Discursive Practice and Communicative Strategy: Eclecticism vs Poly-paradigmatism?
https://doi.org/10.24224/2227-1295-2023-12-6-123-139
Abstract
The focus of this research is on the concepts of “communicative strategy” and “discursive practice,” which are frequently used today without being tied to a specific linguistic paradigm. The objective was to clarify whether these concepts can be classified as cross-paradigmatic, meaning they are not limited to a specific linguistic paradigm. The study revealed that despite their apparent similarities, these concepts differ in several key characteristics and are aimed at solving different tasks. Additionally, it was found that the main differentiation between these phenomena occurs at the level of their association with different linguistic domains: discursive practice is an element of discourse (and therefore belongs to the discursive paradigm), while communicative strategy is an element of communication (and is thus considered within the framework of the communicative-pragmatic / linguo-communicative paradigm and speech act theory). Analysis of contemporary research focused on studying communicative strategies and discursive practices showed a prevalence of a more “narrow” interpretation of the concept of “discourse,” which allows for the identification of specific forms of communicative practices within discourse. Furthermore, there is a simplification in the understanding of the implementation of discursive practices.
About the Author
E. A. Nikonova
Moscow State Institute of International Relations (University) of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Ekaterina A. Nikonova - PhD in Philology, Senior Lecturer, Depart-ment of English No. 3.
Moscow
References
1. Antonova, Yu. A. (2007). Communicative strategies and tactics in modern newspaper dis-course (response to a terrorist act). Author’s abstract of PhD Diss. Yekaterinburg. 23 p. (In Russ.).
2. Arutyunova, N. D., Paducheva, E. V. (1985). Origins, problems and categories of pragmatics. New in foreign linguistics, 16: 8—42. (In Russ.).
3. Atyagina, A. P. (2012). Twitter as a new discursive practice on the Internet. OmSU Bulle-tin, 4 (66). Available at: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/tvitter-kak-novaya-diskursivnaya-praktika-v-seti-internet (accessed 15.01.2023). (In Russ.).
4. Baranov, A. N. (2001). Introduction to applied linguistics: Textbook. Moscow: Editorial URSS. 368 p. ISBN 5-354-00313-X. (In Russ.).
5. Bern, E. (2001). Games played by people: psychology of human relationships; people who play games: psychology of human destiny. Moscow: [b. i.]. 480 p. (In Russ.).
6. Burmakina, N. G. (2015). Discursive practices of constructing authority in the genre of scientific report. In: Discursive practices of modern institutional communication: a monograph. Krasnoyarsk: Sib. feder. un-t. 64—90. (In Russ.).
7. Campbell, S., Roberts, C. (2007). Migration, etnicity and competing discourses in the job in-terview: synthesizing the institutional and personal. Discourse and Society, 18: 243—270.
8. Chernyavskaya, V. E. (2012). “Discourse is a sales leader” or a discourse sale? Bulletin of Irkutsk State Linguistic University, 3: 6—14. (In Russ.).
9. Chernyavskaya, V. E. (2014). Phantoms and syndromes of the discursive paradigm. Bulletin of Cognitive Linguistics, 1 (38): 54—61. (In Russ.).
10. Chernyavskaya, V. E. (2006). The discourse of power and the power of discourse: problems of speech influence. Moscow: Flint: Nauka. 134 p. ISBN 978-5-4458-5891-1. (In Russ.).
11. Chudinov, A. P. (2012). Discursive characteristics of political communication. Political Lin-guistics, 2 (40). Available at: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/diskursivnye-harakteristiki-politicheskoy-kommunikatsii (accessed 23.07.2023). (In Russ.).
12. Deik, T. A. van. (2013). Discourse and Power: Representation of dominance in language and communication. Moscow: LIBROKOM. 260 p. (In Russ.).
13. Fairclough, N. (2003). Analysing Discourse: Textual Analysis for Social Research. London: Routledge. 270 p. ISBN 0415258928.
14. Fairclough, N. (1998). Political Discourse in the Media: An analytical Framework. Oxford: Blackwell. 142—162.
15. Foucault, M. (1996). The Will to Truth: Beyond Knowledge, Power and sexuality. Works of different years. Moscow: Kastal. 446 p. ISBN 5-85374-006-7. (In Russ.).
16. Garfinkel, G. (2007). Studies in ethnomethodology. St. Petersburg: Peter. 335 p. ISBN 5-469-00033-8. (In Russ.).
17. Indyukova, N. S., Bogatikova, L. I. (2017). Communicative strategies of pedagogical dis-course. Eurasian Scientific Journal, 11: 1—3. (In Russ.).
18. Issers, O. S. (2002). Communicative strategies and tactics of Russian speech. Moscow: URSS. 284 p. ISBN 978-5-382-00698-7. (In Russ.).
19. Issers, O. S. (1999). Communicative strategies and tactics of Russian speech. Omsk: Publishing House of Omsk State University. 284 p. ISBN 978-5-382-00698-7. (In Russ.).
20. Issers, O. S. (2011). Discursive practice: to the definition of the concept. In: Modern speech communication: new discursive practices: monograph. Omsk: Publishing House of the Omsk State University. 37—61. ISBN 978-5-7779-1271-8. (In Russ.).
