BIOSCIENCES BIOTECHNOLOGY RESEARCH ASIA, April 2015. Vol. 12(1), 913-920

Institutional, Stereotypical and Mythological Media Markers of Modern Society

Marina Rostislavovna Zheltukhina

Volgograd State Socio-Pedagogical University, Russia, 400066, Volgograd, Lenin Avenue, 27

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.13005/bbra/1740

(Received: 02 March 2014; accepted: 04 April 2014)

The socio-economic and political situation in society creates certain conditions for successful or unsuccessful media communication. Mass media influence on socio- economic and political country life. Media discourse reflects socio-economic and cultural relations in the state and between the states, defines interests of modern society. This article discusses some unresolved issues of the discourse and influence theories, namely establishment of institutional, stereotypical and mythological media markers of modern society. External and internal institutional media communication types are allocated. Mass media institutionality correlates with the leading pragmatical principle of interest and the oracle as a prognostic message based on stereotypes and myths, creating different images.

Key words: Institution, Stereotype, Myth, Image, Media discourse, Media markers, Society.

At the turn of the XX – XXI centuries we religious and other types of discourse have impact observe the escalation of global socio-political on socio-economic and political life of the state. situation, its active coverage in local and The media discourse reflects the socio-economic international mass media and, as a result, increase and cultural relations in the state and between the of native speakers’ interest from various states, defines interests of modern society. linguocultures. The modern lifts a Efficiency of media communication consists in problem of interaction between the addresser and formation of the ideological (political, religious, the addressee, between the discourse and the consumer, creative, etc.) majority, achievement of power, tries to answer questions of a a public consensus. Text linguistics (in particular, role in continuous struggle for people’s power and discursive, socio-, psycho-, media linguistics) is influence, including mass media language. It is one of the most heavily developed areas in modern explained by social and psychological factors. The linguistics. The undertaken research meets needs socio-economic and political situation in the state of the pragmatical and cognitive linguistic areas creates certain conditions for successful or for discourse description experience (Searle, 1983; unsuccessful media communication. In turn, the Cialdini, 2000; Krasavsky, 2001; Pratkanis and media discourse and being realized in it political, Aronson, 2001; Fiske et al., 2002; Zheltukhina, 2003; 2011; Chudinov, 2008; Karasik, 2010; Dobronichenko et al., 2012, etc.). This article discusses some unresolved questions of the * To whom all correspondence should be addressed. discourse and influence theories, namely establishment of institutional, stereotypical and mythological media markers of modern society. 914 ZHELTUKHINA, Biosci., Biotech. Res. Asia, Vol. 12(1), 913-920 (2015)

METHOD features to institutional, social communication. The institutional communication classification offered The aim of the present study identified by V. Dieckmann (Dieckmann, 1981, p. 217-243) we the choice of analysis methods. In the paper such will transfer to the media sphere. As a result we will research procedures, as hypothetical deductive, receive such types of media communication, as inductive, descriptive methods, elements of external (between media institute and the citizen) cognitive interpretation, content analysis to and internal media communication (between identify the substantive aspect of media texts; the agents at media institutes). In both aspects , studying structure and units manifestation of influence, suggestiveness is of discourse, the main of which is the speech act, found: in the journalist speech from media institute as well as a comprehensive approach to the analysis and within media institute. of media texts by analogy with F. Burkhardt’s The problem of semantic uncertainty approach to the analysis of political texts (ambiguity, Ambiguität) of policy language, mass (Burkhardt, 1988), consisting in studying of their media language, making impact on the