Preview

Nauchnyi dialog

Advanced search

Speech Representations of Unity in Early 20th Century Russian Parliamentary Discourse: A Study of Lexemes ‘Edinstvo’ [Unity] and ‘Edinenie’ [Unification]

https://doi.org/10.24224/2227-1295-2023-12-5-39-54

Abstract

The article analyzes the functioning of the lexemes ‘edinstvo’ [unity] and ‘edinenie’ [unification] in the oral public speeches of the deputies of the prerevolutionary State Duma. The aim of the article is to systematize speech representations of the idea of unity on the example of the lexemes ‘edinstvo’ [unity] and ‘edinenie’ [unification] in the Russian parliamentary discourse of the early 20th century in a rhetorical-pragmatic aspect. The category of persuasive complex was used as an instrument for analyzing the persuasiveness of parliamentary discourse. It was established that the analyzed lexemes were actively used in the Russian parliamentary discourse of the early 20th century to express the semantics of integrativeness. Integrativeness, expressed by the analyzed lexemes, relates to many diverse topics, from family and court to opinions, principles, and views. Functional differences between the use of the lexemes ‘edinstvo’ [unity] and ‘edinenie’ [unification] were identified and analyzed. The persuasiveness of ‘edinstvo’ [unity] and ‘edinenie’ [unification] in the rhetorical practice of the prerevolutionary State Duma is associated with achieving a high degree of pathos in speeches through the use of these lexemes in their literal sense, developing epithets with them, and incorporating them into metaphors. It is proven that the use of the lexemes ‘edinstvo’ [unity] and ‘edinenie’ [unification] in a specific context was a political marker, as there is a certain specialization of word usage in speeches by representatives of different political forces.

About the Author

S. A. Gromyko
Vologda State University
Russian Federation

Sergey A. Gromyko - PhD in Philology, associate professor Department of Russian Language, Journalism and Communication Theory.

Vologda



References

1. Gavrilova, M. V. (2010). Development of meaningful forms of the concept “unity” in the Russian political discourse of the XX—XXI centuries. Political Linguistics, 3 (34): 13—18. (In Russ.).

2. Gromyko, S. A. (2021а). Persuasive Complex as a Unit of Analysis of Parliamentary Discourse. Nauchnyi dialog, 4: 66—79. DOI: 10.24224/2227-1295-2021-4-66-79. (In Russ.).

3. Gromyko, S. A. (2021b). The article analyzes the use of a child's image-symbol in the Russian parliamentary communication of the early twentieth century (based on the transcripts of the meetings of the Third and Fourth State Duma). Political Linguistics, 3 (87): 145—155. DOI: 10.26170/1999-2629_2021_03_14. (In Russ.).

4. Dubrovskaya, T. V. (2022). Unity markers in legal and political-legal discourse. In: Leontyeva, T. V. (ed.). Faces of Unity in Language and Discourse. Yekaterinburg: Azhur. 196—264. ISBN 978-5-91256-571-7. (In Russ.).

5. Dzhioeva, V. P. (2017). Implementation of the concepts of unity / iudzinad in the South Ossetian political discourse in the situation of Russian-Ossetian bilingualism. Political Linguistics, 4: 53—59. (In Russ.).

6. Evgenieva, A. P. (ed.). (1999). Dictionary of the Russian language. Moscow: Russkiy yazyk, Poligrafresursy. 795 p. (In Russ.).

7. Ilie, C. (ed.). (2010). European Parliaments under Scrutiny: Discourse Strategies and Inter-action Practices. Amsterdam, the Netherlands: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 386 p.

8. Kiryanov, I. K., Kornienko, S. I. (2009). Verbatim Records of the State Duma of the Early 20th Century: From Traditional to Computer Source Studies. Bulletin of the Chelyabinsk State University, 6 (144), History. Iss. 30: 144—148. (In Russ.).

9. Lekant, P. A. (ed.). (2014). Modern Russian literary language. Moscow: Yurayt. 559 p. (In Russ.).

10. Leontyeva, T. V. (ed.). (2022). Faces of Unity in Language and Discourse. Yekaterinburg: Azhur. 292 p. ISBN 978-5-91256-571-7. (In Russ.).

11. Mikhaylenok, O. M. (2013). The concept of consent in Russian political discourse. In: Consent in society as a condition for the development of Russia. Iss. 3. Political consensus: Strategies and reality. Moscow: IS RAS. 9—25. (In Russ.).

12. Mukhin, A. M. (1995). Variation of syntactic units. St. Petersburg: Institute for Linguistic Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences. 239 p. (In Russ.).

13. Ruzhentseva, N. B., Antonova, Yu. A. (2013). Interethnic discourse: a model in the context of an era. Yekaterinburg: Ural State Pedagogical University. 292 p. (In Russ.).

14. Sannikov, V. Z. (2008). Russian syntax in the semantic-pragmatic space. Moscow: Yazyki slavyanskikh kultur. 624 p. (In Russ.).

15. Semekhina, A. S., Shchetinina, A. V. (2022). Language representation of the idea of national unity in media discourse. In: Leontyeva, T. V. (ed.). Faces of Unity in Language and Discourse. Yekaterinburg: Azhur. 148—168. ISBN 978-5-91256-571-7. (In Russ.).

16. Shchetinina, A. V., Semekhina, A. S. (2021). Language representation of the idea of national unity in media discourse. Bulletin of the Tomsk State Pedagogical University: 1 (213): 18—27. (In Russ.).


Review

For citations:


Gromyko S.A. Speech Representations of Unity in Early 20th Century Russian Parliamentary Discourse: A Study of Lexemes ‘Edinstvo’ [Unity] and ‘Edinenie’ [Unification]. Nauchnyi dialog. 2023;12(5):39-54. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.24224/2227-1295-2023-12-5-39-54

Views: 410


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.


ISSN 2225-756X (Print)
ISSN 2227-1295 (Online)