The use of biblical phraseological units in the speech of politicians: V. Putin, V.V. Zhirinovsky, M. D. Prokhorov. Analysis of the functioning of phraseological units in political printed texts of the QMS

Characteristics of the problems of phraseology in English and Russian languages. Identification of phraseological units based on political debates and determination of their semantic features and evaluative component. Phraseological adhesions, unities, combinations.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/

INconducting

Political phraseology is a living layer, constantly changing, little studied. Politicians often use phraseological units in their speech and do so to varying degrees successfully. Sometimes they themselves are the authors of popular words and expressions, which are subsequently widely used in popular speech. The impact of a politician’s speech and the acceptance or rejection of his ideas largely depend on the appropriateness, accuracy and originality of the use of phraseological units. Mistakes and cliches can be very costly for politicians.

The object of research in our work is idioms, phraseological units and phraseological unities of the English language related to the sphere of human political activity. The range of phraseological units studied includes those semantically oriented towards human political activity, as well as units whose main component denotes political activity.

The choice of phraseological units that are semantically oriented toward human political activity as an object of study is determined by several factors. Firstly, one of the main sources of origin of phraseological units is professional speech. Terms and colloquial or colloquial phraseological units are widely used in it. This phenomenon is especially evident in the political field. The research material was based on the statements of various political figures.

The relevance of the study is determined by the fact that these PU data are used quite often, since politics is a sphere of human activity, the meaning of which will always be of the most lively interest. But since in phraseology there are few works on the analysis and research of this group of phraseological units, there is a need to study them and develop classifications.

In the process of work, the methods of phraseological identification and phraseological analysis of A.V. Kunin were applied.

Research objectives:

1. Study of theoretical literature on the problems of phraseology of English and Russian languages.

2. Identification of phraseological units based on the material of political debates and determination of their evaluative component.

Research objectives:

1. Select from the phraseological fund of the English language phraseological units, both semantically oriented towards politics, and phraseological units found in the speech of politicians

2. Determine the criteria for classifying phraseological units according to their evaluation component.

3. Study the semantic features of the data of phraseological units.

To solve the problems at different stages of the study, we used scientific works E.F.Arsentyeva, A.I.Alekhina, N.N.Amosova, Ya.I. Retzker, V.N. Komissarov and others.

Emotions are one of the forms of reflecting reality and understanding it. Emotions are expressed by linguistic means only when reflected by consciousness. Emotions - a form of a person’s attitude to reality - are always accompanied by an assessment.

And even in politics, where the main rule is to be objective, impartial and fair, expressive, emotive, figurative and evaluative phraseological units are often used. We examined the category of evaluativeness of the studied phraseological units.

The research material included scientific articles, literature devoted to the problem of phraseology, texts of political debates of various political figures, as well as Internet sites.

The course work consists of the following structural parts:

· introduction, which describes the relevance, significance, object and subject of the study;

Theoretical and practical chapters. In the theoretical chapter, an analysis of the scientific literature on the problem of phraseology was carried out, an interpretation of the concept of “phraseological unit” was given, and different kinds phraseological units based on the semantic cohesion of components, the features of political phraseology are highlighted, and the definition of the concept “debate” is revealed.

1. Phraseology as a linguistic discipline. The connection between phraseology and other sciences

Phraseology is the science of phraseological units (phraseologisms), i.e. about stable combinations of words with complicated semantics that are not formed according to generative structural-semantic models of variable combinations.

Phraseological units fill gaps in the lexical system of language, which cannot fully provide the name of the (new) aspects of reality known by man, and in many cases are the only designations of objects, properties, processes, states, situations, etc. The formation of phraseological units weakens the contradiction between the needs of thinking and the limited lexical resources of the language. In those cases when a phraseological unit has a lexical synonym, they usually differ stylistically.

Phraseologisms are highly informative units of language; they cannot be considered "adornment" or "excess". A similar interpretation of phraseological units is found in some works and is currently outdated. Phraseologisms are one of the linguistic universals, since there are no languages ​​without phraseological units. English phraseology is very rich and has a long history.