addressee, semantics, pragmatics, syntactics by component, is considered by many linguists and political contextual and stylistic analysis are used. The scientists. Media discourse semantic uncertainty methodological basis of the research is the system is caused by semantic and pragmatical factors. approach including cognitive, linguistic, Semantic factors include: pragmatical, communicative, rhetorical, 1) Abstractness and latitude values: abstract linguocultural, descriptive, critical subapproaches. words without clarifying definitions According to system approach any phenomenon (democracy instead of parliamentary is considered as integrity in unity of all its democracy, process, phenomenon, mission, connections and relations. At media markers freedom, justice, etc.) owing to its referential research of modern society it is important to uncertainty differ interpretation latitude; proceed from methodological regulations on 2) Meaning complexity caused by denotation language and speech differentiation, on language complexity: designation of ideas complexes as a cultural and historical environment, on remote from a first-hand person experience, relationship between rational and emotional in caused by complexity of extra language thinking, on language as an instrument of social reality (default, impeachment); power and influence. 3) Semantic boundaries blurring of gradual semantics words: lack of accurate RESULTS distinctions in designation of socio-political reference points on a scale: reactionary – Media discourse belongs to an conservative – liberal – progressive – institutional communication type which is carrying radical; out at institutes in which communication acts as a 4) Dsignation relativity or ideological component of their organization, which is based polysemy: use of the same words by carriers on certain social rules and functioning ritualization. of different ideologies to indicate different Degree of communication ritualization depends on concepts (Dieckmann, 1981, p. 56), i.e. such factors, as degree of acquaintance, degree of dependence on the nomination choice of communication situation officiality, communication the speaker position (the same idea – form’s prestigiousness, communicants’ social reactionary and liberal). status, etc. (Bogdanov, 1987, p. 11). The difficult The community of estimates from group system of media institutes expressed in various positions (Edelman, 1964, p. 115), characteristic for forms (publishing houses, TV, radio companies, media discourse, testifies to domination of an etc., regulating distribution of political and other affective-evaluative component over the proposals; groups, unions, blocks, labor unions, informative component. Further we will open etc., developing offers; mixed forms – imposing of pragmatical factors of uncertainty of mass media institutes at each other), generates various language: institutional language actions, gives peculiar 1) motivation, influence: assigning language ZHELTUKHINA, Biosci., Biotech. Res. Asia, Vol. 12(1), 913-920 (2015) 915

symbols and determining their content, of referential deviation correlated with semantic provoking desirable addressee reaction (21 sense of uncertainty factors. Focus on non-existent Green, 1987, p. 2); or “foreign” referent, self-reference character 2) manipulation: such strategies are based on (Baudrillard, 1981) explain sign phantom, existence uncertainty, as a) veiling (obscuring of of lexical phantoms as words without denotatum, undesirable information), b) mystification a real subject of designation (Norman, 1994). (truth concealment, conscious deception), Connection with the unknown referent indicates c) depersonalization (anonymity, esoteric sign character (Sheigal, 2000). Media responsibility removal) (Sheigal, 2000); discourse phantom consists of mythological and 3) face saving: use of abstract or uncertain literary (designations of fictional creatures), expressions hides ignorance, incompetence conceptual (terminology of erroneous scientific of the addresser and if necessary allows to concepts), ideological phantoms (symbol of social deny the told as it is impossible to accuse utopias, illusions, etc.) (Norman, 1994, p. 53). G. of lie of the one who told nothing (Crystal, Pocheptsov’s statement that the imperial board 1995, p. 378); needs phantoms for self-preservation 4) non-conflict communication: fair, neutral (Pocheptsov, 