Preview

Uchenye Zapiski Kazanskogo Universiteta Seriya Gumanitarnye Nauki

Advanced search

Discreditation and Mitigation Strategies as Two Forms of Online Identity Expression in Conflict-Generating Discourse

https://doi.org/10.26907/2541-7738.2024.5.95-111

Abstract

This article explores the language of conflict-generating discourse in socially important contexts using the methods of complex linguo-stylistic and communicative analysis, elements of content and intent analysis, conceptual and discourse analysis, etc. The characteristics of contemporary online texts, in a broad sense, were identified. Their differences from media texts were outlined. The shifting roles of the author and audience, verbal functions, and the writer’s pragmatic intentions and communication strategies on the internet were revealed. Five key characteristics of this new form of online discourse, involving either direct or indirect interaction between the communicators (explicit dialogization), were singled out. The study is based on a number of public Telegram channels that focus on burning socio-political issues, each catering to diverse audiences, fulfilling different communication tasks, and reflecting the distinct objectives of their authors. Two speech strategies typical of socio-political discourse – discreditation and mitigation, which are opposite in their pragmatic aims – were examined. Their manifestations in the modern, potentially conflict-generating online space were demonstrated. Particular attention was given to the tactical implementation of these strategies and how it depends on the author’s stance and personal qualities. The speech examples under study were taken from previous works and provided here for illustration purposes only. The conclusion was made about the interrelation between the speech strategies and tactics used by the authors of Telegram channels and their social status, content focus, and gender. The results obtained are relevant for understanding how individuals express their identity online, as well as for increasing the safety of online interaction, promoting the principles of language ecology, and preventing excessive radicalization in the online environment. 

About the Author

E. S. Palekha
Kazan Federal University
Russian Federation

Kazan, 420008



References

1. Ul’yanova M.A. Internet discourse as a genre of electronic communication. Nauka i Sovremennost’, 2011, no. 11, pp. 349–354. (In Russian)

2. Goroshko E.I., Galichkina E.N., Ryzhkov M.S., et al. Internet-kommunikatsiya kak novaya rechevaya formatsiya [Internet Communication as a New Form of Speech]. Kolokol’tseva T.N., Lutovinova O.V. (Eds.). Moscow, Flinta, Nauka, 2012. 323 p. (In Russian)

3. Lutovinova O.V. Lingvocultural characteristics of virtual discourse. Cand. Philol. Diss. Volgograd, 2009. 519 p. (In Russian)

4. Sirotinina O.B. Media linguistics or media stylistics? Medialingvistika, 2015, no. 2 (8), pp. 17–23. (In Russian)

5. Klushina N.I., Baigozhina D.O., Takhan S.Sh. Mediatization: A stylistic vector. Verkhnevolzhskii Filologicheskii Vestnik, 2019, no. 2, pp. 57–62. (In Russian)

6. Zolotareva L.A., Andreeva I.G. The specifics of headlines in internet marketing (based on YouTube, netology.ru, and habr.com). Mir Russkogo Slova, 2020, no. 4, pp. 39–48. https://doi.org/10.24411/1811-1629-2020-14039. (In Russian)

7. Pokrovskaya E.M., Ozerkin D.V. The problem of manipulative impact on a person in the information and communication space. Sovremennye Problemy Nauki i Obrazovaniya, 2012, no. 5. URL: https://www.science-education.ru/ru/article/view?id=7268. (In Russian)

8. Palekha E.S. Linguoecology as a factor of information and communication security on the Internet. Uchenye Zapiski Kazanskogo Universiteta. Seriya Gumanitarnye Nauki, 2019, vol. 161, no. 5–6, pp. 117–126. https://doi:10.26907/2541-7738.2019.5-6.117-126. (In Russian)

9. Lyakhovenko O.I. Telegram channels within the system of expert and political communication in modern Russia. Galactica Media: Journal of Media Studies, 2022, no. 1, pp. 114–144. https://doi.org/10.46539/gmd.v4i1.230. (In Russian)