Phraseology is an extremely complex phenomenon, the study of which requires its own research method, as well as the use of data from other sciences - lexicology, grammar, stylistics, phonetics, history of language, history, philosophy, logic and regional studies.

The opinions of linguists on a number of problems of phraseology differ, and this is quite natural. However, an important task for linguists working in the field of phraseology is to combine efforts and find common ground in the interests of both the theory of phraseology and the practice of teaching foreign languages.

In the English and American linguistic literature there are few works specifically devoted to the theory of phraseology, but even the most significant works available do not raise such fundamental questions as scientifically based criteria for identifying phraseological units, the relationship of phraseological units and words, the systematic nature of phraseology, phraseological variation, phrase formation, the method of studying phraseology etc. Also, English and American scientists do not raise the question of phraseology as a linguistic discipline. This explains the lack of a name for this discipline in English.

Charles Bally introduced the term phraseologie, meaning “a branch of stylistics that studies related phrases,” but this term did not acquire citizenship rights in the works of Western European and American linguists and is used in three other meanings: 1) choice of words, form of expression, formulation; 2) language, syllable, style; 3) expressions, phrases. This is confirmed by the definitions of the word phraseology in English and American dictionaries.

Over the past decades, phraseology has outgrown the framework of one of the sections of lexicology and has become an independent linguistic discipline, which has its own object and methods of its study.

Phraseology is associated with history, literary studies and linguistic studies, but primarily with linguistic disciplines: lexicology, semantics, grammar, phonetics, stylistics, history of language, etymology, text linguistics and general linguistics. Phraseologisms consist of words, and the word is the main object of study of lexicology. Lexicology data make it possible to determine the nature of the components of phraseological units and the various degrees of “wordiness” of these components. The theory of lexical meaning developed in semantics helps to identify the semantic specificity of phraseological units and highlight different types of meaning in the field of phraseology. A word as part of phraseological units does not always lose its morphological features, morphology helps to establish what has been lost and what has been preserved. Phraseology includes phrases of various structural types, including phraseological units with the structure of phrases and sentences. Syntax data is very important for identifying the grammatical specifics of these phrases, their grammatical structure and functions. A word as part of a phraseological unit is characterized by a certain phonetic appearance, but in the process of development it can change. In both cases, phonetic data cannot be ignored. The stylistic potential of phraseological units, especially idioms and idiomatic units, is very significant. Their meaning has a high proportion of the connotative aspect. Phraseological stylistics, which studies the stylistic possibilities of phraseological units, relies on the experience of lexical stylistics, in particular, in the development of certain stylistic devices. Data from the history of language and etymology are important in the etymological analysis of phraseological units. The analysis of speech actualization of phraseological units, both usual and occasional, is based on the theory of text linguistics.

Phraseology enriches lexicology with information about the changes that words in the composition of phraseological units undergo, and lexical stylistics with data on the usual and occasional stylistic features of phraseological units, and also provides Additional information in many branches of general linguistics. Analysis of phraseological material is very important for linguistic and cultural studies. Unfortunately, phraseological information is still poorly used by other disciplines. It is all the more gratifying to note the widespread use of phraseological material in the book by E.M. Vereshchagin and V.G. Kostomarov, who emphasize that “a number of phraseological units contain a national-cultural component in their semantics - either synchronously, from the standpoint of modern linguistic consciousness, or diachronically, i.e. only because of its connection with the national culture of the prototype phrase.”

1. 1 The concept of a phraseological unit

phraseological political debate semantic

The word is the main, but not the only means of nomination in the language system. In speech, it tends to appear in combinations with other words, and the principle of organizing them into phrases is regulated by syntactic norms and rules. Such combinations are created according to existing models in the language. For example, the A + N model, reflecting the fundamental possibility of combining an adjective and a noun, can be filled with an infinite number of components that meet the requirements of the model, and the result of such an operation is quite predictable: the resulting combination will mean something that has a certain attribute. In identical situations, identical phrases are often used: May I come in? Knock at the door, etc. This combination of words is usually used in a fixed form and is reproduced in speech as a ready-made block. Such combinations are stable, but belong to the general, and not the phraseological fund of the vocabulary. The point is that there are no semantic changes in the components of such combinations; they retain their meaning, sometimes changing only the function, as, for example, in the stable expression Good morning, the nominative function - a description of the time of day - is replaced by a contact one - a greeting. If the stability of the expression is complemented by a semantic change in the component or components, we are dealing with a phraseological unit. Despite the fact that phraseological units are combinations of words, they are considered by linguists not from the standpoint of syntax, as free combinations, but from lexicology. There are several reasons for this.

