TYPES OF MANIPULATIVE SPEECH IN POLITICAL DISCOURSE

Summary The article examines the topic of manipulation and its manifestations in various types of discourse: political, mass media, advertising. The author of the article also investigates the manipulative potential of the text space of Internet comments, using the classifications of manipulation types, strategies and tactics of manipulation, as well as typical techniques of language manipulation available in the scientific literature. Public opinion, which is formed in the discursive space, is an important component of the linguistic existence of society. However, the study of the manipulative component of written communication in the Internet space is one of the least researched aspects of a person's linguistic ability. In his work, the author of the article concludes that spontaneous online texts have a significant potential for researching the manipulative component of written communication in the Internet space. Manipulation is a complex and multifaceted phenomenon that has been the object of interdisciplinary research for more than one decade, being in the focus of attention of philosophers and psychologists, linguists and political scientists, marketers and specialists in the field of advertising. The famous American psychotherapist Everett Schostrom wrote in the book "Anti-Carnegie or Manipulator Man": "Manipulation is a pseudo-philosophy of life aimed at exploiting and controlling both oneself and others."


Introduction
In psychology, manipulation is usually understood as "a type of psychological influence, the implementation of which leads to the hidden emergence of intentions in another person that coincide with existing desires." Important components of manipulative influence are the purposeful transformation of information, as well as skillful play on a person's feelings, emotions, weaknesses (for example, fear, guilt, compassion, greed), as well as on his needs (for example, the need for self-expression, security, respect, recognition). P. B. Parshin notes that, despite the lack of a universally accepted definition of manipulation, "efficiency and inconsistency with the interests of the subject of evaluation are constitutive of the concept of manipulation".
Problems related to the use of language in political discourse are a frequent topic of discussion in the media and the scientific community. People's interest in politics is growing, and accordingly, the need for a more detailed consideration of such a phenomenon as manipulation in political discourse is also growing.
In modern linguistics, the concept of discourse is one of the most difficult to define, which is due to the use of this term in many other scientific fields, such as sociology, philosophy, anthropology, ethnology, etc., directly or indirectly related to the study of language functioning.
Previously, discourse was understood as a set of sentences connected in a text by content, but currently linguists distinguish between the concepts of "text" and "discourse". Thus, discourse is understood as a complex communicative phenomenon that includes not only the text, but also all kinds of extralinguistic factors that contribute to its perception by the recipients.
The role of language in this process is of particular interest to its researchers. According to the apt remark of the researchers, "language knows how to disguise its functions, it knows how to pass one thing off as another, it knows how to inspire, influence, and testify falsely."

