Performatives and prescriptives as markers of conventional-final component in ludic discourse
Current Issues in Philology and Pedagogical Linguistics
Aktualnye problemi filologii i pedagogicheskoi lingvistiki
ISSN 2079-6021(Print)
ISBN 2619-029X(Online)

Performatives and prescriptives as markers of conventional-final component in ludic discourse


Performatives and prescriptives as markers of conventional-final component in ludic discourse

Bredikhin Sergey N.  / Burgakova Lana Dzh. /

Abstract: This item focuses on the main ways of explication for performative and descriptive content in conventionalized acts of distributing actual roles within academic discourse. The work offers an analysis of the linguocultural and cognitive basis for fixing the finalizing and structuring component of child count-out rhymes as an incoative component of the game space. The analysis is based on the content to be found in the following three languages: English, Russian and Kalmyk. Hermeneutical-noematic analysis of variable and formal components helped identify the principles of conceptualization for top certainty level and obligations fulfillment beyond the framework of direct performativity. The legitimization of the actual roles distribution is done not on the basis of an explicit expression of will, yet based on an implicit random variative choice, and is fixed with a prescriptive utterance expressed as a rhythmically rhymed formula-like utterance. This, therefore, increases the degree of performativization, i.e. the equivalence of words and actions – manipulative influence occurs through the strategy of intimization within the framework of objectifying the universal maxims of the psycho-emotional space. A ludic performative act becomes a kind of social and ritual action featuring a combination of factors: 1) contamination of personal and collective mental spaces; 2) variability in using rhythmically-rhymed incoation formulas; 3) a conventionally-formalized component of the finalizing utterance. The conceptual structure of performatization is explicated through real and communicative activity in game interaction based on a priori accepted common mental space of binding-effective semantics and ritual actions in objective reality. Kinesics and mimicry in a formula-performative act, which is built like a call, warning, or pseudo-argumentative utterance, plays the role of ultimate strengthening of the communicative and pragmatic effect, which ensures the maximum conventionality of further game interaction.

Keywords: performative, prescriptive, ludic discourse, reflexive basis, mental space, conventionalization, incoation, finalization, speech acts, variability, formularity, communicative and pragmatic features

For citation: Bredikhin S.N., Burgakova L.Dzh. Performatives and prescriptives as markers of conventional-final component in ludic discourse. Current Issues in Philology and Pedagogical Linguistics. 2020, no 3, pp. 12–21 (In Russ.)

Sergey N. Bredikhin, Doctor of Philology, associate professor, North-Caucasus federal university, Department of translation studies, professor; Stavropol, Russian Federation. 
Address: 355017, Stavropol, 1 Pushkin Str., North-Caucasus federal university. 

Lana Dzh. Burgakova, 3rd year postgraduate student, North-Caucasus federal university, Department of translation studies; Stavropol, Russian Federation
Address: 355017, Stavropol, 1 Pushkin Str., North-Caucasus federal university

Download issue

1. Austin JL. How to do things with words. New trends in foreign linguistics, 1986; XVII. Speech acts theory: 22-129. (In Russ.).
2. Apresyan YuD. Performatives in grammar and vocabulary. Selectas. Integral description of language and system lexicography. Мoscow; 1995;2:199-218. (In Russ.).
3. Clark HH., Bangerter A. Changing conceptions of reference. Experimental pragmatics. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan; 2004:25-49. (In Eng.).
4. Turner M. The origin of ideas: Blending, creativity, and the human spark. New York, 2014. (In Eng.).
5. Fauconnier G., Turner M. Mental spaces: conceptual integration networks. Cognitive linguistics: basic readings. Berlin; 2006:303-371. (In Eng.).
6. Alexandrova OV. Cognitive and discursive technologies in the interpretation of language and speech. Cognitive studies of language. 2015;23:59-63.
7. Linguistic encyclopedic dictionary. Moscow.; 1990. (In Russ.).
8. Temirgazina Z., Nikolaenko S., Akosheva M., Luczyk M., Khamitov G. “Naive anatomy” in the Kazakh language world picture in comparison with English and Russian. XLinguae, 2020;13(2):3-16. DOI: 10.18355/XL.2020.13.02.01. (In Eng.).
9. Bredihin SN., Alikaev RS. Techniques of semantic construct discretion and objectivation in the light of realization and integration. Issues of Cognitive Linguistics, 2016;2(47):123-128. DOI: 10.20916/1812-3228-2016-2-123-128. (In Russ.). 
10. McLaughlin MR. Speech and Language Delay in Children. Am Fam Physician. 2011;83(10):1183-1188. (In Eng.).
11. Pavlikova M. Kierkegaardovo vnimanie cloveka a spolocnosti. XLinguae, 2018;11(1):323-331. DOI: 10.18355/XL.2018.11.01.27. (In Slov.).
12. Osorina MV. Mental Spaces as Mental Reality. Vestnik SPbSU. Psychology and Education, 2017;7(1):6-24. DOI: 10.21638/11701/spbu16.2017.101. (In Russ.).
13. Basangova TG. Kalmyk children’s folklore. Elista, 2009. (In Russ.).

Количество показов: 562

Возврат к списку

We recommend authors to read carefully the scope of our journal, the submission guidelines and malpractice statement. Original papers and studies developing new theoretical and applied issues are preferred. Such works are always cited, and citing your works reflects your status as a researcher.

ISSN 2079-6021 (Print)
ISBN 2619-029X (Online)