First of all, in a free phrase created according to the model, it is possible to replace any of the components within the framework of this model. Thus, the adjective red can be used in combination with a huge variety of nouns (red frock, red banner, red strip, red hair, etc.), retaining its meaning of color. Similarly, any noun denoting an object potentially capable of having a feature, according to the same model, will be combined with an infinite number of adjectives that convey this feature (red frock, dirty frock, new frock, expensive frock, etc.). In a phraseological combination, the connection between the components is rigid and replacing any of them is impossible without destroying the meaning of the entire unit. For example, the combination black sheep (= the worst member), although it is built according to the regular A + N model, cannot be reproduced with the same meaning even with minimal semantically significant substitutions (black ram or gray sheep). Formally corresponding to the language model, phraseological units represent a single use of the language model to convey any semantic structure in a permanent context.

Another reason why phraseological units are classified as objects of lexicological research is the presence of such a combination of common features with the word. Like the word, phraseological units are not created in the process of speech from units of a lower level, but are reproduced as a ready-made block. This feature indicates that in the phraseological unit, as in the word, there is a single lexical meaning; the ability to correlate with any part of speech and act as a single member of a sentence for the entire combination signals that the phraseological unit has a grammatical meaning. Thus, in the example Instead of taking urgent measures the government chose sitting on the fence, the phrase sit on the fence has a single lexical meaning waiting and performs the general grammatical function of the nominal part of a compound predicate (and not the predicate and adverbial place, as would be the case in the case of a free combinations like …chose sitting in the pub).

There are cases when, like the word, phraseological units are subject to rethinking with the subsequent development of polysemy. An example of such a phraseological unit is the expression to place oneself on record, which has two meanings: to do smth noteworthy and to say smth. in public The ability of a phraseological unit to be rethought is also reflected in the stylistic component of its meaning. For example, the stable combination wear and tear can be applied both to describe the physical wear and tear of something (breaking down) and the emotional state (overstrain). In the latter case, the expression is quite rigidly assigned to the colloquial stylistic layer, while the first meaning can even be used in a terminological function.

The cohesion of a phraseological unit allows it to undergo word-formation processes, such as affixation. Thus, from the phraseological unit brain-trust the unit brain-truster is formed by adding the suffix -- er, and from single-rhyme - single-rhymer.

However, unlike a word, phraseological units in speech can vary more strongly, allowing grammatical changes in components within a fixed form. This is especially clearly seen in the presence of a verb component in the phraseological unit: I ground my teeth; he was grinding his teeth; let her grind her teeth then, etc. Changes are also possible in adjective components, although they are less common and bring additional expressiveness to phraseological units: You are the coolest cucumber I "ve ever met. Thus, phraseological units are functionally and semantically similar to a word, although formally they are phrases.

So, a phraseological unit (PU) is an unmodeled phrase connected by semantic unity. In speech, such unity is not created, but is reproduced in finished form (not modeled) and functions as a single member of the sentence. Small variations in the structure of phraseological units do not affect these basic features.

Despite their lack of modeling, phraseological units are quite clearly distributed according to the types of structures that form them. First of all, these are phraseological units that coincide in form with the corresponding free phrases (take silk; break the ice, etc.). The second group is formed by coordinating structures (pick and choose; rain or shine; light to darkness; for love or money; by hook or by crook; etc.). The third group consists of phraseological units with a predicative structure (as the matter stands; before you could say Jack Robinson; as the crow flies). Adjacent to it are phraseological units in the form of the imperative mood, which are interjectional in nature (Take it easy! Draw it mild! Bless my soul! Take your time; etc.), as well as units of a comparative nature (as dead as a door-nail; as mad as a hatter; etc.). Standing somewhat apart are single-vertex structures, consisting of one full-valued and one or several function words (behind the scenes; in the blood; for good), and verb-postpositive phraseological units located on the border of the phraseological fund (to bear up; to give in; etc .).