10. Van’ko T.R. Syntactic parameters of political communication in the blogosphere. Vestnik MGLU. Gumanitarnye Nauki, 2020, no. 11 (840), pp. 21–35. (In Russian)

11. Shaposhnikov V.A. Overcoming the communication vacuum in the blogosphere. Yaroslavskii Pedagogicheskii Vestnik, 2014, no. 1, pp. 141–144. (In Russian)

12. Palekha E.S. Radicalized discourse: Definition, structure, and features. Uchenye Zapiski Kazanskogo Universiteta. Seriya Gumanitarnye Nauki, 2022, vol. 164, no. 5, pp. 59–73. https://doi: 10.26907/2541-7738.2022.5.59-73. (In Russian)

13. Sovremennyy mediatekst [Modern Media Text]. Kuz’mina N.A. (Ed.). Omsk, 2011. 414 p. (In Russian)

14. Kazak M.Yu. Modern media texts: Problems of identification, delimitation, and typology. Medialingvistika, 2014, vol. 1, no. 4, pp. 65–76. (In Russian)

15. Dobrosklonskaya T.G. Media text: Theory and methods of studying. Vestnik Moskovskogo Universiteta. Seriya 10. Zhurnalistika, 2005, no. 2. pp. 28–34. (In Russian)

16. Palekha E.S., Sadykova I.A. Comments of social network users: Once again on the issue of aggressive text. Filologiya i Kul’tura. Philology and Culture, 2018, no. 2 (52), pp. 98–101. (In Russian)

17. Palekha E.S. The influencing potential of YouTube interviews: Psychology of the genre and the phenomenon of popularity. Psikhologiya lichnostnogo i professional’nogo razvitiya cheloveka: materialy Sed’moi konferentsii psikhologov obrazovaniya Sibiri (Irkutsk, 20–21 iyunya 2022 g.). [The Psychology of Personal and Professional Development: Proc. 7th Conf. Educ. Psychol. in Siberia (Irkutsk, June 20–21, 2022)]. Irkutsk, Izd. IGU, 2022, pp. 504–508. CD-ROM. https://doi.org/978-5-9624-2060-8.2022.1-652. (In Russian)

18. Stepanova L.N. A typology of comments in the context of transition to the internet (from the lexicographic analysis). Uchenye Zapiski TNU imeni V.I. Vernadskogo. Seriya “Filologiya. Sotsial’nye Kommunikatsii”, 2013, vol. 26 (65), no. 1, pp. 398–403. (In Russian)

19. Karpoyan S.M. Functions of comments on various communication platforms of social networks. Gumanitarnye, Sotsial’no-Ekonomicheskie i Obshchestvennye Nauki, 2015, vol. 1, no. 11-2, pp. 242–245. (In Russian)

20. Babikova M.R. Internet memes as a soft power tool – technologies modeling the world of today’s youth. Politicheskaya Lingvistika, 2021, no. 5 (89), pp. 116–121. https://doi.org/10.26170/ 1999-2629_2021_05_13. (In Russian)

21. Kostomarov V.G. Russkii yazyk na gazetnoi polose: nekotorye osobennosti yazyka sovremennoi gazetnoi publitsistiki [Russian Language in Newspapers: Some Features of the Language of Modern Newspaper Journalism]. Moscow, Izd. MGU, 1971. 267 p. (In Russian)

22. Kostomarov V.G. Nash yazyk v deistvii: Ocherki sovremennoi russkoi stilistiki [Our Language in Action: Essays on Stylistics of Contemporary Russian]. Moscow, Gardariki, 2005. 287 p. (In Russian)

23. Gavrikova O.A. Pragmatics of clickbaiting in the intertextual space of media discourse. Cand. Philol. Diss. Ufa, 2020. 204 p. (In Russian)

24. Goroshko E.I., Pavlova L.V. Linguistics of new media as one of the challenges to the linguistic tradition of the past. Voprosy Psikholingvistiki, 2015, no. 2 (24), pp. 43–54. (In Russian)