1998, p. 77) allows explaining position by uncertainty creating when phantom mass media and policy language discussing of controversial questions globalism, observed in the modern world, including promotes care manifestation, contradictions democratic countries. smoothing between communicants as the The told testifies to the special addresser is ready to offer clarity of importance of creative and magic functions of mass understanding to strengthen confidence media language. Denotata phantom generates and win sympathies of the addressee mithologems in media discourse sign space and (Hamilton and Mineo, 1998, p. 6); determines specific category existence of 5) lack of actions control: contextual concepts predictability associated with content uncertainty in programs, performances texts interpretation of various kinds of statements. complicates efficiency of control over the Manifestation of magic language function acts implementation of the taken obligations, phydeistic character as a condition of media allows the addresser to maneuver, to phantom existence, caused by such media subordinate his actions to moral standards discourse characteristics, as irrationality, support of situational ethics (Klyucharev, 1995, p. on subconsciousness. Media discourse 214). institutionality allows the addressee to accept Institutionality of media communication promotes reality for political, economic, social and other realization of an inexact reference as semiotics imaginations (real mediated, interpreted pictures), mechanism of semantic uncertainty. The following created and transferred by communicative types of referential deviation are allocated: intermediaries – politicians and journalists. Voter’s 1) broad reference character – the word ratio with protection from TV, radio and press killers during excessively wide range of referents; State Dumas elections of the Russian Federation 2) abstract reference character – the word ratio in 2003 is supposed in the form of indirect ban on with the abstract referent; analytics, any commenting of election campaign 3) ambiguous reference character – the word ratio because of all candidates enumerating need that is with the referent differently treated; reflected in the following outgaming: Vybory 2003 4) unknown reference character – the word ratio goda doverili osveshchat’ tol’ko Gerasimu i Mu with the unknown referent; – Mu. (Elections 2003 entrusted to shine only to 5) alien reference character – the word ratio with Gerasim and Mu-Mu.) (TV, Radio, 09.2003) “foreign” referent; 6) nonexistent reference Influence in the media discourse binds character – the word ratio with the nonexistent preferentially to the impact on the emotions and referent (Klyuev, 1996, p. 215). the subconscious, and not the mind, logical Factual material confirms the findings of thinking. Especially it distinguishes political, E. Sheygal (Sheigal, 2000) that the first three types religious, advertizing communication with the 916 ZHELTUKHINA, Biosci., Biotech. Res. Asia, Vol. 12(1), 913-920 (2015) addressee where the suggestive moment prevails imagination, demands skills to live at image level over rational, and the success of communication from person or organization, carries out regulative, is based on win of sympathy and trust of the motivational and mobilizing functions. Image makes addressee. Esoteric character or media discourses inspiring influence and can turn into a stereotype. secret speech is depending on degree of its Stereotypes act as regulators of social relationship. mythological character. Myth contains secret, They are distinguished by economy of thinking, riddle, represents miracle expectation, belief in an excuse their own behavior, aggressive supernatural, illusory consciousness generation. tendencies satisfaction, way of group tension exit, Mythological and esoteric characters are more inaccuracy, falsehood, emotional and estimated inherent in a discourse in totalitarian systems character, relative stability. In longitudinal studies (Kravchenkko, 1999). Esoteric character depends the effect of attenuation, the movement toward on media institute, its political and other bigger schematization and abstraction is found. orientation, its interests and purposes. The flip Information received earlier, has stronger impact side of esoteric character is the divination which is on category formation, than a refutation of this purposely