According to the classification proposed by A.V. Kunin, phraseological units form two main groups in accordance with the nature of their functioning in speech. Nominative units name objects, phenomena, signs and may have different structure(a bitter pill to swallow; a wolf in sheep's clothing; a cock-and-bull story; to stir up a hornets" nest; much cry and little wool; to call a spade a spade; etc.). Nominative-communicative phraseological units perform the functions of enhancing speech and are often close to interjections, despite the variety of structural types (as hell; birds of a feather; this cat won't jump; the fat's in the fire; etc.).

The phraseological fund of a language can be represented in the form of a semantic structure that has its own core and periphery. The core of the structure is phraseological units, the components of which have completely changed their meaning under the influence of each other. V.V. Vinogradov calls such units phraseological fusions; in English studies, the term proposed by N. N. Amosova is more accepted - idioms (mare's nest - nonsence; spill the beans - reveal a secret). Phrase units that retain the direct meaning of one of the components and are directly adjacent seem to be less welded together. to the core of the fund. In the terminology of V.V. Vinogradov, these are phraseological unities, in the terminology of N.N. Amosova - phrasemes (husband's tea - very weak tea; dressed up to the nines - dressed to perfection).

1. 2 Classification of phraseological units

The classification of phraseological units from the point of view of the semantic unity of their components belongs to academician V.V. Vinogradov. As you know, phraseological units arise from a free combination of words, which are used in a figurative meaning. Gradually, the portability is forgotten, erased, and the combination becomes stable. Depending on how much the nominative meanings of the components of a phraseological unit are erased, how strong the figurative meaning is in them, V.V. Vinogradov divides them into three types: “phraseological adhesions, phraseological unities and phraseological combinations.” Let's consider these types of phraseological units in relation to modern English.

1.2.1 Phraseological adjunctions

Phraseological combinations, or idioms, are absolutely indivisible, indecomposable stable combinations, general meaning which does not depend on the meaning of their constituent words: kick the bucket (colloquial) - bend over, die; - stretch your legs; send smb. to Coventry - boycott someone, stop communicating with someone; at bay - driven, in a hopeless situation; be at smb."s beck and call - to be always ready to serve; - to be at your beck and call; to rain cats and dogs - to pour like buckets (about rain); be all thumbs - to be awkward, clumsy; Kilkenny cats - deadly enemies. Phraseological fusions arose on the basis of figurative meanings of their components, but subsequently these figurative meanings became incomprehensible from the point of view of modern language. “The imagery of phraseological fusions is revealed only historically. For example, the words “bay”, meaning “dead end”, and “beck” - “wave of the hand” are archaisms and are not used anywhere other than the phraseological unit given above. Or, for example, the expression to be all thumbs was historically formed from the expression one's fingers are all thumbs. We see something similar in the phraseological units Kilkenny cats (which, apparently, goes back to the legend of a fierce struggle between the cities of Kilkenny and Irishtown in the 17th century, which led to their ruin) and send smb. to Coventry (Clarendon’s book “The History of the Great Rebellion and Civil Wars in England” says that during the English Revolution in the city of Coventry there was a prison in which exiled royalists were kept).

Thus, in phraseological fusions the connection between direct and figurative meanings has been lost; the figurative has become the main one for them. That is why phraseological fusions are difficult to translate into other languages.

Phraseological fusions have a number of characteristic features:

they may include so-called necrotisms - words that are not used anywhere except for this fusion and are therefore incomprehensible from the point of view of modern language;

adhesions may include archaisms;

they are syntactically indecomposable;

in most cases, it is impossible to rearrange the components;

they are characterized by impenetrability - they do not allow additional words into their composition.

Losing their independent lexical meaning, “...words included in the structure of a phraseological fusion turn into components of a complex lexical unit, which approaches the meaning of a separate word.” Therefore, many phraseological combinations are synonymous with the words: kick the bucket - to die; ; send smb. to Coventry - to ignore, etc. But we should not forget that, as stated in the chapter on the equivalence of a phraseological unit to a word, from the point of view of stylistics, phraseological units and the word are far from each other.