Main text
In linguistics, speech manipulation (or speech manipulation) is defined as "a type of interaction between people in which one of them (the manipulator) consciously tries to control the behavior of another (the one being manipulated), encouraging him to behave in any manipulative way... in this way , that the one who is being manipulated is not aware of himself as an object of control." At the same time, language is called manipulation, which is "carried out through the conscious and purposeful use of certain features of the system and the use of language." Scientists believe that language manipulation is inevitable in real everyday communication and define it as "a hidden influence on a person, carried out by means of communication, which aims to change his emotional and psychological state." Therefore, through the linguistic prism, this phenomenon is seen as a set of language actions and language means, with the help of which the addressee influences the addressee for his own purposes. Moreover, as in some works, this influence can have instant success and go unnoticed by the object of influence. According to H. Schiller, "in order to achieve the greatest success, the manipulation must remain invisible." On the other hand, the exerted influence is sometimes fully realized by the manipulator himself, in this case the existence of unconscious manipulation is recognized. Here it should be noted that the behavior of some people, in particular, speech, is characterized by their typical tendency to covertly manage people in order to gain profit. And here the reason for such behavior is a property of this personality, which is usually denoted by the term manipulativeness. The manipulator type is distinguished both in psychology and in linguistics. E. Shostrom calls a person "who treats himself and other persons as objects, "things" subject to use and control, a manipulator. The modern manipulator is a product of a scientific and market approach, in which a person is seen as a thing about which one needs to know a lot in order to be able to influence him. As for manipulativeness as a typical linguistic behavior, the type of linguistic personality of the manipulator in the works of scientists who are engaged in modeling and typology of linguistic personality. But this approach "from the personality to the text" defines a different angle of research: knowing about the manipulator as a typical personality, one can find his representatives among literary characters, etc. (Kishchenko, 2019).
As a number of scientists note, "in everyday life, many of us play the role of involuntary manipulators without the goal of causing harm. Manipulations can even be directed, in our opinion, for the benefit of the "victim", of course, not according to her wishes, but at least not to her detriment. So, for example, a mother can use various tricks to prevent her daughter from dating an "unsuitable" young man, in the mother's opinion. We will talk about conscious, deliberate, planned manipulation aimed at achieving self-interested goals." Let's consider two examples from situations of everyday communication. The woman, being delighted with the purchase, tells her colleagues about it.
As a result, one of her colleagues buys the same thing the next day. In this case, the narrator convinced her colleague that she needed the thing, but she did it unconsciously and had no ulterior motives. Here we can talk about a communicative strategy of self-representation, the implementation of which had a parallel advertising effect -convincing the communication partner of the need to make a purchase.
However, it should be noted that both fakes and propaganda are in many respects a response to demand on the part of the object of manipulation. People "prefer the information that corresponds to their political views or their picture of the world", which is caused by a tendency to stereotype thinking and the inability to critically analyze the situation. The reason for the popularity and effectiveness of the fake as a means of manipulation should also be sought in the recipient's desire to avoid cognitive dissonance. If the media discourse ceases to appeal to the stereotypical knowledge shared by all members of the relevant subculture, this dissonance will inevitably occur. The second manipulative strategy -ideological polarization -is implemented through the creation of cognitive models that make the recipient feel more acutely his belonging to "his" and reject "strangers". The goals of polarization are a positive presentation of "Self/ Us" and a negative presentation of "Us/Them", which consolidate ideological affiliation and ideological conflict.
Example two. In a conversation with her granddaughter, the grandmother notes that she would really like to participate in the latest lottery draw, but for some reason there are no tickets in the bookstore near her house. As a result, the granddaughter buys a lottery ticket, although the grandmother did not ask her to do so. As can be seen from the second example, an elderly woman manipulates her granddaughter (manipulation based on a sense of duty, respect for older age) in her own interests (Mykhalchuk, Bihunova, Fridrikh, Vietrova, 2021).
There is an opinion among foreign marketers that manipulation is the achievement of one's goals in the form of persuasion. Therefore, in our opinion, it is necessary to distinguish between manipulation and persuasion. From the point of view of communication theory, persuasion is not quite a manipulative speech act, but if persuasion is carried out not explicitly, but by implicit means, against the will and without awareness of the interlocutor, then in this case we can talk about the presence of manipulation. Some researchers believe that "manipulation differs from persuasion primarily in that persuasion achieves the planned effect "voluntarily" based on information, explanations and evidence perceived by the addressee, and manipulation is a kind of "intellectual violence" that is carried out with the help of a specific reception of a certain set of techniques". The manipulativeness of the mentioned spheres of communication exists and is justified a priori. We are interested in the other side of the question: whether manipulation with the help of language takes place in everyday discourse, in that part of it that is somehow related to political topics. In this segment of the discursive space, the object of research is Internet users' comments on articles of political content. These texts, which today belong to the genre of natural written speech, rightfully constitute a wide space at the junction of political and everyday discourses. According to scientists, "another part of the political discourse consists of texts created by ordinary citizens who, not being professional politicians or journalists, occasionally participate in political communication (Clausner, 1999). Such texts are in the sphere of intersection of political and everyday discourses" foreign scholars also believe that insufficient attention is paid today to the corpus of Internet texts in which political issues are discussed: "Scholars "ordinary" citizens online is most likely to occur. This line of research is an increasingly profound belief that schoolchildren should be recognized for the importance and development of such a conversation in the global world. (Scholars do not pay attention to the space where most (everyday) talk about politics between ordinary citizens is likely to take place. The lack of such research is even more surprising when scholars recognize the importance of this kind of political communication in the "offline" world.)

Conclusions
The approach implemented in the study from extralinguistic causes of language influence to linguistic means of its implementation and use as a basic theory of activity allowed to interrelatedly investigate intra-and interpersonal processes, linguistic and psychological phenomena and describe a special kind of speech influence.
The identifying (generating) characteristic of manipulation is the specific -manipulative -cognitive and communicative attitude of the influencing subject, -value disposition in relation to the object of influence. The manipulative cognitive attitude is characterized by a system of conditions: 1) failure of the subject of the MV to recognize the equal value of the personality of the object of the MV in comparison with his own, which is manifested in the failure to recognize the equal value of the needs of the object of the MV; 2) the desire to achieve the desired in the event of a conflict of interests without any concessions, to get something without payment, for nothing -that is, without any emotional costs. The manipulative communicative attitude is characterized by 1) the desire to satisfy one's own need in the form of use, but not in satisfying the needs of the object of the MV; 2) striving to satisfy one's own need without revealing a conflict of interest to the object of the MV.
Manipulative linguistic influence (like any influence in general) is an interaction of its subject and object. This means that in complimentary relations, firstly, there must be the attitudes of the manipulator and the manipulated, and secondly, the means used by the manipulator and the personality structures of the manipulated, where these means affect.