The development of the language occurs with the help of vocabulary, which instantly responds to any changes taking place in public life, and is a special form of accumulation of social cognitive experience and its transmission in the chain of generations. A native speaker functions in society with the help of the language, and the life of society affects the language through the native speaker. The OPL, which fully reflects the features of the state system, the socio-political structure of society and its history, is "one of the main areas of maximum concentration of nationally colored vocabulary that reflects the characteristics of the life of the people" . Political vocabulary is a thematic community of commonly used words that should be understood by everyone (the absolute majority of citizens).
It is obvious that the lexico-semantic system of the language is more influenced by social factors. For example, in the 90s of the twentieth century, according to researchers, the English language was replenished annually by 15,000-20,000 new units. But even during relatively stable periods in the life of society, the political vocabulary is constantly evolving and updating.
The political text, first of all, expresses a certain point of view on any issue. He is persuaded to create some mood, to refute certain beliefs, to strengthen adherence to any principles, to break prejudice. In other words, "a political text is meant to agitate and propagandize an audience." The concept of OPL should be understood as the ideologized part of the dictionary, which reflects the concepts of social, political and social life society and used in the mass media (socio-political) communication. OPL, like other lexical-semantic categories, has its own features and characteristics. The OPL reflects those concepts and phenomena of social and political life (socialism, fascism, liberalism, conservatism) that become socially significant and relevant for a certain time.
Socio-political vocabulary directs representatives of society to discuss and solve state problems, to perform various public functions. OPL is also included in everyday colloquial speech, thereby becoming an integral part of the actively used vocabulary of the modern language.
The sphere of use of OPL is means mass media, public speeches of politicians and public figures.
Summarizing the above, we can name the following signs of APL:
reflection of those concepts and phenomena of social and political life that for a certain time become socially significant and actively discussed;
in its overwhelming part, it is close and understandable to the participants in all ongoing social phenomena;
has a socio-evaluative character;
is ideological;
widely used in the media and journalism.
Socio-political vocabulary of the English language and features of its composition
The main semantic feature of the OPL is the presence of the semantic component "political, social". This approach is characteristic of the Western lexicographic tradition with a large set of political glossaries and dictionaries. Foreign linguists interpret political terminology as a language used by politicians both officially and behind the scenes in the process of communication about politics. Determining the composition of the NPL is a very difficult task, because “The definition of the very concepts of “political, social” is complex and multifaceted. It is in connection with this that linguists begin the analysis of the OPL with the determination of the values of the components this term. So, L.A. Muradova quite extensively characterizes the composition of the OPL, including in its composition lexical units from various spheres of public life, for example, from the economy, diplomacy, culture, which characterize the policy of the state in a particular area. “The policy of the state is applicable to a large number of areas of the social life of society, because it affects all areas of human activity.” Muradova L.A. Semantic and functional characteristics of the socio-political vocabulary of the modern French language. - M.: Enlightenment, 1986. - S. 61.
However, at the same time, politics is a field of activity that is associated with relations between classes, nations, social groups. Its core is the problem of conquering, retaining and using state power participation in the affairs of the state. It can be noted that the core of the RPL is a very complex phenomenon, and the boundaries of the RPL are conditional, since language is a living, moving matter. It is the OPL that reacts quickly to the changes taking place in the world. When translating it, not only traditional grammar is used, but also a large number of clichés.
There are 4 zones in the PPL: Zhdanova L.A. Socio-political lexicon: Structure and dynamics: dissertation of a candidate of philological sciences: 10.02.01. - Moscow, 1996. - 224 p.
- Zone 1 - the actual OPL (OPL in the narrow sense). Actually OPL is a political lexicon. This group includes direct nominations of persons, places, phenomena, structures that shape the political life of society.
- Zone 2 - ideological vocabulary. The expression of a power relationship is associated with an evaluative meaning and a pragmatic component of the meaning, designated as "engagement", reflecting the attachment of the word to a particular historical era. Ideological vocabulary is a marker of the political position of the speaker and the ideological orientation of the text.
- 3 zone - thematic vocabulary. First of all, this vocabulary refers to the spheres and forms of manifestation of public life (the army, the economy, the administrative sphere, foreign policy and etc.)
- 4 zone - not actually OPL (the so-called "peripheral" OPL). Such vocabulary describes power relations in general, regardless of the sphere of implementation, or a specific (but not state-political) sphere of the implementation of power relations. Traditionally, this vocabulary is not included in the OPL. But the semantics and systematic correlation of the non-proper GPL with socio-political life, including metaphorical transfers, branched relationships between all words denoting a power relationship, are the basis for considering this vocabulary within the framework of the GLP.
It should be noted that the term "socio-political vocabulary" (SPL) is used by domestic linguistics to refer to a set of lexical units that name the concepts and realities of socio-political life and are widely used in the media. Foreign science, in turn, operates with a different terminological apparatus:
«social life, political life, political discourse, political discourse analysis, political dictionary, language of politics, political language, political cognition, political communication, political opinion classification, political economy words, political quotations, political slang, dictionary of social sciences, political terms, social issues dictionary, social science terminology".
but never socio-political life or socio-political words/lexis. In the West, there is a tendency to distinguish between the political and social spheres, so social and political life/language/vocabulary/lexis options are possible (cf. public life - public life - is understood in English in a different context). According to the definition in many English-language dictionaries, socio-political is understood as “related to, connected with or implying a combination of both social and political factors” URL: http://www.dictionary.com/browse/sociopolitical (Accessed: 04/28/2013) .
Library
materials
Introduction…………………………………………………………………..4
Chapter I. Language as a factor of political influence………………………..17
1.1. Politicization of the modern language of the media………………………….17
1.2. The role and place of language in politics…………………………………………….22
Chapter II. The content of political vocabulary…………………………………29
2.1. The boundaries of the concept of "political vocabulary"……………………………….29
2.2. Lexical means of linguistic influence on mass consciousness…..31
Chapter III. Features of the political vocabulary of Kazakh and Russian media……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………34
Conclusion………………………………………………………………………….49
Bibliography……………………………………………………………………….53
Appendix 1. Political vocabulary………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Appendix 2. Political phraseology (set phrases) ... 60
Introduction
Language and politics are deeply interconnected phenomena. There are many opinions of various researchers regarding the problem of their relationship. So, in his work "Politics and Language" W. Bergsdorf writes that "language is politics, and politics is language, since power cannot rest only on physical and economic strength, but also requires consistency in the actions of the ruling classes themselves" . According to N. A. Ozhevan, “language is not only a means of communication, but also of separation. Not only a means of self-expression, but also a means of manipulation. Not only a means of liberation, but also enslavement by language stereotypes. In other words, language is inseparable from politics and power relations, and only in this context can it be understood adequately. The power exercised by politicians largely depends on how professionally they use the language, because language is also a means of exercising power, its instrument. A politician must be able to choose the right words and expressions in order to convey to the addressee his thoughts, his political position. One cannot but agree with the opinion of R. Wodak, who argues that “language gains power only when it is used by people with power; language itself has no power."
The object of our study is the political vocabulary and phraseology of the Russian language (2006 - 2008).
It should also be noted that the object of study is political vocabulary and phraseology, the units of which express political connectedness, regardless of the context.
The language of politics is intended for political communication. And in this regard, O. I. Vorobyova, highlighting the political language as an independent linguistic subsystem (by analyzing its lexical level), even talks about the possible emergence of a new discipline - linguo-political science, the object of which it will be. E. I. Sheigal writes that the language of politics "should be considered as one of the professional sublanguages - variants of the national language" . As some researchers note, the political language performs contradictory functions, since, on the one hand, “the language of politics, first of all, is the language of power, a special language for professional purposes”, and on the other hand, the language of politics “should be understandable (in in accordance with the tasks of propaganda) ”, this is the generally understood language of public political speech. It is precisely such a property of this subsystem of the language as accessibility that "allows some researchers to deny the existence of the language of politics" .
Exploring the language of politics, W. Dieckmann speaks of such a property as uncertainty, that is, he notes properties that are characteristic of other lexical-semantic subsystems (vagueness of meanings, (abstractness, complexity, fuzziness, relativity, ambiguity), and characteristic only for socio-political vocabulary (ideologically determined polysemy, which is determined not by the context, but by political attitudes and goals).
In the encyclopedic dictionary dedicated to the science of political science, such properties of the language of politics are noted as “the communication of assessments before information about facts; preference for general formulations and abstractions over the presentation of specific facts; replacing uncomfortable expressions with conditional or meaningless ones; use of language patterns and stereotypes; dominance of commentary over information".
The specificity of the political language, according to D.V. Olshansky, “consists in its purpose to serve as a materialized (oral or written) language form of fixing political ideas and practices of power, in which their true meaning is simultaneously revealed and hidden” [Olshansky, p. 563]. He also notes such a property of the political language as axiological (explicit and hidden), while "assessments dominate the facts" and the impact "on emotions, not on the mind" is carried out. It should be noted such property of the language of politics as extreme mobility, mobility, dynamism. It reacts very quickly to any changes in society: some words and expressions appear to designate new political realities, others disappear from use and are used only as designations for the realities of the past, changes occur in the semantics of language units, etc. Another important property of a political language is its semantic and stylistic openness, which leads to the penetration of units from other public spheres into the language of politics (general use of many political terms and the lack of a clear stylistic fixation). Here we agree with the opinion of O. I. Vorobyova that “political language is wider than the concept of style”, and it would be wrong to consider it as belonging only to the journalistic style of speech, but nevertheless, the journalistic style is the main area of its functioning.
The language of politics has attracted the attention of researchers for a long time. Most of the research is devoted to describing the language of politics of a certain period of time (I. F. Protchenko, T. S. Kogotkova, N. A. Kupina, etc.) or a separate sphere of its functioning: F. P. Sergeev writes about the vocabulary of the sphere of international relations; The works of S. I. Vinogradov, E. N. Shiryaev, V. P. Danilenko, O. L. Dmitrieva, D. Yu. belonging to the language of politics (M. U. Etkin, A. V. Zelenin, G. D. Udalykh, Er. Khan-Pira).
There are a number of works devoted to the study of the socio-political vocabulary of certain writers, for example, Yu. A. Belchikov studied the socio-political vocabulary of V. G. Belinsky, V. I. Akimov - the socio-political vocabulary in the journalism of N. P. Ogaryov.
In connection with the radical changes that took place in our society in the late 80s - early 90s. XX century, interest in the language of politics has increased especially. One of the objects that attracted the attention of scientists was a political metaphor (A. N. Baranov, Yu. N. Karaulov, E. G. Kazakevich, A. P. Chudinov, I. M. Kobozeva, E. I. Chepanova and others. ). Works devoted to the problems of political discourse (V. N. Bazylev, E. I. Sheigal, O. A. Burukina, V. I. Ubiyko, V. I. Shakhovsky and others) received intensive development, which, as a rule, is studied in terms of the effectiveness of speech impact in the field of mass communication.
With regard to lexicography related to the sphere of politics, it should be noted that there are two types of dictionaries: the first can be called dictionaries of politics, which are focused not so much on explaining the meanings of words and expressions, but on explaining the concept itself, for example: "Political Dictionary" (1958 ), "Political Science: encyclopedic Dictionary"(1993), "Man and Society: A Concise Encyclopedic Dictionary-Reference (Political Science)" (1997), "Modern Ideological Struggle: Dictionary" (1988), "Fundamentals of Political Science. Concise Dictionary terms and concepts” (1993), Khalipov VF Vlast: Cratological Dictionary (1997), etc. The second type of dictionaries are dictionaries of the language of politics. They are inherently not encyclopedic dictionaries, but explanatory ones. The focus of such lexicographic studies is precisely the meaning of words and expressions.
