Discursive realization of threat in pre-election communication

Cover Page

Cite item

Abstract

This article focuses on the question of pragmatic effectiveness of threat statements in political communication, in particular, the relevance of using threats in pre-election programs and intimidating voters with the goal of forcing them to vote for a certain politician. The aim of this article is to consider pre-election threat statements as verbal regulative actions and to propose a typology of such constructive menacives taking into account the targeted orientation of their consequent component. This study is based on a corpus of threat statements realized in the presidential candidates’ pre-election programs in Russia in 2018. The total number of menacives is 1. The study investigated the data from the perspective of the theory of speech activity, speech act theory and psychosemantics. The theoretical framework of the study is an action-related approach to the analysis of speech (dialogic) acts developed in Tver semantic and pragmatic research school (Romanov 1988; 2002; 2020). The study specified 18 targeted types of menacives that have a certain pragmatic and emotional effect on voters and are characterized by different frequencies in pre-election programs. This result demonstrates that the author of the pre-election program does not know mass voter’s preferences, their emotional state and feelings well; therefore, the politician directs their menacing influence on a wide range of potential voters. The authors conclude that politicians deliberately prefer to use threat statements with negative effect on an unfocused audience trying to win the attention and votes. The analysis shows that four types of threat statements with different targeting of consequent component proved to be a pragmatically effective tool in the Russian pre-election campaign in 2018. The results of this study can be used to predict the pragmatic effect of politicians’ threat statements on voters.

Full Text

Table 1. Targeted types of pre-election threat statements 

Targeted types of pre-election threat statements

Number of threat statements

Percentage of the total number of threat statements in Russian pre-election discourse

Politicians who used targeted types of threat statements (number of threat statements)

I

Threat statements with negative effect on voters

42

18.34 %

All participants of pre-election discourse, except
Pavel Grudinin

1

Threat statements with negative effect on voters

42

18.34 %

7 politicians:

Grigorii Yavlinskii (16)

Boris Titov (8)

Sergei Baburin (6)

Kseniya Sobchak (5)

Vladimir Putin (4)

Vladimir Zhirinovskii (2)

Maksim Suraikin (1)

II

Threat statements with negative effect on non-voters (unfocused audience)

187

81.66 %

All politicians

2

Threat statements with negative effect on the representatives of the government, officials and representatives of the state apparatus

71

31.00%

7 politicians:

Grigorii Yavlinskii (35)

Maksim Suraikin (13)

Kseniya Sobchak (12)

Sergei Baburin (7)

Vladimir Zhirinovskii (3)

Boris Titov (1)

3

Threat statements with negative effect on citizens who break the law

32

13.97%

7 politicians:

Grigorii Yavlinskii (13)

Vladimir Zhirinovskii (7)

Maksim Suraikin (6)

Sergei Baburin (2)

Kseniya Sobchak (2)

Pavel Grudinin (1)

Vladimir Putin (1)

4

Threat statements with negative effect on citizens with high incomes or on profitable (including monopolistic) enterprises

16

6.98 %

7 politicians:

Grigorii Yavlinskii (5)

Sergei Baburin (2)

Pavel Grudinin (2)

Vladimir Zhirinovskii (2)

Kseniya Sobchak (2)

Maksim Suraikin (2)

Boris Titov (1)

5

Threat statements with negative effect on dishonest businessmen or employers

16

6.98 %

5 politicians:

Sergei Baburin (6)

Grigorii Yavlinskii (5)

Pavel Grudinin (2)

Maksim Suraikin (2)

Vladimir Zhirinovskii (1)

6

Threat statements with negative effect on citizens who support corruption and corrupt officials

15

6.55 %

5 politicians:

Grigorii Yavlinskii (7)

Kseniya Sobchak (3)

Sergei Baburin (2)

Maksim Suraikin (2)

Pavel Grudinin (1)

7

Threat statements with negative effect on countries-aggressors

9

3.93%

6 politicians:

