aristotle, but it seems that the last word on it will never be said. Not so long ago, thanks to Lakoff and Johnson, who put forward the cognitive theory of metaphor, the linguistic community, with the joyful surprise of Molière's Jourdain, realized that we all, and not just word artists, "speak in metaphors", and even "live" them, perceiving the world through the prism of metaphorical models and acting accordingly. As a result, a huge number of descriptive works have appeared that identify and register metaphorical models used in everyday life, science, politics, art, including special metaphor dictionaries and electronic databases. Against this background, old questions sounded with renewed vigor and new questions appeared: what are the boundaries of the concept of “metaphor”, what is the procedure for identifying a metaphor in discourse, how to measure the degree of erasure of a metaphor, and where is the line crossing which a metaphor dies; whether grammatical metaphors have the same impact potential as lexical ones; how to deal with the gradualness and alternativeness of metaphorical derivation, how to check the “guiding and guiding role” of metaphor in thinking? Venerable philosophers, logicians and philologists - both linguists and literary critics - gave their answers to these questions. The range of possible approaches to the analysis of metaphor within the scientific paradigms of the 20th century is well reflected in the collection [Theory of Metaphor 1990], ed. N. D. Arutyunova and with her own introductory article, which gives not only a critical review of approaches, but also original answers to acute questions of the theory of metaphor. And yet, as soon as the study of metaphorics moves from the plane of theoretical constructions, operating with a small number of characteristic examples, to the plane of creating a dictionary of metaphors, as fully as possible reflecting their functioning in certain types of discourse, specific questions arise at every step that do not have ready-made solutions. The considerations on some of these issues brought to the attention of readers are connected with the participation of the author in a project involving the creation of a comparative database on political metaphor in the Russian and German press 1 , led by prof. L. Tsybatov (Innsbruck University), and ideologically a continuation of the work begun at the Institute of the Russian Language of the Russian Academy of Sciences by A. N. Baranov and Yu. N. Karaulov, who created a database on the Russian political metaphor of the perestroika period, on the basis of which dictionaries were published [ Baranov, Karaulov 1991; 1994] 2 .
The theoretical basis of the created base is the cognitive theory of metaphor by Lakoff and Johnson, who consider metaphor as a way of understanding an entity of a certain type (related to the target area) in terms of concepts related to entities of another, simpler, basic type (related to the source area). As in the database and dictionaries of Baranov and Karaulov, the source area is described by significative descriptors - words (or phrases) representing concepts from various semantic fields, and the target area - by denotative descriptors - expressions representing political and social phenomena. Both significative and denotative descriptors, in principle, form finite sets and should be organized into thesaurus hierarchies reflecting the structure of the respective areas. These hierarchies can serve as separate entrances to the database. Hierarchies of significative descriptors A. N. Baranov calls metaphorical models. Examples of such hierarchies are proposed in [Baranov, Karaulov 1991; 1994], but they are not final and may be supplemented and revised during the expansion of the base.
Each base unit contains six types of information placed in the corresponding fields. Let us illustrate the structure of a separate unit with a rather simple example from that part of the database, in the creation of which the author is directly involved - the bases of metaphorical understanding of Europe in the Russian press of recent years 3 .
METAPHOR field
IDEOLOGICAL CEMENT
SIGNIF_DES field
cement / binder / building material / construction
DENO_DES field
idea/ideology/European integration/EU
Comparison of entries from 2 and 3 fields gives a fairly obvious interpretation of the metaphor: a certain general idea should play the same role in the process of EU integration as cement plays in the construction of a building: without such an idea, this process will either stop altogether, or integration will not be strong enough.
EXAMPLE field
United Europe in search of ideological cement.
Fear of war can no longer serve as a basis for integration.
The remaining three fields record the date of publication of the text, its source and author.
After this, if necessary, brief description of the computer-linguistic resource being created, let's turn to our main topic - semantic problems that are generally significant for the linguistic study of political metaphor that arise in the process of its creation, and the rationale for decisions made on them.
