The contrast of representation of political conflicts in American and Russian presidential discourses
The problem discussed in the article is topical due to the interest of linguists to the phenomenon of political modalization as an immanent feature of political and especially presidential discourse in which language is used as the main instrument of political power, its maintenance, exercise and ch...
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Sourthern Federal University
2016-09-01
|
| Series: | Izvestiâ Ûžnogo Federalʹnogo Universiteta: Filologičeskie Nauki |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://philol-journal.sfedu.ru/index.php/sfuphilol/article/view/935 |
| Summary: | The problem discussed in the article is topical due to the interest of linguists to the phenomenon of political modalization as an immanent feature of political and especially presidential discourse in which language is used as the main instrument of political power, its maintenance, exercise and change. This modalization presupposes axiological ambivalency of interpretation of political events in oppositional political discourses. The article reveals linguistic means used for the modalization in question such as contrastive nominations, metaphors and comparisons with contrastive connotations as well as antonyms in the presidential discourses of B. Obama and V.V. Putin. The authors analyze the role of these means in representing Russia in Putin’s discourse as a peaceful country which keeps within law especially while joining Crimea, does it best to settle the conflict in the south-east of Ukraine and achieves military successes in Syria and in representing it in Obama’s discourse as an aggressor which suppresses small nations, supports separatists in Ukraine and conducts counterproductive operation in Syria. It is concluded that language is a powerful weapon used in ideological war nowadays and it is worth studying in this aspect. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1995-0640 2312-1343 |