<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE root>
<article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:ali="http://www.niso.org/schemas/ali/1.0/" article-type="research-article" dtd-version="1.2" xml:lang="en"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">RUDN Journal of Language Studies, Semiotics and Semantics</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title xml:lang="en">RUDN Journal of Language Studies, Semiotics and Semantics</journal-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="ru"><trans-title>Вестник Российского университета дружбы народов. Серия: Теория языка. Семиотика. Семантика</trans-title></trans-title-group></journal-title-group><issn publication-format="print">2313-2299</issn><issn publication-format="electronic">2411-1236</issn><publisher><publisher-name xml:lang="en">Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia named after Patrice Lumumba (RUDN University)</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">43619</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.22363/2313-2299-2024-15-4-1232-1244</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="edn">TORFNH</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="toc-heading" xml:lang="en"><subject>DISCURSIVE STUDIES</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="toc-heading" xml:lang="ru"><subject>ДИСКУРСИВНЫЕ ИССЛЕДОВАНИЯ</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="article-type"><subject>Research Article</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title xml:lang="en">Implementation of Positive and Negative Politeness Strategies in Kazakh and Russian Family Discourse Talk Show</article-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="ru"><trans-title>Реализация стратегий позитивной и негативной вежливости в казахском и русском семейном дискурсе ток-шоу</trans-title></trans-title-group></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author"><contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4346-983X</contrib-id><name-alternatives><name xml:lang="en"><surname>Yergazy</surname><given-names>Nazerke</given-names></name><name xml:lang="ru"><surname>Ергазы</surname><given-names>Назерке</given-names></name></name-alternatives><bio xml:lang="en"><p>PhD student, the General and Russian Linguistics Department, Faculty of Philology</p></bio><bio xml:lang="ru"><p>аспирант кафедры общего и русского языкознания филологического факультета</p></bio><email>naz_erke9898@inbox.ru</email><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"/></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0222-5460</contrib-id><contrib-id contrib-id-type="researcherid">D-7770-2019</contrib-id><contrib-id contrib-id-type="spin">9567-3407</contrib-id><name-alternatives><name xml:lang="en"><surname>Denisenko</surname><given-names>Anastasia V.</given-names></name><name xml:lang="ru"><surname>Денисенко</surname><given-names>Анастасия Владимировна</given-names></name></name-alternatives><bio xml:lang="en"><p>PhD in Philology, Associate Professor of the Russian language department № 4 of Russian Language Institute</p></bio><bio xml:lang="ru"><p>кандидат филологических наук, доцент кафедры русского языка № 4 Института русского языка</p></bio><email>denisenko_av@pfur.ru</email><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"/></contrib></contrib-group><aff-alternatives id="aff1"><aff><institution xml:lang="en">RUDN University</institution></aff><aff><institution xml:lang="ru">Российский университет дружбы народов</institution></aff></aff-alternatives><pub-date date-type="pub" iso-8601-date="2024-12-31" publication-format="electronic"><day>31</day><month>12</month><year>2024</year></pub-date><volume>15</volume><issue>4</issue><issue-title xml:lang="en"/><issue-title xml:lang="ru"/><fpage>1232</fpage><lpage>1244</lpage><history><date date-type="received" iso-8601-date="2025-04-03"><day>03</day><month>04</month><year>2025</year></date></history><permissions><copyright-statement xml:lang="en">Copyright ©; 2024, Yergazy N., Denisenko A.V.</copyright-statement><copyright-statement xml:lang="ru">Copyright ©; 2024, Ергазы Н., Денисенко А.В.</copyright-statement><copyright-year>2024</copyright-year><copyright-holder xml:lang="en">Yergazy N., Denisenko A.V.</copyright-holder><copyright-holder xml:lang="ru">Ергазы Н., Денисенко А.В.