Vladimir Putin (4)

Sergei Baburin (1)

Pavel Grudinin (1)

Vladimir Zhirinovskii (1)

Maksim Suraikin (1)

Grigorii Yavlinskii (1)

8

Threat statements with negative effect on bankers

4

1.74 %

2 politicians:

Sergei Baburin (2)

Maksim Suraikin (2)

9

Threat statements with negative effect on those who do nothing for the country's development or hinders its development

4

1.74 %

2 politicians:

Vladimir Putin (3)

Vladimir Zhirinovskii (1)

10

Threat statements with negative effect on religious organizations

3

1.31 %

2 politicians:

Maksim Suraikin (2)

Grigorii Yavlinskii (1)

11

Threat statements with negative effect on the media, and also on the media with fake news

3

1.31 %

2 politicians:

Maksim Suraikin (2)

Grigorii Yavlinskii (1)

12

Threat statements with negative effect on representatives of housing and communal services

2

0.87 %

2 politicians:

Sergei Baburin (1)

Maksim Suraikin (1)

13

Threat statements with negative effect on judicial authority

2

0.87 %

2 politicians:

Kseniya Sobchak (1)

Grigorii Yavlinskii (1)

14

Threat statements with negative effect on administration of

educational institutions

2

0.87 %

1 politician:

Kseniya Sobchak (2)

15

Threat statements with negative effect on

international outlawed organizations or citizens supporting them

2

0.87 %

1 politician:

Grigorii Yavlinskii (2)

16

Threat statements with negative effect on those

who illegally uses someone else's intellectual property

2

0.87 %

1 politician:

Grigorii Yavlinskii (2)

17

Threat statements with negative effect on the opposition

2

0.87 %

2 politicians:

Maksim Suraikin (1)

Boris Titov (1)

18

Threat statements with negative effect on different groups of persons or mass addressee

2

0.87 %

1 politician:

Maksim Suraikin (2)

Note. The number after the surname indicates the number of targeted types of threat statements in politician’s pre-election program.

 

Table 2. Election results in the Russian Federation in 2018

Politician

The percentage of votes,%

Number of threat statements

1

Vladimir Putin

76.6

12

2

Pavel Grudinin

11.8

7

3

Vladimir Zhirinovskii

5.66

17

4

Kseniya Sobchak

1.67

27

5

Grigorii Yavlinskii

1.04

89

6

Boris Titov

0.76

11

7

Maksim Suraikin

0.68

37

8

Sergei Baburin

0.65

29

 

Table 3. The number of targeted types of threat statements

Politician

Number
 of targeted types of threat statements

1

Vladimir Putin /
Boris Titov

4

2

Pavel Grudinin

5

3

Vladimir Zhirinovskii / Kseniya Sobchak

7

4

Sergei Baburin

9

5

Grigorii Yavlinskii

12

6

Maksim Suraikin

13

 

×

About the authors

Aleksey Arkad'evich Romanov

Tver State Agricultural Academy; Tver State University

Author for correspondence.
Email: romanov_tgsha@mail.ru

full professor, Doctor of Philology, Honored Scholar of the Russian Federation, Honorary Worker of Higher Professional Education of the Russian Federation, Head of the Department of Theory of Language and Intercultural Communication and Director of the Institute of Applied Linguistics and Mass Communications

Tver, Russia

Olga Vladimirovna Novoselova

Tver State Agricultural Academy

Email: olvnov@mail.ru

Doctor of Philology, Associate Professor at the Department of Theory of Language and Intercultural Communication

