ON STYLISTIC MEANS FOR IMAGE MAKING IN POLITICAL DISCOURSE
The studies of mass media texts, devoted to global political players have become relevant especially in the modern tendencies. The way some political figures are presented in British and American mass media is investigated in the current research.This research is devoted to the study of the language means for creating the image of a political leader used in the British and American mediaon the example of a political portrait of Russian President Vladimir Putin and President of the USA Donald Trump. The author pays special attention to the fact that the cognitive study of language tools used for image makingof political leaders is connected with contemporary British and American political discourse. Stylistic analysis of means for image making shows the main and common linguistic tools to affect readers. The presented stylistic means, as a rule, are used by journalists to influence on mass consciousness as well. When selecting the material, the main focus was directed at the analysis of political images of two political leaders as the brightest representatives of the world powers.
Key words: discourse, political discourse, media discourse, political image, media image.
INTRODUCTION
In modern information society, the media, as a powerful tool of influence, play an important role in the formation of mass consciousness and public opinion. The main function of the media is not an informative, but manipulative function. Political images of both states and individual political leaders are purposefully created in the media of communication, forming a definite attitude of the reader to a particular state or political figures.
The political image of the leader of the state plays a crucial role in the field of international relations: the success of the country’s foreign policy and the development of trade and economic relations with other states depend on whether it is positive or negative. The foreign policy image has an impact on the political processes taking place in the state: the negative image of the country can be used by opposition forces as one of the arguments in criticizing the government and its policy. In addition, the way political leaders are perceived by other countries has an impact on their political image amaong partner countries and various international organizations.
Speaking about the authenticity of the press as a source, it should be noted that there are often a lot of factual errors, falsificationsand evaluations of various socially significant phenomena. However, for this study, in addition to the reliability of the reported information, an important characteristic is also the frequency of use of certain media images, which allows us to assess the degree of their stability and prevalence in public opinion.
When giving the definition of discourse, N. D. Arutyunova provides three perspectives to discuss. The first one would be when discourse is regarded a coherent text together with a set of extralinguistic aspects including pragmatic, sociocultural, psychological ones and other. Discourse can also be a text within a specific context. The last would be when discourse is regarded as speech viewed as intended social action, a component of human interaction and cognition. It is worthwhile mentioning that N. D. Arutyunova sees discourse as speech imbedded in context [1, 136].
According to the experts in the field of political linguistics E. V. Budaev and A. P. Chudinov, “the intensive development of information technology, the increasing role of the media affect public attention to political discourse” [2, 45]. Taking into account the relation between journalism and politics, it can be assumed that the image of the state will be influenced by the information that is presented in the media. News, articles and other media materials draw attention of the audience to problems from different angles.
Media discourse includes the concept of the media, which is closely related to mass communication. T.G. Dobrosklonskaya defines it as a set of processes and products of speech activity in the field of mass communication in all its richness and the complexity of the interaction” [3, 263].
In the modern world, the nature of international relations is often directly related to the personal characteristics of state leaders. As noted above, the media play a crucial role in creating and maintaining the media-political image of a politician. Each personal quality of a politician can be either ignored by journalists, or interpreted by them in such a way that as a result it will be noticed by all recipients.
Particular interest for the study is the image of the President of the Russian Federation, Vladimir Putin and the President of the USA Donald Trump in American and Britishmedia. Development of the internet allows traditional media to expand their broadcasting using sites which content is usually available to users. The global network also serves as a platform for creating new publications.
MAIN PART
Today, interest in this area of scientific knowledge has increased significantly. It should be noted that “image” is a universal category. This concept is actively used in the political, economic, and social fields. For example, in economics, a well-thought-out image helps to attract buyers, while in politics it promotes a positive attitude of the electorate towards a particular political figure. In society, not only public figures, but also ordinary people are concerned about their image. In this regard, the definition of image can be seen in the works of specialists from various fields of knowledge. For example, in the field of advertising one can come across such a definition — “the image of a product (trademark, trademark) is a combination of feelings, ideas, beliefs associated with a trademark, its use or non-use, to a greater extent, as a result of its advertising and presentation on the market for goods”.
Linguistic means plays a key role in creating the image (image) of a politician in the process of forming public opinion in mass media. Media has an essential role in the world where relations between states often directly depend on the personal characteristics of the leaders representing them.