</copyright-holder><ali:free_to_read xmlns:ali="http://www.niso.org/schemas/ali/1.0/"/><license><ali:license_ref xmlns:ali="http://www.niso.org/schemas/ali/1.0/">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0</ali:license_ref></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://journals.rudn.ru/semiotics-semantics/article/view/43619">https://journals.rudn.ru/semiotics-semantics/article/view/43619</self-uri><abstract xml:lang="en"><p>The research material was talk-shows presented on the YouTube platform. The study is aimed at identifying the characteristics of the use of polite strategies in different cultural contexts and their impact on communication within the family. Attention is paid to how participants in the discourse express respect, support and agreement (positive politeness) or seek to minimize intrusion into the personal space of the interlocutor, avoid direct conflicts and the imposition of opinions (negative politeness). The research methodology includes analysis of talk show videos, transcription of dialogues, and subsequent qualitative and quantitative study of politeness strategies used. The main techniques and tactics used by presenters and participants to achieve communicative goals are highlighted. The results show that in Kazakh family discourse the emphasis is on maintaining harmony and respect for elders, which is manifested through the frequent use of negative politeness strategies. In Russian discourse, there is a more frequent use of positive politeness strategies aimed at establishing trusting relationships and an open exchange of opinions. The article also discusses possible reasons for such differences related to cultural and social norms and their impact on communication effectiveness in the family context. The findings may be useful for linguists, cultural scientists and intercultural communication specialists, as well as for content creators targeting family audiences. The paper analyzes both positive and negative politeness strategies that are used by presenters and participants to manage interactions, reduce conflict, and maintain harmonious relationships in public. The authorы draw on Brown and Levinson’s theoretical framework of politeness to identify and describe specific politeness strategies used in discourse. The results of the study show that the choice of The study material makes talk-shows presented on the YouTube platform. It is aimed at identifying the characteristics of the use of polite strategies in different cultural contexts and their impact on communication within the family. Attention is paid to how participants of the discourse express respect, support and agreement (positive politeness) or seek to minimize intrusion into the personal space of an interlocutor, avoid direct conflicts and the imposition of opinions (negative politeness). The study methodology includes the analysis of talk show videos, transcription of dialogues, and subsequent qualitative and quantitative study of politeness strategies used. The main techniques and tactics used by presenters and participants to achieve communicative goals are highlighted. The results show that in Kazakh family discourse the emphasis is on maintaining harmony and respect for the elders, which is manifested through the frequent use of negative politeness strategies. In Russian discourse, there is a more frequent use of positive politeness strategies aimed at establishing trusting relationships and an open exchange of opinions. The article also discusses possible reasons for such differences related to cultural and social norms and their impact on communication effectiveness in the family context. The findings may be useful for linguists, cultural scientists and intercultural communication experts, as well as for content creators targeting family audiences. The paper analyzes both positive and negative politeness strategies that are used by presenters and participants to manage interactions, reduce conflict, and maintain harmonious relationships in public. The authorbi draw on Brown and Levinson’s theoretical framework of politeness to identify and describe specific politeness strategies used in discourse. The results of the study show that the choice of politeness strategy often depends on the cultural characteristics of the society in which communication takes place, and note significant differences in the use of these strategies between Kazakh and Russian talk shows. It contributes to the understanding of cross-cultural differences in the use of politeness strategies and offers recommendations for media professionals on how to effectively use these strategies to improve interpersonal communication in family talk shows.