put in media messages. Institutionality information. Therefore in mass media various of the mass media language correlates with the pseudo-sensations, slanders, libel based on leading pragmatical principle of interest (the stereotypes (sudden disappearance of authority, message has to be interesting, to contain new, etc.) are actively used. unknown information) and prediction as prognostic We will take as a basis stereotype message (addressee carries out predictive activity understanding as spiritual formation developed in which is consciously programmed), leans on people consciousness, emotionally painted image, stereotypes and myths, creating various images. transferring values in which there are elements of Along with institutionality process of the description, evaluation and prescription perception of information messages is influenced (Kunitsyna et al., 2001, p. 330). According to the by stereotypes. People knowledge accumulated content a stereotype is a set of the properties, both in personal experiences of communication, attributed to any group, characterized by a positive and from other sources, compiled and fixed in or negative orientation, degree of its internal people minds in the form of steady representations coherence and bias degree. After V. Krasnykh we – stereotypes. Stereotypes as a type of social distinguish behavior stereotypes (define setting are widely used by the person at people communicative behavior) and representations assessment as simplify, facilitate knowledge stereotypes (predetermine a set of associations process. The term “social stereotype” is entered and a language form of their expression) (Krasnykh, into social psychology by U. Lippman (Lippmann, 2003). Ethnic stereotypes are defined as simplified, 2007) to refer to preconceived representations and schematized, and emotionally painted and opinions. According to him, the main stereotypical extremely steady images of any ethnic groups or estimation reasons are the intellectual efforts communities, easily postponed for all economy principle, and functions of group values, representatives of these groups. National authorities, views and opinions protection. It is stereotype, designating entirely national group, about evaluative stereotypes rather than habits. assumes presence of certain feature of all group Gender stereotype is a people idea of how men members, comprises an assessment, compliance and women really behave. Professional stereotype with which makes it the same for all members of the as a kind of a social stereotype is a personified group. Use of a negative estimated stereotype in profession image, i.e. the generalized image of a respect of others is a powerful tool of self- typical professional (Kunitsyna et al., 2001, p. 337- identification. National and ethnic stereotypes 338). Image being a kind of a social stereotype is a changes happen very slowly and are caused by picture, representation, by associations’ method relationship of national and ethnic groups (Sorokin, allocating object of additional values which don’t 1994). The higher the stereotypical perception is, have the bases in real object properties, but the brighter the manifestation of the inability to possess social importance for perceiving this communicate is (negative correlations with this object. It involves guessing; stimulates parameter, as well as insight and intuition), and the ZHELTUKHINA, Biosci., Biotech. Res. Asia, Vol. 12(1), 913-920 (2015) 917 greater the exposure is. Too low indicators of colors”, “preservatives”, “salt”, “pesticides”, stereotypes also worsen possibilities of successful “nitrates”, etc. interaction. By people who are guided in assessing Conscious, purposeful approach to stereotypes, communicative competence is well stereotyping clearly demonstrated all leading developed that is explained by ability to use Russian TV channels during the 1996 presidential communicative stamps. It should be noted that elections in Russia. To illustrate this, let us turn to stereotypes are not the only reason of the the content of the news programs of the three simplified and schematical other people leading channels – ORT, RTV, NTV – June 28, 1996, representations. Barriers to understanding other a week before the 2nd round of elections (I. Smirnov, people are psychological defense mechanisms that “Nezavisimaya Gazeta” / “The independent distort the truth in the subjective