Back in the 20s and 30s. In the 20th century, many scientists, including V. M. Zhirmunsky, E. A. Polivanov, A. M. Selishchev, spoke about the creation of a special dictionary of the sphere of politics, which would be implemented from an expressive-evaluative point of view. A. L. Golovanevsky, T. B. Kryuchkova and others wrote about the ways of representing the studied lexical-semantic subsystem.
Since the political life of society is changing, it does not stand still, dictionaries of this type are aimed at reflecting dynamic processes in the language, and when describing the political lexicon by dictionaries, the presence of certain chronological frameworks is implied. An example is the "Dictionary of Perestroika" (1992), which notes words and expressions, as well as the meanings of some of them, which have become new for the Russian language, have been updated, etc. In 1994, the work of A. N. Baranov was published and Yu. N. Karaulov "Dictionary of Russian political metaphors", which describes and classifies the main metaphorical models inherent in the political life of 1989-1991. The dictionaries describing the language of politics include A. L. Golovanevsky’s “Ideological and Evaluative Dictionary of the Russian Language of the 19th – Early 20th Centuries” (1995). There are ideological dictionaries of the language of writers and politicians (the dictionary of M. Gorky, the dictionary of K. Marx and F. Engels), which contain vocabulary with an ideological assessment. A significant number of works are translation dictionaries devoted to socio-political vocabulary, in particular, “Russian-English Dictionary of Socio-Political Vocabulary” by V. Rodionova and V. P. Filatov (1987), “French-Russian and Russian-French Dictionary of Social political vocabulary of the mass media in the 90s of the XX century” by T. M. Kumleva and Yu. V. Kumlev (1999). The original model of the English-Russian electronic dictionary of socio-political vocabulary, which has significant advantages over book editions, is proposed by O. M. Karpova and S. A. Manik. It should be noted here that there is no dictionary yet that would be completely devoted to the language of politics, although such projects exist. For example, the idea to create a “Concise Dictionary of the Political Language” arose from V. V. Bakerkina and L. L. Shestakova. Nevertheless, there are dictionaries that, reflecting the linguistic dynamics as a whole, contain many units of the language that belong to the political lexicon, for example, a series of periodic dictionaries "New in Russian vocabulary". The advantage of such lexicographical works is that, not being normative, they give words and expressions in the meaning, usage and spelling in which they were found in print, that is, they provide very valuable material for studying the development of the meanings of language units. One of the main sources used by us in describing the language of politics, the dynamics of the development of its constituent words and expressions, is " Dictionary modern Russian language. Language Changes at the End of the 20th Century” (2001).
In the history of studying the political vocabulary of the Russian language (in its broadest sense), linguists traditionally distinguish two periods:
1) 20 - 30s. XX century. These include the works of A.M. Selishchev, P.A. Barannikov, S. I. Kartsevsky, R. O. Yakobson, P. Ya. Chernykh, B. A. Uspensky and other researchers who studied the language of the revolutionary era;
2) since the beginning of the 1950s, when the very term “socio-political vocabulary” (hereinafter referred to as OPL) itself appears. Since that time, OPL has been studied as a special lexical subsystem, in the analysis of which several approaches are outlined:
a) nominative, or content-thematic, that is, associated with the nominative description of the OPL (Yu. A. Belchikov, S. G. Kapralova, A. A. Buryachok, L. A. Muradova, I. F. Protchenko, V. M. Melnik, N. M. Leiberova and others);
b) connotative, or nominative-evaluative, according to which the seme of “ideological” becomes the criterion for belonging to the OPL, and one of critical components the meaning of the units of this lexical subsystem is the assessment that they can acquire (A. L. Golovanevsky, V. I. Goverdovsky, T. B. Kryuchkova);
c) functional-stylistic (G.Ya. Solganik, V.G. Kostomarov, Yu. D. Desheriev, D. Ya. Rozental, Yu. A. Belchikov, N. A. Kolosova, etc.). Researchers who adhere to this approach focus on working with the text, so their focus is on issues related to the belonging of the OPL to a certain functional style. Most of the works are devoted to the functioning of the OPL in journalistic and official business styles;
d) the conceptual approach, which began to develop very actively in the 90s of the XX century in the works of O. G. Revzina, L. A. Zhdanova, O. I. Vorobyova and others. When structuring the concept sphere (mental space) of modern political discourse, different researchers make different accents. So, for example, V. I. Ubiyko considers the concept “power” to be the basic one in politics, M. R. Zheltukhina considers the key concept “politician”, since “the politician is the main character in political communication, carrying out the struggle for power”, as the main in the political discourse, the concepts of "power" and "politician" are distinguished in the works of E. I. Sheigal.
The language of politics was also of interest to foreign researchers, in particular W. Bergsdorf, G. Lasswell, G. Klaus, T. Weldon. The German linguist W. Schmidt introduced the concept of "ideological coherence" (Ideologiegebundenheit) of lexical units into scientific use. It should be noted that the above approaches taken separately reflect only some specific features of this lexical group, and researchers, as a rule, remain within their chosen aspect of the study of OPL, without going beyond it. For a more comprehensive description of the political vocabulary and phraseology we are studying, we will highlight, to one degree or another, each of the approaches: what do we attribute to political vocabulary and phraseology and what thematic subgroups are distinguished in this lexico-semantic subsystem (nominative aspect), what is a political assessment and how it changes (connotative aspect), in what styles political vocabulary and phraseology predominantly function, what stylistic changes it undergoes (functional-stylistic aspect), what are the most frequent concepts of the language of politics, on the basis of which metaphorical models are built (conceptual approach).
Some researchers, in particular, A. Davis, tend to distinguish between the terms "language of politics" and "political language". Thus, he understands the first term as “the terminology and rhetoric of political activity, where politicians act in their professional role(like the discourses of other professional areas– religion, medicine, justice, etc.)”, while “political language” is not the prerogative of professional politicians or government officials; it is a resource open to all members of the linguistic community, it is associated with the specific use of the common language as a means of persuasion and control, or, in other words, it is a language used for manipulative purposes.
We tend to adhere to the point of view of E. I. Sheigal, who believes that the concepts denoted by these terms intersect with each other: “The language of politics in a significant number of cases is simultaneously the language of manipulation, although it is not entirely in particular, referential signs perform a purely informative function. At the same time, "political language" is used for manipulation in many other areas of communication - in everyday, advertising, pedagogical, religious communication.
Due to the fact that these two terms have a significant area of intersection, we will use them as relative synonyms. More often in the works there is the term "language of politics", which is conditional and is used both in designating a special vocabulary of politics and in studying this dictionary from the point of view of pragmatics, that is, its functioning in speech. According to E. I. Sheigal, “the specifics of politics, unlike a number of other areas of human activity, lies in its predominantly discursive nature: many political actions are by their nature speech actions” . In this regard, we will also use the term "discourse", which we understand in a broad sense, namely as "a coherent text in conjunction with extralinguistic - pragmatic, socio-cultural, psychological and other factors; text taken in the event aspect; speech, considered as a purposeful social action, as a component involved in the interaction of people and the mechanisms of their consciousness (cognitive processes). Thus, agreeing with the opinion of V. N. Bazylev, we note that political discourse appears “as a text, speech practice and language phenomenon” . We understand political discourse as “a coherent, verbally expressed text (oral or written) in conjunction with pragmatic, sociocultural, psychological and other factors, taken in an eventful political aspect, representing a political action, participating in the interaction of political figures and reflecting the mechanism of their political consciousness » . The language of politics appears as "a structured set of signs that form the semiotic space of political discourse" . We include speech acts, newspaper and journalistic texts devoted to politics, official texts on a political topic, scientific and political science articles in political discourse.
Phraseology is understood by us in a broad sense, that is, we refer to phraseological units not only idiomatic phrases, but also proverbs, sayings, aphorisms, well-aimed, often repeated expressions, phrases that are stable in terms of word order. In the language of politics, stable phrases constantly appear, which are reproduced with high frequency in speech. It is noteworthy that “none of the non-free combinations of political discourse is 100% stable. Even in phrases with a relatively high degree of phraseological solidarity (power vertical, cold war), none of the elements predicts the other 100%. Agreeing with the opinion of E. V. Kolesnikova, we note that from a general linguistic point of view, such phrases that do not have one hundred percent stability cannot be considered stable, but “within political discourse, there is still a different degree of stability ... Inside the political discourse “cold war "is a stable phrase, since the word "cold" is not actually used outside of this combination", predicting it almost 100% [ibid.]. E. V. Kolesnikova calls such stability functional. (Political phraseology has its own specific features, which does not allow it to be classified as phraseology proper. One of the main differences is that phraseology proper is anthropocentric in nature, and political phraseology is ideologized. Political phraseological units, according to V.N. Zoller, are "such a product of the language of mass communication in its political and journalistic aspect, where it corresponds to the idea (class, political, national, etc.)"... Phraseology itself has been reproduced for centuries, is associated with the national and cultural picture of the world, it reflects some enduring values , it clearly distinguishes between good and bad, while political phraseology is tied to certain periods of time and in its development can undergo a change in assessment.Political phraseological units quickly arise in connection with their repeated use and just as quickly disappear, losing their relevance.
We consider the regularity and frequency of its use in the language of politics to be the main criterion for classifying a particular phrase as a phraseological unit. If the phrase has a tendency to repeatability, then we include it in the composition of phraseological units. In addition, a broad understanding of phraseology allows us to classify political aphorisms (the process has begun; we wanted the best, but it turned out as always; more socialism), which are quite often used in the language of politics, as well as expressions that have arisen as a result of transformation within the political discourse . In them, political reality acts as the primary referent (if you go to the left, you will come to the right, hope for power, but save firewood for the winter), and unlike common language phraseological units performing a stylistic function, political phraseological units perform a semantic function.
Although the language of politics has been the object of close attention throughout the 20th century, the political vocabulary and phraseology of the Russian language is still insufficiently studied. This is confirmed at least by the fact that none of the studies known to us clearly define the boundaries of this lexico-semantic subsystem. However, an analysis of the specific features of political vocabulary and phraseology shows that this layer of linguistic units can and should be studied as a relatively independent lexical-semantic subsystem of the language.
Relevance This study is also related to the fact that the language of politics at the end of the 20th - beginning of the 21st century has undergone significant changes, as a result of which it became necessary to highlight and systematize the processes characteristic of political vocabulary and phraseology in this period.
Research objectives:
1) allocation of proper political vocabulary and phraseology into an independent lexical-semantic subsystem, its systematization and description;
2) identification of specific features of political vocabulary and phraseology.
The set goals predetermined such research objectives:
consider the interpretation of the concept of "politics" and show its close relationship with the concepts of "power" and "ideology";
determine the status of political vocabulary and phraseology within the socio-political, its distinctive features, composition;
highlight the core and periphery of political vocabulary and phraseology;
develop a criterion for the classification of political vocabulary and phraseology;
analyze the dynamic processes inherent in political vocabulary and phraseology, their causes and nature.
Sources actual material studies served primarily periodicals. To a lesser extent, we use television speech. When studying the vocabulary of a language, many researchers prefer the language of the newspaper, which is quite understandable - “New concepts, new words, and new expressions are formed first of all on the pages of newspapers. It is in the language of the newspaper that all the slightest changes in the semantics of the word, in its stylistic coloring, are easily traced.
Scientific novelty research lies in the fact that it theoretically comprehends the pragmatic orientation of political discourse. As part of the study, an analysis of lexical and phraseological elements that inform the statement of a political orientation was carried out.