An analysis of some of the linguistic features of media texts that directly or indirectly influence the formation of an image, in particular, of Russian and American politicians, causes quite definite interest and seems relevant. Media can shape the worldview of an individual, which is ultimately part of public opinion. Due to this function, the media is a powerful ideological weapon.
The image of a politician is created in the media primarily through the judgments and assessments of journalists, which reflect their subjective perception of the personal qualities of a politician. The opinion of the press largely depends on the public work: open speeches, events, and communication with the media. Journalists often tend to use linguistic means to illustrate certain qualities of a politician. They are broadcasted to the masses and are also subjectively perceived by public, forming the image of a politician who does not always exactly match the real political portrait. Thus, the image is the connecting link between a well-known personality and audience, it is created and formed based on the perception of a person [2]. It is relevant to consider which language tools are most often used in the media, and how they affect the formation of the image of a politician [4, 23].
The interest around representatives of Russian and American political eliteleads to the formation of their political portraits. Mass media widely uses a wide range of lexical, lexicalgrammatical and stylistic means in creating images of political figures.
The metaphor is the most common meansfor giving expressiveness and originality to the image of politician.
All metaphors in newspaper articles are divided into semantic groups, such as gambling («He bet almost his whole economy on oil and gas») (New York Times, Dec 20, 2014), military (gambit, strategic pivot, maneuvers, to take the offensive), sport (conquest, chess move, strike back, playing defense, rival, arbiter, adversity, victory,setback), jurisprudence (machinations, kleptocracy, legal bureaucracy).
Metaphor “play chess” in the following example clearly demonstrates the ability of the Russian leader to foresee the possible consequences, and metaphor “play marbles” is an antithesis and illustrates American side.
Putin is playing chess, and I think we’re playing marbles.(New York Times, Dec 20, 2014)
However, in most examples, the authors express a negative attitude from conviction to harsh criticism:
Mr. Putin’s brand of crony capitalism has turned loyalists into billionaires whose influence over strategic sectors of the economy has in turn helped him maintain his iron-fisted grip on power.
(New York Times, Sep 27, 2014) The use of metaphor “iron-fisted grip on power” is an attempt to create the image of a dictator who does not tolerate competition.
However, it should be noticed that a positive image of the political leader is formed by metaphors that have less positive connotation:
For instance, today’s reigning cliché is that the wily fox, President Vladimir Putin of Russia, has once again outmaneuvered the flat-footed Americans, by deploying some troops, planes and tanks to Syria to buttress the regime of President Bashar al-Assad and to fight the Islamic State forces threatening him. If only we had a president who was so daring, so tough, so smart. (New York Times, 30 сентября, 2015.)
Using the metaphor “wily fox” (“sly fox”) and outmaneuvered (“to gain advantage by maneuver, to surpass the enemy”), the author shows a critical attitude in general, but nevertheless pays attention to the consciousness and ability of Putin to find the right solution in critical situations, and the epithets “daring”, “tough” and “smart” show this. Vladimir Putin is portrayed as an experienced tactician and skillful strategist, capable of achieving his goal and defends his interests.
Epithets are widely used in political articles to describe a political figure. In comparison with metaphors, epithets mostly have positive patterns (plainly and forcefully, smart, relaxed and joking, confident and defiant, efficient). The analysis showed that the frequency of negative epithets is higher than the frequency of metaphors:
He is acting decisively, seizing the initiative and creating facts on the ground. (New York Times, Oct 23, 2015).
We helped to foster the political conditions in Russia for Putin’s xenophobic, grievance-based politics to flourish. (New York Times, Dec 20, 2014.)
Epithets “decisive”, “xenophobic, grievance -based politics” illustrates the image of a strong and at the same time dangerous rival, who can stand against powerfulauthorities. Some epithets relate to the personal characteristics of Vladimir Putin (aggrieved, angry, sarcastic, brazenly) and the author tries to show his discontent, intractability, irritability and cruelty.
Antithesis is also common stylistic mean in creating the image of Russian President. In general, the popularity of the antithesis as a stylistic device for creating an image of Russian leader is considered quite logical as the President is showed in contrast and opposed to American leader, competition and rivalry of two world powers is beyond doubt.
But his short-term successes have produced long-term costs.(New York Times, Oct 23, 2015). Even in retreat, Mr. Putin tries to take the offensive.(New York Times, Dec 4, 2014).
He rode the price (for oil) up and now it is riding him down (New York Times, Dec 20, 2014).