direction newspaper”, 28.07.1996). Content of our interest is necessary to the addresser subjective, prejudices the information that aims to combat competitor. and biases. ORT “Novosti” (18.00 chas.) Sozdan Vserossiyskiy demokraticheskiy DISCUSSION soyuz: v svyazi s etim yego lider Rybkin ob”yasnyayet, kak protivostoyat’ kommunistam. Impact on the addressee reaches extent Glava LDPR Zhirinovskiy prizyvayet svoikh of suggestion and creates the prejudices as which storonnikov ne golosovat’ za lidera kommunistov emergence reasons act labels “hanging”, rough, Zyuganova. Ministr sotsial’noy zashchity scornful in relation to another education style, Bezlepkina: kommunistam nel’zya doveryat’ posty unexpected children’s emotional injuries by v pravitel’stve, tak kak “za sotsial’nuyu sferu interacting with “strangers”. Prejudices are dolzhny otvechat’ professionaly”. Prem’yer-ministr widespread and steady as, like stereotypes, realize Chernomyrdin vspominayet glavu tsarskogo an economical way of thinking, are hardy owing to pravitel’stva Stolypina: “Mechtam o conformism and fanaticism. Being an essential sotsialisticheskom perevorote nastupit konets”. marker of authoritarian religious person they Prazdnik na Ukraine: novaya Konstitutsiya – become part of thinking (Allport, 1968, p. 179), are “pobeda demokraticheskoy ideologii nad activated by anxiety and threat to sense of security. kommunisticheskoy!”. The most widespread in political propaganda, (ORT “News” (18.00 hrs.) advertizing are manipulations with basic estimated The All-Russian democratic union is categories: “advantage – harm”, “acceptable – created: in this regard its leader Rybkin explains unacceptable”, “good – evil” – the expressions how to resist to communists. The head of LDPR subordinating to another, heading hierarchy of Zhirinovsky calls on his supporters not to vote for estimated terms. the Communist leader Zyuganov. Social Protection For example, symbols since the 50th: Minister Bezlepkina: Communists can’t be trusted GOOD / EVIL positions in the government as “professionals Progress (war, ecology, diseases), have to be responsible for the social sphere”. The science (the invention of atomic weapons and Prime Minister Chernomyrdin remembers the head destruction technologies), of the imperial government Stolypin: “Dreams of GOOD – aerobics, jogging, socialist revolution come to an end.” Holiday in EVIL – AIDS, drugs; Ukraine: the new Constitution is “a victory of symbols since the 90th: democratic ideology over communistic ideology!”) GOOD – environment, “green”, family, safety, RTR “Vesti” (20.00 chas.) balanced budget, political correctness; S”yezd kompartii V’yetnama, kadr: EVIL – terrorism, sects, preservatives. nishchaya starukha s protyanutoy rukoy. Prezident Any speech influence spheres possess Yel’tsin: “Mne ne o chem razgovarivat’ s sytym certain characteristics. So, for example, in food demagogom ot partii” (o pryamykh teledebatakh s advertizing are used as positive concepts: “low- liderom kommunistov Zyuganovym). Zyuganov calorie”, “light”, “low sodium”, “environmentally protiv SMI (obshcheye vyrazheniye negodovaniya friendly”, and negative concepts: “artificial v zapisi). Dlinnaya i konkretnaya rech’ glavy LDPR 918 ZHELTUKHINA, Biosci., Biotech. Res. Asia, Vol. 12(1), 913-920 (2015)

Zhirinovskogo s rugan’yu v adres kompartii: “kto- angry statement to mass media”. “Sensation” – to iz kommunistov, mozhet byt’, ran’she vremeni the long anti-communistic speech of the head of uydet iz zhizni...”. Patriarkh Aleksiy II LDPR Zhirinovsky: “Because since the 17th year kommentiruyet vyskazyvaniya lidera dvizheniya this political force... Even into a bed got to each “Trudovaya Rossiya” Anpilova protiv khrama citizen...”. Information: Rybkin, Boris Fedorov and Khrista Spasitelya. Akter Zhzhenov: “YA smotryu Shakhrai’s Democratic Union against the po fanatichnym ostervenelym litsam, kotoryye Communists. The new Constitution of Ukraine, vykhodyat s Zyuganovym...” … “Nikto v Rossii v compromise “without “ruhovtsy” and communists 17-m godu ne dumal, chto budut unichtozhat’ who couldn’t overcome ideological dogmas and tselyye narody...”