Theoretical significance research consists in describing the units of political discourse that determine its pragmatic orientation. The proposed approach can contribute to the further development of this issue in linguistic research.
Practical significance of the obtained results lies in the fact that the observations and generalizations made in the process of research can be used in lexicology courses, in the development of special courses in political linguistics, stylistics.
To solve the problems posed in the study, a descriptive method, represented by such techniques as selection, processing and interpretation of the material, elements of cognitive-discursive analysis, as well as the method of transformation.
Work structure. The study consists of an Introduction, three chapters, a Conclusion and a list of references.
The Introduction substantiates the choice of the topic, its relevance, novelty, theoretical and practical significance, sets goals, objectives, defines the methods, object and subject of research, formulates the main provisions for defense.
In the first chapter "Language as a factor of political influence" is a review of works on the research issues, describes theoretical foundations functioning of the language in politics, various approaches to the problem of manipulative influence are considered.
In the second chapter "The content of political vocabulary" the boundaries of the concept of "political vocabulary" are defined and the lexical means of linguistic influence on mass consciousness are considered.
In the third chapter "Peculiarities of the political dictionary of Kazakhstani and Russian media" the identified units of the lexical and phraseological subsystem of the political language are presented and analyzed.
In the Conclusion, the results of the study are summed up, the practical results are summarized, and the prospects for further research are determined.
Chapter I. Language as a factor of political influence
1.1. The politicization of the modern media language
All mass media in the USSR were absolutely ideologized, subjected to the strictest party censorship and served only and exclusively the political interests of the Soviet government.
Most of the states located on the territory of the post-Soviet space do not have a state ideology, a national idea has not been formed, but, on the other hand, a fairly wide range of political views are represented, from the extreme right to the extreme left. At the same time, paradoxical as it may seem at first glance, not a single political force has a popular mass media outlet, since most parties and movements do not have the necessary funds to “promotion” and maintain their media, and, by the way, there is no urgent need for this. , because the media for the most part is absolutely politicized. Materials devoted to momentary political issues are not difficult to find even in publications such as women's magazines. Therefore, almost any party and movement finds "their" newspapers, magazines, television programs and radio broadcasts on a long-term or short-term basis. All this can be explained by only one thing: the vast majority of new media were conceived and created not as commercial enterprises (because there was no such experience before, and even now information is not considered a serious business), but as an instrument of political influence, the main tool for shaping public opinion.
Thus, having lost the totalitarian-centralized Soviet scheme organizations, modern media have fully retained their politicization, serving primarily the political interests of various groups, as their main characteristic.
“Independent mass media body” is a metaphorical term, since in 99 percent of cases it means only one thing - non-state.
As we said above, in the post-Soviet space there is no experience and, most importantly, socio-political conditions for the formation and existence of truly independent media, that is, not a single media outlet has such a strong financial base to afford an independent point of view, the publication of objective and unbiased information , equidistance from centers of influence.
The denationalization of already existing mass media took place according to the scheme of corporatization and transfer of shares to the “editorial staff”. As a result, controlling stakes through various legal and semi-legal machinations passed to a limited group of employees, as a rule, the old management, which immediately began to look for a financial "patron". The fact is that the schemes of distribution and production of media that have survived to this day were designed for the subsidized economy of a publication or a television and radio channel, for the significant participation of state structures in this process (for example, the Ministry of Communications, post offices, transport enterprises). In the era of centralized totalitarianism, few people were worried about this state of affairs - after all, it was a matter of formally shifting funds from one state pocket to another.
After 1991, the situation changed dramatically - firstly, not a single media outlet, when corporatized, could or did not want to privatize the entire production line, leaving behind only editorial space, creative teams, equipment and a trademark. As a result, printing houses, distribution and transport organizations, and means of delivering over-the-air signals formed independent companies and began to almost exclusively dictate prices for the production, distribution and delivery of the signal. Yes, and relations between the state and the media have moved from the sphere of formal to purely commercial.
All this put the media on the brink of survival, and only those who began to receive subsidies, as before, in Soviet times, could survive. It's just that their source has now changed: today "independent" media receive subsidies from individuals, political associations, state and non-state monopolies, and so on. Moreover, most often subsidies are issued through the acquisition by donors of a controlling or blocking stake, as well as through co-foundership.
Newly created media, as we noted above, are rarely conceived by their creators as a commercial enterprise that promises profit. As you know, there are no rules without exceptions. Of the Russian media, the private news agency Interfax has come closest to the concept of true independence, successfully competing with such a state giant as ITAR-TASS. It was created, built its policy and developed as an agency strictly focused on making a profit from the sale of information. However, despite the apparent prosperity and the annual growth in the number of bureaus and representative offices in Russia and the CIS countries, Interfax, nevertheless, is connected by many sources with financial and commercial structures close to the presidential administration.
Thus, today in the traditionally more important and influential - the so-called "central" information field, in addition to the state media block, more than 50 percent of the shares belong to several very influential non-state, private media.
The situation in the regional media almost in detail copies the situation with the central media, although, of course, it contains a number of regional features.
Due to the fact that the conditions for the survival of the media in the provinces were immeasurably more stringent than in the center, their dependence on "subsidies" is stronger, and the possibilities to get rid of it in the foreseeable future are more ephemeral.
Since in the provinces both financial, industrial and commercial capital are more dependent on official authorities, primarily on governors and heads of autonomous republics, in most cases the media receive financial support from the authorities. A mixed form of media ownership is very common, according to the scheme: private capital plus administration acting as co-founders.
Due to the constantly deteriorating economic situation of the population in the regions, the central publications lost their former influence there, the high cost of subscription caused a sharp reduction in their circulation. There are examples when in entire regions with a population of several million people a once very popular newspaper is subscribed to in the amount of 600-1000 copies. In addition, due to its extreme politicization and remoteness of the issue from the interests of the provincial audience, the central media have lost its trust and former authority, when the central media’s speech in defense of the reader or viewer meant, as a rule, a solution to the problem.
All this has led to an extraordinary increase in the influence on the audience of local media, especially print media. It is on the basis of this phenomenon that local administrations are trying to subjugate as many media outlets as possible.
Of course, in such a brief review, we only touched on the main features of the state of modern media.
It is necessary to highlight one more aspect of the problem: the vast majority of post-Soviet countries today are characterized by a situation where the population is much less involved in political reforms compared to the elites.
High degree apathy of the Kazakh population on present stage development is still maintained. Most likely, this situation is primarily due to the fact that today democratic values, recognized in principle, are not yet perceived by the mass consciousness as a real tool for solving the problems facing society. At the same time, one cannot fail to note the emerging trend of a certain change in public opinion. The intensification of the political process in recent years, associated with the holding of elections at different levels, could not but find a response in public opinion.
Thus, the elections to maslikhats in 2003 and elections to the Mazhilis of the Parliament of the Republic of Kazakhstan in 2004 showed an average level of voter turnout, which indicates a slight increase in the activity of the electorate. In the elections to maslikhats and the Mazhilis, the turnout was about 56% of the entire electorate. This may indicate the success of the information resources of the parties and a certain increase in the political consciousness of the population, its dissatisfaction with certain aspects of the development of the country's political system.
However, this slight increase in the political activity of the population is likely to be temporary. In the current conditions, citizens do not believe in the possibility of their influence on political events through participation in this or that political association and in elections.
Thus, as shown by the past elections, a significant part of Kazakhstanis have a passive interest in politics. This is largely due to the fact that in public opinion, politics has little to do with everyday life. Most citizens do not believe in the possibility of their influence on political events through participation in a particular political association and in elections. As a result, party activity and politics as a whole turned into an occupation predominantly for the political elite, as well as political parties and socio-political organizations.
Such a distance between the main part of the population and the political elite has been preserved for the past few years, which is confirmed by the past election campaigns.
However, as the past elections have shown, during the electoral process, the level of participation of the population in political life is gradually increasing. This is due to a number of objective reasons, among which the main place is occupied by dynamic and large-scale PR campaigns of political parties, which for a certain time significantly intensify political processes in the country.
1.2. The role and place of language in politics
Information technology for Lately changed the face of the modern world. The means and channels for the delivery of information, created on the basis of computer and inter-satellite communication systems, have revolutionized human communication. The flows of messages formed on their basis have created the information sphere, which has become an independent area of life with its own institutions, norms, stable relationships and connections. In this dynamically changing information environment, politicians are building new relationships, forming a new style of communication with the authorities. State structures are beginning to master the technologies of PR communications, political advertising and other methods of communication with civil society. A characteristic indicator of the emergence of new political practices and relations in the sphere of power is political communications.
As world experience shows, the development of political communications is inextricably linked with the complication of methods for organizing political discourse. The theoretical foundations of political communication studies as a science that studies the nature and structure of the information-political sphere of public life, the development trends of public and non-public contacts, laid the natural science research of N. Wiener, C. Shannon, W. Weaver, philosophical, sociological and linguistic research of J. Galbraith, T. Parsons, D. Riesman, D. Bell, G. Bloomer, M. Buber, T. Newcomb, A. Mohl, A. Touraine, J. Habermas, N. Luhmann, F. de Saussure, R. Jacobson, A Toffler and many other theorists working in the field of studying this interdisciplinary problem. G. Lasswell, R. Braddock, S. Lipset, W. Lippman, P. Lasersfeld, R. Park, G. McLuhan are at the origins of political communication studies. The study of this topic began in the 1920s. It should be emphasized the internal inconsistency of political communication studies, the formation of which took place at the intersection of the natural and human sciences.
The main task of the language, as you know, is the creation, storage and transmission of information, the implementation of the process of communication and ensuring the connection of generations, and, consequently, the progress of mankind. Language is both an instrument of thought and a means of communication. Language belongs to man and obeys him. It is considered by people as a given, as something natural that becomes the property of each of us as it is mastered in the process of ontogenesis. According to the definition of R.M.Blacar, "we really live and act inside the world of language" .
The role of language in public life is invaluable: "most of what happens in the social sphere is mediated by language." Ideally, the language is intended to provide a natural, conflict-free social progress supported by successful communication. According to Aristotle's theory, the state itself arose as "some kind of communication", communication for the sake of satisfying common interests, or "human communication in its most perfect form, giving people the full opportunity to live according to their aspirations ...". Thanks to language, a person is a social being, and according to Aristotle, a political being and capable of governing in the name of some “higher good”, which, in turn, “refers to the conduct of the most important science, i.e. science, which mainly governs. Aristotle speaks here of the "science of the state, or politics", which owes its emergence as a social phenomenon to communication, and, consequently, to language.
The existence of a close connection and interdependence of language and politics is one of the topical topics of scientific work not only in the field of political science, sociology and philosophy, but also in linguistic research.
The comparability of politics and language is based on their genetic commonality: both language and politics are social phenomena, they arose and change along with the emergence and development of human society. History shows that language is one of the most important factors in the implementation of politics, generating it and, at the same time, obeying it. Language has been and remains an instrument of power, which, according to R. M. Blakar, “is played by the one who uses it” .
Politics, as the most comprehensive social phenomenon that governs the main areas of life, is characterized by a desire to unite the state and society. This installation is implemented in the overwhelming majority of cases with the help of linguistic communication as the most effective means available to political power. A.A.Leontiev emphasizes: “... communication through language is the most direct, most effective way to transform consciousness. Through the meaning of words (and other linguistic signs) we can influence the objective meaning of the word, i.e. on how a person realizes an object and a phenomenon in reality ... ". It is the "transformation of consciousness" of people, society as a whole by changing the deep conceptual structures, or the "model of the world", the manipulation of consciousness is the key to a successful policy. Language acts as a conductor of ideological concepts necessary for the state to maintain and justify its existence at a certain stage in the development of society. Often in politics, the word replaces the deed; there is even a point of view that the crisis policy is characterized by an abundance of words. In general, any political action is accompanied by a linguistic action, the addressee of which is primarily society. It is aimed at the implementation of a specific pragmatic task: turning public consciousness in the direction necessary for the authorities, justifying this action.