The cases of antithesis combined with metaphor (short-term successes — long-term costs, in retreat -to take the offensive, ride up — ride down) used in these examples represent Putin as a leader trying to save face in a bad game and not acknowledging his mistakes and creating the image of a loser and a man who deceived everyone and himself, as well as a leader with ghostly illusions.
As for metonymy as a stylistic device in creating the image of Putin, all examples are based on the word «the world», which confirms the key role of the President, the extent of his actions and their global influence:
But that return seems far out of his reach, and what’s closer to his grasp is something more destructive — a wrecker’s legacy, not Peter the Great’s, in which his own people gain little from his efforts, but the world grows more unstable with every move he makes.( New York Times, October 3, 2015)
«Putin lied to the world and deluded himself» (New York Times, Dec 20, 2014).
The titles of the articles represent these expressive, stylistic means: «Putin’s War of Words «(New York Times, Dec 4, 2014.), «Sheikh Putin of Syria» (New York Times, Oct 22, 2015).
Almost all of them are full of irony, the pun “War of Putin’s Words” refers to the famous novel by G. Wells “War of the Worlds”, which once again emphasizes the significant role of Russian President in the world politics. There is a hint of a megalomaniac of the President in the metaphor “Sheikh Putin of Syria”, as well as the desire to have support of other states.
Thus, after analyzing the materials ofthe newspaper, we can conclude that the image of Russian President formed in the media is negative. Putin appears, on the one hand, as an unprincipled, immoral, quirky politician who pursues only his own interests and benefits. On the other hand, he appears as a strong political figure who is able to influence the course of world events, clearly adhering to his own principles, but these qualities are not explicatedvividly.
In terms of stylistic, there is a predomination of colloquial and vulgar lexical units (land grab, a professional thug, a bully, stupid, a first-class jerk, crazy, naked). We can distinguish semantic fields related to military topics (maneuvers, to take the offensive, made a strategic pivot), legal (machinations, kleptocracy, legal bureaucracy, legal assault) or sport (chess move, playing defense, rival, arbiter, adversity, victory, setback), which indicates the rivalry and confrontation of two world powers.
As for the political image of Donald Trump, in the article written by John Cassidy, the headline «Is Donald Trump losing it?»( The New Yorker, July 7, 2016)shows his negative attitude towards Donald Trump. The author uses simile “like a silent-movie comic”, thereby comparing him with “silent movie comedian”, and characterizes him as a person who brings only disasters by repetition of the word “disasters” («from calamity to calamity»). In addition, describing last months of disasters as “each one more bruising than the last”, the author uses epithet “bruising” (“harmful, leading to bruising”).
John Cassidy uses the words «patter» and «unhinged» («making a mess»), through which he conveys that the words of Donald Trump and his campaign promises are not trustworthy: «Perhaps a majority will like his populist patter and unhinged campaigning style, much as a plurality of the
Republican primary electorate did.»
In the last paragraph, the journalist states that the political figure “appears to have neither the self-discipline nor the paid-media strategy that is essential to deliver a focused message «. To strengthen the negative pattern, the author uses the construction «neither. Nor», as well as the epithet «focused», thereby hinting at his problems with speech.
Journalist David Ramnick writes in his article : (» Introducing a new series: Trump and the truth, Sep 2, 2016 «) ‘Donald Trump, the Republican nominee for President, does not so much struggle with the truth as strangle it altogether. He lies to avoid. He lies to inflame. He lies to promote and to preen. Sometimes he seems to lie just for the hell of it. He traffics in conspiracy theories that he cannot possibly believe and in grotesque promises that he cannot possibly fulfill. When found out, he changes the subject — or lies largef ‘. This passage is based on the use of lexical anaphora: the author repeatedly uses the word «lies» in one paragraph. Anaphora, using the same syntactic constructions listing goals of deceitful actions of Donald Trump, enhances the reader’s negative impression. In the following sentences, the author uses an oxymoron, combining words with opposite meanings, calling Trump “a master of“ truthful hyperbole “.
In general, an analysis of the language tools that form the image of Donald Trump revealed the intensive use of various language tools for analyzing at different levels of the language: mostly negative patterns are found at the lexical level; stylistic means as metaphor, epithets, anaphora, oxymoron are widely used at the stylistic level. The language means of expressing an attitude of the speaker plays a crucial role not only in the functionality of the article itself, but also in creating the image of a politician.