Tver, Russia

References

  1. Вежбицка А. Речевые акты // Новое в зарубежной лингвистике. 1985. Вып. 16. Лингвистическая прагматика. С. 251-275. [Vezhbitska, Anna. 1985. Speech Acts. Novoe v zarubezhnoi lingvistike 16. 251-275. (In Russ.)]
  2. Гарпушкин В.Е. Прагматический аспект знаков и человеческое взаимопонимание // Философские науки. 1977. № 1. С.136-140. [Garpushkin, Vyacheslav E. 1977. The pragmatic aspect of signs and human understanding. Filosofskie nauki 1. 136-140. (In Russ.)].
  3. Кастельс М. Власть коммуникации. Пер. с англ. М.: Изд. дом Высшей школы экономики, 2016. 564 с. [Kastel's, Manuel. 2016. Vlast' kommunikatsii (Power of communication). Moscow: Izd. dom Vysshei shkoly ekonomiki (In Russ.)].
  4. Кацнельсон С.Д. Типология языка и речевое мышление. Л.: Наука. Ленингр. отд-ние, 1972. 216 с. [Katsnel'son, Solomon D. 1972. Tipologiya yazyka i rechevoe myshlenie (Typology of language and speech thinking). Leningrad: Nauka. Leningr. otd-nie (In Russ.)].
  5. Лайнбарджер П. Психологическая война. Теория и практика обработки массового сознания. М.: Центроплиграф, 2013. 445 с. [Lainbardzher, Pol. 2013. Psikhologicheskaya voina. Teoriya i praktika obrabotki massovogo soznaniya (Psychological warfare. Theory and practice of mass consciousness processing). Moscow: Tsentropligraf (In Russ.)].
  6. Леонтьев А.А. Высказывание как предмет лингвистики, психолингвистики и теории коммуникации // Синтаксис текста. М.: Наука, 1979. С. 18-36. [Leont'ev, Aleksey A. 1979. Vyskazyvanie kak predmet lingvistiki, psikholingvistiki i teorii kommunikatsii (Statement as a subject of linguistics, psycholinguistics and communication theory), 18-36. Moscow: Nauka (In Russ.)].
  7. Леонтьев А.Н. Общее понятие деятельности // Хрестоматия по психологии. М.: Просвещение, 1977. С. 206-214. [Leont'ev, Aleksey N. 1977. Obshchee ponyatie deyatel'nosti (General concept of activity), 206-214. Moscow: Prosveshchenie (In Russ.)].
  8. Най Дж.С. Гибкая власть. Как добиться успеха в мировой политике. Пер. с англ. М.: ФСПИ Тренды, 2006. 221 с. [Nye, Joseph Samuel. 2006. Gibkaya vlast'. Kak dobit'sya uspekha v mirovoi politike (Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics). Moscow: FSPI Trendy (In Russ.)].
  9. Новоселова О.В. Коммуникативная толерантность vs коммуникативная справедливость высказываний различной прагматической направленности [Электронный ресурс] // Мир лингвистики и коммуникации: электронный научный журнал. 2017. № 2. С. 125-147. URL: http://tverlingua.ru (дата обращения: 15.01.2020). [Novoselova, Olga V. 2017. Communicative tolerance vs communicative fairness of different pragmatic orientation statements. World of linguistics and communication: electronic scientific journal 1. 125-147. (In Russ.)].
  10. Новоселова О.В. Менасивные высказывания в коммуникативно справедливом пространстве диалога // Русский язык и литература в мультикультурном пространстве: материалы Всероссийской научно-практической конференции. Ч. 2. Комсомольск-наАмуре: АмГПГУ, 2017а. С. 67-73. [Novoselova, Olga V. 2017a. Menasivnye vyskazyvaniya v kommunikativno spravedlivom prostranstve dialoga (Menasive statements in communicative fair space of dialogue). Materialy Vserossiiskoi nauchnoprakticheskoi konferentsii, 67-73. Komsomolsk-on-Amur: AmGPGU (In Russ.)]
