Your shopping cart is empty.
Log in

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Библиотека журнала 

"Филологические науки"

Все подробности в разделе
"Книжная полка"

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Discourse analysis: the theory of frames of analysis

A.B. Bouchev
80,00 Р

UDC 81`42

https://doi.org/10.20339/PhS.5-21.013       

 

Bouchev Alexander B.,

Dоctor of Philology, Professor of the Journalism,

Advertising and Public Relations Department

Tver State University

e-mail: alex.bouchev@list.ru

 

The discourse analysis is of interdisciplinary character, but it is impossible without the analysis of linguistic characteristics of discourse. The problem of method of these studies remains debatable. The paper dwells on discourse analysis of election campaign in the USA in 2020. The importance of these studies is reflected not only in the task of creating the theory of discourse analysis in modern linguistics, but also in the institutionalizing of these discourse practices in modern Russian society. These pragmatic texts are notable by their topics, issues, values embodied in them, key audiences, verbal (rhetorical) tactics of image-creating. The author suggests the theory of analysis of discourse — the existence of factual, linguistic, argumentative, non-verbal frames of analysis, the frame of key communicators, the frame of performance communication, the frame of virtual communication. Due attention is given to the new subtype of political discourse — that of net origin. The paper explores the publicprivate character of political communication in the nets and characteristics of verbal behavior of its authors. The paper makes a contribution to the discourse studies suggesting an original theory of frames of discourse studies.

Keywords: discourse, electioneering, theory of frames in discourse analysis.

 

References

1.         Diskurs-Pi. Nauchnyi zhurnal. URL: https://www.madipi.ru/.

2.         Kozhemyakin E.A. Diskursnyi podkhod k izucheniiu institutsional’noi kul’tury. Belgorod: Izd-vo BelGU, 2008. 246 s.

3.         Pocheptsov G.G. Teoriia kommunikatsii. Moscow: Vakler; Kiev: Refl-buk, 2001. 656 s.

4.         Prokhorov Yu.E. Deistvitel’nost’. Tekst. Diskurs. Moscow: Flinta: Nauka, 2016. 224 s.

5.         Sinelnikova L.N. Diskurs vlasti: ot legitimizatsii do manipuliatsii // Uchenye zapiski Krymskogo federal’nogo universiteta imeni V.I. Vernadskogo. Filologicheskie nauki. 2015. T. 1 (67), No. 4. S. 10–15.

6.         Sovremennyi diskurs-analiz: povestka dnia, problematika, perspektivy: kollectivnaia monografia / pod red. E.A. Kozhemyakina, A.V. Polonskogo. Belgorod: ID “Belgorod”, 2016. 244 s.

7.         Baker P., Ellece S. Key terms in discourse analysis. N.Y.: Continuum International Pub. Group, 2011. 241 p. URL: https://uogbooks.files.wordpress.com/2015/02/key_terms_in_discourse_anal... (01.12.2020).

8.         Discourse analysis / G. Brown, G. Yule (eds.). Cambridge University Press, 1983. 304 p.

9.         Van Dijk Teun A. Discourse and power. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008. 320 p. URL: https://www.macmillanihe.com/resources/sample-chapters/9780230574090_sam... (01.12.2020).

10.       Reisigl M. The discourse — historical approach // The Routledge Book on Critical Doiscourse Analysis. 2017. Ch. 3. URL: https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/doi/10.4324/9781315739342.ch3 (01.12.2020).

11.       Wodak R. The discourse of politics in action: politics as usual. 2nd revised edition. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011. 186 p.