CONCLUSION
Having thoroughly studied over 40 articles fromEnglish and Americanpapers in which the authors aimed at creating political images of the two current presidents of the most powerful and influential states we may draw the following conclusions:
1. Thus, the study of stylistic means for image making in political discourse showed a predominance of the negative assessment used in image making of Russian President Vladimir Putin by American and British media.
2. The political image of Donald Trump created by the media also has negative connotation.
3. The vast majority of media data createnegative images of political figures in mass consciousness. Such an assessment is explicated at the morphological, lexical, syntactic and textual levels.
4. As for the stylistic tools,metaphors, epithets, antithesis, metonymy, irony, anaphora, oxymoron are most used stylistic means. The analysis shows that most often journalists use metaphor and epithets, which is explained by theirintrinsic potential expressiveness.
5. In general, the study allows us to claim that image making in political discourse largely depends on media resources. The media plays a crucial role in influencing public opinion, and its main goal remains as the formation of image for mass consciousness about someone, convincing them that this idea is the only trueone.
REFERENCES
1 N.D. Arutyunova Discourse / N.D. Arutyunova // Linguistic Encyclopedic Dictionary / Ch.
ed. V.N. Yartseva — M.: Sov. Encyclopedia, 1990, p 136.
2 E.V. Budaev, A.P. Chudinov, Metaphor in political interdiscourse / Budaev, E.V., Chudinov, A.P. — Yekaterinburg: Ural. State Pedagogical University, 2006. — P. 45.
3 T.G. DobrosklonskayaMedialinguistics: a systematic approach to studying the language of the media: modern English media speech -Flint: science, 2008. P. 263.
4 E.V. Frolov The political image of the institutions of state power in Russia: current status and prospects for improvement : abstract. dis… PhD candidate: 23.00.02 / E.V. Frolov. — Moscow, 2005. – p. 23.
Э.Ш.Никифорова1, А..А.Нурмаганбетова2
Cаяси дискурстағы бейнені жасаудың стилистикалық құралдары туралы
А.Байтурсынов атындағы Қостанай мемлекеттік университеті,
Қостанай қ., Қазақстан
Жаһандық саяси қайраткерлер туралы бұқаралық ақпарат құралдарындағы мәтіндерді зерттеу қазіргі заманғы үрдістерде ерекше өзекті болып табылады. Бұл мақалада саяси қайраткерлердің британдық және американдық бұқаралық ақпарат құралдарында бейнелеу жолдары қарастырылған. Бұл зерттеуге мысал ретінде Ресей президенті Владимир Путин мен АҚШ президенті Дональд Трамптың саяси портретін қолдана отырып, британдық және американдық бұқаралық ақпарат құралдарында қолданылатын саяси көшбасшының бейнесін жасау үшін қолданылатын тілдік құралдарға назар аударады. Автор саяси көшбасшылардың бейнесін қалыптастыруда қолданылатын тілдік құралдарды когнитивті зерттеу қазіргі заманғы британдық және американдық саяси дискурстармен байланысты екендігіне ерекше назар аударады. Саяси бейнені қалыптастыру құралдарына стилистикалық талдау оқырмандарға әсер етудің негізгі және жалпы лингвистикалық құралдарын көрсетеді. Ұсынылған стилистикалық құралдарды әдетте журналистер бұқаралық санаға әсер ету үшін қолданады. Материалды таңдау кезінде басты назар екі саяси көшбасшының әлемдік державалардың ең көрнекті өкілдері ретіндегі саяси бейнелерін талдауға аударылды.
Э.Ш.Никифорова1, А.А.Нурмаганбетова2
О стилистических средствах создания образа в политическом дискурсе
1, 2Костанайский государственный университет имени А.Байтурсынова, Костанай, Казахстан
Исследования текстов средств массовой информации, посвященных глобальным политическим деятелям, особенно актуальны в современных тенденциях. В настоящейстатье исследуется способ представления некоторых политических деятелей в британских и американских СМИ. Данное исследование посвящено изучению языковых средств,используемых в британских и американских СМИдля создания образа политического лидера, на примере политического портрета президента России Владимира Путина и президента США Дональда Трампа. Автор обращает особое внимание на то, что когнитивное изучение языковых средств, используемых для формирования имиджа политических лидеров, связано с современным британским и американским политическим дискурсом. Стилистический анализ средств для создания образа показывает основные и распространенные лингвистические средства воздействия на читателей. Представленные стилистические средства, как правило, используются журналистами для воздействия на массовое сознание. При выборе материала основное внимание было направлено на анализ политических образов двух политических лидеров как самых ярких представителей мировых держав.