Russian Journal of LinguisticsRussian Journal of LinguisticsRussian Journal of Linguistics2687-00882686-8024Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia named after Patrice Lumumba (RUDN University)4782510.22363/2687-0088-46296KLXYHQRESEARCH ARTICLESНАУЧНЫЕ СТАТЬИResearch ArticleFormulaicity and pragmatics of contact-terminating means in cinematic vs. artistic discourse: A corpus studyФормульность и прагматика средств прекращения контакта в кинодискурсе vs. художественном дискурсе: корпусный подходhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-0430-7769ZykovaIrina V.ЗыковаИрина Владимировна

Doctor Habil. of Philology and a leading researcher at the Yuri Stepanov Department of Theory and Practice of Communication

доктор филологических наук, ведущий научный сотрудник отдела теории и практики коммуникации имени Ю.С. Степанова

irina_zykova@iling-ran.ruInstitute of Linguistics of the Russian Academy of SciencesИнститут языкознания Российской академии наук29122025294Pragmalinguistics: Сorpora and Discourse StudiesPragmalinguistics: Сorpora and Discourse Studies86288529122025Copyright ©; 2025, Zykova I.V.Copyright ©; 2025, Зыкова И.В.Copyright ©; 2025, Zykova I.2025Zykova I.V.Зыкова И.В.Zykova I.https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0https://journals.rudn.ru/linguistics/article/view/47825

In measuring “pragmatic authenticity” of cinematic discourse, researchers traditionally compare films of different genres with real-life talks. However, a recently growing tendency towards the colloquialization of the written language of literature (when it is becoming more speech-like) makes it relevant to compare cinematic discourse with other types of artistic discourse from a pragmatic point of view. Among various pragmatically relevant linguistic units, formulas are of special interest due to their colloquial character, recurrence and frequency in everyday conversations. The aim of the study is to identify formulaicity of contact-terminating means (CTM) in cinematic discourse and establish its pragmatic specificity in comparison with that in other types of artistic discourse. To do so, two sample corpora were used: a cinematic corpus compiled ad hoc which includes four British drama films (2000-2020) and the Written BNC2014, in which two subcorpora were applied: “Fiction” and “Written-to-be-Spoken”. The work with the first corpus (Case study-1) resulted in identifying CTM in films and establishing their relation to twelve pragmatic types (‘farewell’, ‘request’, ‘apology’, etc.). The CTM with the highest frequency of occurrence and distribution in the feature films are formulas of farewells. Based on the second corpus (Case study-2), the functioning of three formulas of farewells were explored in different types of artistic discourse in comparison with their use in the films. The corpus findings showed that, unlike films, in artistic discourse these formulas can have other (meta)communicative functions and are characterized by a low degree of variability. Overall, the present research makes a contribution to the development of pragmalinguistics of cinema and artistic communication by providing new data about the use of formulaic means in artistic (in particular, filmic) dialogues.

Оценивая «прагматическую аутентичность» кинодискурса, исследователи традиционно сравнивают фильмы разных жанров с реальными диалогами. Однако усиливающаяся в последнее время тенденция к коллоквиализации письменного литературного языка (когда он становится все более похожим на устную речь) делает актуальным сравнение кинодискурса с другими типами художественного дискурса с прагматической точки зрения. Среди прагматически значимых языковых единиц особый интерес представляют формулы, отличающиеся разговорным характером, рекуррентностью и частотностью использования в повседневном общении. Цель исследования - выявить формульность средств прекращения контакта (СПК) в кинодискурсе и установить ее прагматическую специфику по сравнению с другими типами художественного дискурса. В качестве источников материала выступают два корпуса: кинематографический корпус, составленный ad hoc и включающий четыре британских художественных фильма, вышедших в период с 2000 по 2020 год и корпус письменных текстов BNC2014, в рамках которого использовались два подкорпуса: «Художественная литература» и «Написано для произнесения». В ходе работы с первым корпусом (кейс 1) выявлены все используемые СПК и установлена их отнесенность к двенадцати прагматическим типам («прощание», «просьба», «извинение» и др.). Наибольшей частотностью употребления и дистрибуцией в первом корпусе обладают формулы прощания. На базе второго корпуса (кейс 2) изучена специфика функционирования трех формул прощания в разных типах художественного дискурса в сравнении с их использованием в фильмах. Обнаружено, что в отличие от фильмов в художественном дискурсе данные формулы могут иметь другие (мета)коммуникативные функции и характеризуются низкой степенью варьирования. В целом проведенное исследование вносит вклад в развитие прагмалингвистики кино и художественной коммуникации, предоставляя новые данные об использовании формульных средств в художественных (в частности, кинематографических) диалогах.

