Authors retain the copyright without restrictions for their published content in this journal. HSSR is a SHERPA ROMEO Green Journal.
Publishing License
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of
DISCOURSE AND DISCOURSE ANALYSIS IN THE CONCEPT OF SOCIOHUMANITARIAN KNOWLEDGE
Corresponding Author(s) : Tatiana S. Makarova
Humanities & Social Sciences Reviews,
Vol. 7 No. 6 (2019): November
Abstract
Purpose of the study: The aim of the scientific work is to develop a new theory of interdisciplinary discourse based on social and humanitarian knowledge. Today, there are many interpretations of the concept of discourse. This causes certain difficulties in its interpretation. Presentation of the discourse within the multidimensional socio-humanitarian category will allow us to generalize and systematize various approaches to its study, to reveal the sociolinguistic features of the mental-linguistic product in the future integration of social and humanitarian disciplines.
Methodology: The integrative socio-humanitarian theory of discourse analysis highlights the subjective-objective nature of discourse and actualizes the structuralist, poststructuralist, cognitive approaches and its study. The sociolinguistic concept of discourse analysis focuses on the method of synchronous diachronic study of discourse, a descriptive method of discourse analysis, and a comparative historical discourse analysis method.
Main findings: The study found that the theory of discourse, based on a number of humanitarian disciplines (philosophy, sociolinguistics, linguistics), indicates a transformation of the concept of discourse, as well as methods of discourse analysis. A multi-faceted humanitarian concept of discourse analysis is positioned in the post-structuralist, logical-philosophical, sociolinguistic vein.
Applications of this study: The presented integrative interdisciplinary theory of discourse will serve as an impetus for scientific research carried out in the framework of sociolinguistic knowledge. The ontological methodology of discourse analysis, combining the features of structuralism, post-structuralism, cognitivism, is of great practical importance in philosophy, linguistics of the text, communication theory, sociolinguistics, cognitive linguistics.
Novelty/Originality of this study: In the social sciences, there is no single understanding of the concept of discourse. Due to the variability of this concept, various theories of discourse analysis are put forward. For the first time in scientific work, the theory of discourse analysis summarizes the socio-humanitarian theories of discourse (structuralism, poststructuralism, cognitivism). It is demonstrated as a comprehensive research method that allows you to explicate a single utterance, text, as well as cognitive-communicative (speech-cognitive) activity.
Keywords
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)BibTeX
- Ðleksandrova, O. V. (2007).Some peculiarities of speech and its structure.Moscow: LENÐND.
- Ðlekseeva, L. M. (2013).The use of metaphors in a discourse. Perm': RIO PGNIU.
- Arutyunova, N.D. (1990). Discourse. In V. N.Yartseva (Ed.),Linguistic Encyclopedic Dictionary(pp. 136–137). Moscow: Sov. Encyclopedia.
- Benvenist, E. (2002). General linguistics. Moscow: URSS.
- Dementiev, V.V. (2000). The situation of indirect communication. Problems of verbal communication (pp. 31–43). Saratov: Publishing House of Sarat. University.
- Foucault, M. (2004). Archeology of knowledge. Saint-Petersburg:Gumanitarnaya akademiya.
- Goldin, V.E., Sirotinina O.B., Yagubova M.A. (2003).Russian language and culture of speech. Moscow: URSSeditorial.
- Habermas, K.Y.(2000). Moral conscience and communicative action. Saint-Petersburg:Nauka.
- Karasik, V. I. (2004). Language circle: personality, concepts, discourse. Moscow: GNOZIS.
- Karasik, V. I. (2000). Structure of institutional discourse in problems of verbal communication.Problems of verbal communication(pp. 25–33).Saratov: Publishing House of Sarat. University.
- Kibrik, Ð. Ð. (1994). Cognitive studies on discourse. Issues of Linguistics, 5, 126−139.
- Kolokoltseva, T.N. (2000).The role of dialogue and dialogicity in the modern communicative space (based on the media). Problems of verbal communication (pp. 50–57).Saratov: Publishing House of Sarat. University.
- Kormilitsyna, M.A. (2000). Reflectives in speech communication.Problems of verbal communication (pp. 20–25).Saratov: Publishing House of Sarat. University.
- Krasnykh, V. V. (2002). Ethno-psycholinguistics and linguocultorology. Moscow: Gnozis.
- Kubryakova, E. S. (2012). Searching for the essence of a language. Moscow: Znak.