In the process of achieving its own goals, the politician uses all available language tools. In particular, one of the most important factors is the choice of words and expressions, which acquires the character of a political action. P.M. Blakar notes in this connection: “The reason that the choice of a word or phrase represents a means or instrument of power is that the same phenomenon can be expressed in several synonymous ways ... sometimes in very subtle differences between the so-called synonymous expressions contain one of the sender's most important tools.
Mastery of the language, the ability to turn a word into a tool is one of the necessary qualities of a professional politician, whether he is an ordinary deputy or a political leader. Politics are made by politicians, and politicians are made by the word. No wonder Aristotle noted eloquence as one of the most revered skills in the state, along with skills in military command and management, and V.I. Dahl defined a politician as a secretive and cunning person who knows how to tilt things in his favor, by the way to say and keep silent in time. IN modern world As never before, the activity of a politician is associated primarily with verbal activity. Answering the question why it is verbal activity that becomes decisive in the work of a politician, A.V. Glukhova notes: “If we interpret politics as the use of power mechanisms to achieve certain goals, then it is obvious that such activity implies that the subjects of political actions agree on a number of general concepts, the main terms by which they are explained among themselves and with the population, it is described reality around them.
Indeed, verbal activity as one of the conditions for the professional success of a politician is determined by the need for constant communication both within the framework of political institutions and in the process of mass communication.
Unfortunately, a virtuoso orientation in the world of language does not always imply a politician's command of the norms of the literary language. The language of politicians is very diverse and depends on the position or position held, level of development and other personal and professional factors. Political activity often becomes fertile ground for those who “do not go into their pockets for words”, and literacy does not always play a positive role in the image of a politician, compare, for example, the language of modern Russian politicians E. Gaidar and V. Chernomyrdin. Meanwhile, regardless of the level of language proficiency, politicians pursue a single goal, subordinate to the goal of politics as a whole, namely manipulation, influence on consciousness, and transformation of thinking. D. Grever emphasizes that it is precisely thanks to the verbal activity of politicians that as a result, “another sensory and conceptual world is created - a hypothetical image of reality - which can limit the mental horizons of their audience and, thereby, change the course of history” .
The transformation of people's thinking in a certain direction is the main goal of politicians who, in the process of political communication, implement this pragmatic attitude, ultimately pursuing the goal of maintaining their own status, holding power.
Following D. Grever, S.D. Ushakin distinguishes three types of political verbal activity and, accordingly, three types of politicians, depending on the characteristics of their speech:
1. rhetoric of a statesman;
2. rhetoric of a demagogue;
3. rhetoric of a charismatic leader.
The statesman (1) appeals to the rational and evaluative qualities of the public. The success of this type of speech activity is based on the desire of the listener to find a rational explanation for the current processes and policies. An extreme variant of this kind of verbal activity can be “hanging political labels”, designed to perform the function of classification and ordering in the vision of the social world.
The rhetoric of the demagogue (2), according to D. Grever, does not have a clearly defined framework due to its "principled unscrupulousness". The only goal here is to capture the attention of the electorate, and for this, all possible and available methods are used (therefore, the speech of a politician-demagogue can include both grandiloquent statements and reduced style). The dominant feature of this type of verbal activity is an appeal to emotions, feelings that are non-rational in nature.
The speech of a charismatic leader (Z) is, from the point of view of D. Grever, the most interesting type verbal activity. At the same time, the politician relies on the feelings inherent in a large number of people who, by virtue of various reasons either unable or unwilling to publish them: cf. the rhetoric of Mussolini, Hitler, the use of vivid expressions, ideas such as “national shame”, “great people - great country”, etc. .
As a rule, none of the above types is manifested in its pure form, but there are dominant features of one or another type of verbal activity, which are manifested in the process of political communication. Thus, in certain situations, the rhetoric of a statesman can acquire both the features of a demagogue (elections) and the features of a charismatic leader (change in political status). Politics as such is realized only in the unity of all types of speech of politicians, while the determinant is the language that penetrates into all spheres and levels of power.
Using the power of linguistic influence, linguistic manipulations can not only form the necessary policy, and, consequently, the state, views and "perception matrices", but completely change the behavior of the individual, his conscious and unconscious orientation in the world.
The obviousness that language in politics plays, if not the main, then one of critical roles, attracted the attention of linguists to politics. The area of interest, in particular, of pragmatists was identity, the coincidence of linguistic and political actions, as well as ways and methods of "political and linguistic" influence. The attitude to the place of language in politics was most successfully formulated by one of the founders of German political linguistics, W. Dieckmann, according to which politics is language, language relations.
However, the point of view about the prevailing role of language in politics is not shared by all linguists. W. Diekmann's opinion seems to them to be largely hyperbolic, since without language the existence of not only politics, but also social and public life as such, is called into question. In this regard, H.J. Heringer's remark that political activity is only realized with the help of language is correct. G. Lubbe considers linguistic influence only as a specific case of political action and pays more attention to non-linguistic factors in politics, without denying, however, the control function of language, which can be defined as “replacement force methods in politics".
In this regard, the question arises of how to define the boundary of linguistic relations in politics and separate them from political ones, about how influential language is in politics and how politics determines its functioning on its own scale.
Chapter II. The content of political vocabulary
2.1. The boundaries of the concept of "political vocabulary"
The focus of political linguistics is political vocabulary, which was studied in the 90s by V.N. Kiselev, N.A. Kupina, V.I. Maksimov, S.V. Molokov, A.B. Novikov, L.G. Samotik. Phenomena of political discourse at the turn of the XX-XXI centuries. V.N. Bazylev, E.A. Zemskaya, V.G. Kostomarov, L.P. Krysin, A.K. Mikhalskaya, A.P. Chudinov, V.N.
First of all, we specify the concept of political vocabulary. In linguistic literature, there are different approaches - from the inclusion of political terminology in it to the consideration of the entire lexical variety of written and oral speech on topics that are somehow related to politics. In this work, political vocabulary is understood as a complex of those lexical means of expressing political views and interests that are used for communication both between politicians and between politicians and the people, that is, the totality of political terminology and the lexical layer that T.B. Kryuchkova in her monograph “Peculiarities of the Formation and Development of Socio-Political Vocabulary and Terminology” [37, 16] identified it as socio-political vocabulary.
What requirements does the practice of political discourse impose on political vocabulary defined in the above way? First of all, this vocabulary should be understandable to all participants in the global political discourse. As a consequence of this, a process of despecialization of political terminology takes place, it becomes well known (legitimacy, democratization, reforms, conservative, liberal, radical, etc.). Regardless of the national, cultural, confessional or other social affiliation of the participants in the discourse, the use of this vocabulary should not cause misunderstandings, ambiguous interpretation of phenomena, their ambiguous assessment and inadequate emotional reaction on them.
Complete elimination of ambiguity is impossible, but this ambiguity should not lead to hostility, conflicts and confrontation. Unfortunately, misunderstanding and ignoring differences in the conceptual system often leads to serious political mistakes, to the provocation and escalation of internal and international conflicts. Thus, the attempt by the United States and its allies to “make happy” the people of Iraq by overthrowing Saddam Hussein and introducing democracy is failing largely because of the irreparable contradictions between Western and Eastern concepts of the principles of state power, morality, justice and historical pattern development of two different civilizations.
A.P. Chudinov proposes to distinguish between political vocabulary and political terminology, arguing that political terminology “does not belong to the common vocabulary and is used only in scientific and other special texts aimed at political scientists. Political vocabulary is a thematic association of commonly used words understood by the absolute majority of citizens. Researchers highlight following groups vocabulary of the modern political language: colloquial vocabulary, slang vocabulary, foreign vocabulary, compound words.
2.2. Lexical means of linguistic influence
to the mass consciousness
The most important aspect of political linguistics is the pragmatic orientation of the language of politics and political vocabulary as its element. The main function of the modern language of politics is the manipulative function, that is, the function of managing society, public opinion, imposing their will on the audience by politicians. Naturally, this orientation of the language of politics gave rise to a specific arsenal of lexical means of linguistic influence on mass consciousness: political metaphors, labels, nicknames, ideological clichés and clichés, political euphemisms and dysphemisms.
Here are some examples in which society gives characteristics to the heroes: “Lyska” (aka “burry” - V.I. Lenin), “Krupa” - N.K. Krupskaya, “Father of the Mustachioed Constitution” - I.V. Stalin, L.I. Brezhnev - “eyebrow bearer in the dark” and “Neolith Ilyich with a wide-screen chest”; The surname of Yu.V. Andropov contributed to the formation of the subject "andropology", the renaming of the Kremlin into "Andropol" and Leningrad - into "Pitekantropovsk". The presidium old men are already a thing of the past, because of which the distance from the House of the Unions to Red Square was called the "corpse pipeline". MS Gorbachev was called “Gorby”, “Mineral Secretary”, his reforms were called “non-alcoholic chatterbox”; the island of Foros - "Foros seat", a new formation "Mikhal-Sergeevsky Posad" appeared; the surname itself became the decoding of the abbreviation: “Citizens! Rejoiced early. Brezhnev, Andropov, Chernenko still remember! B.N. Yeltsin gave rise to the "new" cities of "Yeltsinburg" and "Nizhny Yelts", E. Bryntsalov turned into "Little Brynts", the party of V.V. Zhirinovsky stands for "I like to fool ordinary guys." “600-second Shurik” - A. Nevzorov began to be broadcast on TV channels, only the lazy did not learn the phrase “fell - did push-ups”.
Russia is an international country. There appeared "Damn Clinton" (aka "Clean Blinton"), "Agdam Suhein", "United States of Armenia", "Federal Republic of Georgia" - Germany.
This vocabulary, emotionally evaluative in nature, is one of the main elements of the language of politics, and it is this vocabulary that represents the main obstacle to globalization.
In addition to the above, there are other problems of interlingual communication: a) the displacement of the languages of national minorities by the language of the majority, b) the forced introduction of the language of the dominant nation. Such an approach leads to the loss of linguistic wealth and the actual destruction of the culture of the linguistic minority, which, obviously, only deepens mutual misunderstanding, rejection and confrontation. Unfortunately, we have to admit that recurrences of such a language policy are still observed.
Among the features of the vocabulary of political discourse, it is necessary to highlight:
transformation of the meanings of words (hype, background, slums - former dialectisms);
changes in lexical compatibility (space - economic, cultural, educational, party - political, "green");
strengthening of expressive coloring (lawlessness, disassembly, scumbags, voice, developments, roofing, run over);
positive or negative coloring of controversial lexemes of the modern political vocabulary (in different contexts of their use - oligarch);
the use of labels, nicknames (Yeltsinism, "Kazakhgate", Bereza - B. Berezovsky, Kolobok, Kepka - Y. Luzhkov, "chemo-organization of power structures", "Nazar-by");
political metaphors (decay virus, paralysis of power, parliamentary crisis, information wars, architect of Kazakhstan's success, etc.)
