Abstract:
In this article, the questions of speech impact in political discourse are analyzed. It is an accepted fact that political discourse is, unsurprisingly, a discourse made for politicians. The main function of the political text is the function of speech impact. Linguists that study political discourse are interested in how exactly language tools are used by the author to express different political statements. The subjects of study are, in this case, those language tools that can be used to influence the conversationalist. Antithesis is, as commonly known, a figure of speech, which is built on contrast of comparable concepts. In terms of creation, antithesis can be represented by two words or two groups of words that are related to each other by the lexical and contextual antonymy. The article is focused on how modern Russian politicians are using antithesis in their speeches. The main method of this research is the conceptual analysis, which can produce detailed analysis of text fragments, where antithesis is used, and analyze the dependency of meanings of the words that create antithesis itself in terms of context. In a study, the continuous sampling and linguistic observation and description methods were used. The article analyzes speeches of such prominent Russian politicians as V.V. Putin, S.V. Lavrov and V.V. Zhirinovsky. Particular emphasis in this study has been placed on the antithesis usage by politicians. Certain conclusions related to the usage of antithesis in Russian political discourse have been made. Antithesis is a powerful persuasive tool in the political discourse. The main features of current research and the collected factual material can be interesting to the specialists in the discourse field and also can be used while creating training courses for communication and special courses for researching of political discourse specificity in the modern Russian society.
Machine summary:
Moreover, such researchers of political discourse as Chudinov (2006), Shejgal (2004) and others have repeatedly noted this persuasive tool and its role in foreign and domestic politicians' speeches.
, 2018; Sagajdachnaya, 2009; Yapparova & Bochina, 2015), there are currently no separate works dedicated to the research of antithesis as a powerful persuasive tool in the political discourse (Mohammad et al, 2018).
751 320 I Special Issue of Journal of Research in Applied Linguistics, 10, Summer & Autumn 2019 This can be seen, for example, in the speeches of Zhirinovsky, Russian political party leader "LDPR".
The same "friend-or-foe" opposition with another form is seen in the speech of Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov at the Munich Security Conference (2015): "Pochemu v sluchayah, naprimer, s Afganistanom, Liviej, Irakom, Jemenom, Mali, Yuzhnym Sudanom nashi partnery nastojchivo prizyvayut pravitel'stva dogovarivat'sya s oppoziciej, s povstancami, v otdel'nyh sluchayah - dazhe s ekstremistami, a v otnoshenii ukrainskogo krizisa postupayut inache, fakticheski potakaya silovoj operacii Kieva, vplot' do opravdaniya ili popytok opravdat' primenenie kassetnyh boepripasov" (Myunhenskaya rech' Lavrova).
Antithesis with implementation of "friend-or-foe" opposition is even seen in speeches of Russian politicians that are not even related to anything political.
While using antithesis as a strong method of expressiveness and persuasiveness creating, cases of lexical field expanding by the usage of synonyms, 753 322 I Special Issue of Journal of Research in Applied Linguistics, 10, Summer & Autumn 2019 language or contextual ones, in a series of oppositions is common.
4. Summary In the end, Russian politicians quite often use such vivid method as antithesis for an effective speech impact.
754 Antithesis as Leverage in Russian Political Discourse ...