formulaic languagecontact terminationcinematic discourseartistic discoursepragmatic authenticitycorpus analysisEnglishформульностьпрекращение контактакинодискурсхудожественный дискурспрагматическая аутентичностькорпусный анализанглийский языкBaranov, Anatoly N. & Dmitry O. Dobrovolsky. 2008. Aspekty teorii frazeologii (Aspects of the Theory of Phraseology). Moscow: Znak. (In Russ.).Baranov, Anatoly N. & Grigory E. Kreidlin. 1992. The structure of dialogical text: Lexical indicators of minimal dialogues. Voprosy Yazykoznaniya 3. 84–93. (In Russ.).Biber, Douglas. 2009. A corpus-driven approach to formulaic language in English: Multiword patterns in speech and writing. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 14 (3). 275–311.Bladas, Òscar. 2012. Conversational routines, formulaic language and subjectification. Journal of Pragmatics 44 (8). 929–957. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2012.04.009Bolden, Galina. 2017. Opening up closings in Russian. In Geoffrey T. Raymond, Gene H. Lerner, John Heritage (eds.), Enabling human conduct: Studies of talk-in interaction. In honour of Emanuel A. Schegloff, 231–271. Amsterdam: John Benjiamins.Brezina, Vaclav, Abi Hawtin & Tony McEnery. 2021. The Written British National Corpus 2014 – design and comparability. Text & Talk 41(5–6). 595–615.Buerki, Andreas. 2020. (How) is formulaic language universal? Insights from Korean, German and English. In Elisabeth Piirainen, Natalia Filatkina, Sören Stumpf & Christian Pfeiffer (eds.), Formulaic language and new data: Theoretical and methodological implications, 103–134. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter, https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110669824-005Dąbrowska, Ewa. 2014. Recycling utterances: A speaker’s guide to sentence processing. Cognitive Linguistics 25 (4). 617–653.Freddi, Maria. 2011. A phraseological approach to film dialogue: Film stylistics revisited. Yearbook of Phraseology 2. 137–162.Gibbs, Raymond W. 2020. Our metaphorical experiences of Film. In Sarah Greifenstein, Dorothea Horst, Thomas Scherer, Christina Schmitt, Hermann Kapelhoff & Cornelia Müller (eds.), Cinematic metaphor in perspective: Reflections on a transdisciplinary framework, Vol. 5, 120–140. Berlin/Boston, Walter de Gruyter GmbH.Gorodnikova, Margarita D. & Dmitry O. Dobrovolskij. 1998. Nemetsko-russkii slovar' rechevogo obshcheniya (German-Russian dictionary of speech communication). 2nd ed. Moscow: Russian language. (In Russ.).Grant, Lynn & Donna Starks. 2001. Screening appropriate teaching materials. Closings from textbooks and television soap operas. International Review of Applied Linguistics 39. 39–50.Grigorieva, Valentina S. 2006. Rechevoe vzaimodeistvie v pragmalingvisticheskom aspekte na materiale nemetskogo i russkogo yazykov (Speech interaction in the pragmalinguistic aspect based on the material of German and Russian languages). Tambov: Publishing House of the Tambov State Technical University. (In Russ.).House, Juliane & Dániel Z. Kádár. 2024. An interactional approach to speech acts for applied linguistics. Applied Linguistics Review15 (4). 1695–1715.House, Juliane. 2006. Communicative styles in English and German. European Journal of English Studies 10 (3). 249–267.Janney, Richard. 2012. Pragmatics and cinematic discourse. Lodz Papers in Pragmatics 8 (1). 85–113.Larina, Tatiana V. 2025. Emotive politeness and communicative styles: Leave-taking in British and Russian interpersonal interaction. In Laura Alba-Juez & Michael Haugh (eds.), The Sociopragmatics of Emotion, 171–193. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Larina, Tatiana V. 2009. Kategoriya vezhlivosti i stil' kommunikatsii: Sopostavlenie angliiskikh i russkikh lingvokul'turnykh traditsii (The Category of Politeness and the Style of Communication: A Comparison of English and Russian Linguacultural Traditions). Moscow: Yazyki slavyanskikh kul'tur. (In Russ.)McKeown, Jamie & Qilin Zhang. 2015. Socio-pragmatic influence on opening salutation and closing valediction of British workplace email. Journal of Pragmatics 85. 92–107.Namba, Kazuhiko. 2010. Formulaicity in code-switching: Criteria for identifying formulaic sequences. In David Wood (ed.), Perspectives on formulaic language: Acquisition and communication, 129–150. London: Continuum.Napoli, Vittorio & Vittorio Tantucci. 2022. Pragmalinguistic and sociopragmatic patterns of requestive acts in English and Italian: Insights from film conversation. Journal of Pragmatics 202. 48–62.Paltridge, Brian. 2022. Discourse Analysis: An Introduction. 3rd ed. London: Bloomsbury Academic.Pavesi, Maria & Maicol Formentelli. 2023. The pragmatic dimensions of swearing in films: Searching for coherence in dubbing strategies. Journal of Pragmatic 217. 126–139.Pillet-Shore, Danielle. 2024. ‘Routines’ and ‘formulaic language’ in conversation analysis (a longer version showing additional data of Chapter 10). In Matthew Burdelski & Timothy Greer (eds.), The Routledge handbook of conversation analysis. URL: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/385470140_'Routines'_and_'Formulaic_ Language'_in_Conversation_AnalysisQuaglio, Paulo. 2009. Television Dialogue: The Sitcom Friends vs. Natural Conversation. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins.Rakhilina, Ekaterina V. & Valentina A. Zhukova, Daria A. Demidova, Polina S. Kudryavtseva, Gloria P. Rozovskaya, Anna A. Endresen, Laura A. Janda. 2022. Frazeologiya v rakurse «Russkogo konstruktikona» (Phraseology in the perspective of the “Russian constructicon”). Proceedings of the V.V. Vinogradov Russian Language Institute 2. 13–45. (In Russ.).Ryan, Jonathon & Scott Granville. 2020. The suitability of film for modelling the pragmatics of interaction: Exploring authenticity. System 89. https://doi/org/10.1016/j.system. 2019.102186Sokolova, Olga V. & Vladimir V. Feshchenko. 2024. Pragmatic markers in contemporary poetry: A corpus-based discourse analysis. Russian Journal of Linguistics 25 (1). 250–277. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.22363/2687-0088-40107Tannen, Deborah. 2007. Talking Voices: Repetition, Dialogue, and Imagery in Conversational Discourse. 2-nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 240 p.Taylor, Christopher. 2004. The language of film: Corpora and statistics in the search for authenticity. NOTTING HILL (1998) – a case study. Miscelanea 30. 71–85.Taylor, Christopher. 2006. “I knew he’d say that!” A consideration of the predictability of language use in film. MuTra 2006 – Audiovisual Translation Scenarios: Conference Proceedings, 1–11.Tuncer, Sylvaine. 2015. Walking away: An embodied resource to close informal encounters in offices. Journal of pragmatics 76. 101–116.Van Lancker-Sidtis, Diana & Gail Rallon. 2004. Tracking the incidence of formulaic expressions in everyday speech: Methods for classification and verification. Language and Communication 24 (3). 207–240.Wood, David. 2015. Fundamentals of Formulaic Language: An Introduction. London: Bloomsbury.Zykova, Irina V. 2023. Linguistic creativity and multimodal tropes in cinematic discourse. Russian Journal of Linguistics 27 (2). 334–362. https://doi.org/10.22363/2687-0088-33206Burnard, Lou. 2000. Reference guide for the British National Corpus (World Edition). Available at: http://www.natcorp.ox.ac.uk/archive/worldURG/urg.pdf.Online Etymology Dictionary (OEtD). 2025. Available at: https://www.etymonline.com/