Leaders of all ranks and levels constantly appear on TV screens, their voices are heard on the radio. Due to the importance of judgments, these speeches are repeated many times from program to program and affect the linguistic culture of ordinary citizens. Not everyone can evaluate public figures from a professional point of view. But even a superficial glance helps to catch the difference between such politicians as V.V. Putin, who thinks and speaks at a slow pace, N.A. Nazarbaev, the author of numerous language “pearls” V.S. always”, “there is no worse than vodka”, “one must be born in charisma”, the bright and original oratorical talent of V.V. Zhirinovsky attracts attention. As a negative example, we can cite the 2005 election campaign in Kazakhstan, when most of the presidential candidates caused a negative attitude towards themselves by being too aggressive, calling for fundamental changes - "we are ours, we will build a new world." Against their background, ordinary voters were more impressed by the image of the incumbent President N.A. Nazarbayev, who does not give empty promises and speaks clearly and specifically.
Chapter III. Features of the political vocabulary
Kazakh and Russian media
The history of our people was reflected in the borrowing of foreign words by the Russian language in different eras: economic, political, cultural contacts with other countries, military clashes left their mark on the development of the language. New words were poured into the Russian language from other languages as a result of the economic, political and cultural ties of the Russian people with other peoples, as a result of the introduction into the life of the Russian people of realities that are new to Russia, but already having names in other languages. The Russian language in Kazakhstan, which has the status of an official language, is no exception. Borrowings from the English language, penetrating into the Russian language today, take root in Kazakhstan. This chapter proposes a classification of socio-political vocabulary used by various media sources.
Nomenclature names of persons:
Prime Minister(“Prime Minister K. Massimov held a meeting on the development of Almaty” “Kazakhstanskaya Pravda”, 22.01.2008.);
vice speaker(“… the vice-speaker told the guests about the political and economic situation”, “Kazakhstanskaya Pravda”, 22.01.2008.);
departments, bodies, etc.
parliament(“... at a meeting of parliament, they discussed ethical standards behavior of individual government officials”; "Kazakhstanskaya Pravda", 05/27/2006.);
mazhilis(The upper chamber of the Kazakh Parliament Majilis for International Affairs presented its opinion on the draft law…” “Kazakhstanskaya Pravda”, 22.03.2008)
Terminology of electoral and related technologies (political marketing, etc.):
run for office(“... candidates from the Otan, Akzhol parties, running for president ...”; Kostanay News, November 15, 2006 (from “ballot”, French ballotter, to decide on the issue of someone by giving votes; initially - by lowering balls, called points, into the urn);
impeachment(... the issue of impeachment is on the agenda ..., "Kazakhstanskaya Pravda", 2.04.2005), (impeachment - early termination powers of the highest state elected official);
inauguration(“After his inauguration, a lull followed ...”; “Kazakhstanskaya Pravda”, 01/12/2007; inauguration - solemn assumption of office);
lobbyists(“Representatives of political parties, various lobbyists have already actively rushed to win the upper house of parliament .. ." "Kazakhstanskaya Pravda" 27.01.2007)
populism(“All these populist ideas will lead nowhere…” Khabar TV channel from pre-election speeches.)
referendum(“A referendum on amendments to the Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan passed” “Kostanay news” 2006);
electoral(“One of the main ratings is the electoral one; the situation is worse with the electoral anti-rating”; “Crossroads”, 28.04.2006);
Names of political parties, movements, ideological currents and their members (participants):
Political jargon:
national separatist(“... one of the most illustrative examples of the formation of national separatist aspirations on the basis of a public organization can be the activities of the International Circassian Association ...”; Literaturnaya Gazeta, April 28 - May 1, 2001);
pluralists(“...what will our pluralists choose…”; Literaturnaya Gazeta, April 28 – May 1, 2001);
clan-oligarchic system (« V. Putin received an obvious mandate to dismantleclan-oligarchic system...”;);
mandate (« V. Putin received an obvious mandate to dismantle the clan-oligarchic system...”; Rossiyskaya Gazeta, 06/23/2000);
oligarch(“Autumn of the Oligarch”; “Some observers have already called the RSPP a “trade union of oligarchs”; The New York Times fears that, having burned himself on Gusinsky, Putin will not forget about his promise to destroy the Russian oligarchs “as a class”; “Rossiyskaya Gazeta ", 06/23/2000);
tricolor(“To be objective, then for seven years - from 1993 to 2000 - the tricolor, the double-headed eagle was against the Constitution ...”; Literaturnaya Gazeta, April 28 - May 1, 2001; tricolor is a slang name for the tricolor Russian flag) ;
speaker(“The speaker thanked the ambassador for his significant contribution to the development of friendly relations” “Kazakhstanskaya Pravda 17.01.2008”);
charisma(“... his charisma is capable of attracting young people, the working majority and caring pensioners at the same time ...”; Nasha Gazeta, 2008);
Terms of law:
legitimate("...until the very last moment they feared the president's illegitimate actions..."; "Was the dissolution of the CPSU constitutional? No, but it was legitimate..."; Novoye Vremya, No. 40, 1993; the word "legitimate" literally means "legal", but is used in the sense of "supported and understood by the general public"; otherwise, the expression "unconstitutional, but legitimate" would sound like an oxymoron);
extradite, extradite(“The issue of extradition of R.Aliyev is a matter of time” “Aikyn” 12.01.2008.);
Legal jargon:
green card(“Spitting on the long-awaited green card (residence permit) just received ...”; Komsomolskaya Pravda, 04/26/2006);
privacy(“The famous “privacy”, the right to privacy and inviolability ..”; “Komsomolskaya Pravda” 04/26/2001);
Among these words there are words that are quite old borrowings, but updated in the last decade of the twentieth century and acquired new meanings or shades of meanings. Word oligarch, for example, denotes a representative of big business, which has a serious influence on the government, politics and economy of the country. Previously, this word was not used outside of works on the history of the ancient world, where it denoted each of the co-rulers of ancient Sparta separately. Suppose that the word used in the press in recent years oligarch, strictly speaking, is not the result of the development of an additional meaning for the word oligarch, meaning the Spartan ruler, and is formed from the word oligarchy in the phrase financial oligarchy- political and economic domination by a handful of exploiting financiers. This phrase was present in almost any Soviet textbook on modern history, the foundations of state and law, political economy, but there was no need to single out a special word to designate an individual representative of the financial oligarchy. We admit that this word could be found in some special works, but it was not a fact of public consciousness. In the last decade of the twentieth century, the existence of such individual representatives of the financial oligarchy became a significant and noticeable fact and was immediately reflected in the language, primarily in the language of the press.
The situation is similar with the word electorate(the people as electors). In the old Soviet dictionaries of foreign words, this lexeme is not recorded, although the words elector(elector) and electoral(electoral, electoral) are already present in the dictionary of Lekhin and Petrov in 1949. It is easy to assume that in some special works the cognate with the words elector And electoral word electorate met even then, but the undoubted fact remains that in the active lexicon For literate Russian-speaking people, it entered precisely in the nineties of the twentieth century, when real elections began to be held in Russia and the countries of the post-Soviet space and the electoral function of the population became truly relevant. An example of a specific use of the word “electoral”: “One of the main ratings is electoral; the situation with electoral anti-rating is worse…”; "Crossroads", 04/28/2006).
It was in connection with the replacement of fictitious Soviet elections with a real electoral system, with the formation of democracy in Russia and Kazakhstan, that the words were updated and acquired new meanings, shades of meanings and new compatibility. run, rating, populism. In Soviet times, it was unthinkable to talk about ranking this or that politician, because Soviet politicians and politicians of the “fraternal” countries were revered almost like saints, and a saint cannot have a rating, while bourgeois politicians were perceived as enemies, which also did not imply that they had a rating. The current public competition of politicians and their dependence on voters (electorate) made it possible to combine the word rating with the names of specific politicians, updated the word populism and filled the word run for office(put forward his candidacy in the elections) real meaning.
A typical example is, for example, the word "president". Let us recall that M.S. Gorbachev, still at the Congress people's deputies, corrected one of the speakers who addressed him with the words “Mr. President”, calling for accuracy and explaining that “president” is a different position, a different reality, etc. The borrowed word "president" was relevant as the name of foreign political and social realities (for example: "President of the United States", "President of France"). Since then, the situation has changed, and extralinguistic factors have made the word “president” relevant for Russia and the CIS countries (“President of the Russian Federation”, “President of Tatarstan”, “President of the Republic of Kazakhstan”, etc.). Words have the same fate mayor(fr. maire), prefect(lat. praefectus - chief), prefecture,municipality. If in the early eighties of the twentieth century, for example, the chairman of the city executive committee was called in private conversations mayor then today's word mayor became the official title of the head of executive power in some cities of Russia ("Mayor of Moscow", "Mayor's Office of Moscow"). However, sometimes the word mayor has retained its slang connotation: in some cities of Russia, the head of the city executive authority bears the title of “head of the city”, “chairman of the city government”, etc., however, local media often call him the mayor, either setting the fashion, or, on the contrary, following already established. The same applies, for example, to the word municipality, which is often used in the sense of "city-level executive authority", although officially these bodies, as a rule, have other names: "administration of the head of the city", "mayor's office", "government of the city", "city administration". The same can be said about the word referendum(popular vote on an issue).
Words prime minister And speaker also borrowed a long time ago, but have received special distribution in the language of the press in recent years. Note that, unlike, for example, the word the president, they did not become the official nomenclature names of Russian officials, but became elements of common word usage. Prime Minister(Prime Minister) is called the Chairman of the Government of the Russian Federation. Word speaker called the chairman of the Mazhilis (Upper House of Parliament in Kazakhstan).
Actually, the word parliament is also not the nomenclature name of the Russian legislative body, but is generally accepted in the press and in everyday speech as its designation.
Words lobbyist, lobby(from the English lobby - lobbies) have also been found in Russian for a long time, but, like those mentioned above, they were not previously relevant to Kazakhstani and Russian reality and were used only in scientific papers and rare newspaper feuilletons about Western parliamentarism. Today lobby the same part of Kazakhstani and Russian reality as the parliament, and therefore the words lobby, lobbyists have become part of the active vocabulary of the media. Note that the meaning of this word has somewhat deviated from the original - agents of large banks and industrial monopolies, exerting influence on parliamentarians behind the scenes. Today under the term lobby are understood directly as deputies of the legislative body who secretly or openly represent (lobby) the interests of one or another financial, industrial or national group.
The word long formed from a borrowed stem has also received a new meaning. federal. The same can be said for words. region, regional. Opposition federal - regional came to replace the former union - republican(local). Word federal previously used primarily when referring to the United States of America (federal law, Federal Bureau of Investigation, etc.). In connection with the new state structure of Russia, the word federal began to be used in relation to Russian realities (federal law, federal troops). Word actualization region occurred due to the need for a common short designation for territories (subjects of the federation) with different nomenclature names: republics, territories, regions, autonomous districts, etc.
New for the language of Kazakhstani and Russian media are the words charisma, impeachment.
Charisma- God's gift, God's spark, charm, ability to lead, genius. A complex characteristic of a politician or religious leader, consisting of many personal qualities and PR techniques.
Impeachment- recall of a senior official (president), forced resignation. It is not surprising that this word is more often found on the pages of opposition publications.
Pluralism, pluralists- words recorded in Russian dictionaries for a long time, but defined as an idealistic philosophical trend (and its adherents, respectively), opposite to monism and allowing the existence in the world of several spiritual entities independent of each other. In a new meaning - the presence of a multitude of equal opinions - was introduced into active circulation by M.S. Gorbachev.
Words legitimate, illegitimate met in the works of Russian publicists of the early twentieth century, but after the establishment of Soviet power, they became the property of only a narrow circle of specialists. At the end of the twentieth early XXI century, in connection with the revival of political processes in Russia and the CIS countries, these words appeared on the pages of periodicals. The literal meaning of the word legitimate- legal, but in recent years in the press it is more often used in the sense of "supported by the majority of the politically active population."
