UDC

81’23

DOI

10.17238/issn2227-6564.2020.1.44

Authors

Aleksey A. Romanov
Tver State Agricultural Academy; ul. Marshala Vasilevskogo (Sakharovo) 7, Tver, 170904, Russian Federation;
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0905-4921 e-mail: romanov_tgsha@mail.ru
Ol’ga V. Novoselova
Tver State Agricultural Academy; ul. Marshala Vasilevskogo (Sakharovo) 7, Tver, 170904, Russian Federation;
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4501-986X e-mail: olvnov@mail.ru

Abstract

The aim of this article was to study linguistic manifestations of pre-election threat statements as well as to construct their explicit formula and evaluate their pragmatic effect on the voters. This study used the material of discursive practices with the meaning of threat found in the pre-election programmes of the presidential candidates in Russia in 2018. Based on the performative hypothesis, the authors were able to construct an explicit (basic) formula of threat statements and single out its types. The research showed that statements with the meaning of threat can contain a declaration of threat influence directed at either voters or the opposition. In this regard, the basic formula of pre-election threat statements can be represented by two functional-semantic models: explicit-exponential and prospective-consequent threat statements. The authors come to the conclusion that the basic forms of threat statements found in the programmes of the presidential candidates in Russia in 2018 are capable of producing an intensive pragmatic and emotional effect on the mass addressee, since they contain an explicit declaration of the threat influence. Only a small number of explicit statements with the meaning of threat in Russian preelection discourse point to the politicians’ avoiding frequent use of these forms of threats in order not to intimidate voters by possible consequences. In a situation of pre-election discourse, politicians prefer prospective-consequent statements with the meaning of threat, whose possible effect is addressed to the opposition politicians. The results of this study can be used to predict the pragmatic effect of politicians’ threat statements on voters.
For citation: Romanov A.A., Novoselova O.V. Pre-Election Threats as a Special Pragmatic Type of Statements. Vestnik Severnogo (Arkticheskogo) federal’nogo universiteta. Ser.: Gumanitarnye i sotsial’nye nauki, 2020, no. 1, pp. 44–52. DOI: 10.17238/issn2227-6564.2020.1.44

Keywords

pre-election discourse, threat statement, explicit form, pragmatic effect

References

1. Romanov A.A. Sistemnyy analiz regulyativnykh sredstv dialogicheskogo obshcheniya [Systemic Analysis of Regulatory Means of Dialogic Communication]. Moscow, 1988. 183 p.
2. Wunderlich D. Studien zur Sprechakttheorie. Frankfurt am Main, 1976. 416 p.
3. Letuchiy A.B. Russkiy “ugrozativ” i ego rodstvenniki [Russian Construction of Threat and Its Relatives]. Available at: http://www.dialog-21.ru/dialog2007/materials/html/57.htm (accessed: 20 March 2019).
4. Bystrov V.V. Funktsional’no-semanticheskiy analiz menasivnykh dialogicheskikh replik [Functional-Semantic Analysis of Dialogic Threat Statements: Diss.]. Tver, 2001. 117 p.
5. Romanov A.A., Novoselova O.V. Diskurs ugrozy v sotsial’noy interaktsii (funktsional’no-semanticheskiy analiz) [Discourse of Threat in Social Interaction (Functional and Semantic Analysis)]. Moscow, 2013. 168 p.
6. Maslova A.Yu. Kommunikativno-semanticheskaya kategoriya pobuditel’nosti i ee realizatsiya v slavyanskikh yazykakh (na materiale serbskogo i bolgarskogo yazykov v sopostavlenii s russkim) [Communicative-Semantic Category of Urging and Its Realization in Slavic Languages (on the Material of the Serbian and Bulgarian Languages Compared with Russian): Diss. Abs.]. St. Petersburg, 2009. 40 p.
7. Gordon D., Lakoff G. Postulaty rechevogo obshcheniya [Conversational Postulates]. Novoe v zarubezhnoy lingvistike. Vyp. 16. Lingvisticheskaya pragmatika [News of Foreign Linguistics. Iss. 16. Linguistic Pragmatics]. Moscow, 1985, pp. 276–302.
8. Grigor’eva V.S. Rechevoe obshchenie v aspekte vzaimodeystviya kognitivnykh i yazykovykh struktur [Speech Communication in the Aspect of Interaction of Cognitive and Language Structures]. Kognitivnye issledovaniya yazyka, 2012, no. 12, pp. 82–92.
9. Pocheptsov O.G. Osnovy pragmaticheskogo opisaniya predlozheniya [Basics of a Pragmatic Description of the Sentence]. Kiev, 1986. 116 p.
10. Austin J.L. Zur Theorie der Sprechakte. Stuttgart, 1979. 217 p.