The question may seem strange, if you do not take into account that the scope of the concept of “metaphor” varies from theory to theory, as well as the criteria for metaphor. While there is general agreement in the assessment of typical representatives of this variety of tropes, there are significant disagreements regarding peripheral phenomena of the same nature (in relation to the theory of poetic tropes, these disagreements are considered, for example, in [Chernets 2001]). We venture to suggest that there should not be uniform criteria for metaphoricality for different types of discourse, since metaphor performs different functions in different types of discourse. I will explain my idea with the help of a metaphor (in one of the existing - rather broad - understanding of this term). Imagine some polyfunctional type of objects, for example, a piece of cloth. You can sew clothes from it, you can wrap something in it, you can use it to absorb moisture, protect from the sun, etc. Then, for “wrapping” purposes, a sheet of paper or foil may well fall into the same class with a fabric, but it is unlikely for “clothing” or “absorbent” purposes; a sponge will be a kind of cloth if you need to wipe something dry, but it would never occur to anyone to consider a sponge in a wrapping function, and in this aspect it has nothing to do with a cloth. A metaphor is also a multifunctional object, and those properties of typical metaphors that are important for some purposes may be less important for others, which means that the sets of phenomena that can be functionally identified with the reference metaphor will also change.
In a poetic text, the main function of metaphor is recognized as aesthetic (metaphor as a decoration of speech) and activation (metaphor as a means of activating the perception of the addressee), while cognitive fades into the background. In scientific discourse, the cognitive, heuristic function of metaphor comes to the fore, which makes it possible to comprehend a new object of study based on knowledge of other types of objects (cf. the chemical valence metaphor used to explain types of syntactic links that differ in strength, a computer metaphor of the human mind, etc.). P.). The argumentative function of metaphor is also important for scientific discourse as a means of persuading the correctness (plausibility) of the theses or postulates put forward (it is for these purposes that we have just introduced the metaphor of a polyfunctional object). In political discourse, metaphor also performs a heuristic function, serving as a means of comprehending the constantly changing political reality and formulating new political programs, and an argumentative function, serving as a means of persuading the audience of the correctness of certain political views. Political metaphor also has functions that are not characteristic of either poetic or scientific discourse. Due to its figurativeness, non-literalness, it performs a pragmatic interactive function of smoothing out the most dangerous political statements affecting controversial political issues, minimizing the speaker's responsibility for a possible literal interpretation of his words by the addressee. And finally, since a metaphor in political discourse (unlike poetic) always appeals to a fund of common knowledge, it thereby creates a common platform for communication partners, relying on which the subject of speech can more successfully introduce unconventional opinions into the mind of the addressee 4. Of course, even in newspaper articles about politics, metaphor can serve as a means of embellishment and activization of attention, but these aspects of it are not so significant here and arise, rather, as a side effect.
Let us now try to define the boundaries of metaphor in political discourse, taking into account its functions. Let's start with the opposition of metaphor and simile. Most theorists agree that metaphor and comparison have a single cognitive basis - the operation of comparison, or assimilation, which establishes a relationship of similarity or analogy between two entities. Of course, it is reasonable to distinguish between trivial similarity judgments embodied in “literal” comparisons (such as Warts look like sores), from non-trivial, likening in reality completely different entities and creating “figurative”, figurative comparisons (cf. Warts look like posters), as E. Ortoni does [Ortoni 1990]. Only the latter are referred to as tropes, and only such comparisons are meant, since the time of Quintillian, metaphor has been spoken of as an abbreviated comparison. In the traditional theory of tropes, comparisons include expressions in which at least a minimal formal reflex of the comparison operation remains (for example, a comparative union), metaphors - only those where it is absent and the assimilation is implicit. Undoubtedly, these two types of tropes differ not only in form 5 , in other words, the metaphor and the corresponding comparison are not completely synonymous 6 . In poetics and rhetoric, the difference between metaphor and comparison (implicitness, and the optional motivation associated with it, the synthetic meaning and brevity) are rightly recognized as significant, since they affect the aesthetic and “activation” qualities of speech 7 . In political discourse, properties that are common to metaphor and figurative comparison, no matter how explicit the latter may be, come to the fore: “1) the fusion of image and meaning; 2) contrast with the trivial taxonomy of objects; 3) categorical shift; 4) actualization of “random connections” [Arutyunova 1990, 20]. What in one text is formulated as a metaphor, see (1a), in another may appear as a comparison (1b) or paraphrase (1c):
(1) a. The Marshall Plan locomotive pulled investment in Europe.
b. The Marshall Plan, like a locomotive, pulled along investment in Europe.
in. Let's take Marshall plan. This steam locomotive pulled investment in Europe.
