METHODOLOGICAL PRINCIPLES OF INVESTIGATING UKRAINIAN PHRASEOLOGISMS IN MEDIA DISCOURSE

←2020. – Vol. 16

Tetiana M. Kniaz
Ph.D in Philology, Associate Professor
Kharkiv National Agrarian University named after V. V. Dokuchayev


DOI: https://doi.org/10.17721/StudLing2020.16.58-70


FULL TEXT PDF (UKRAINIAN)


ABSTRACT

The article deals with theoretical grounds of lingvo-pragmatic, functional, structural and semantic methods of research, which are used for analyzing phraseological units (PhU) of the Ukrainian language in media discourse. The verbal representation is the most powerful channel for information dissemination. That is why such important issues as the semantic and functional features of lexical, phraseological units of media discourse remain relevant. The clarification of the main methodological principles of studying the peculiarities of functioning the phraseology in the Ukrainian media discourse is the purpose of the proposed work. The object of research is the lingvo-pragmatic, structural and semantic features of phraseologisms’ functioning in the Ukrainian media discourse. Different types of structural and semantic transformations of phraseological units have been analyzed in the article. The transformed phraseologisms in media discourse demonstrate the dynamics of evaluative, ideological and cultural perception of reality. The realization of the pragmatic possibilities of “contracted” phraseological units happens due to the context or situation, the intentions of the speaker, as well as the linguistic and cultural competence of the communicator. Phraseological units play a special role in the process of communication, the pragmatic value of which lies in the ability to influence the addressee in a particular communicative situation. The phraseologisms of the Ukrainian language perform a variety of functions in the media discourse: nominative, evaluative, emotionally expressive, pragmatic, the function of characterizing the social status of social and political figures etc.

Key words: media discourse, phraseological unit (PhU), transformation, lingvo-pragmatics.


REFERENCES

1. Arnol’d, I. V. Osnovy nauchnyh issledovanij v lingvistike [=Fundamentals of scientific research in linguistics], (Moskva, 1991). (In Russ.).
2. Batsevych, F. S. Vstup do linhvistychnoi prahmatyky [=Entering of Linguistic Pragmatics] (Kyiv, Akademiia, 2011) (in Ukr.).
3. Benvenist, Je. Obshhaja lingvistika [=General Linguistics] (Moskva, Progress, 1974) (In Russ.).
4. Hlukhovtseva, I. Ia. “Dynamika ukrainskoi frazeolohii kintsia KhKh – pochatku KhKhI stolittia: tendentsii rozvytku. [Dynamics of Ukrainian Phraseology of the late XX – early
XXI centuries: development trends].” Avtoreferat dys. kand. filol. nauk (Kharkiv, 2012) (in Ukr.).
5. Zhuikova, M. V. Dynamichni protsesy u frazeolohichnii systemi skhidnoslovianskykh mov [=Dynamic processes in the Phraseology system of East Slavic languages]: monohrafiia (Lutsk, 2007) (in Ukr.).
6. Karasik, V. I. Jazykovoj krug: lichnost’, koncepty, diskurs: monografija [=Language circle: personality, concepts, discourse] (Volgograd, Peremena, 2002) (In Russ.).
7. Kniaz, T. M. “Transformatsii leksychnoho napovnennia frazeolohizmiv yak svidchennia dynamiky poniattia «zamozhnist» [=The Transformation of the Lexical Filling of Phraseological Units as Evidence of Dynamic Concept «Prosperity»].” Linhvistychni doslidzhennia 39 (2015): 21-27 (in Ukr.).
8. Kozhemjakin, E. “Massovaja kommunikacija i mediadiskurs: k metodologii issledovanija (opublikovano s nekotorymi izmenenijami) [=Mass communication and media discourse: to research methodology (published with some changes)].” Nauchnye vedomosti Belgorodskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Serija: Gumanitarnye nauki 2 (73). (2010): 13-21, http://www.discourseanalysis. org/ada2_1/st20.shtml (In Russ.).
9. Kubrjakova, E. S. “Jevoljucija lingvisticheskih idej vo vtoroj polovine XX veka [=Evolution of Linguistic ideas in the second half of the 20th century]”. Jazyk i nauka v konce
XX veka (1995): 144–238 (In Russ.).
10. Kubrjakova, E. S. V poiskah sushhnosti jazyka: Kognitivnye issledovanija [=In search for the essence of language: Cognitive research] (Moskva, Znak, 2012) (In Russ.).
11. Mokienko, V. M. “Ustojchivye sravnenija v sisteme frazeologii [=Sustained comparisons in the Phraseology system].” Ustojchivye sravnenija v sisteme frazeologii: kollektivnaja monografija (2016): 37-49 (In Russ.).
12. Mokienko, V. M. “Frazeologija v sovremennoj publicistike [=Phraseology in modern journalism].” Slavjanskaja frazeologija v sovremennyh SMI (publicisticheskij diskurs): kollektivnaja monografija. Grajfsval’d (2017): 26-36 (In Russ.).
13. Selivanova, E. A. “Processy neologizacii v rakurse dinamiki jetnosoznanija [=Neologization processes in the aspect of ethnic consciousness dynamics].” Leksiko-grammaticheskie innovacii v sovremennyh vostochnoslavjanskih jazykah (Dnepropetrovsk, Porogi 2007): 57-60 (In Russ.).
14. Serazhym, K. S. Dyskurs yak sotsiolinhvalne yavyshche: metodolohiia, arkhitektonika, variatyvnist (na materialakh suchasnoi hazetnoi publitsystyky) [=Discourse as a social and linguistic phenomenon: methodology, architectonics, variability (based on modern newspaper journalism)]: monohrafiia (Kyiv, 2002) (in Ukr.).
15. Serebrennikov, B. A. Rol’ chelovecheskogo faktora v jazyke. Jazyk i porozhdenie rechi [=The role of the human factor in language. Language and speech generation] (Moskva, Nauka, 1991) (In Russ.).
16. Serio, P. “Kak chitajut teksty vo Francii [=How to read texts in France].” Kvadratura smysla: Francuzskaja shkola analiza diskursa (Moskva, Progress, 1990): 12-54. (In Russ.).
17. Stepanenko, M. Publitsystychno-politychni peryfrazy v ukrainskii movi [=Journalistic-political periphrases in Ukrainian language]: monohrafiia (Poltava, Dyvosvit, 2018) (in Ukr.).
18. Shkitska, I. Iu. Manipuliatyvni taktyky pozytyvu : linhvistychnyi aspekt [=Manipulative positive tactics: linguistic aspect]: monohrafiia (Kyiv, 2012) (in Ukr.).
19. Dijk, van T. A. “On Context.” Discourse Society 10 (1999): 291–292.
20. Talbot, M. Media Discourse: Representation and Interaction (Edinburgh, Edinburgh University Press, 2007).
21. Fairclough, N., & Wodak, R. “Critical discourse analysis.” Discourse as social interaction – Discourse studies 2, ed. T A. Van Dijk (London, SAGE Publications, 1996): 259–283.
22. Bilonozhenko, V. M., Hnatiuk, I. S., Dyatchuk, V. V. Slovnyk frazeolohizmiv ukrainskoi movy [=Dictionary of phraseology of the Ukrainian language] (Кyiv, Naukova dumka, 2008) (in Ukrainian).
23. Ukrainskyi tyzhden, Site of journal «Ukrainian Week», https://tyzhden.ua.