  11. Новоселова О.В. Средства языковой репрезентации менасивов в программном дискурсе кандидатов на пост Президента РФ в 2018 году // Инновационные подходы к развитию науки и производства регионов: сборник научных трудов по материалам Национальной научно-практической конференции. Тверь: ТГСХА, 2019. С. 391-394. [Novoselova, Olga V. 2019. Sredstva yazykovoi reprezentatsii menasivov v programmnom diskurse kandidatov na post Prezidenta RF v 2018 godu (Means of language representation of menasives in the program discourse of presidential candidates in the Russian Federation in 2018). Sbornik nauchnykh trudov po materialam Natsional'noi nauchno-prakticheskoi konferentsii, 391-394. Tver: TGSKhA, (In Russ.)]
  12. Романов А.А. Системный анализ регулятивных средств диалогического общения. М.: Институт языкознания АН СССР, 1988. 183 с. [Romanov, Aleksey A. 1988. Sistemnyi analiz regulyativnykh sredstv dialogicheskogo obshcheniya (System analysis of regulatory means of dialogic communication). Moscow: Institut yazykoznaniya AN SSSR (In Russ.)].
  13. Романов А.А. Политическая лингвистика: Функциональный подход. Москва-Тверь: Институт языкознания РАН, 2002. 191 с. [Romanov, Aleksey A. 2002. Politicheskaya lingvistika: Funktsional'nyi podkhod (Political Linguistics: A Functional Approach). Moscow-Tver: Institut yazykoznaniya RAN (In Russ.)]
  14. Романов А.А. Лингвопрагматическая модель речевого управления диалогом: системный анализ с примерами из русского и немецкого языков. М.: URSS (ЛЕНАНД), 2020. 264 с. [Romanov, Aleksey A. 2020. Lingvopragmaticheskaya model' rechevogo upravleniya dialogom: sistemnyi analiz s primerami iz russkogo i nemetskogo yazykov (Linguopragmatic model of speech dialogue: system analysis with examples from Russian and German). Moscow: URSS (In Russ.)]
  15. Романов А.А., Новоселова О.В. Дискурс угрозы в социальной интеракции (функционально-семантический анализ). Москва-Тверь: Институт языкознания РАН, Тверская ГСХА, 2013. 168 с. [Romanov, Aleksey A. & Olga V. Novoselova. 2013. Diskurs ugrozy v sotsial'noi interaktsii (funktsional'no-semanticheskii analiz) (Threat discourse in social interaction (functional-semantic analysis)). Moscow-Tver: Institut yazykoznaniya RAN, Tverskaya GSKhA (In Russ.)]
  16. Романов А.А., Новоселова О.В. Топономия психологического пространства вербальных практик-угроз // Вестник Тверского Государственного Университета. Серия: Педагогика и психология. 2013а. № 2. С. 20-32. [Romanov, Aleksey A. & Olga V. Novoselova. 2013a. Toponomy of the psychological space of verbal threat practices. Vestnik Tverskogo Gosudarstvennogo Universiteta. Seriya: Pedagogika i psikhologiya 2. 20-32. (In Russ.)]
  17. Романов А.А. Новоселова О.В. Предвыборные менасивы как особый прагматический тип высказываний со значением угрозы // Вестн. Сев. (Арктич.) федер. ун-та. Сер.: Гуманит. и соц. науки. 2020. № 1. С. 44-52. doi: 10.17238/issn2227-6564.2020.1.44. [Romanov, Aleksey A. & Olga V. Novoselova. 2020. Predvybornye menasivy kak osobyi pragmaticheskii tip vyskazyvanii so znacheniem ugrozy (Pre-Election Threats as a Special Pragmatic Type of Statements). Vestnik Severnogo (Arkticheskogo) federal’nogo universiteta. Ser.: Gumanitarnye i sotsial’nye nauki 1. 44-52. doi: 10.17238/issn22276564.2020.1.44. (In Russ.)]