Therefore, when selecting units in the database of political metaphor, we recognize as metaphors, or, more cautiously, metaphor-like expressions, all figurative constructions that have as a cognitive basis the assimilation of objects belonging to different areas of ontology, or types. We prefer to talk about areas of ontology, or types, and not about classes of trivial or ordinary taxonomy, since the latter are usually understood as thesaurus classifications that model the so-called naive picture of the world reflected in the language. In this classification boyar may well be in the same class, type, category with deputy or government member, which means that the likeness of the latter to the boyars, contained in example (2), turns out to be devoid of the main sign of metaphor - the assertion of the identity of “distant”, in reality, little similar entities:
(2) For a significant, unfortunately, part of the Moscow"near boyars" Europe,
and the whole world is presented as an object of division with the Americans ... For their official
it is unbearable to see how their power, which until recently extended to half of Europe, is shrinking like shagreen leather, and the recent "serfs", taking advantage of a temporary relief, decided to run away to a hated rival.
However, for the political picture of the world, or ontology, the cognitive distance between the boyars of pre-Petrine Russia and the representatives of power in modern Russia is quite large, if only because of the time distance and the difference in political systems within which both are endowed with power. This historical and political remoteness explains the clearly palpable figurative nature of this designation of a political denotation, which justifies referring this “secondary nomination” to a metaphor. As befits a real metaphor, it, interacting with its implied referent, creates a new semantic formation in which the properties of inertia and self-interest are attributed to modern politicians - connotations of the boyars, learned by most native speakers from school. As we can see, in this context, the so-called “metaphorical consequence” is also realized - a correlate appears boyar - serf going to run away- a metaphorical designation of the authorities of the former countries of the socialist camp, seeking to join the political structures of the West ( hateful rival) - NATO and the European Union. The argumentative function of this metaphor is quite obvious - offering to see "near boyars" in modern politicians who are trying to counteract the mentioned political tendencies, to convince the reader to join the author's negative assessment of themselves and their actions 8 .
If any tropes based on assimilation (up to identification) of ontologically distant from each other phenomena, within the framework of political discourse, it is advisable to consider metaphors (in the broad sense), then this cannot be said about tropes based on the relationship of contiguity (metonymy) or part-whole (synecdoches).
The cognitive operation that occurs during the generation and understanding of a metaphor consists in the interaction of two different conceptual spheres (mental spaces, frames), due to which the metaphorized idea is endowed with new representations and associative links, enriched. With metonymy, in which, as is often done, we also include synecdoche, the cognitive operation is carried out within one conceptual structure [Lakoff 1988, 33], one frame [Kobozeva 1993, Baranov, Doborovolskij 1996], and essentially consists in transferring the name one of its constituent elements to another. Like metaphor, metonymy usually makes the statement more concise and at the same time less unambiguous, but does not provide any information increment, any new vision of the object of speech, which is precisely the most important property of metaphor in political discourse. However, despite the fundamental difference between these two types of tropes in a political text, it is not always easy to distinguish metonymy from one of the basic metaphors of political discourse - the metaphor of personification. This issue deserves careful consideration if we do not want to distort the frequency indicators of different metaphorical models of the socio-political situation in Europe based on a continuous sample of contexts for the name Europe from the existing body.
How to distinguish the metaphor of personification from metonymy when it comes to human communities?
For all its significance, this is the most inconspicuous of the metaphors, because although the Russian grammatical system treats human communities as inanimate objects, but semantically they are sets consisting of people. For this reason, predicate metaphors of personification (and they constitute the most frequent formal type of this metaphor) cannot be identified simply on the basis of a combination of a community name with a predicate denoting the properties, states, and actions of an individual. For convenience of reference, we will call such predicates “private”. The literalness, metonymy, or metaphor of a combination of a society name with a private predicate depends on which narrower semantic type this name and predicate belong to. Let's consider possible cases on the example of the name that is in the center of our interest Europe.
The direct meaning of this name, apparently, should be considered a continent stretching from the Atlantic to the Urals - a geographical concept (hereinafter - ‘Europe-Geo’). However, in political discourse this name appears much more often in a meaning metonymically associated with ‘EuropeGeo’, denoting certain political entities located on the territory of Europe (‘Europe-Polit’). Depending on the context, this can be either a set of all states, at least part of which, as in the case of Russia, is located on a given territory ('Europe-Poln'), or Western Europe ('Europe-West'), or the EU ('EU '). All three meanings - 'Europe-Poln', 'Europe-West', 'EU' - connected by synecdoche relations, belong to the category of 'society', and it is to them that the metaphor SOCIETY IS PERSONALITY is applied in principle. The question is in what cases it actually takes place. Is it always the presence of a private predicate with a name Europe in the meaning of ‘Europe-Polit’ contains a metaphor of personification?
There are private predicates, the attribution of which to a society means only that all its members, individually or collectively, have this property, are in this state, perform this action cf.:
(3)The teaching staff of the faculty has been re-certified.
(4) The organization decided not to participate in the elections.
In such cases, no assimilation of society to an individual occurs and is not felt. With the possibility of a distributive interpretation of the subjective argument, such statements, if they differ from the corresponding statements with the subject in the plural, then only by the value of the referential feature of distributivity/collectivity, cf. (3) and (5):
Professors and teachers of the faculty have been re-certified.
Consider a more common case, described by combining a community name with a private predicate, illustrated by example (6):
The organization bought a plot of land on the Black Sea coast of the Caucasus.
It seems that America and Europe are trying with all their might to establish relations with the new man in Moscow, suspecting that a change of power is inevitable.
(8) Europe is now obsessed with helping Bosnia.
Its meaning certainly cannot be the patently false statement that all members of any of the three ‘Europe-Polit’ communities are universally passionate about helping Bosnia. In contrast to (7), an interpretation like ‘The relevant subset of persons from Europa-Polit, whose function it is, is attracted to helping Bosnia’ does not pass either, because there is no such subset. In such cases, we are dealing with a metaphor of personification. If we apply the method of explication of metaphors proposed by A. Vezhbitskaya [Vezhbitskaya 1990, 144-145], then the meaning of (8) will be (8’):
(8’) ‘(Thinking about Europe) - one might say. that this is not Europe, but a person who is passionate about helping Bosnia’ 9
Similarly, in example (9):
Today, however, plans for NATO expansion to the East make the idea of a European rapprochement with Russia unrealistic. It is impossible to imagine Europe abandoning the US in favor of Russia.
Thus, we recognize the personification metaphor SOCIETY IS PERSONALITY only in those cases when neither literal nor metonymic understanding of the combination of a private predicate with a term denoting ‘community’ passes.
Semantic checks for the possibility of metonymic comprehension can be omitted when a quantified word appears with the name of the community the whole as in example (10):
Moscow and Russia run the risk of being left without an authoritative team that all basketball Europe reckons with.
The relationship between hyperbole and metaphor is a matter that deserves to be touched upon, at least briefly.
According to A. Vezhbitskaya, hyperbole, metaphor and comparison, although they differ from each other semantically, they also have a common semantic basis: ‘(A) - we can say that this is ... B’ [Vezhbitskaya 1990, p. 142], where A corresponds to the expressed or implied literal meaning, and B - figurative, not corresponding to reality. The main difference between metaphor and hyperbole and Wierzbitskaya comparison is the presence of negation in the metaphor: ‘(A) - we can say that this is not A, but B’. In section 1, we have already explained why, in the analysis of political metaphors, we consider it appropriate to consider figurative comparisons as metaphor-like expressions: in them, as in metaphor, a relation of similarity or analogy is established between A and B, despite the fact that A and B belong to two cognitively areas far from each other. We can now refine this essentially metaphorical notion of cognitive distance between concepts.
It is natural to consider two concepts cognitively distant from each other, between which there are no standard connections in the knowledge base about the world (the so-called background, or encyclopedic knowledge involved in the processes of understanding the text in NL). So, neither in knowledge about ideology, nor in knowledge about construction, nor in any third area of knowledge, we will find such a cognitive structure (scheme, frame, scenario, etc.) in which 'cement' would also be present at the same time. and 'ideology'. This allows us to evaluate an expression like anddeological cement as a metaphor, and the corresponding comparison, for example, Ideology is like cement as a metaphorical expression.
As for the hyperbole, in the indicated cognitive respect, the set of expressions containing hyperbole is not homogeneous. Consider first expressions like example (10), e.g. (11) or (12):
I've told you this a thousand times.
Her husband is the real Othello.
His hamstrings trembled with fear/ frost passed over the skin etc.
I am starving.