25. Polonskii A.V. Medialect: Language in a media format. Nauchnye Vedomosti. Seriya Gumanitarnye Nauki, 2018, vol. 37, no. 2, pp. 230–240. (In Russian)

26. Salmina L.M. Kommunikatsiya. Yazyk. Myshlenie [Communication. Language. Thinking]. Kazan, DAS, 2001. 168 p. (In Russian)

27. Zherebilo T.V. Slovar’ lingvisticheskikh terminov [Dictionary of Linguistic Terms]. Nazran, Piligrim, 2010. 485 p. (In Russian)

28. Abdullaeva R.A. Analysis of the influence of social networks on the life of modern society. Mezhdunarodnyi Zhurnal Prikladnykh i Fundamental’nykh Issledovanii, 2015, no. 9-3, pp. 542–546. URL: https://applied-research.ru/ru/article/view?id=7369. (In Russian)

29. Kishina E.V. The semantic opposition “friend–foe” as the manifestation of the ideological and manipulative potential of political discourse. Vestnik KemGU, 2011, no. 4 (48), pp. 174–179. (In Russian)

30. Lisyutkina I.S. The dynamics of implementing the discreditation strategy in media discourse from 1950 to 2019: Based on the Russian and English languages. Extended Abstract of Cand. Philol. Diss. Saratov, 2021. 28 p. (In Russian)

31. Trukhanova D.S. Mitigation strategies and tactics in contemporary Russian parliamentary discourse. Extended Abstract of Cand. Philol. Diss. Moscow, 2021. 25 p. (In Russian)

32. Watts R.J., Ide S., Ehlich K. (Eds.) Politeness in Language: Studies in Its History, Theory and Practice. Ser.: Mouton Textbook. Berlin, New York, NY, De Gruyter Mouton, 2005. 404 p. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110199819.

33. Shakhovskii V.I. Dissonans ekologichnosti v kommunikativnom kruge: chelovek, yazyk, emotsii [The Dissonance of Environmental Friendliness in the Communicative Circle: Humans, Language, and Emotions]. Volgograd, IP Polikarpov I.L., 2016. 504 p. (In Russian)

34. Ezekh A.O. Communicative mitigation in directive speech acts (based on Russian and German dialogic discourse). Cand. Philol. Diss. Moscow, 2018. 199 p. (In Russian)

35. Voinova E.A. The mediatization of politics as a phenomenon of the new information culture. Cand. Philol. Diss. Moscow, 2006. 237 p. (In Russian)

36. Van Dijk T.A. Diskurs i vlast’: Reprezentatsiya dominirovaniya v yazyke i kommunikatsii [Discourse and Power: Representation of Dominance in Language and Communication]. Pereverzev E., Kozhemyakin E. (Trans.). Moscow, URSS, 2013. 344 p. (In Russian)

37. Golovina N.M. Parliamentary “non-parliamentary expressions”: Verbal aggression as a rhetorical strategy in parliamentary discourse. Voprosy Psikholingvistiki, 2019, no. 3, pp. 200–215. https://doi.org/10.37882/2223-2982.2021.06.27. (In Russian)

38. Volkova Ya.A., Panchenko N.N. Destructiveness in political discourse. Vestnik RUDN. Seriya: Lingvistika, 2016, vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 161–178. https://doi.org/10.22363/2312-9182-2016-20-4-160-178. (In Russian)

39. Verzun A.B. Gender atonality of political discourse. Extended Abstract of Cand. Philol. Diss. Volgograd, 2005. 24 p. (In Russian)


Review

For citations:


Palekha E.S. Discreditation and Mitigation Strategies as Two Forms of Online Identity Expression in Conflict-Generating Discourse. Uchenye Zapiski Kazanskogo Universiteta Seriya Gumanitarnye Nauki. 2024;166(5):95-111. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.26907/2541-7738.2024.5.95-111

Views: 50


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.


ISSN 2541-7738 (Print)
ISSN 2500-2171 (Online)