- Makarova, T. C. (2018). The problem of interpretation of historical political discourse.Political linguistics, 3 (69), 114−121. DOI: https://doi.org/10.26170/pl18-03-15
- Mishlanova, S. L., Khrustaleva, M. Ð. (2009). Interference: cognitive discourse analysis of synonymy:monography. Perm: PGU.
- Shiryaev, E.N. (2000). The structure of intentional conflict dialogs of the spoken language. Problems of verbal communication (pp. 80–85).Saratov: Publishing House of Sarat. University.
- Sirotinina, O. B. (1994). Texts, textoids, discourses in the area of colloquial speech. InN. A. Kupina, T. V. Matveeva (Ed.), Man − text − culture: collection monograph (pp. 105–124). Yekaterinburg: Institute of Regional Development. Education.
- Stolyarova, E.A. (2000).On some difficulties of the lexicographic representation of everyday communication. Problems of verbal communication (pp. 76–79).Saratov: Publishing House of Sarat. University.
- Zakharova, E.P. (2000). Types of communicative categories. Problems of verbal communication (pp. 13–19).Saratov: Publishing House of Sarat. University.
- Zvegintsev, V. Ð. (1976). Sentence and its retation to the language and speech. Moscow: University Press.
References
Ðleksandrova, O. V. (2007).Some peculiarities of speech and its structure.Moscow: LENÐND.
Ðlekseeva, L. M. (2013).The use of metaphors in a discourse. Perm': RIO PGNIU.
Arutyunova, N.D. (1990). Discourse. In V. N.Yartseva (Ed.),Linguistic Encyclopedic Dictionary(pp. 136–137). Moscow: Sov. Encyclopedia.
Benvenist, E. (2002). General linguistics. Moscow: URSS.
Dementiev, V.V. (2000). The situation of indirect communication. Problems of verbal communication (pp. 31–43). Saratov: Publishing House of Sarat. University.
Foucault, M. (2004). Archeology of knowledge. Saint-Petersburg:Gumanitarnaya akademiya.
Goldin, V.E., Sirotinina O.B., Yagubova M.A. (2003).Russian language and culture of speech. Moscow: URSSeditorial.
Habermas, K.Y.(2000). Moral conscience and communicative action. Saint-Petersburg:Nauka.
Karasik, V. I. (2004). Language circle: personality, concepts, discourse. Moscow: GNOZIS.
Karasik, V. I. (2000). Structure of institutional discourse in problems of verbal communication.Problems of verbal communication(pp. 25–33).Saratov: Publishing House of Sarat. University.
Kibrik, Ð. Ð. (1994). Cognitive studies on discourse. Issues of Linguistics, 5, 126−139.
Kolokoltseva, T.N. (2000).The role of dialogue and dialogicity in the modern communicative space (based on the media). Problems of verbal communication (pp. 50–57).Saratov: Publishing House of Sarat. University.
Kormilitsyna, M.A. (2000). Reflectives in speech communication.Problems of verbal communication (pp. 20–25).Saratov: Publishing House of Sarat. University.
Krasnykh, V. V. (2002). Ethno-psycholinguistics and linguocultorology. Moscow: Gnozis.
Kubryakova, E. S. (2012). Searching for the essence of a language. Moscow: Znak.
Makarova, T. C. (2018). The problem of interpretation of historical political discourse.Political linguistics, 3 (69), 114−121. DOI: https://doi.org/10.26170/pl18-03-15
Mishlanova, S. L., Khrustaleva, M. Ð. (2009). Interference: cognitive discourse analysis of synonymy:monography. Perm: PGU.
Shiryaev, E.N. (2000). The structure of intentional conflict dialogs of the spoken language. Problems of verbal communication (pp. 80–85).Saratov: Publishing House of Sarat. University.
Sirotinina, O. B. (1994). Texts, textoids, discourses in the area of colloquial speech. InN. A. Kupina, T. V. Matveeva (Ed.), Man − text − culture: collection monograph (pp. 105–124). Yekaterinburg: Institute of Regional Development. Education.
Stolyarova, E.A. (2000).On some difficulties of the lexicographic representation of everyday communication. Problems of verbal communication (pp. 76–79).Saratov: Publishing House of Sarat. University.
Zakharova, E.P. (2000). Types of communicative categories. Problems of verbal communication (pp. 13–19).Saratov: Publishing House of Sarat. University.
Zvegintsev, V. Ð. (1976). Sentence and its retation to the language and speech. Moscow: University Press.