Artistic functions of Models of Manipulative Speech Interaction in Dialogues of Heroes by F.M. Dostoevsky
https://doi.org/10.24224/2227-1295-2022-11-4-9-28
Abstract
The models of manipulative communication in the dialogues of the characters of F. M. Dostoevsky are highlighted in terms of their artistic functions in the narrative. The material for the research is the texts of the novels by F. M. Dostoevsky “Crime and Punishment”, “The Idiot”, “Demons”, “Teenager” and “The Brothers Karamazov”. Particular attention is paid to plot-forming and character-forming functions. It has been established that the plot-forming functions of dialogues with elements of manipulative communication lie in the fact that they psychologically prepare future plot twists or act as a direct impetus to change a particular plot situation, embodying the narrative setting for reticence, silence, hiding “sore spots” in the minds of characters. The analysis revealed that the character-forming functions of dialogues with elements of manipulative communication lie in the artistic embodiment of dramatic relationships between the characters, often at turning points in their lives, when the complex and intense inner life of the character is suddenly revealed to readers. It is shown that the use of certain manipulative techniques by the addressee does not always lead to a violation of the postulates of cooperative communication or the principle of politeness: in a number of cases, manipulation in the addressee's zone may have the goal of just observing the postulate of tact. It is concluded that the use of the analyzed manipulative strategies serves as an artistic means of revealing the character of the hero in speech, when the character, imperceptibly for himself, reveals his inner world to the reader.
About the Author
Ya. G. Bazhenova
National Research Lobachevsky State University of Nizhny Novgorod
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Yana G. Bazhenova - Postgraduate student, Department of Theoretical and Applied Linguistics, Lecturer, Department of Foreign Linguistics Institute of Philology and Journalism.
Nizhny Novgorod
References
1. Arutyunova, N. D. (1999). Dostoevsky’s style in the frame of the Russian picture of the world. Language and the human world. Moscow: Languages of Russian Culture. 846—870. ISBN 5-7859-0027-0. (In Russ.).
2. Ashimbayeva, N. T. (2014). Dostoevsky. Contexts of words. St. Petersburg: Silver Age. 232 p. ISBN 978-5-906357-15-1. (In Russ.).
3. Badalova, E. N. (2017). Conceptosphere of F. M. Dostoevsky’s novel “Idiot”. PhD Diss. Astrakhan. 180 p. (In Russ.).
4. Bakhtin, M. M. (1979). Problems of Dostoevsky’s poetics. Moscow: Soviet Russia. 318 p. (In Russ.).
5. Bazhenova, Ya. G. (2021). Manipulative speech strategies in dialogic communication in Russian: cognitive-discursive aspect of communication. Cognitive studies of language, 3 (46): Language and Thinking in the era of global change. 300—303. (In Russ.).
6. Borisova, I. N. (2009). Russian conversational dialogue: structure and dynamics. Moscow: LIBROCOM. 320 p. ISBN 978-5-397-00069-7. (In Russ.).
7. Bulygina, T. V., Shmelev, A. D. (1997). Language conceptualization of the world (based on Russian grammar). Moscow: Languages of Russian culture. 576 p. (In Russ.).
8. Chernyavskaya, V. E. (2006). The discourse of power and the power of discourse: problems of speech influence. Moscow: Flint. 136 p. (In Russ.).
9. Dostoevsky: Aesthetics and Poetics: Dictionary-reference. (1997). Chelyabinsk: Metal. 272 p. ISBN 5-87324-042-6. (In Russ.).
10. Dostoevsky’s Dictionary of the language. Lexical structure of idiolect, 1—3. (2001—2003). Moscow: Azbukovnik. ISBN 5-93786-031-4. (In Russ.).
11. Durov, A. A. (2009). The concept of the “big dialogue” by M. M. Bakhtin as a methodological basis for the study of folk culture. Bulletin of Stavropol State University, 60: 45—51. (In Russ.).
12. Garicheva, E. A. (2002). About Dostoevsky’s dialogue. Literary Journal, 16: 38—44. (In Russ.).
13. Issers, O. S. (1999). Communicative strategies and tactics of Russian speech. Omsk: Omsk State University. 285 p. (In Russ.).
14. Issers, O. S. (2020). More than half a century under the umbrella of communicative strategies. Communicative research, 7 (2): 243—256. DOI: 10.24147/2413-6182.2020.7(2) .243-256. (In Russ.).
