Abstract:
The aim of the article is to analyze the dominant speech behavior of groups of parliamentarians, depending on the national and cultural specifics of the sender of the text, using the methodology adopted in Implicit Pragmalinguistics. The text of each speech is divided into small syntactic groups, which in Implicit Pragmalinguistics are considered the standard units of the analysis. In total, more than three thousand such units were analyzed during the study period. The material for the study of the politicians’ speech behavior was the texts of the speeches of 20 politicians speaking in English and Russian, presented in the period from 2019 to 2020 in their national parliaments, the British Parliament and the State Duma. The analysis shows that the majority of politicians are distinguished by a dominant type of behavior, which is expressed in the manifestation of a bright individuality. A successful politician is always a talented leader and organizer who has the prevalence of character traits that are associated with independence, decisiveness, authoritarianism and focus not only on himself/herself, but also on the audience. All selected groups of the politicians showed great confidence in what they are talking about, which indicates the signs of a successful and professional leader. In the course of a comparative analysis, we came to the conclusion that dominance in the speech of the politicians is manifested differently and depends on the nationality of the parliamentarians. Thus, the Russian-speaking politicians of both sexes confirm their collectivist cultural orientation in speech behavior, and the British generally follow the principles of individualism; the Russian-speaking female politicians are a little more categorical and confident in their speeches than the English-speaking ones.
Keywords: dominance, Implicit Pragmalinguistics, speech behavior, strategy, speech signal, ethnic and cultural specifics, politician-parliamentarian.
For citation: Zyubina I.A. National Specificity of Dominance in Politicians’ Speech Behavior. Current Issues in Philology and Pedagogical Linguistics. 2021, no 4, pp. 51–61 (In Russ.)
Bionote:
Irina A. Zyubina
Southern Federal University, 105/42 Bolshaya Sadovaya Str.,
Rostov-on-Don, Russian Federation, 344006
ORCID ID: 0000-0002-1265-8366;
Researcher ID: J-5205-2017;
Scopus Author ID: 57194704279
References:
1. Baigozhina DO., Zheltukhina MR., Shiryaeva TA., Talybina EV., Minakova NA., Zyubina IA. The Threat and Fear of War: The State and Politics in American Mass Media. Media Watch. 2020; 11(3): 439-446. ISSN 0976-0911 | e-ISSN 2249-8818 DOI: 10.15655/mw/2020/v11i3/202930.
2. Safwat S. Speech Acts in Political Speeches. Journal of Modern Education Review. 2015; 5(7): 699-706.
3. Zheltukhina MR., Busygina MV., Merkulova MG., Zyubina IA., Buzinova LM. Linguopragmatic aspect of modern communication: main political media speech strategies and tactics in the USA and the UK. XLinguae. 2018; 11(2): 639-654. DOI: 10.18355/XL.2018.11.02.51. ISSN 1337-8384, eISSN 2453-711X.
4. Dramnescu M. Communication. Political Speech. Populist Speech. Topical Communication Uncertainties. 2014; 16: 15-19.
5. Tameryan TYu., Zheltukhina MR., Slyshkin GG., Shevchenko AV., Katermina VV., Sausheva YeV. 2018. New Country’s Political Discourse: Formation of Speech Technologies. Modern Journal of Language Teaching Methods. 2018; 8(8): 11-18.
6. Bekoeva ID., Dzhioeva VP., Tameryan TY. Ethnocultural peculiarities of political communication. Language and Culture. 2018; 12: 4-13.
7. Polyakov SE. Concepts and other constructions of consciousness. St. Petersburg; 2017. (In Russ.).
8. Sternin IA. Communicative behavior in the structure of national culture. Ethnocultural specificity of linguistic consciousness. M.; 2000. (In Russ.).
9. Razumova MV. Reflection of the national mentality in the language. Foreign languages: linguistic and methodological aspects. Tver. 2014; 29: 270-273. (In Russ.).
10. Samchik NN. Methods of reflection of cultural information in the language. Regional Bulletin. Kursk. 2019; 12(27): 25-26. (In Russ.).
11. Tatarkina MV. Mentality in the Russian speech etiquette and the specifics of the Russian mentality in comparison with English. Bulletin of the Ugra State University. 2010; 3(18): 20-23. (In Russ.).
12. Zyubina IA., Dzyubenko AI., Borisenko VA., Popova OV., Prokopyev AI. Implicit linguopragmatic strategies of speech behavior of English speaking prosecutors. XLinguae. 2019; 12 (4): 92-102. ISSN 1337- 8384, eISSN 2453-711X. DOI: 10.18355/XL.2019.12.04.08
13. Zyubina IA., Filippova MIu., Minakova NA., Krivoshlykova LV., Anikejeva IG. Synchronous personal method of language studying speech behavior in implicit pragmalinguistics. XLinguae. 2020; 13 (4): 81-90. ISSN 1337-8384, ISSN 2453-711X DOI: 10.18355/XL.2020.13.04.06.
14. Matveeva GG. On the method of text analysis in the aspect of Implicit Pragmalinguistics. Language units: functional and communicative aspect. Rostov-on-Don; 2001; 2: 51-53. (In Russ.).
15. Zyubina IA. Dominant strategies of state power discourse. Current Issues in Philology and Pedagogical Linguistics. 2021; 1: 48-59. (In Russ.).
16. Zyubina IA. Gender and national identity in stereotyped speech behavior of the Russian-speaking and English-speaking politicians. Baltic Humanitarian Journal. Т. 10. 2021; 2(35): 275-277. ISSN print: 2311-0066; ISSN online: 2712-9780. (In Russ.).