Word separatists(supporters of the separation of a territory from the state of which this territory is officially included) could previously only be used if it was about Punjab, Kashmir, Ulster, or, for example, the “Shan State” in Myanmar. The events in Chechnya made this word one of the most used borrowed words in the Russian press in the nineties.
Word inauguration, denoting the official (often solemn) inauguration of the head of state, is also new to the socio-political vocabulary of the Kazakh and Russian media.
Extradite, extradition(from ex - from, outside and traditio - transfer) - the extradition to a foreign state of a person who has violated the laws of this state. The term of international law, which received wide circulation in the Russian language only after the fall " iron curtain”, when Russian citizens got the opportunity to freely travel to foreign countries and conduct business outside of domestic jurisdiction.
green card- US residence permit. The word is borrowed in connection with the high standard of living in the United States, the already mentioned American cultural expansion and relevant in this regard for many Russian citizens the problem of emigration to the USA (especially at the beginning of the period of interest to us). However, sometimes this word still needs clarification and it is too early to talk about its “permanent registration” in the Russian language.
privacy- a term taken from English and American law, meaning the right of the individual to privacy and inviolability. Used in the media for brevity of designation of this concept.
Economic terms
business("... the bill for the" game without rules "in big business ..."; "Rossiyskaya Gazeta", 06/23/2006);
brand(“Recently, the name of Putin has become almost a trademark, a brand ...”)
voucher(“... the idea of a land certificate, a voucher of a special kind, has not yet spent the night here ...”; Novoye Vremya, No. 45, 1993);
default(“... the situation was not limited to the consequences of the default...”; Nasha Gazeta, 2007);
dealer(“We are the official dealer of a company that has a certain weight, including in political circles ...”; “Kostanay News” No. 47,2008);
investment(“... everyone is striving to attract Western investments today ...”; Kostanay News, No. 47, 2008);
inflation(“Currently, inflation is…” “Kazakhstan Business” 2.04.2008)
consulting(“... employees of the consulting company were “checked for reliability ...”; Kostanay News, 30.03.2008);
minority(majority) shareholder (Association for the Protection of the Rights of Minority Shareholders...; Komsomolskaya Pravda, April 26, 2001);
privatization("... all privatization problems have been resolved to date" "Mayak" 2.02.2008)
firm(“I would become a teacher, a teacher of social science at school or a teacher of political science at a university. A manager in some company ...” (Zhirinovsky, answering the question of who he would have become if he had not become a politician); “Rossiyskaya Gazeta”, 23.06 .2000);
holding("Ivolga-Holding opens its branch in Taranovskoye" "Mayak" 10/25/2007)
emission(“...the results of the ruble issue are much more significant...”; Literaturnaya Gazeta, April 28 - May 1, 2001).
A special place among these terms is occupied by the words privatization(translated into private property) And voucher(privatization check). The opposition press uses the first of them, as a rule, with the stable epithet predatory, and, interestingly, the loyal press often agrees with it, occasionally only replacing this epithet with clumsy, mediocre or wild.
Since August 1997, after a serious crisis of non-payments, the economic term has firmly entered the Russian language default(from the English default - failure to fulfill obligations, especially monetary ones).
Terms investments, inflation, emission, business, firm, commercialization have long been present in the Russian language, but have been updated only in the last decade.
Completely new to the Russian language is the word brand(from English brand - brand, brand, trade mark) - trademark. Word brand used in political discourse. For example: "... Putin's name has almost become a trademark, a brand..."
Names of enterprises, organizations, trusts, associations various forms property, specializing in different areas of activity and management, for example: consulting, holding, are new words for the Russian language that came from English. Consulting - consulting. Holding - a leased piece of land, shareholding.
The word is also new. dealer- commercial representative.
Religious terms
Wahhabis(“A group of people who were trained by Wahhabis was arrested in Kostanay” “Kostanay News”, 26.04.2005);
Taliban(“Today there was another clash with the Taliban” TV channel “Khabar” 2007);
Wahhabis- an Islamic fundamentalist movement that played a significant role in the escalation of the armed conflict in the North Caucasus.
Ethnographic terms
Turkmen bashi(“Recently, the Turkmen-bashi himself quit smoking at the insistence of cardiologists”, “Gazeta.Ru”);
Word turkmen-ba shi takes special place in a series of borrowings. This word refers to only one person - the former president of Turkmenistan - Saparmurat Niyazov, who called himself Turkmen-bashi (head of the Turkmens), imitating Ataturk in this. The fact that this unofficial title of the Turkmen president is not translated, but borrowed, has several reasons, among which the somewhat ironic attitude of the Russian press towards the dictatorial claims of the Turkmen leader stands out. It is also possible that in this way the Russian press is trying to show the special position of the dictator in the modern, mainly striving for maximum democracy, world. The analogy with the famous Mustafa Kemal - Atatürk ("Father of the Turks") - also probably matters.
Technical terms
The Internet is a global non-centralized computer information network that has recently become a very important factor in social and political life.
Philosophical, cultural, sociological, linguistic and psychological terms denoting realities of great social significance
establishment(“The Wall Street Journal” writes about the “moral depravity and general disrespect for the law of the Russian establishment”; “Rossiyskaya Gazeta”, 06/23/2000);
mentality(“... still a soviet mentality to the root of the hair with its incurable atavisms”; Novoye Vremya, No. 50, 1993);
psi factor(“Psi-factor with stolen doses ...”; “Rossiyskaya Gazeta”, 06/23/2000;.);
teenager(“And no one claims that it’s easy to be a teenager” ElArna TV channel, talk show “Nachistotu” 01/12/2008)
The establishment is the elite, the educated and wealthy part of society, the high society.
Teenager. This word is usually translated as "teenager". Why not use the word "teenager" in this case? Why is this borrowing necessary? There are two main reasons. The first is that a teenager is not a completely authentic translation English word teen-ager. Teen-ager, strictly speaking, is a person under twenty years old, while teenagers are usually called young people up to sixteen years old. The second reason is American cultural expansion. Teenagers in the modern Russian linguistic consciousness, these are probably not just teenagers, but teenagers cultivating some elements of the mass youth subculture, common with American teenagers and having American roots.
Mentality is a term used in social psychology, political science, etc. social sciences. It entered the active vocabulary of the Russian media and politicians in the late 80s - early 90s of the twentieth century and remains there to this day. Means a set of certain patterns of thinking, common to a particular social group (nation, adherents of a particular religious denomination, etc.).
The psi factor is a factor in the psychological state of people. Composed of a variety of conditions. It is taken into account in pre-election and other political technologies, in the art of management.
Some socio-political terms are not easy to assign to one or another thematic group. For example, the token corruption is related both to politics proper and to the economy, and in addition (and even more so) to criminal law.
New Borrowing image("picture", advertising image of a politician, company, artist, public figure etc.) is widely used in politics and, for example, in show business, but it is difficult to attribute it to the proper political or social vocabulary.
Word manager(head, coordinator) is also so widely represented in the socio-political (and not only) media discourse that it is difficult to unambiguously classify him. (You can introduce special classes for it: social role, position, etc., but it does not fit into our preliminary classification).
Thus, classifying the words of the socio-political vocabulary in the language of the Russian and Kazakh media according to the areas of use, we see that, in addition to the words of the actual political discourse, which are subdivided in turn into subclasses (nomenclature names of officials, departments, territories, terminology of electoral technologies, names political parties, ideological movements and their adherents, and political jargon), the lexical paradigm of interest to us really includes (this can be seen from the examples) also some borrowed terms of law, legal jargon, economic terms, names of religious movements, ethnographic terms, technical terms denoting realities that have received great social significance (in our examples - "Internet"), philosophical, cultural, sociological and psychological terms denoting realities of significant social or political significance.
The language of politics acts as a link between society and government. Expressing a variety of attitudes and ideas, language is a tool with which citizens try to understand and interpret political reality, and also serves as a means of maintaining the necessary information level throughout the country. It is significant that “politics is a system of human relations, carried out largely with the help of language. ... It is the study of the language that is designed to reveal the content of myths, illusions, stereotypes and, in a broader sense, the whole complex of issues” [K.S. Gadzhiev 1994: 57]. Thus, the language is presented as part of the political world, the significance of which is difficult to overestimate when analyzing various political events. Conversely, studies of the language of politics cannot be carried out at a distance from the main political processes that govern life. modern society. In this regard, the description of models of political metaphor, reflecting the way of understanding and representing political reality, seems to be promising and relevant.
Conclusion
There are objective reasons for modern language changes: today our language is changing because life is changing, and in the 21st century, they will apparently speak a different Russian language. There is a danger of clogging the language with foreign words and jargon. It is necessary to find a middle line that would allow the language to be enriched both at the expense of foreign words and at the expense of the living speech of the street, and at the same time preserve the normalization of Russian speech with all its irregularities.
The globalization of mankind requires the development of means of global communication, primarily language. Language communication should become global not only in the field of science, technology, medicine, the terminology and style of which are already largely international, but also in the field of politics, the language of which is ideologized, characterized by figurativeness, metaphor, ambiguity of semantics and the predominance of emotional evaluation. Historically known methods of organizing interethnic linguistic communication, such as the displacement of languages of small linguistic groups, the forced introduction or voluntary choice of any language (natural or artificial) as a "lingua franca", are not only unacceptable from the point of view of preserving national languages and cultures , but also in principle unable to solve the problem of global language communication in the sphere of politics. Examples of the use of emotional-evaluative vocabulary in the language of politics in the United States, Russia and the CIS countries clearly demonstrate that the essence of the problem of mutual misunderstanding in political discourse lies in the significant difference in political thesauri of various segments of the population, parties, religious denominations and other groups that differ in ideology and political interests.
Despite the complexity of the problem of harmonization of global political discourse, it is solvable, since history knows precedents for the creation of sub-global languages based on a common ideology and political organization, a common system of concepts and a common political thesaurus. This sub-global language was used by the socialist countries before the collapse of the USSR. Such a sub-global language is now being formed within the framework of the European Union.
There is a method of harmonization of term systems, which can be generalized and extended to the entire political vocabulary and which will help to harmonize political thesauri on a global scale.
Changes in the socio-political, state and economic structure of Russia, Kazakhstan, etc., changes in the prevailing form of ownership, local armed conflicts, scientific and technological progress - all these events and processes continue and continue to be the reason for the borrowing of new words and the transition of words from one sphere communication to another in modern language. As already noted, socio-political discourse is in contact with a wide variety of areas of human activity. and uses in one way or another the words of the most different layers vocabulary. New borrowings, which have not yet been fully mastered by the linguistic consciousness and are not included in dictionaries, but are already used in the media, may require the perceiving subject (reader or researcher) to refer to the dictionaries of donor languages. The original word may turn out to be ambiguous, and in this case it is useful for the reader or researcher to understand what sphere of human activity, what functional style is being discussed. In addition, the borrowing of new words is an active process, and no amount of research in this area can close this topic, at least as long as there are different languages and culture and there is communication between them.
To date, the education system is practically the only one of all trying to preserve the traditional speech culture, and this imposes a special responsibility on school teachers, and on university teachers, and on each person receiving higher education. Of course, laws can be passed that prohibit the release of printed materials without proofreading, publishers can be fined for spelling errors, and the media for obscene expressions, but repressive actions of this kind will inevitably lead to the fact that many citizens will associate violations of language norms with the idea of \u200b\u200bnon-freedom of the individual . So, apparently, the only way to preserve the Russian language as the language of civilization, science and culture is to help a person receiving an education to understand that an impeccable command of the Russian language in general, and political vocabulary in particular, makes him a person capable of analytical thinking. , feel deeply, express your thoughts and feelings, convince others, achieve success.