21. Issers, O. S. (2012). People say: discursive practices of our time. Omsk: Publishing House of the Omsk State University. 275 p. ISBN 978-5-7779-1520-7. (In Russ.).
22. Ivanova, S. V. (2019). Not to get lost in the discursive space: methodology as a compass. In: Modern problems in linguistics and language teaching: the problem of method: a collection of scientific articles based on the materials of the III International Scientific and Practical Conference Penza, April 24—27, 2017. Penza: PSU Publishing House. 15—19. (In Russ.).
23. Khutyz, I. P. (2018). Communicative categories and strategies of lecture discourse. Philologi-cal sciences. Questions of theory and practice, 10—2 (88). DOI: 10.30853/filnauki.2018-10-2.33. (In Russ.).
24. Klyuev, E. V. (1998). Speech communication. Moscow: PRIOR. 224 p. ISBN 5-7990-0101-X. (In Russ.).
25. Klyuev, E. V. (2002). Speech communication: the success of speech interaction. Moscow: Ripol classic. 320 p. ISBN 5-7905-1349-2. (In Russ.).
26. Kolosovskaya, E. V. (2010). The place of discursive tactics in the educational process. Philo-logical sciences. Questions of theory and practice, 2 (6): 80—85. (In Russ.).
27. Larson, C. U. (1995). Persuasion: reception and responsibility. Belmont: Wadsnorth Publ. Company. 449 p.
28. Lavrova, S. Yu., Gonchar, A. A. (2021). Linguistic representation of theatrical discursive practice in the genre of analytical interview. Bulletin of the ChSU. Philological scienc-es, 2: 76—89. (In Russ.).
29. Leto, Ya. V. (2022). Communicative means of expressing aggression in American political discourse (based on the material of D. Trump’s Internet publications and speeches). PhD Diss. Ufa. 186 p. (In Russ.).
30. McElhinny, B., Muehlmann, S. (2009). Discursive practice theory. Concise Encyclopedia of Pragmatics. Oxford: Elsiver Ltd. 216—219.
31. Mikhaleva, O. L. (2009). Political discourse. Specifics of manipulative influence. Moscow: Librocom. 256 p. (In Russ.).
32. Mlechko, A. V., Shamaev, I. N. (2018). Discursive practices of traditional and new media. Bulletin of the Volga, 17 (3): 119—129. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15688/jvolsu2.2018.3.12. (In Russ.).
33. Molyavina, E. A. (2022). Communicative strategy: nature, classification and pragmatics. Bul-letin of the Moscow State Linguistic University. Humanities, 7 (862): 94—99. DOI: 10.52070/2542-2197-2022-7-862-94. (In Russ.).
34. Musolff, A. (2004). Metaphor and Political Discourse. Analogical Reasoning in Debates about Europe. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 211 p.
35. Nesteryuk, Yu. V. (2016). Strategy of conducting a personal interview (based on the material of the German-language mass media). PhD Diss. Samara. 204 p. (In Russ.).
36. Pastukhov, A. G. (2006). N. Fairclough’s theory and the problem of the implementation of the speech genre in the triad “Text — discursive practice — social practice”. Dis-course-Pi, 1: 216—219. (In Russ.).
37. Sadikova, V. A. (2016). Discourse and communication: correlation of concepts. In: Komi-na, N. A. (ed.). Language discourse in social practice. Tver: Tver State University. 208—211. (In Russ.).
38. Shilikhina, K. M. (2014). Discursive practice of irony: cognitive, semantic and pragmatic as-pects. PhD Diss. Voronezh. 399 p. (In Russ.).
39. Shuts, A. (1996). Formation of the concept and theory in the social sciences. In: American Sociological thought. Textbook. Moscow: International Institute of Business and Man-agement. 526—542. ISBN 5-211-03099-0. (In Russ.).
40. Ulanov, A. V. (2014). Communicative strategies in military discourse. Siberian Philological Journal, 4. Available at: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/kommunikativnye-strategiiv-voennom-diskurse-1 (accessed 12.01.2023). (In Russ.).
41. Vasilyeva, E. Y. (2019). Functional and pragmatic aspect of medical media discourse (based on the material of a medical talk show). PhD Diss. Volgograd. 214 p. (In Russ.).
42. Voyakina, E. Y. (2022). Discursive practices of Internet communication in the light of linguistic research: a systematic review. Philological Sciences. Questions of theory and practice, 15 (11): 3469—3479. DOI: 10.30853/phil20220590. (In Russ.).
43. Yum, D. (2000). About human nature. St. Petersburg: ABC. 314 p. ISBN 5-267-00438-3. (In Russ.).
44. Yurina, M. V. (2006). Communicative strategies of partners in a political interview: based on the material of the modern press of Germany. Author’s abstract of PhD Diss. Samara. 22 p. (In Russ.).
Review
For citations:
Nikonova E.A. Discursive Practice and Communicative Strategy: Eclecticism vs Poly-paradigmatism? Nauchnyi dialog. 2023;12(6):123-139. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.24224/2227-1295-2023-12-6-123-139
Views:
570
Email this article 