TYPES OF COMMUNICATIVE BEHAVIOUR OF UKRAINIAN POLITICIANS (P. POROSHENKO, YU. TYMOSHENKO, V. YANUKOVYCH AND V. YUSHCHENKO)

Daria Kharytonova

doi:10.23856/4004

Daria Kharytonova Taras Schevchenko National University of Kyiv http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4806-3572

Keywords: discourse, institutional political discourse, communicative metastrategy, communicative tactics, cognitive scenario

Abstract

The present study is devoted to the investigation of the main types of communicative behaviour in the Ukrainian political linguoculture. In the institutional political discourse types of communicative behaviour might be qualified as markers of status and the most powerful manipulative determinants. Its identification can only be made by deep analysis of manipulative metastrategies, tactics, and cognitive scenarios. The use of manipulative metastrategies and tactics in the institutional political discourse demonstrates that knowledge, emotions, and will of the addressee are being operated. Manipulative metastrategies and tactics are called to implement and realize the communicative goals and intentions of the I-speaker-politician. The classification of manipulative metastrategies and tactics proposed in this paper is processed in the framework of cognitive scenarios of their deployment. According to it, politicians could be attributed with conflict, conflict-neutral, conflict-cooperative, and cooperative-conflict types of communicative behaviour. The conflict type is represented by Yu. Tymoshenko. P. Poroshenko shows a conflict-cooperative type. The cooperative-conflict can be distinguished in V. Yanukovych. And V. Yushchenko has a conflict-neutral type of communicative behaviour.

References

1. Artyukhova, А. А. (2014). Ahressyvnaia rytoryka kak persuazyvnui sposob v polytycheskoi kommunykatsyy (na materyale vыstuplenyi nemetskoho polytyka Hrehora Hyzy) [Aggressive rhetoric as a persuasive way in political communication (based on the material of the speeches of the German politician Gregor Gizi)]. Odessa: MGU. [in Russian]
2. Golubovska, І. О. (2008). Movna osobystist yak linhvokulturnyi fenomen. [Linguistic personality as a linguistic and cultural phenomenon]. Kyiv: Logos. [in Ukrainian]
3. Dudchenko, V. S. (2000). Transformatsyia konflykta. [Conflict transformation]. Moscow: RАN. [in Russian]
4. Karasyk, V. Y. (2002). Iazukovoi kruh: lychnost, kontseptы, dyskurs. [Language circle: personality, concepts, discourse.]. Volhohrad: Peremena. [in Russian]
5. Kytaihorodskaia, M. V., Rozanova, N. N. (1995). Russkyi rechevoi portret: fonokhrestomatyia. [Russian speech portrait: phono-restomacy]. Moscow: Nauka. [in Russian]
6. Korolova, A. V. (2008). Stratehii i taktyky komunikatyvnoi povedinky uchasnykiv spilkuvannia v sytuatsii konfliktu. [Strategies and tactics of communicative behavior of communication participants in a conflict situation]. Kyiv: Logos [in Ukrainian]
7. Krasnukh, V. V. (2003). “Svoi” sredy “chuzhykh”: myf yly realnost? [“Self” among “aliens”: myth or reality?]. Moscow: Gnozus. [in Russian]
8. Matveeva, G. G. (1999). Dyahnostyrovanye lychnostnыkh svoistv avtora po eho rechevomu povedenyiu. [Diagnosing the author's personality traits by his speech behavior]. Rostov-na-Donu: DIuY [in Russian]
9. Sternyn, Y. A. (2015). Modely opysanyia kommunykatyvnoho povedenyia. [Models for describing communicative behavior]. Voronezh: Harant. [in Russian]
10. Formanovskaia, N. Y. (2005). Kultura obshchenyia y rechevoi etyket [Communication culture and speech etiquette]. Moscow: Ykar. [in Russian]
11. Kharytonova, D. D. (2018). Ukrainskyi politychnyi dyskurs: kohnityvno-semantychni ta prahmakomunikatyvni vymiry [Ukrainian Political Discourse: Cognitive and Pragmatic Dimensions]. Kyiv: Taras Schevnchenko University [in Ukrainian]