From the analyzed examples, it is clear that most of the used lexemes are due to the change in the socio-political structure of the CIS states in the late XX - early XXI century and belong to the spheres of human activity that have undergone a radical breakdown in connection with this change, which have become more relevant: politics, law, economics, religion , new technologies, etc.
Socio-political vocabulary is one of the most mobile layers of the language system: some words and phraseological units go out of active use, they are replaced by other units that were used in other areas.
Analyzing the modern socio-political vocabulary and its replenishment, it should be noted that a number of new words accompany the development of new experience, new phenomena and concepts. The renewal of the language consists not only in the appearance of new words, but also in the development of new meanings.
Conclusions:
1. The social processes of the late XX - early XXI century significantly influenced the formation of the lexical and phraseological system of the language, highlighting the socio-political vocabulary and phraseology in it as the most important aspect of political communication.
2. Active processes are characteristic of the Russian language at the turn of the century; they are specifically reflected in the Russian language in the situation of a foreign language environment. Active semantic processes in socio-political vocabulary and phraseology did not lead to the creation of a new language, but to a gradual change in the political space.
3. The classification of socio-political vocabulary and phraseology according to the areas of use seems to be justified for the most accurate definition of the semantics of a particular lexeme. Summing up, we can state that the vocabulary of the language is most susceptible to socio-political, social change and ideological restructuring, and this is especially evident in the composition of political vocabulary and phraseology.
Bibliography
Avina N.Yu. Native language in a foreign language environment. M. 2006.
Bazylev A.T. Language and nation. M., 1973.
Bernstein S.I. Radio language. M., 1977.
Valgina N.S. Active processes in modern Russian. M., 2001.
Gadzhiev K.S. Introduction to political science. "Logos", 1997.
Global interview// Rossiyskaya Gazeta. 2004. 25.10.
Demidov A.I. Political science. M. Gardariki, 2006.
Demyankov V.Z. Production and comprehension errors. Permian. 1989.
A single consolidating force // Kostanay news. 2008 No. 10.
Weekly "Arguments and Facts". 2004. No. 5.
Zhangazi R. To the question of the role of youth in socio-political processes. 06/30/2006, 141.
Zavarzina G.A. Without ideological layers: Socio-political vocabulary at the end of the twentieth century // "Russian speech" - No. 6. - 2000, 41-47.
Zarva M.V. Some features of the language of radio as a type of mass communication // Language and style of media and propaganda. Press, radio, television, documentaries / ed. Rosenthal D.E. M, 1980.
Zakharov A.V. Folk images of power // Polis. 1998 No. 1.
Kostomarov V.G. Language taste of the era. From observations of the language practice of the mass media. St. Petersburg, 1999.
Kostomarov V.G. , Maksimov V.I. Modern Russian literary language. M. 2003.
Crystal D. English as a global language. M, 2001.
Krysin L.P. Russian word own and others. Studies in the Russian language and sociopolitics. M. 2004.
Kryukova G.A. To the question of the formation of a picture of the world among foreign students studying the Russian language / / Bulletin of Moscow State University. Ser. 19. Linguistics and intercultural communication. 2005. №2.
Kryuchkova T.B. Features of the formation and development of socio-political vocabulary and terminology. M., 1989.
Mandrikova G.M. Anthropocentric linguistics: new language units.// Proceedings of the conference. 2006.
Nesterskaya L.A. On some new trends in the development of the vocabulary of the modern Russian language (sociocultural and linguistic aspects) // Bulletin of Moscow State University. Philology. 1991. No. 4.
Oleinik B. To Slav brothers: from the speech at the congress Slavic peoples// Roman-magazine XXI century. 2004. No. 1.
On the role of the media in political discourse// Teaching Russian language and literature in schools of Kazakhstan. April 2005
Pavlova E.K. Lexical problems of global political discourse // Bulletin of Moscow State University. Series 19. Linguistics and intercultural communication. 2005. No. 2.
Political communications: A guide for university students / ed. Solovieva A.A. M. 2004.
Teaching Russian language and literature in schools of Kazakhstan. Almaty, "Asia-izdat", May 2005.
Russian language at the end of the 20th century (1985-1995). M., 1996.
Russian language at school. LLC "Our language" M., 2007, No. 1.
Russian language at school. LLC "Nash language" M., 2007, No. 3.
Senkevich M.P. The culture of radio and television speech. M., 1997.
Solganik G.Ya. Newspaper vocabulary. M. 1997.
Stylistics and literary editing / ed. Maksimova V.I. 2005.
Ter-Minasova S.G. Language and intercultural communication. M., 2000.
Fedeneva Yu.B. Functions of metaphor in political speech.// Ekaterinburg. 1999.
Feller M.D. The effectiveness of the message and the literary aspect of editing. Lvov. 1978.
Formanovskaya N.I. Culture of communication and speech etiquette.//РЯШ. 1993. No. 5.
Chudinov A.P. Political Linguistics. - Yekaterinburg: Ural Humanitarian Institute, 2003. - 194 p.
Chudinov A.P. Political linguistics. Tutorial. M. 2006
Shaposhnikov V.N. About some features of modern Russian speech. M. 2000.
Shkatova L.A., Kharchenko E.V. Linguoculturology// Electronic linguoculturological courses. ChelGU. 2001.
The language and style of the media and propaganda. Print, radio, television, documentaries. / Ed. Rosenthal D.E. M., 1980.
Yartseva V.N. National-linguistic relations in the USSR: state and prospects / Russian speech. 1958. No. 5.
Leo I. New Verbal Order// U.S. News and World Report. 1991. 22 July.
Dictionaries
Vasiliev N.V., Vinogradov V.A., Shakhnarovich A.M. Brief dictionary of linguistic terms. M. 1995.
Komlev N.G. Dictionary of new foreign words: (With translation, etymology, interpretation). - M., 1995.
Brief political dictionary. M. 1989.
Brief Dictionary of Foreign Words: About 3500 words / Compiled and edited by N.L. gear. - M., 1997.
Krysin L.P. Explanatory dictionary of foreign words. – M.: Rus. yaz., 1998.
Kubryakova E.S., Demyankov V.Z., Pankrats Yu.G., Luzina L.G. A short dictionary of cognitive terms. 1996.
Migolatiev A.A. Political Dictionary. "Ray" 1994 in 2 volumes.
Ozhegov S.I., Shvedova N.Yu. Explanatory dictionary of the Russian language. Ed.-4. M. 2001.
Political Dictionary. M. 1956.
Political science. Encyclopedic Dictionary. M. 1993.
Rosenthal D.E. Telenkova M.A. Dictionary-reference book of linguistic terms. M. 1985.
Modern dictionary of foreign words. – M.: Rus. yaz., 1993.
Sklyarevskaya G.N. Explanatory dictionary of the modern Russian language. M., 2001.
Khridina N.N. Conceptual and terminological dictionary: Management of education as a social system. E-burg. Ural publishing house. 2003.
Annex 1. Political vocabulary
Aggression
Administrative command system
Akimat
Active employment policy
Alliance
Crisis management
Bandocracy
Unemployed
Mayhem
Budget institutions
Bureaucracy
Veto
Power
Power based on coercion
Wahhabis
verbal note
Corrupt practices
War
Insurrection
Elections
Genocide
Geopolitics
Publicity
State
State legal
State debt
State regulation
Public administration
Government order
Globalization
Citizen
Civil rights and freedoms
Civil society
Citizenship
humanization
Debate
Deideologization
Jihad
Diaspora
Dictatorship
Demography
Democracy
Demonstration
Department
Personal dignity
Yellow press
Strike
Ideology
Image
Innovation strategy
Integration
Information approach
Human Capital
catastrophe
The quality of life
Constitution
Corruption
Cosmopolitanism
Cosmocentrism
legitimacy
Liberalism
Mazhilis
Mankurt
Maslikhat
Marginal
mentality
Rally
Morality
Monarchy
Moratorium
Power motive
Municipality
rebellion
National
national character
Nation
Innovation
Nomenclature
Nonconformism
Nouveau riche
public consciousness
Society
Public relations
community social
Informal youth associations
Oligarchy
Opposition
Opponent
Optimization
United Nations
Official
Ochlocracy
partnership
Partocracy
Patriot
perestroika
Transition period
Pauperism
Pacifism
Plenary
Pluralism
Human rights
Populism
Policy
Gender policy
political thinking
Politic system
Political crisis
Political campaign
Political decision
accounting policy
The president
The principle of publicity
Progress
Living wage
Putsch
Employer
Radicalism
Revolution
Region
Regionalization
Regulation
Anti-crisis regulation
Reorganization procedures
Republic
Referendum
Reform
motherland
Russophilia
Russophobia
Self-regulating system
Self-awareness civil
Self-consciousness is national
Liberty
Senate
Socialization
Social
Social protection
social process
social status
society
Standard
Strategic planning
Strategic Management
Strategy
Tolerance
Crowd
Terrorism
Totalitarianism
Unification
Control
Fascism
Fascist groups
Federalism
State shape
Form of government
National character
Charisma
Human values
Value
Private
Poverty line
Electorate
Elite political
Ethics
Ethnos
Appendix 2 Political phraseology
Aggressive policy
Sharks of politics
Painless remove
Safe Policy
Fight in the second round
power struggle
Struggle of interests
Fight against corruption
be on a horse
Branch
Take revenge
Decay virus
Back to the roots
Wolf in sheep's clothing
wolf ticket
The challenge of modernity
Geopolitical ambitions
coup d'état
money bags
Eurasian rhythm
Eurasia-fortress
Eurasia-people
Eurasia desert
Eurasia is the heart of the mainland
Unified central nervous system of mankind
Heated discussions
Backstage games
Hostages of ideology
Substitute
One gate play
Information wars
Information hunger
Kazakhstan - open space
Complex of universal problems
Horses do not change at the crossing
Circle of questions of time
Lion's share
Crisis resolution mechanism
Peaceful civilizations
Rat race
Sore topics
Offensive in all directions
national bigotry
Parade of Sovereignties
Power paralysis
Power paralysis
Party castling
Transition period
Transition period
Positive ethnic identity
Good neighbor policy
Political activity
Political passivity
Political shooting ranges
Political terrorists
Political heavyweights
Political chaos
Political fighter
political charge
political robbery
Political exclusion
Political confrontation
Last fight
election race
election race
Election battles
Election Marathon
searchlight perestroika
Make a path in the field
Time travel
Realities of the new world
Decisive battle
Decisive game
Burn the bridges
Bench
tactical thinking
Theater of political struggle
theater of war
A dark horse
Shadow cabinet
Title ethnos
The threat of losing roots
Hit below the belt
finish line
cold war
civilization-bridge
Man to man wolf
Shock therapy
Ethnic indifference
Ethnoisolationism
Ethnoegoism
Nuclear policy
An ulcer of society
Find material for any lesson,
The content of political speech predetermines the use in it of a special group of words (as well as phraseological units, compound names) - political vocabulary (parliament, deputy, head of administration, voting, voter, mayor, opposition, decree, etc.). It is necessary to distinguish between political vocabulary and political science terminology. Political science terminology, like any terminology, is fully known only to specialists, it does not belong to common vocabulary and is used only in scientific and other texts aimed at specialists. Political vocabulary is a thematic association of commonly used words that should be understood by everyone (the absolute majority of citizens).