. external orders”.) (RTR “Vesti” (20.00 hrs.) Such content concentrated, rigidly form Communist Party Congress of Vietnam, built leading TV channels information and news picture: poor old woman with a cap in hand. line repeating day by day within two-three months President Yeltsin: “I have nothing to talk to the allowed to build and strengthen a resistant anti- satiated party demagogue” (about direct TV communistic stereotype in public consciousness. debates with Communist leader Zyuganov). Psychological mechanism of formation Zyuganov against mass media (the general and change of installations and stereotypes expression of indignation in record). The long and includes the following components. concrete speech of the head of LDPR Zhirinovsky Information source and installation subject with abuse to Communist Party: “someone from compliance communists, maybe, will die ahead of time... “. The In a case with formation of stereotypes in patriarch Alexy II makes comments on statements pre-election presidential fight in 1996 in Russia of the movement leader “Labor Russia” Anpilov information source (mass media and standing against the Cathedral of Christ the Savior. Actor behind them power and financial structures), Zhzhenov: “I look on fanatical frenzied persons information subject (anticommunism and pre- that go with Zyuganov…” … “Anybody in Russia existing installations in consciousness of the in the 17th year didn’t think that they will destroy addressee) corresponded each other, had the the whole people... “.) general positive assessment. Therefore mental NTV “Segodnya” (19.00 chas.) tension at the most audience part didn’t arise. Prezident Yel’tsin o pryamykh Election campaign was carried out in the direction teledebatakh so svoimi sopernikami na vyborakh: of fixing installations and stereotypes. “Mne ne o chem diskutirovat’”. Kommentariy Installations changes and stereotypes destruction teleprogrammy o press-konferentsii Zyuganova, at dissonance approach kotoryy “vystupil s razdrazhennym zayavleniyem L. Festinger’s cognitive dissonance v adres SMI”. “Sensatsiya” – dlinnaya theory notes contradictions between information antikommunisticheskaya rech’ glavy LDPR messages and addressee’s knowledge about reality Zhirinovskogo: “Ibo s 17-go goda eta (Festinger, 1957) with the mental tension which politicheskaya sila... Dazhe v krovat’ zalezli lead to installations, beliefs, stereotypes change, kazhdomu grazhdaninu...”. Informatsiya: eventually, to consciousness splitting. Demokraticheskiy soyuz Rybkina, Borisa Fedorova i Shakhraya protiv kommunistov. Novaya CONCLUSIONS Konstitutsiya Ukrainy, kompromiss “bez “rukhovtsev” i kommunistov, kotoryye ne smogli Thus, as shown by our research, in the preodolet’ ideologicheskiye dogmy i vneshniye last decade due to the intensification of political zakazy”. activity in the world and the global informatization (NTV “Today” (19.00 hrs.) the mass media language became an intense study The president Yeltsin about direct TV object of , cognitive linguistics, debates with his rivals on elections: “I have text linguistics, discourse linguistics. Intensity of nothing to discuss”. TV program comment on a information media processes in many respects is press conference of Zyuganov who “made the defined by structure of their spatial features: center ZHELTUKHINA, Biosci., Biotech. Res. Asia, Vol. 12(1), 913-920 (2015) 919 and periphery relations; nature of horizontal and Flinta: Nauka, 2008. vertical linkages and subjects relations, 7. Cialdini, R. B., Influence: Science and Practice. concentration of social, political, military, Boston: Allyn & Bacon, 2000. economic, ideological forces and factors operating 8. Crystal, D., The Cambridge Encyclopedia of the English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge in the world (global, intercontinental) international University Press, 1995. and national, regional and local space. Despite the 9. Dieckmann, W., Politische Sprache, politische fact that all people belonging to the same society, Kommunikation: Vorträge, Aufsätze, Entwürfe. live in unified physical space, their mentality is Heidelberg: Winter, 1981. different. In media language features of language 10. Dobronichenko, E. V., Magomadova, T. D. consciousness, thinking, individual and mass Slyshkin, G. G. & Zheltukhina, M. R., Military speech behavior which reflects the institutional, Metaphorization of the Wedding Media stereotypical and mythological media markers of Performance. Innovations of XXI Century. All- modern society are shown. Influence realization Russia Scientific and Public-Educational Journal, 2012; 1: 178-180. consideration in different