New Country's Political Discourse: Formation of Speech Technologies

Modern Journal of Language Teaching Methods (MJLTM) ISSN: 2251-6204 www.mjltm.org New Country's Political Discourse: Formation Of Speech Technologies Tatyana Yu. Tameryan1, Marina R. Zheltukhina2*, Gennady G. Slyshkin3, Alevtina V. Shevchenko4, Veronica V. Katermina5, Yelena V. Sausheva6 1Department of Foreign Languages for the Faculties of Natural Sciences, North-Ossetian State University named after K.L. Khetagurov, Vladikavkaz, Russia. 2Department of English Philology, Volgograd State Socio-Pedagogical University, Volgograd, Russia. 3Institute of Law and National Security, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, Moscow, Russia. 4Institute of Law and National Security, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, Moscow, Russia. 5Department of English Philology, Kuban State University, Krasnodar, Russia. 6Faculty of Foreign Languages, Military University of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, Moscow, Russia. *corresponding author ARTICLE INFORMATION ABSTRACT Original Research Paper In this article we investigate the characteristic features of political Received May. 2018 communication in the Republic of South Ossetia. Strategies and Accepted July. 2018 tactics for carrying on a political discourse will be examined with the Keywords: material of press conferences and interviews of south Ossetian political communication political discourse politicians, and the methods of their verbalization are considered. South Ossetia politicians Investigation in this area is carried out for the first time, as the speech strategies discursive analysis and systemic account of south Ossetian political speech tactics communication is one of the most important and problematic issues within South Ossetian linguistics. In the present article speech strategies and tactics of key political leaders, in particular, the President and the speaker of the parliament of the Republic of South Ossetia and methods of their language realization are dealt with. The basic purpose of the investigation is the disclosure of peculiarities of functioning of political communication in the Republic of South Ossetia. The main method of investigation is discursive-cognitive analysis. Tactic-strategic store of the President and the speaker of the parliament serve for realizing the discourse of power and nation. Unity of the political course of the leaders of the country is manifested by use of dominating strategies-unity, openness/transparency and feedback. Role self-presentation of the representatives of the two branches of the government is sustained in the framework of Ossetic cultural tradition, in accordance with which the President of the Republic of South Ossetia is “the senior” and the speaker is “the junior”. 1. Introduction The appearance of new nation-states on the map of the world, some of which are only starting to gain experience of political dialogue within the country and trying to get integrated into the global context stipulates significance of studying the political communication in the framework of modern linguistics. The Republic of South Ossetia is a young state, which is being formed and is developing in close collaboration with the Russian MJLTM, 8 (7), 139-147. Federation, and with its support. After the declaration of South Ossetian Independence in 1990, providing for the progress of the country, a model of a political system with support of the Russian Federation was worked out. A one-house parliament was formed that same year. The first staff of the legislators (64 deputies) – then called the Supreme Soviet of South Ossetia – was formed after the nation-wide elections on December 9, 1990. The active representatives of the organization Adamon Nykhas (People’s Assembly) made up its main body. The first Chairman was Torez Kulumbegov, the first Deputy Chairman was Alan Chochiev. The Institute of President was formed in accordance with global laws of political consciousness. Establishment of the post of President was preceded by a serious internal political crisis, being the menace of civil war. On November 27, 1996, inauguration of the first President of the Republic of South Ossetia Ludvig Alekseevich Chibirov took place. The model of State organization used was largely based on the one used by the Russian Federation. The goal of the article is to analyze the new South Ossetian political discourse, speech strategies and tactics in the political sphere of new country. Literature Review Coming into being of the new political system, change of social and political situation inside the country, its ideology and tendency of its development, serving as the factor of striking root of state identity, reflect appearance of political leaders, who are working out technologies of communication. Political communication and its various aspects have always been the subject of much debate and intensive study in diverse disciplines including linguistics, pragmatics, sociology, anthropology and others (Wilson, 1990; van Dijk, 1997; Obeng, 1997; Beard, 2000; Shevchenko, 2003; Chilton, 2004; Slyshkin, 2007; Katermina, 2015; Bobyreva et al., 2017; Ponomarenko et al., 2017; Sausheva, 2017; Zyubina et al., 2017; Yumatov et al., 2017; Gulinov et al., 2018; Zheltukhina et al., 2018; Tastan et al., 2018; Rudenko et al., 2018). Interaction is an important part of making politics. According to T. van Dijk (1997), the public sphere of politics is accomplished in the form of speech, which ranges from controversy and revelations to proclamation and declaration. Public speeches of two political leaders of the country – L.Kh. Tibilov and A. I. Bibilov realize the ethnic specificity of communication of the government with the people. Oral forms of South Ossetian political communication reflect general tendencies to the growing role of close-contact communication of the government and the citizens of the country, which confirms great significance of its examination. South Ossetian political discourse is presented as an institutional communicative act carried out in the framework of Russian-Ossetic bilingualism in the stage of coming into being. We take into account the thesis that political discourse is the sum total of all acts of communication used in political discussions as well as the rules of public politics, backed by and joined with traditions, and proven effective by experience. What is clear is that political activity does not exist without the use of language. It is true, as noted earlier, that other behaviours are involved and, in particular, physical coercion. However, the doing of politics is predominantly constituted in language. Conversely, it is also arguably the case that the need for language (or for the cultural elaboration of the language instinct) arose from socialization of humans involving the formation of coalitions, the signaling of group boundaries, and all that these developments imply, including the emergence of what is called reciprocal altruism. This is not of course to say that language arises exclusively out of these motives or functions. Contemporary anthropocentric paradigm displayed in study of the influence of the language upon behavior and mentality of an individual, interrelation between language and society, are characterized by accentuating the human factor in the language. MJLTM, 8 (7), 139-147. The present investigation is carried out within the framework of cognitive-discursive approach. Discursive analysis deals with detection and account of specificity of realization of communicative reciprocity of the language based upon contextual milieu, which influences the choice of linguistic means. Cognitive approach enables us to recognize clearly relations between process of mental activity, speech origination, cognitive basis, communicative intentions, pragmatic goals and value orientations with verbal realization of the message in the context of linguistic, ethno-cultural, and institutional competence of the author. Moreover, cognitive linguistics develops perspectives of constructing cognitive models, schemes and frames, which structure communication, in particular, account of personal lingual manifestations of the country leaders as of the representatives of the political institutions. Problem of political discourse is based on theoretical theses of a general theory of discourse, worked out both by foreign and Russian linguists. Denotation “political communication” discloses a range of problems associated with political problems and is correlated with communication, the subjects of which are politicians or political journalists, or, in a broader sense, deals with political problems, analyzed from the point of view of the subjects of politics, the latter considered the authors of political texts. The decision to analyze the public speeches of the President and the speaker of the parliament of the Republic of South Ossetia was predetermined by increasing significance of oral public communication of the leaders of the two branches of government, whose referent linguistic personalities have had a major impact on the formation of South Ossetian political discourse. The material for the article was withdrawn from Russian scripts representing genres of press conference and interview: on-line press conference of the President in the TV programme “Good evening, Ossetia”, and speeches of the speaker in the weekly “Parliament digest”. Which permit one to analyze the genre variety of the semi-institutional communication of the government with the population, and

Load more