</p></abstract><trans-abstract xml:lang="ru"><p>Материалом исследования стали ток-шоу, представленные на платформе YouTube. Исследование направлено на выявление особенностей использования стратегий вежливости в разных культурных контекстах и их влияния на коммуникацию внутри семьи. Уделяется внимание тому, как участники дискурса выражают уважение, поддержку и согласие (позитивная вежливость) или стремятся минимизировать вторжение в личное пространство собеседника, избегать прямых конфликтов и навязывания своего мнения (негативная вежливость). Методология исследования включает анализ видеозаписей ток-шоу, транскрипцию диалогов и последующее качественное и количественное изучение используемых стратегий вежливости. Выделены основные приемы и тактики, используемые ведущими и участниками для достижения коммуникативных целей. Результаты показывают, что в казахском семейном дискурсе акцент делается на поддержании гармонии и уважении к старшим, что проявляется в частом использовании негативных стратегий вежливости. В русском дискурсе наблюдается более частое использование позитивных стратегий вежливости, направленных на установление доверительных отношений и открытый обмен мнениями. В статье также обсуждаются возможные причины таких различий, связанные с культурными и социальными нормами, и их влияние на эффективность коммуникации в семейном контексте. Результаты могут быть полезны лингвистам, культурологам и специалистам по межкультурной коммуникации, а также создателям контента, ориентированного на семейную аудиторию. В статье анализируются как позитивные, так и негативные стратегии вежливости, которые используются ведущими и участниками для управления взаимодействиями, снижения конфликтности и поддержания гармоничных отношений на публике. Авторы опираются на теорию вежливости Брауна и Левинсона для выявления и описания конкретных стратегий вежливости, используемых в дискурсе. Результаты исследования показывают, что выбор стратегии вежливости часто зависит от культурных особенностей общества, в котором происходит общение, и отмечают существенные различия в использовании этих стратегий между казахскими и русскими ток-шоу. Статья способствует пониманию кросс-культурных различий в использовании стратегий вежливости и предлагает рекомендации для специалистов в области СМИ о том, как эффективно использовать эти стратегии для улучшения межличностной коммуникации в семейных ток-шоу.</p></trans-abstract><kwd-group xml:lang="en"><kwd>positive politeness</kwd><kwd>negative politeness</kwd><kwd>YouTube</kwd><kwd>cultural differences</kwd><kwd>communication strategies</kwd><kwd>intercultural communication</kwd></kwd-group><kwd-group xml:lang="ru"><kwd>позитивная вежливость</kwd><kwd>негативная вежливость</kwd><kwd>YouTube</kwd><kwd>культурные различия</kwd><kwd>стратегии общения</kwd><kwd>межкультурная коммуникация</kwd></kwd-group><funding-group/></article-meta></front><body></body><back><ref-list><ref id="B1"><label>1.</label><mixed-citation>Brown, P. &amp; Levinson, S. (1987). Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B2"><label>2.</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Tyurina, S.Yu. (2008). Discursive markers of politeness in business communication. Vestnik IGEU, 1, 92-95. EDN: PFJKNH (In Russ.).</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Тюрина С.Ю. Дискурсивные маркеры вежливости в деловом общении // Вестник Ивановского государственного энергетического университета. 2008. № 1. С. 92-95. EDN: PFJKNH</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="B3"><label>3.</label><mixed-citation>Lakoff, R.T. (1973). The Logic of Politeness: Or, Minding Your p’s and q’s. Proceedings from the Annual Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, 9(1), 292-305.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B4"><label>4.</label><mixed-citation>Goffman, E. (1955). On face-­work: An analysis of ritual elements of social interaction. Psychiatry, 18(3), 213-231. https://doi.org/10.1080/00332747</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B5"><label>5.</label><mixed-citation>Brown, P. &amp; Levinson, S. (2009). Modelling linguistic politeness (II): Brown and Levinson and their critics. In: Politeness, R.J. Watts (Ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 85-116.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B6"><label>6.</label><mixed-citation>Fraser, B. (2005). Wither politeness. In: Broadening the horizon of linguistic politeness, R.T. Lakoff &amp; S. Ide (Eds.). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. pp. 65-83.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B7"><label>7.