THE BASIS OF THE POLITICALLY CORRECT MODERN POLITICAL DISCOURSE IN THE FRENCH LANGUAGE
https://doi.org/10.21603/2078-8975-2017-3-180-186
Abstract
The object of the investigation is modern political discourse. The research is focused on the sociological, cultural, epistemological and linguistic bases of formation of political correctness in the modern political discourse. It is proved that the sociological base of the formation of political correctness in the political discourse is determined by the process of social development. The basis of political correctness formation is represented by the opposition "us / them" in political discourse. The most important role in the political discourse is played by an epistemological, cognitive opposition "true / false", where the truth is an adequate reflection of the objective reality of the knower, and the lie is a deliberate substitution of the truth by a misconception. The linguistic bases of formation of political correctness are based on the interpretation of the bilateral nature of the linguistic sign that performs a crucial function of designation. The asymmetric duality of the linguistic sign, as well as the arbitrary nature of the relationship of the signified and the signifier allows the ideologists of political correctness to create different names for one and the same extra-linguistic content, or denotation, that is socially unacceptable, for some reason.
About the Authors
Tamara P. Karpukhina
Pacific National State University, Pedagogical Institute.
Russian Federation
68, Karl Marx St., Khabarovsk, 680000.
Russian Federation
68, Karl Marx St., Khabarovsk, 680000.
Natalia V. Kuznetsova
Pacific National State University, Pedagogical Institute.
Russian Federation
68, Karl Marx St., Khabarovsk, 680000.
Russian Federation
68, Karl Marx St., Khabarovsk, 680000.
References
1. Kuznetsova N. V. Fenomen politkorrektnosti v sovremennom politicheskom diskurse. Avtoref. diss. cand. filol. nauk [The phenomenon of political correctness in contemporary political discourse. Cand. philol. Sci. Diss. Abstr.]. Ulan-Ude, 2017, 23.
2. Sheigal E. I. Semiotika politicheskogo diskursa. Avtoref. diss. doctora filol. nauk [The semiotics of political discourse. Dr. philol. Sci. Diss. Abstr.]. Volgograd, 2000, 326.
3. Dem'iankov V. Z. Tekst i diskurs kak terminy i kak slova obydennogo iazyka [Text and discourse as terms and as words of everyday language]. Iazyk. Lichnost'. Tekst [Language. Personality. Text]. Moscow: Iazyki slavianskikh kul'tur, 2005, 34–55.
4. Fuko M. Volia k istine: po tu storonu znaniia, vlasti i seksual'nosti [The will to truth: beyond knowledge, power and sexuality]. Moscow: Kastal', 1996, 48.
5. Bayley P. Live Oratory in the Television Age: The Language of Formal Speeches. Campaign Language: Language, Image, Myth in the U.S. Presidential Elections 1984. Bologna: Cooperativa Libraria Universitaria Editrice Bologna, 1985, 77–174.
6. Kashchei N. A. Sovremennaia ritorika v sotsial'no-politicheskom vzaimodeistvii. Avtoref. diss. doctora filos. nauk [Modern rhetoric in socio-political interaction. Dr. philos. Sci. Diss. Abstr.]. Velikii Novgorod, 2005, 275.
7. Bazhalkina N. S. Rol' aforistiki v politicheskom diskurse [The role of aphorism in political discourse]. Vestnik Moskovskogo gosudarstvennogo oblastnogo universiteta = Bulletin of the Moscow State Regional University, no. 3 (2009): 63–66.
8. Iurkovskaia E. A. Manipuliatsii v diskurse redaktorskoi stat'i: kosvennaia direktivnost' [Manipulations in the discourse of the editorial article: indirect directives]. Argumentatsiia vs. Manipuliatsiia [Argument vs. Manipulation]. Irkutsk: IGLU. 2009, 144–156.
9. Ter-Minasova S. G. Iazyk i mezhkul'turnaia kommunikatsiia [Language and intercultural communication]. Moscow: Slovo, 2000, 264.
10. Maiba V. V. Retseptsiia politkorrektnosti v russkoi lingvokul'ture [Reception of political correctness in Russian lingvoculture]. Evraziiskaia lingvokul'turnaia paradigma i protsessy globalizatsii: istoriia i sovremennost': tr. 2-I mezhdunar. nauch. konf. [Eurasian linguocultural paradigm and the processes of globalization: history and modernity: Proc. 2th Int. Sc.Prac. Conf.]. Piatigorsk: PGLU, 2011, 202–207.
11. Holder R. W. How not to Say What you Mean. A Dictionary of Euphemisms. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 2003, 501.
12. RHWD – Random House Webster's Dictionary – Random House, Inc, 1993, 792.
13. Larousse. Dictionnaire français en ligne, 2013. Available at: http://www.larousse.fr/dictionnaires/francaismonolingue (accessed 04.09.2013).
14. Komlev N. G. Slovar' inostrannykh slov [Dictionary of foreign words]. Moscow: Eksmo, 2006, 672.
15. Filosofskii entsiklopedicheskii slovar' [Philosophical encyclopedic dictionary]. Moscow: Infra–M, 2001, 576.
16. Absalon J. L'islam peut-il s’accommoder de la laïcité? Ma réponse est oui. RTL. 08.09.2016. Available at: http://www.rtl.fr/actu/politique/francois-hollande-l-islam-peut-il-s-accommoder-de-la-laicite-ma-reponse-est-oui7784780766 (accessed 21.09.2016).
17. Issers O. S. Kommunikativnye strategii i taktiki russkoi rechi [Communicative strategies and tactics of Russian speech]. Moscow: KomKniga, 2006, 288.
18. Deik van T. A. Iazyk. Poznanie. Kommunikatsiia [Language. Cognition. Communication]. Moscow: Progress, 1989, 412.
19. Deik van T. A. Diskurs i vlast': Reprezentatsiia dominirovaniia v iazyke i kommunikatsii [Discourse and Power: Representation of Domination in Language and Communication]. Moscow: LIBROKOM, 2013, 344.
20. Berra N. Le jour où il y aura autant de minarets que de cathédrales en France, ça ne sera plus la France. LePoste. 22.12.2009. Available at: http://archives-lepost.huffingtonpost.fr/article/2009/12/22/1853694_qui-a-dit-le-jour-ou-il-y-auraautant-de-minarets-que-de-cathedrales-en-france-ca-ne-sera-plus-la-france.html (accessed 11.01.2017).
21. Robert-Diard P. Immigration incontrôlée: tollé après une phrase de Guéant. Le Monde. 18.03.2011. Available at: http://www.lemonde.fr/politique/article/2011/03/17/immigration-incontrolee-tolle-apres-une-phrase-degueant_1494904_823448.html (accessed 11.01.2017).
22. Lotman Iu. M. Karamzin. «Sotvorenie Karamzina». Zametki i retsenzii [The creation of Karamzin. Notes and reviews]. Saint-Petersburg: Iskusstvo-SPb, 1997, 832.
23. Kratkii filosofskii slovar' [Brief philosophical dictionary]. Ed. A. P. Alekseeva. Moscow: Prospekt, 2000, 400.
24. Pirs Ch. S. Izbrannye filosofskie proizvedeniia [Selected philosophical works]. Moscow: Logos, 2000, 448.
25. Lellouche P. La France n'a pas vocation à accueillir 9 millions de Roms. Le Parisien. 05 août 2010. Available at: http://www.leparisien.fr/faits-divers/la-france-n-a-pas-vocation-a-accueillir-9-millions-de-roms-05-08-2010-1022431.php (accessed 21.09.2016).
26. Kolosov S. A. Manipuliativnye strategii diskursa nenavisti [Manipulative strategies of the discourse of hatred]. Kritika i semiotika = Criticism and semiotics, no. 7 (2004): 248–256.
27. Sossiur F. de. Trudy po iazykoznaniiu [Works on linguistics by Saussure F. de]. Moscow: Progress, 1977, 695.
28. Solov'ev V. S. Sochineniia [Compositions]. Moscow: Mysl', 1988, 892.
29. Derrida Zh. O grammatologii [About Grammatology]. Moscow: Ad Marginem, 2000, 540.
30. Kartsevskii S. O. Ob asimmetrichnom dualizme lingvisticheskogo znaka [On the asymmetric dualism of a linguistic sign]. Zvegintsev V. A. Istoriia iazykoznaniia XIX–XX vekov v ocherkakh i izvlecheniiakh [The history of linguistics of the XIX-XX centuries in essays and extracts]. 3rd ed. Moscow: Prosveshchenie, Part 2 (1965): 85–93.
31. Moréas G. Le fusil à pompe dans la police: une longue histoire. Le Monde. 09.12.2011. Available at: http://moreas.blog.lemonde.fr/2011/12/09/le-fusil-a-pompe-dans-la-police-une-longue-histoire/ (accessed 23.09.2016).
Review
For citations:
Karpukhina T.P., Kuznetsova N.V. THE BASIS OF THE POLITICALLY CORRECT MODERN POLITICAL DISCOURSE IN THE FRENCH LANGUAGE. The Bulletin of Kemerovo State University. 2017;(3):180-186. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.21603/2078-8975-2017-3-180-186
Views:
742
Email this article 