(15) But whoever comes to power in the Serbian Republic will be forced to comply with the requirements of the "architects" of the Dayton Accords, otherwisethe republic will simply disappear from the map united Bosnia and Herzegovina.
talking the republic will disappear from the map, the author admits exaggeration, wishing to emphasize the danger of violating certain points of international agreements by the authorities of the Republika Srpska. The disappearance of a nation-state entity from the map is a direct consequence of its disappearance in the world of politics, which is usually caused by the loss of its autonomy (this is part of our knowledge of politics), and the loss of autonomy can be considered as the highest evil for a state entity. And although the “cartographic” metaphor is used in Russian political discourse (for example, the coming to power of leftist parties as a change in the color of the country on the map), (15) has nothing to do with it, since a different, metonymic, cognitive mechanism is involved here (an expression of an extremely high degree any sign through an indication of the consequences that occur with such a degree of it).
Due to the cognitive-functional approach to metaphor substantiated in Section 1, we include in the database only such hyperbolas in which, as in metaphor, there is, if not an identification, then an assimilation of two cognitively distant (not directly related) concepts, see, for example , advertising hyperbole (16) and political (17):
(16) Hurghada -paradise for diving enthusiasts.
(17) …residents of Azerbaijan, not being able to apply to the Constitutional Court of their state, will soon be able to legally bombard the court of the Council of Europe with complaints. As one of the leaders of the democratic party of Azerbaijan quite reasonably suggested: "I am afraid that Europedrown in the stream these complaints"
In (16), the settlement is likened to paradise (though not for everyone), as a result of which the well-known positive connotations of paradise are transferred to it. In (17), the hypothetical receipt of numerous complaints from Azerbaijan to the Court of Europe by the Council of Europe is presented as a natural disaster with the interrelations inherent in this conceptual area of the concepts of 'elements', 'uncontrollability', 'victims', 'accident', 'forecasting', 'salvation', etc. In both cases, the possibilities of interpreting the denotative situation are expanded, which is not the case with the metonymic connection of concepts.
4. Does the feminine grammeme in the name “Europe” have a metaphorical function?
In this section, we will address the question posed in the talk: can grammatical categories function as cognitively active metaphors? In particular, can the grammatical gender of nouns be considered as a means of metaphorizing the concepts they express? As evidence that in Russian the grammemes of the masculine and feminine genders of inanimate names can be played as metaphors that communicate the signs of gender to the corresponding denotation and thus at the same time personify (personify) it, A. Chenki cited Lermontov's lines:
(18)A golden cloud spent the night
On the chest of a giant's cliff.(M. Yu. Lermontov)
It is difficult to dispute the fact that after reading even just these two lines, we easily imagine a cloud as a young (due to the diminutive suffix) female creature, and a cliff as a man. This means that the original metaphor, frozen in the grammemes of the genus, can be revived, unfrozen. At the same time, it is clear that contextual support is absolutely necessary for such a revival. In (18) this is the personifying cloud predicate spend the night, personifying cliff part designation - breast and supporting the signs of sex, etymologically embedded in the grammes of the masculine and feminine gender, predication sleep on the chest, activating the "Man and woman sleeping together" scene. In this case, the main way to revive the metaphor is the explicit indication in the text of the consequences from it. Thus, for example, the mention of the chest of a cliff realizes one of the consequences of the metaphor “a cliff is a person” (see Baranov 1994 on linguistic methods of animating metaphors).
With regard to the task of building a database of metaphorical understanding of Europe, this issue is concretized: is the sign of gender transferred to the denotation? Europe with the metaphor of personification? In other words, is it always, when comprehending any of the communities hiding under the name Europe as a person this person is a woman?
The metaphorical representation of Europe as a woman is explicitly recorded in the Russian political discourse in the form of a stable expression old Europe, quite common in our corpus 13 . But does this mean that when any personifying predicates are attributed to Europe, she is thought of as a woman, and not as a person in general? It is natural to consider that this happens only in the situation of the revival of a given grammatical metaphor, and this, as we have already said, occurs only in the case of supporting the sign of “female sex” in the immediate context of the name. So, in one of the contexts of the corpus, a performance is mentioned, which was arranged in Berlin by someone Sandpiper. Calling his performance "I love Europe, but she doesn't love me"... the author of this performance revived the metaphor EUROPE IS A WOMAN through a direct mention of a typical scenario of unrequited love. In example (19):
(19) Neither proud Europe, nor traditional Asia, nor virgin Africa could resist the billions invested in these two transistor-computer "terminators" with the Made in U.S.A. sticker.
sex sign Europe activated listing it in the same row as virgin Africa and supported by predicate resist, realizing one of the consequences of the metaphor, namely the consequence associated with one of the cultural stereotypes of behavior proud women.
