|
|
|
Shevchenko V.D., Shevchenko E.S. AXIOLOGICAL DOMINANT IN THE DISCOURSEThe present paper is devoted to the study of interrelations between the contexts of a quotation and the quoting text. Presently, the issue of interrelations between discourses has not been studied fully yet. The analysis of a citation and a quoting text belonging to various discourses implies analyzing the referent situations and their cognitive models determining the semantics and pragmatics of the interacting texts. The intention of a speaker serves as the means of creating the hierarchy of the cognitive model's components. Depending on the author's will one or several components of both the situation and its cognitive model acquire specific significance becoming dominant within the framework of a particular referent situation. The meaning of an intext indicates the dominant, i.e. the most significant component of the situations mentioned. The present paper studies the peculiarities of the axiological dominant actualized as a result of inserting a quotation into a text. The authors make a conclusion about the peculiarities of axiological dominant component realization in the interacting discourses: the positive and negative assessments can be realized simultaneously; they can also be realized implicitly and explicitly, which proves significance of the axiological dominant component for the participants of a communicative situation within the media discourse.Key words: media discourse, quotation, quoting text, cognitive model of a situation, axiological dominant.
References:
1. Dijk T.A. van. Language. Cognition. Communication. Moscow: Progress, 1989.
2. Karasik V.I. The Language Circle: personality, concepts, discourse. Moscow: Gnozis, 2004.
3. Lotman Y.M. About Art. St.-Petersburg: "Iskusstvo-SPB", 2005.
4. Makarov M.L. Basics of the Discourse Theory. Moscow: Gnozis, 2003.
5. Ricur P. Hermeneutics. Ethics. Politics. Moscow Lectures and Interviews. Moscow: "Kami", "Academia", 1995.
6. Semiotics: Anthology / Compiled by Y.S. Stepanov. Moscow: Akademicheskiy Proekt, 2001.
7. Shabes V.Y. Event and Text. Moscow: Higher School Publishing House, 1989.
8. Eco U. The Absent Structure. Saint-Petersburg: Symposium, 2004.
9. Argyle M., Furnham A., Graham J. A. Social Situations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981.
10. Dijk T.A. van. Discourse as Interaction in Society//Discourse as Social Interaction. Discourse Studies: A Multidisciplinary Introduction. Volume II. Ed. by Teun A. van Dijk. London, Thousand Oaks, New Delhi: Sage Publications, 2003. — pp. 1-37.
11. Dijk T.A. van. The Study of Discourse//Discourse as Structure and Process. Discourse Studies: A Multidisciplinary Introduction. Volume I. Ed. by Teun A. van Dijk. London, Thousand Oaks, New Delhi: Sage Publications, 1998. — pp. 1-34.
12. Hymes D. Sociolinguistics and the Ethnography of Speaking//Social anthropology and language. Ed. by E. Ardener. London: Routledge, 1971. — pp. 47-93.
13. Laclau E., Mouffe C. Hegemony and Socialist Strategy. Towards a Radical Democratic Politics. London: Verso, 1985.
14. Searle J.R. The Construction of Social Reality. New York: The Free Press, 1995.
15. Tomlin R.S., Forrest L., Pu M.M., Kim M.H. Discourse Semantics//Discourse as Structure and Process. Discourse Studies: A Multidisciplinary Introduction. Volume I. Ed. by Teun A. van Dijk. London, Thousand Oaks, New Delhi: Sage Publications, 1998. — pp. 63-111.
About this article
Authors: Shevchenko V.D., Shevchenko E.S.
Year: 2016
|
|
Editor-in-chief |
Sergey Aleksandrovich MIROSHNIKOV |
|
|