media discourse genres, 11. Edelman, M., The Symbolic Uses of Politics. influence dynamics establishment in media Urbana: Univ. of Illinois Press, 1964. language, further cognitive models and strategies 12. Festinger, L., A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. research of tropes influence on the addressee in Evanston, Illinois: Row, Peterson, 1957. the media discourse, discursive portraits of 13. Fiske, S.T., Cuddy, A.J.C., Glick, P. & Xu J., A domestic and foreign mass media examination and Model of (Often Mixed) Stereotype Content: comparison from the point of view of their impact Competence and Warmth Respectively Follow force, identification of tropes influence force in from Perceived Status and Competition. Journal the discursive space by comparing of various of Personality and Social Psychology, 2002; 82(6): 878-902. discourse types in the mass media (political, 14. Green, D., The Language of Politics in America: advertizing, sports, etc.) are interesting and Shaping the Political Consciousness from perspective to research the speech influence McKinley to Reagan. Ithaca: Cornell Univ. Press, problem in the media discourse. 1987. 15. Hamilton, A. & Mineo, P. J., A Framework for ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Understanding Equivocation. Journal of Language and Psychology, 1998; 17(1): 3-35. Thanks for being such a perceptive 16. Karasik, V. I., Language Crystallization of Sense. reader. Thanks to the Education and Science Volgograd: Paragigma, 2010. 17. Klyucharev, G. A., Language Activity and Ministry of the Russian Federation for financial Political Image. Updating of Russia: Difficult research support for state works performance in Search of Decisions, 1995; 3: 211-216. the scientific activity sphere within a basic unit of 18. Klyuev, E. V., Fatick as Discussion Subject. In the state task # 2014/411 (project code: 1417). Poetics. Stylistics. Language and Culture. T.G. Vinokur’s Memories Moscow: Nauka, 1996; REFERENCES 212-220. 19. Krasavsky, N. A., Dynamics of Emotional 1. Allport, G. W., The Person in Psychology: Concepts in German and Russian linguocultures Selected Essays. Boston: Beacon Press, 1968. (Doctoral dissertation). Volgograd: VSPU, 2001. 2. Bachem, R., Einführung in die Analyse politischer 20. Krasnykh, V. V., “Friend” among “Strangers”: Texte. München: Oldenbourg, 1979. Myth or Reality. Moscow: Gnosis, 2003. 3. Baudrillard, J., Simulacres et Simulation. Paris: 21. Kravchenkko, I. I., Political Mythology: Galilée, 1981. Eternity and Present. Philosophy Questions, 4. Bogdanov, V. V., Rhetoric and Pragmatics. In 1999; 1: 3-17. Rhetoric and Syntactic Structures: Proceedings 22. Kunitsyna, V.N., Kazarinova, N. V. & Pogolsha, 1987; 11-14. Krasnoyarsk: KSU. V. M., Interpersonal Communication. SPb.: St. 5. Burkhardt, F, Sprache in der Politik: Linguistische Petersburg, 2001. Begriffe und Methoden. Englisch- 23. Lippmann, W., Public Opinion. New York: Amerikanische Studien, 1988; 10(3/4): 333-358. Filiquarian Publishing, LLC, 2007. 6. Chudinov, A. P., Political Linguistics. “oscow: 24. Norman, B.Yu., Lexical Phantoms in Terms of Linguistics and Cultural Studies. In Language 920 ZHELTUKHINA, Biosci., Biotech. Res. Asia, Vol. 12(1), 913-920 (2015)

and Culture: Proceedings of the III Intern. !onf. 29. Sorokin, Yu. A., Ethnic Conflictology: Kiev: !ollegium: Firm “Vipol”, 1994; 53-60. Theoretical and Experimental Fragments. 25. Pocheptsov, G. G., Theory and Practice of Samara: Rus. Lyceum, 1994. Communication: From the Speeches of 30. Zheltukhina, M. R., Tropological Suggestiveness Presidents to Negotiations with Terrorists. of Mass Media Discourse: on the Issue of Speech Moscow: Centr, 1998. Impact of Tropes in Mass Media Language. 26. Pratkanis, A. R. & Aronson, E., Age of “oscow: Institute of Linguistics of RAS; Propaganda: the Everyday Use and Abuse of Volgograd: VB MUCC, 2003. Persuasion. New York: W. H. Freeman & Co 31. Zheltukhina, M. R., Linguopragmatic Ltd, 2001. Mechanism of the Comic in Political Discourse. 27. Searle, J., Intentionality: An Essay in the In Matveeva, G. G. / Zyubina, I. A. (Eds.) IV Philosophy of Mind. Cambridge: Cambridge Intern. Conf. on Pragmalinguistics and Speech University Press, 1983. Practices. (pp. 97-117). Newcastle upon Type: 28. Sheigal, E. I., Semiotics of Political Discourse. Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2011. Volgograd: Peremena, 2000.