We have dealt with just a few of a number of semantic problems in creating a database of metaphor in political discourse. We hope that we have managed to show that it is possible to obtain an objective picture of the composition of the used metaphorical models and assess the degree of their productivity only on the basis of the preliminary development of metaphorical criteria, taking into account the functions of metaphor in this type of discourse and using the entire arsenal of semantic analysis tools, including not only cognitive-semantic the theory of conceptual metaphor, but also the theory of reference, and the typology of implicit information, and the theory of discourse.
Literature
Apresyan V. Yu, Apresyan Yu. D. Metaphors in the semantic representation of emotions // VYa No. 3, 1993.
Arutyunova N. D. Metaphor and discourse // Theory of metaphor. Ed. N. D. Arutyunova. M., 1990.
Baranov A.N. Resurrection of metaphor // Baranov A.N., Karaulov Yu.N. Dictionary of Russian political metaphors. M., 1994.
Baranov A.N., Karaulov Yu.N. Russian political metaphor (materials for the dictionary). M., 1991.
Baranov A.N., Karaulov Yu.N. Dictionary of Russian political metaphors. M., 1994.
Black M. Metaphor // Theory of Metaphor. Ed. N. D. Arutyunova. M., 1990.
Vezhbitskaya A. Comparison - gradation - metaphor // Theory of Metaphor. Ed. N. D. Arutyunova. M., 1990.
Vsevolodova M. V. Theory of functional-communicative syntax. M., 2000.
Dobrovolsky D. O. Figurative component in the semantics of idioms // VYa, No. 1, 1996.
Kobozeva I. M. Thought and idea against the background of subcategorization of mental names // Logical analysis of language. mental actions. M., 1993.
Lakoff J. Thinking in the mirror of classifiers // New in foreign linguistics. Issue. XXIII. M., 1988.
Ortoni E. The role of similarity in assimilation and metaphor // Theory of Metaphor. Ed. N. D. Arutyunova. M., 1990.
The theory of metaphor. Ed. N. D. Arutyunova. M., 1990.
Turovsky V.V. how, similar, remind, creative comparisons: interpretations for the group of quasi-synonyms // Reference and problems of text formation.
Chernets L. V. On the theory of poetic tropes // Bulletin of Moscow State University Philology. No. 2, 2000.
Baranov A.N., Dobrovol "skij D.O. Cognitive modeling of actual meaning in the field of phraseology // Journal of pragmatics, 25, 1996.
Chilton P., Ilyin M. Metaphor in political discourse: the case of the ‘common European house’ // Discourse and society. Vol. 4(1). London, 1993.
Cienki A. What counts as metaphor? Challenges that Slavic data present for conceptual metaphor theory. // First annual conference of the Slavic Cognitive Linguistics Assosiation, preprint, Univ. of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, 2000.
Kobozeva I. M., Parshin P. B. An analysis of selected language categories in US and Soviet national security discourse: have linguists anything to say? // Security discussion in cold war era. New school for social research Working paper N 180, 1993.
Lakoff G., Johnson M. Metaphors We Live By. - Chicago, 1980.
1 The project is funded by the German Science Foundation DFG and implemented at the University of Bielefeld in Germany. Its full name is “Worlds of cultural representations. A Contrastive Study of Metaphorical Models in the Russian and German Press”.
2 A. N. Baranov also participates in L. Tsybatov's project. The author takes the pleasant opportunity to express his gratitude to A. N. Baranov, who has read the abstracts of the report on which this article is based, for valuable remarks. I also thank my colleagues who took part in the discussion of the report “Problems of Building a Database of Political Metaphors” at the International Seminar on Computational Linguistics and its Applications Dialogue'2001 on June 4, 2001 in Aksakovo.
3 The contexts for the analysis were taken from the “Corpus of texts on modern journalism” (23 million word usages), created in the Department of Experimental Lexicography of the IRL RAS.
5 For a comprehensive analysis of these differences, see [Arutyunova 1990, 26-29].
6 Ways of explication of subtle semantic differences between metaphor and various formal comparisons are proposed, for example. in [Vezhbitskaya 1990], [Turovsky 1988].
7 Wed. the following opinion: “abbreviation”, reticence, ellipticity of a metaphor is the source of its increased ambiguity and therefore is preferable for writers in cases. when the clarity of meaning is not part of their plan.” [Chernets, 2001: 16]. The same property of metaphor makes it preferable for the implementation of the pragmatic function of smoothing out acute problems in political discourse.
