Featuring subtext in contemporary political discourse
https://doi.org/10.28995/2686-7249-2022-4-415-424
Abstract
The article discusses the pragmalinguistic phenomenon ‘subtext’ in today’s political discourse. It seeks to review a number of examples that demonstrate semantic, syntactic and pragmatic aspects of the “linguistics of lies”, or more precisely, accentuate the distinction between conventional and communicative implicatures. The varieties of subtext refer either to euphemization processes and inflated meanings, or to stealth persuasion strategies resting on the use of jargon and bureaucratese. In most analyzed cases of the first cluster, there is an abundance of words with a positive connotation, but with vague subject semantics, which often helps the politician distract the audience from the actual meaning of things. The second cluster of examples highlights the problem of bad style on the part of a person endowed with power. Subtext studies may thus, on the one hand, be of interest to researchers of neo-rhetoric, semantics, and semiotics, and, on the other hand, to instructors and learners of English stylistics.
About the Authors
O. V. Aleksandrova
Lomonosov Moscow State University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Ol’ga V. Aleksandrova, Dr. of Sci. (Philology), professor
bld. 1/53, Leninskie Gory, Moscow, 119991
D. S. Mukhortov
MGIMO University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Denis S. Mukhortov, Cand. of Sci. (Philology), associate professor
bld. 76, Vernadsky Avenue, Moscow, 119454
References
1. Aleksandrova, O.V. and Strelets, I.E. (2021), “The place and role of diplomatic discourse in modern discursive studies”, Cognitive Studies of Language, no. 1, vol. 44, pp. 413–420.
2. Alexandrova, O. and Mukhortov, D. (2020), “Political discourse within cognitive pragmatic studies of the language”, in Višnyaková, O. (ed.), Problémy interakce jazyka, literatury a kultury: nové směry výzkumu [Problems of Language, Literature and Culture Interaction: New Trends of the Research], Západočeská univerzita v Plzni, Plzeň, Česká republika, pp. 199–219.
3. Andryukhina, N.V. (2019), Insincere discourse in English-language political texts, Ph.D. Thesis, Samara, Russia.
4. Beatty, R. (1982), “Windyfoggery and Bureaucratese”, Rhetoric Society Quarterly, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 261–69, available at: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3885166 (Accessed 23 March 2022).
5. Longley, R. (2021), Overview of Rider Bills in Government: Rider Bills are Often Stealth Legislation, available at: https://www.thoughtco.com/rider-bills-in-the-us-con-gress-stealth-legislation-4090449 (Accessed 23 March 2022).
6. Lutz, W. (1988), “Fourteen Years of Doublespeak”, The English Journal, vol. 77, no. 30, pp. 40–42.
7. Lutz, W. (1989), Doublespeak: From “revenue enhancement” to “terminal living”: How government, business, advertisers, and others use language to deceive you, Harper & Row, New York, USA.
8. Lutz, W. (1996), The new doublespeak: Why no one knows what anyone’s saying anymore. Harper Perennial, New York, USA.
9. Minin-White, D. (2017), “Political Speech, Doublespeak, and Critical-Thinking Skills in American Education”, School of Education Student Capstone Projects. 83, available at: https://digitalcommons.hamline.edu/hse_cp/83 (Accessed 23 March 2022).
10. Moore, J. (2018), “Why do politicians usually bureaucratese in their speech? Is the language barrier somehow necessary?”, available at: https://www.quora.com/Why-do-politicians-usually-bureaucratese-their-speech-Is-the-language-barrier-somehow-necessary (Accessed 23 March 2022).
11. Mukhortov, D.S. (2014), “Manipulative potential of ideological polysemy in modern political discourse”, Ubezhdenie i dokazatel’stvo v sovremennom politicheskom diskurse: materialy Mezhdunar. nauch. konf. [Persuasion and proof in contemporary political discourse: Proceedings of the Intern. scientific conf.], 26–28 August 2014, Ekaterinburg, Russia, pp. 68–76.
12. Osipov, G.A. (2013), Hedging as a cognitive-pragmatic method of suggestion in political discourse, Abstract of Ph.D. dissertation, Maikop, Russia.
13. Popov, V.I. (2003), Sovremennaya diplomatiya. Teoriya i praktika [Diplomacy Today. Theory and Practice], Mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya, Moscow, Russia.
14. Strelets, I.E. (2020), “Linguistic and stylistic features of D. Trump’s communicative behavior during the crisis period of 2020”, Moscow University Bulletin. Series 3: Philology, no. 6, pp. 100–114.
Review
For citations:
Aleksandrova O.V., Mukhortov D.S. Featuring subtext in contemporary political discourse. RSUH/RGGU Bulletin: “Literary Teory. Linguistics. Cultural Studies”, Series. 2022;1(4(3)):415-424. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.28995/2686-7249-2022-4-415-424
Views:
121
Email this article 