</label><mixed-citation>Janney, R.W. &amp; Arndt, H. (1993). Universality and relativity in cross-­cultural politeness research: A historical perspective. Multilingua - Journal of Cross-­Cultural and Interlanguage Communication, 12(1), 13-50.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B8"><label>8.</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Formanovskaya, N.I. (1984). Ways of expressing a request in Russian (a pragmatic approach). Russian Language Abroad, 6, 67-72. EDN: JSDOUL (In Russ.).</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Формановская Н.И. Способы выражения просьбы в русском языке (прагматический подход) // Русский язык за рубежом. 1984. № 6. С. 67-72. EDN: JSDOUL</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="B9"><label>9.</label><mixed-citation>Holmes, J. (2006). Politeness strategies as linguistic variables. In: Encyclopedia of Language &amp; Linguistics, E.K. Brown (Ed.). Elsevier. pp. 684-697.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B10"><label>10.</label><mixed-citation>Leech, G. (2014). The Pragmatics of Politeness. Oxford: Oxford University Press.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B11"><label>11.</label><mixed-citation>Leech, G. &amp; Larina, T. (2014). Politeness: West and East. Russian Journal of Linguistics, 4, 9-34. EDN: TFLGPX</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B12"><label>12.</label><mixed-citation>Norrby, C. &amp; Wide, C. (2015). Introduction: Address practice as social action across cultures and contexts. In: Address Practice as Social Action: European Perspectives, Catrin Norrby &amp; Camilla Wide (eds.). Houndsmills-­Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. pp. 1-12.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B13"><label>13.</label><mixed-citation>Khalil, A.A. &amp; Larina, T.V. (2022). Terms of Endearment in American English and Syrian Arabic Family Discourse. RUDN Journal of Language Studies, Semiotics and Semantics, 13(1), 27-44. https://doi.org/10.22363/2313-2299-2022-13-1-27-44 EDN: RUITPY</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B14"><label>14.</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Van, Yue (2023). Politeness and Antipoliteness in the Communication Space of the Internet (a Study of the Online Comments). Nauchnye issledovaniya i razrabotki. Sovremennaya kommunikativistika, 12(1), 48-52. https://doi.org/10.12737/2587-9103-2023-12-1-48-52 EDN: RTIDPC (In Russ.).</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Ван Юе. Вежливость и антивежливость в коммуникативном пространстве интернета (на материале интернет-­комментариев) // Научные исследования и разработки. Современная коммуникативистика. 2023. Т. 12. № 1. С. 48-52. https://doi.org/10.12737/2587-9103-2023-12-1-48-52 EDN: RTIDPC</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="B15"><label>15.</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Karasik, V.I. (2024). Linguistic and cultural conceptualization of politeness. World of linguistics and communication: electronic scientific journal, 2, 1-15. EDN: HJVGCE (In Russ.).</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Карасик В.И. Лингвокультурное осмысление вежливости // Мир лингвистики и коммуникации: электронный научный журнал. 2024. № 2. С. 1-15. EDN: HJVGCE</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="B16"><label>16.</label><mixed-citation>Leontovich, O.A. &amp; Nikitina, A.V. (2024). Communication monitoring as a politeness mechanism. Training, Language and Culture, 8(3), 62-72. https://doi.org 10.22363/2521-442X-2024-8-3-62-72 EDN: GMYCZZ</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B17"><label>17.</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Yakubinsky, L.P. (2023). O dialogicheskoi rechi [About dialogical speech]. In: Russkaya rech’ [Russian speech]. Moscow. Iss. 1. pp. 96-194. (In Russ.).</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Якубинский Л.П. О диалогической речи // Русская речь. M.,1923. Кн. 1. С. 96-194.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="B18"><label>18.</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Vinogradov, V.V. (1972). Russkii yazyk [Russian language]. Moscow. (In Russ.).</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Виноградов В.В. Русский язык. М., 1972.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="B19"><label>19.</label><mixed-citation>Grice, H.P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In: Syntax and Semantics, P. Cole &amp; J. Morgan (eds.). Vol. 3.: Speech Arts. New York: Academic Press. pp. 41-58.</mixed-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article>