15. Ivanchikova, E. A. (1994). The narrator in the narrative structure of Dostoevsky’s works. Dostoevsky: materials and research: a collection of articles, 11. St. Petersburg: Nauka. 41—50. (In Russ.).
16. Karasev, L. V. (1994). About Dostoevsky’s symbols. Questions of philosophy, 10: 90—111. (In Russ.).
17. Karaulov, Y. N., Ginzburg, E. L. (eds.). (2001). Dostoevsky’s Word — 2000: Collection of articles. Russian Academy of Sciences. V. V. Vinogradov Institute of the Russian Language. Moscow: Azbukovnik. 595 p. ISBN 5-88744-038-4. (In Russ.).
18. Kasatkina, T. A. (2004). About the creative nature of the word. Ontology of the word in the works of F. M. Dostoevsky as the basis of “realism in the highest sense”. Moscow: IMLI RAS. 480 p. ISBN 5-9208-0173-5. (In Russ.).
19. Khots, A. N. (1994). Structural features of space in Dostoevsky’s prose. Dostoevsky: materials and research: collection of articles: in 20 volumes, 11. St. Petersburg: Nauka. 51—60. (In Russ.).
20. Lagutin, V. I. (1991). Problems of analysis of artistic dialogue (to the pragmalinguistic theory of drama). Chisinau: Shtinitsa. 98 p. ISBN 5-376-00932-7. (In Russ.).
21. Makarov, M. L. (2003). Fundamentals of the theory of discourse. Moscow: Gnosis. 280 p. ISBN 5-94244-005-0. (In Russ.).
22. Meerson, O. A. (2009). Personalism as poetics: the literary world through the eyes of its inhabitants. St. Petersburg: Pushkin House. 432 p. (In Russ.).
23. Radbil, T. B. (2007). Paradoxes of unconventionality and the language of Andrei Platonov. In: Die Welt der Slaven: Internationale Halbjahresschrift fur Slavistik. Jahrgang LII, 2. Munchen: Verlag Otto Sagner. 281—298. (In Russ.).
24. Radbil, T. B., Ratsiburskaya, L. V., Paloshi, I. V. (2021). Active Processes in the Vocabulary and Word Formation of the Russian Language in the Era of Coronavirus: Linguo-Cognitive Aspect. Nauchnyi dialog, 1: 63—79. DOI: 10.24224/2227-1295-2021-1-63-79. (In Russ.).
25. Romanova, G. I., Orlova, N. N. (2018). Nonverbal dialogue in F. M. Dostoevsky’s novel “Crime and Punishment”. Bulletin of the State University of Humanities and Technology, 2: 68—71. (In Russ.).
26. Rozhdestvenskaya, O. Y. (2018). Dialogue: its role and functions in the work of F. M. Dostoevsky. PhD Diss. Moscow. 164 p. (In Russ.).
27. Russian everyday communication: pragmatics, cultural studies. (2018). Yekaterinburg: Humanities University. 442 p. ISBN 978-5-7741-0328-7. (In Russ.).
28. Ruzhitsky, I. V. (2013). About the language of Dostoevsky. Scientific bulletin of the Voronezh State University of architecture and civil engineering: linguistics and intercultural communication, 9: 74–81. (In Russ.).
29. Ruzhitsky, I. V. (2015). Dostoevsky’s language: idioglossary, thesaurus, eidos: monograph. Moscow: LEXRUS. 543 p. ISBN 978-5-905532-25-2. (In Russ.).
30. Saraskina, L. I. (1996). Fyodor Dostoevsky: Overcoming Demons. Moscow: Consent. 462 p. ISBN 5-86884-048-8. (In Russ.).
31. Sharapova, E. V. (2018). Abnormal compatibility of intensifiers in the language of F. M. Dostoevsky. PhD Diss. Moscow. 229 p. (In Russ.).
32. Stepanyan, K. A. (2010). Phenomenon and dialogue in the novels of F. M. Dostoevsky. St. Petersburg: Kriga. 400 p. ISBN 978-5-901805-47-3. (In Russ.).
Review
For citations:
Bazhenova Ya.G. Artistic functions of Models of Manipulative Speech Interaction in Dialogues of Heroes by F.M. Dostoevsky. Nauchnyi dialog. 2022;11(4):9-28. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.24224/2227-1295-2022-11-4-9-28
Views:
451
Email this article 