Political vocabulary is constantly enriched by political science terminology: for example, a decade and a half ago, such words and compound names as consensus, subject of the Federation, impeachment were understood only by specialists, but now they have become well known, that is, the term has despecialized. On the other hand, many words and expressions commonly used in the Soviet era (executive committee, soviets, party committee, shock worker of communist labor) are already turning into special terms political history. At the same time, some words that in the Soviet era seemed to be connected only with the distant past of our country or with the political system of other countries (governor, State Duma, department, mayor) were updated again. Therefore, the boundaries between political vocabulary and political science terminology, between political neologisms and political archaisms are rather arbitrary: we are not always able to accurately determine the line at which a word becomes or ceases to be commonly used, turns into archaism or again turns out to be quite modern.
In political speech, this or that word can acquire special semantic connotations; often the leading, main (least dependent on context, most frequent) meaning is such a meaning that is marked as secondary in explanatory dictionaries or is not recorded at all. For example, in modern Russian political speech, an agrarian is primarily a member of the agrarian faction in the State Duma (or a supporter of this faction), and not a "specialist on the agrarian issue" (this meaning is presented as the only one in the four-volume academic Dictionary of the Russian Language in 1981 ). The words right and left in modern political texts characterize, first of all, Political Views, and supporters of a market liberal economy during the period of "perestroika" were considered leftists, and in the last decade of the last century they began to be called rightists; accordingly, their political antipodes - adherents of the communist ideology - were first called right in our country, but over time, in accordance with international practice, they began to be called left. Another example is the adjectives red, brown, pink and green, which in modern Russian political discourse usually characterize a person's political beliefs rather than their preferred color. Accordingly, during the Civil War in Russia, the main "color" opposition was the opposition of whites and reds.
In totalitarian states, attempts are often made to directly or indirectly regulate the use of certain words and expressions. For example, in the Russian-Soviet language, the political allies of the USSR were called the countries of people's democracy, the states of the world socialist system, or the socialist community (there were some semantic differences between these designations). Such word usage is often interpreted as a manifestation of "newspeak", a means of creating some kind of illusory reality (according to George Orwell). However, if desired, elements of "newspeak" can also be found in countries that are considered models of democracy.
The book, which is one of the most important spiritual needs of modern man, organically combines the work of the artist, publishers and printers.
book graphics - one of the types of graphic art. This includes, in particular, book illustrations, vignettes, headpieces, drop caps, covers, dust jackets, etc. The history of drawing has been largely associated with the handwritten book since antiquity and the Middle Ages, and the development of engraving and lithography has been connected with the printed book. IN ancient world a font appeared, also related to graphics, since the letter itself is a graphic sign
A distinctive feature of book graphics is its close connection with printing, its dependence on the level and culture of work in printing production.
Based on the main tasks of book graphics, it is divided into design and illustration of the book. The design of the book includes its decorative outfit, its decoration, hand-drawn font elements, the compositional construction of the text set, etc. (cover, title page, half-titles, etc.). Illustrating a book (from the Latin illustratio - a visual image, description) solves the problem of figurative disclosure of a literary text with the help of drawings (illustrations). different kind).
Real illustrations in the book, with all the depth of the ideological, figurative solution, in turn, do not lose their decorative effect, do not cease to be elements of the book's decoration, in perfect harmony with the set, paper - with the nature of the book.
The history of the book begins with papyrus scrolls (from 3 thousand BC in Ancient Egypt), in the first centuries AD. parchment codices appear (a type of modern book) - both were decorated with drawings and miniatures. This design system is richly and intricately developed in the paper book of the Middle Ages of Europe and Asia. The invention of printing in the middle of the 15th century created a classic European book with a combination of type and engravings (first on wood, from the 17th century on metal). At 19 - beg. 20th century The rapid development of reproduction technology brought book graphics closer to printing, created the profession of a book artist and illustrator.
An illustrator working on book illustrations. An illustrator cannot do without knowledge of special complex techniques: etching, aquatin, etc. Although it happens that an illustration is just a pencil drawing. In his work, the illustrator uses a computer, most often with its help a layout is made on artistic material. An illustrator must: be able to make sketches (so that they do not take too much time, but it is clear how the result will look), soberly calculate their strengths, cope with work on time and show sketches at the right time; be able to offer two significantly different versions of the finished picture, without the fact that their creation becomes a double job. And most importantly: it should have a pronounced and predictable style.
Distinctive featurebookstore graphics is its close relationship with printing, its dependence on the level and culture of work of printing production.
Based on the main tasks of book graphics, it is divided intodecor Andillustration books. The design of the book includes its decorative outfit, its decoration, drawn font elements, the compositional construction of text types, etc. (cover, title page, title page, etc.) Illustrating the book (from lat. illustration - a visual image, description) solves the problem of figurative disclosure of a literary text with the help of drawings (illustrations of various types). Immediately make a reservation that such a division is very conditional. In a good book, it is impossible to trace where the design ends and the illustration begins. We know examples of convincing solutions ideological concept and building books only by means of design. Quite often in the design elements (on the cover, title page, dust jacket, etc.) we find a drawing that contributes to the disclosure of a literary text. Real illustrations in the book, with all the depth of the ideological, figurative solution, in turn, do not lose their decorative effect, do not cease to be elements of the book's decoration, in perfect harmony with the set, paper - with the nature of the book.
I. Bilibin. Cover of the book by J. Kennan "Siberia and exile". 1906.
Super cover
The complex organism of a book consists of manyelements . Let's get acquainted with those elements in the solution of which the artist plays a leading role.
Cover (hardback) – artistic solution book cover that encloses the book block. The cover solution, in which, as a rule, color is used, should be conditionally decorative, clear, give the book a beautiful appearance, but at the same time give an accurate description of the book, reveal its main meaning, style and figurative structure. The cover should have font elements that reflect the main heading data (author and title of the book).
Title example.
V. Favorsky. Reversal title. 1931.
dust jacket ( from lat. super - above, above) is called the artistically designed paper cover of the book on top of the cover. the main task dust jackets - draw attention to the book and protect the cover from damage for a while.
Title or title page – the right half of the first spread of the book. The title contains more complex font elements that explain the heading and publishing data. Sometimes this data is extended to the adjacent, left page - the countertitle. This decision is called a reversal title. If an illustration is placed on the left page of the first spread or a portrait of the author is printed, such a page is calledfrontispiece . The drawing on the title is used relatively rarely and has more decorative value.Shmuttitulami Separate sheets are called, which open parts, sections of the book. A heading and a simple ornamental motif or drawing are placed on it.
N.I. Piskarev. Shmuttitul to the book by A.V. Lunacharsky "The Liberated Don Quixote". 1922.
Illustrations are drawings that figuratively reveal literary text, subordinate to the content and style of a literary work, at the same time decorating the book and enriching its decorative structure. The tasks of illustration are also partially solved in the drawings on the cover, title, intros, and endings.
Screensaver - a small composition of an ornamental nature or in the form of a drawing, opening some section of the text (the beginning of a book, part, chapter). The splash screen is closely related to the typesetting strip and never turns into an illustration.
ending - a small drawing or ornamental motif that completes the last page of a section or entire book.
Initial (from lat. initialis - initial) - the initial letter of any section in the text of the book, manuscript, created by the artist. In everyday life, the old Russian name of the initial has been preserved - a letter.
The first page of the text of the book, usually decorated with a headband or initial letter, is called a descent ordownhill strip.
Gerasimenko-Zhiznevsky. Illustration for V. Bykov's story "The Sign of Trouble". Lithography.
This is a short list of the elements of the book. In addition to the obligatory cover and title for each book, all other elements are introduced to the extent required by the purpose, purpose of the book, its volume, circulation and artist's intention.
The creative process in the art of book graphics is complex. The artist must capture the spirit of a literary work, its style and reflect it in his work. In front of himthe task is - to reveal the ideological and artistic content of the work by means of fine art, to preserve the unity of the figurative and decorative structure of the book with the spirit of the work, the style of the writer, and to give a modern assessment of the literary work in his individual pictorial decision.
I. Bilibin. Screensaver to the poem by A.S. Pushkin "Two Crows". 1910.
I. Bilibin. Ending to A.S. Pushkin's poem "Two Crows". 1910.
An important side of the art of book graphics is the obligatory consideration of the features of the printing structure of the book, its peculiar nature as cultural value and how things. The artist of the book must work in a strictly defined, predetermined size (format). There are certain most rational standard formats. The artist cannot arbitrarily change the proportions of the sheet, which creates certain difficulties and features in the composition. Based on the mandatory format, the artist determines the volume of the book, the number and type of pictorial elements, their distribution throughout the book, it must be clear to him what font the text will be typed in, what are the proportions of the typesetting strip and page margins. All the pictorial elements in the book are very closely related to type. The creation of fonts is ancient and high art. Many generations of artists have worked on the creation of fonts beautiful drawing, perfect proportions, fonts clear, readable and varied in style. Only having a variety of beautiful fonts, you can successfully solve the problem of book design. Type elements of the cover, titles, dust jackets, half-titles, separate headings, as a rule, are drawn by artists. It is necessary to achieve their harmonious combination with typesetting fonts, with graphic elements. The book artist must not only know fonts and be able to use them, but also be able to modify existing fonts and create new ones that correspond to his idea, the style of the book, the nature of the literary work. Constantly caring about the printing and artistic unity of the book, the artist must know at least the basics of printing production and be in close contact with publishing workers preparing the book for publication, and printers. All the pictorial elements of the book should be harmoniously connected with the plane of the paper, with the strip of typesetting. When working, for example, on an illustration, the artist must clearly imagine how it will be combined with the set strip on the next page, what the spread of the book will be like.
I. Bilibin. Initial. 1921.
Modern book graphics are characterized by a variety of searches, bold experiments by many masters, different in their creative appearance.
A separate line in the art of book graphics should be consideredmagazine and newspaper graphics. The specificity of periodicals poses its own, special tasks for magazine and newspaper graphics. If a book serves a person for a long time and is devoted to a specific topic, one branch of knowledge, then rapidly changing (periodical) magazines and newspapers contain the most diverse material, reflecting the tasks of the day, covering the most diverse areas of human activity. The newspaper serves one day, it is read quickly, and all its visual elements should immediately fit into the mind, and therefore, be simple, beautiful and clear, convenient for quick perception. Line drawings are best perceived in newspapers. The journal publishes material of a review, generalizing nature. Quite often the magazine is addressed to a certain circle of readers (an agricultural magazine, a health magazine, a fashion magazine, etc.). But the magazine is also characterized by a variety of material and a short service life. The formats of magazines and the layout of the text in them differ significantly from those in books. The magazine drawing should be expressive and catchy, in good harmony with headings and typesetting. Very good for a sketchbook. They are favorably distinguished from photographs by the artist's ability to display the most typical, to generalize a phenomenon, to create an image, a character; besides, the drawings fit much better with the set than the photographs. Today, unfortunately, our newspapers and magazines often abound with stamps that make it easy and quick to use computer technology.
V. Zamirailo. Descent lane. 1921.
Caricature (from it. caricatura< caricare - load, exaggerate) - a special satirical genre of newspaper and magazine graphics. The caricature deliberately emphasizes, exaggerates the characteristic features and characteristics of a person or event in order to fulfill the task of exposing, ridiculing, influencing. Independent (easel) caricature is relatively rare - it is almost always associated with a newspaper, magazine, book, poster. In most cases, the cartoon is accompanied by text. Thanks to the printed editions, the caricature spreads very widely.
There are special comic magazines, collections of cartoons, etc. Not every artist can work in this genre. A caricaturist must have a special gift, a sharp eye, notice the most characteristic, the ability to exaggerate, while remaining a deep and subtle artist, without falling into empty superficial scoffing and vulgarity. In the history of art, many such “accurate” masters are known, for example, O. Daumier, H. Bidstrup, J. Effel, V. Serov, D. Moor, Kukryniksy and many others.