8 As it is clear from what was said earlier, the metaphor-comparison will also get into the database from this context power is shrinking like shagreen leather, likening power(read ‘political influence’) Moscow "near boyars" famous magical item from Balzac's novel of the same name. Of the properties of this object in this context, the property is explicitly distinguished shrink, and thus implicitly updated the sign of the irreversibility of this reduction, which again should gradually lead the reader to the idea of the irreversibility of the change in the spheres of political influence in Europe. This is just one example of the fact that the ontology of political discourse includes not only political denotations and everyday concepts of a naive picture of the world, but also entities known to the average educated representative of a given culture from various fields of science and art.
Of course, “distributivity” and “collectivity” are essentially different ways of understanding and interpreting a set. The tendency to interpret communities that act as political subjects as collective rather than distributive sets, manifested in the preference for collective nouns over the corresponding plural forms, is a distinctive feature of Russian political discourse compared to American.
9 By the way, the second term of this sentence - Bosnia - is also personified, since not every citizen of Bosnia receives assistance, but not any particular political institution either. So the interpretation could be clarified: ‘it can be said that this is not Bosnia, but another person’.
10 Pushkin's perceptibly deviating from the ordinary I won't die contains the same semantic shift from a holistic interpretation of the object to its aspectization (mortal body and immortal soul of the poet).
11 The opposite opinion is presented in [Apresyan, Apresyan 1993], [Dobrovolsky 1996].
12 In [Dobrovolsky 1996] are discussed as ‘metaphorical models’ FEAR IS COLD, FEAR IS PHYSICAL WEAKNESS and FEAR IS DEFECATION. It should be noted that the link here expresses not the relation of identity, as in true metaphors, but the relation of following. One of the reasons for not distinguishing between these two different logical-semantic relations, perhaps, is that in NL they can both be expressed as a copula, cf. War is a chess game(metaphor) and War is blood and tears(not an isosemic construction expressing causal relationships [Vsevolodova 2000, 89-98]).
13 Apparently, the metaphor “Europe is a woman” is part of the common European cultural heritage, dating back to ancient Greek mythology. So, in the French political caricature of the Crimean War, Europe was represented in the form of a woman, and Russia - in the form of a big evil bear.
The textbook outlines the main issues of semantics as a section of the course of the general theory of language. The first part contains an introduction to the subject, a brief outline of the history of semantic teachings, including the latest, and introduces the concepts used in the semantic description of any significant language formations, from a morpheme to a whole text. The second part is devoted to lexical semantics. It deals with the main problems and methods of describing the content side of the word as a unit of language and speech. The third part analyzes the semantics of the sentence-statement, taking into account its three aspects: logical-semantic (propositional), communicative and pragmatic, and discusses the formal means (metalanguages) used to describe it. The problems of semantics are considered in the textbook from the point of view of the activity approach to language and in the context of the diverse tasks facing applied linguistics. A number of chapters of the textbook are detailed illustrations of the ideas and methods presented on the material of the author's specific semantic research.
The textbook is addressed not only to students of the linguistic departments of faculties of a philological profile, but to everyone who, by the nature of their occupation, has given with the creation or analysis of texts in natural language: literary critics, journalists, translators, copywriters, etc., as well as everyone who is interested in the device and functioning of the language.
Duality of the subject of semantics.
Semantics, like any scientific discipline, has its own subject. But defining this subject is not as easy as it might seem. While most linguists would agree that semantics is the study of the meaning of linguistic expressions, there is no generally accepted answer to the question of what is meant by meaning (see section 1.2.3 for more on the different meanings of "meaning"). Due to the different understanding of the subject, the boundaries between semantics and other linguistic disciplines, in particular, between semantics and pragmatics, are drawn differently. Therefore, the question of the subject of semantics deserves the most careful consideration.
To begin with, in order to avoid the “theoretically biased”, and due to this ambiguous term “meaning”, we use the neutral term “content”, or “information” and we will assume that semantics is a branch of linguistics that studies the content of language units and those speech works, which of these units are built.
Free download e-book in a convenient format, watch and read:
Download the book Linguistic semantics, Kobozeva I.M., 2000 - fileskachat.com, fast and free download.
Download pdf
Below you can buy this book at the best discounted price with delivery throughout Russia.