  18. Романов А.А., Ульянич Г.А. Мелолийный дискурс как информационный медиум в системе публичных коммуникаций. Москва-Тверь: ИЯ РАН; ТИПЛ и МК, Тверская ГСХА, 2014. 163 с. [Romanov, Aleksey A. & Gennadiy A. Ul'yanich. 2014. Meloliinyi diskurs kak informatsionnyi medium v sisteme publichnykh kommunikatsii (Meloline discourse as an information medium in the system of public communications.). MoscowTver: Institut yazykoznaniya RAN, Tverskaya GSKhA (In Russ.)]
  19. Романов А.А., Романова Е.Г., Воеводкин Н.Ю. Имя собственное в политике. М.: Лилия ЛТД, 2000. 112 с. [Romanov, Aleksey A., Elena G. Romanova & Nikolay Yu. Voevodkin. 2000. Imya sobstvennoe v politike (The proper name in politics). Moscow: Liliya LTD (In Russ.)]
  20. Black, Peter. 1993. Soft Kill: Fighting Infrastructure Wars in the 21st Century. Wired, JulyAugust. 49-50
  21. Khanna, Parag. 2016. Connectography. Mapping the future of global civilization. New York: Penguin Random House LLC
  22. Leonard, Mark. 2016. Introduction: connectivity wars. In Mark Leonard (eds.), Connectivity wars. Why migration, finance and trade are the geo-economic battlegrounds of the future. 13-27. London: European Council on Foreign Relations
  23. Mattern, Janice Bially. 2005. Why Soft Power Is Not So Soft: Representational Force and the Sociolinguistic Construction of attraction in World Politics. Millennium: Journal of International Studies 33 (3). 583-612
  24. Rehbein, Jochen. 1977. Komplexes Handeln: Elemente zur Handlungstheorie der Sprache. Stuttgart: Metzler
  25. Schlenker, Barry R. 2003. Self-presentation. In Mark R. Leary (eds.), Handbook of Self and Identity. 488-518
  26. Schlenker, Barry R. & Michael F. Weigold. 1990. Self-consciousness and self-presentation: Being autonomous versus appearing autonomous. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 59, 820-828
  27. Vosoughi, Soroush, Deb Roy & Sinan Aral. 2018. The Spread of True and False News Online. Science 359 (6380). 1146-1151
  28. Основное содержание послания Президента РФ Владимира Путина Федеральному Собранию [Электронный ресурс] // Российская газета, 2018. URL: https: rg.ru.poslanie.pdf (дата обращения: 10.03.18)
  29. Предвыборная программа Всероссийской политической партии «Партия роста» на выборах Президента Российской Федерации [Электронный ресурс]. URL: http://vibory-rf.ru/kandidaty-2018/boris-titov (дата обращения: 10.03.18)
  30. Мощный рывок вперед! Программа В.В. Жириновского «100 пунктов» [Электронный ресурс]. URL: https://ldpr.ru/leader/Powerful_leap_forward_ 2018, (дата обращения: 10.03.18)
  31. Дорога в будущее. Основные направления президентской программы Григория Алексеевича Явлинского [Электронный ресурс]. URL: https://2018.yavlinsky.ru/programm (дата обращения: 10.03.18)
  32. Предвыборная программа кандидата Бабурина Сергея [Электронный ресурс]. URL: http://baburin2018.ru/programma (дата обращения: 10.03.18)
  33. Платформа Ксении Собчак. 123 Трудных шага [Электронный ресурс]. URL: https://sobchakprotivvseh.ru/steps123 (дата обращения: 10.03.18)
  34. Программа товарища Максима Сурайкина [Электронный ресурс]. URL: http://komros.info/programma-tovarischa-maksima-suraykina (дата обращения: 10.03.18)
  35. шагов Павла Грудинина. Кандидат в президенты России обращается к каждому [Электронный ресурс]. URL: http://grudininkprf.ru/programma (дата обращения: 10.03.18)
  36. Результаты выборов президента России 2018 [Электронный ресурс]. URL: http://vibory-rf.ru/rezultaty-vyborov-prezidenta-rossii-2018 (дата обращения: 1.05.18)

Copyright (c) 2020 Romanov A.A., Novoselova O.V.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies