Kuzbass through Anthropomorphic Metaphors (Case Study of Institutional Administrative Discourse of Ministries in the Region)

 The present research featured the image of Kuzbass and its metaphorization in the institutional administrative discourse of official websites of seventeen regional ministries (2018–2021). Anthropomorphic metaphors appeared
to dominate: the research revealed 137 anthropomorphic metaphors, which  represented Kuzbass, as well as its governing bodies. The anthropomorphic metaphor was considered from a holistic viewpoint, which covered its psychophysiological, socio-cultural, and socio-economic aspects. The study relied on standard methods of synthesis and analysis, as well as linguistic methods of contextual and stylistic analyses, while the lexeme Kuzbass was described based on some elements of content analysis. The obtained results can help the regional authorities to monitor the difference between the targeted image of Kuzbass and the real situation. The anthropomorphic image of the region demonstrated such psycho-physiological characteristics of a person as mental abilities, will, feelings, a desire for improvement, the ability to plan, etc. In the socio-cultural aspect, Kuzbass was metaphorically presented as a hospitable and cheerful person who has a family, keeps traditions, and loves holidays. In the socio-economic sense, Kuzbass was personified as a reliable business partner who thinks about their own well-being and the well-being of the country. 

1. Barsegyan V. M. Administrative discourse: structure, volume, production practices and legitimization of texts. Zhurnal sotsiologii i sotsialnoy antropologii, 2018, 21(1): 107–135. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.31119/jssa.2018.21.1.5

2. Evtushenko O. A. Administrative discourse: institutional characteristics. Izvestija Volgogr. gos. ped. un-ta, 2011, (5): 11–14. (In Russ.)

3. Karasik V. I. Institutional discourse. Linguistic personality: current problems of linguistics: Proc. Sci. Conf., Volgograd, 6–8 Feb 1996. Volgograd: Peremena, 1996, 21–24. (In Russ.)

4. Karasik V. I. On the types of discourse. Linguistic personality: institutional and personal discourse, eds. Karasik V. I., Slyshkin G. G. Volgograd: Peremena, 2000, 5–20. (In Russ.)

5. Oleshkov M. Yu. Institutional discourse in the categorical aspect. Current Issues in Philology and Pedagogical Linguistics, 2011, (13): 150–155. (In Russ.)

6. Panova M. N. Relevant issues and directions of research of modern administrative discourse. Political discourse in Russia: X All-Russian seminar, Moscow, 20 Apr 2007. Moscow: Gos. IRIa im. A. S. Pushkina, 2007, 152–169. (In Russ.)

7. Pisanaya T. O. Institutional discourse: general characteristics and main functions. Inostrannye iazyki: lingvisticheskie i metodicheskie aspekty, 2014, (27): 117–121. (In Russ.)

8. Romanova T. V. Institutional political discourse: linguistic analysis. The Russian language in the multicultural world: Proc. IV Intern. Symposium, Simferopol, 9–11 Jun 2020. Simferopol: KFU im. V. I. Vernadskogo, 2020, vol. 1, 263–270. (In Russ.)

9. Sopova I. V. Institutional discourse as a component of culture. Perevod i sopostavitelnaia lingvistika, 2016, (12): 54–58. (In Russ.)

10. Popova T. P. Characteristics of institutional discourse. Historical and Socio-Educational Idea, 2015, 7(6-2): 295–300. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17748/2075-9908-2015-7-6/2-295-300

11. Beilinson L. S. Institutional discourse functions. Vestnik Irkutskogo gosudarstvennogo lingvisticheskogo universiteta, 2009, (3): 142–147. (In Russ.)

12. Bern A. A. Modality and politeness of initial requests in oral administrative discourse. Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Series 9. Philology. Oriental studies. Journalism, 2012, (2): 107–117. (In Russ.)

13. Gatina Ju. A., Kharkovskaya A. A. Administrative greetings on the websites of British schools: an experience of discourse analysis. Nauka i kultura Rossii, 2014, 1: 259–261. (In Russ.)

14. Evtushenko O. A. Implementation of the executive function in the administrative discourse. Vestnik Surgutskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta, 2014, (5): 121–127. (In Russ.)

15. Yankina E. V. Dialogic communication between administrative managers and employees as an object of linguistic research. Vestnik TvGU. Seriia: "Filologiia", 2021, (2): 175–183. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.26456/vtfilol/2021.2.175

16. Kostomarov P. I. Anthropocentrism as an important feature of modern linguistics. Vestnik Kemerovskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta, 2014, (2-1): 198–203. (In Russ.)

17. Piskareva A. V. Anthropomorphic metaphor in linguistic terminology in Russian, German, and English. Germanistics 2019 nove et nova: Proc. Second Intern. Sci.-Prac. Conf., Moscow, 10–12 Apr 2019. Moscow: MGLU, 2019, 293–296. (In Russ.)

18. Nasrullaeva G. Linguistic properties and types of anthropocentric metaphor. Academy, 2020, (3): 46–47. (In Russ.)

19. Stemburis I. M. The role of anthropomorphic metaphor in the formation of the image of Europe. Congress of Masters – 2018: Proc. Intern. Sci.-Prac. Integrated Conf., Lipetsk, 26–27 Oct 2018. Lipetsk: LGPU im. P. P. Semenova-Tian-Shanskogo, 2018, 10–13. (In Russ.)

20. Litovchenko A. S., Koptyakova E. E. Anthropomorphic metaphor in the conceptualization of Russia in the economic platform of the political party "United Russia". Modern Science: actual problems of theory and practice. Series: Humanities, 2019, (7-2): 72–74. (In Russ.)

21. Morozova A. S. Anthropomorphic metaphor as means of creating the image of Russia in English media. EURASIASCIENCE: Proc. XXXVIII Intern. Sci.-Prac. Conf., Moscow, 30 Jun 2021. Moscow: Aktualnost.RF, 2021, 139–140. (In Russ.)

22. Ponomareva V. S., Kurbanov I. A. Anthropomorphic and artifact metaphors in creating the Crimea's image in the media. Modern Science: actual problems of theory and practice. Series: Humanities, 2019, (7): 154–158. (In Russ.)

23. Burmakova E. A., Marugina N. I. Anthropomorphic metaphor in literary discourse (on autobiographical stories by V. M. Shukshin). Nauchnyi dialog, 2015, (3): 29–45. (In Russ.)

24. Maksimova Yu. A., Milutina M. G. Political metaphoric system of L. D. Trotsky (through anthropomorphous metaphors). Vestnik Udmurtskogo universiteta. Seriya Istoriya i filologiya, 2013, (2): 134–138. (In Russ.)

25. Babkina V. A. Physiological metaphor as means of creating the image of modern Russia in German media. Nauchnyi dialog, 2017, (3): 9–18. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.24224/2227-1295-2017-3-9-18

26. Bashkatova Yu. A. Body metaphor in English and Russian linguacultures. Vestnik Kemerovskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta, 2013, (2-2): 24–27. (In Russ.)

27. Sosnin A. V. The organism metaphor as a key one in the formation of the London text of the English language and literature. Vestnik NSU. Series: Linguistics and Intercultural Communication, 2018, 16(2): 101–112. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.25205/1818-7935-2018-16-2-101-112

28. Chudinov A. P. Russia in the metaphorical mirror: A cognitive study of political metaphors (1991–2000). Ekaterinburg: UrGPU, 2001, 238. (In Russ.)

29. Chudinov A. P. Essays on modern political metaphorology. Ekaterinburg: UrGPU, 2013, 176. (In Russ.)