1. 2 .2 Phraseological unities

Phraseological unities are such stable combinations of words in which, if there is a common figurative meaning signs of semantic separation of components are clearly preserved: to spill the beans - give out a secret; to burn bridges - burn bridges; to have other fish to fry - to have more important things to do; to throw dust into smb."s eyes - talk with teeth; to burn one"s fingers - get burned on something; to throw mud at smb. - throw mud; to be narrow in the shoulders - not to understand jokes; to paint the devil blacker than he is - to thicken the paint; to put a spoke in smb."s wheel - put spokes in the wheels; to hold one"s cards close to one"s chest - keep something secret, not disclose something, keep quiet, ~ keep your mouth shut; to gild refined gold - to gild pure gold, to try to improve, to decorate something that is already quite good; to paint the lily - to tint the color of a lily, to try to improve or decorate something that does not need improvement.

Phraseological unities are somewhat closer to phraseological fusions in their imagery and metaphor. But unlike phraseological fusions, where figurative content is revealed only diachronically, in phraseological unities, figurativeness and portability are realized from the point of view of modern language. No wonder Academician V.V. Vinogradov considers imagery characteristic feature only phraseological unities.

The connection between the components of phraseological unity is motivated, and metaphorization is clearly felt.” To understand phraseological unity, it is necessary to perceive its components in a figurative meaning. For example, the meaning of the expression make a mountain out of a molehill is to make a mountain out of a mountain, i.e. to greatly exaggerate something (literally, to make a mountain out of the mound of a mole hole), is revealed only if the word molehill is considered in the meaning of “something insignificant, small,” and the word mountain is “something very large.” There are no words in the phraseological units that are not understandable from the point of view of modern language.

Characteristic features of phraseological units:

vivid imagery and the resulting possibility of coincidence with parallel existing phrases (cf.: to throw dust into smb."s eyes, to be narrow in the shoulders, to burn one"s fingers, to burn bridges);

preserving the semantics of individual components (to put a spoke in smb."s wheel);

the impossibility of replacing some components with others (to hold one's cards close to one's chest);

emotional and expressive coloring plays a decisive role (to throw dust into smb."s eyes, to paint the devil blacker than he is);

the ability to enter into synonymous relationships with individual words or other phraseological units (to gild refined gold - to paint the lily).

1.2.3 Phraseological combinations

Phraseological combinations are stable phrases that include words with both free and phraseologically related meanings: a bosom friend - bosom friend, a pitched battle - a fierce fight, (to have) a narrow escape - to be saved by a miracle, to frown one "s eyebrows - frown, Adam"s apple - Adam's apple, a Sisyfean labor - Sisyphean labor, rack one"s brains - rack your brains (think hard, remember), to pay attention to smb. - pay attention to someone , etc.

Unlike phraseological adhesions and phraseological unities, which have a holistic, indecomposable meaning, phraseological combinations are characterized by semantic decomposability. In this respect, they come close to free phrases.

Characteristic features of phraseological combinations:

in them, variation of one of the components is allowed (a bosom friend - a bosom friend, a bosom buddy - a bosom buddy);

a synonymous replacement of the core word is possible (a pitched battle - a fierce fight, a fierce battle - a fierce fight);

it is possible to include definitions (he frowned his thick eyebrows, he frowned his thick eyebrows);

permissible rearrangement of components (a Sisyfean labor - Sisyphus's work, a labor of Sisyphus - the work of Sisyphus);

the free use of one of the components and the associated use of the other is mandatory (a bosom friend - a bosom friend: a bosom cannot be an enemy or anyone else).

The promotion of reproducibility as the main feature of phraseological units allowed Professor N.M. Shansky to further develop the classification of Academician V.V. Vinogradov and identify the fourth type of phraseological units - the so-called phraseological expressions."

1.2.4 Phraseological expressions

Phraseological expressions include phraseological units that are stable in their composition and use, which consist entirely of words with a free nominative meaning and are semantically divisible. Their only feature is reproducibility: they are used as ready-made speech units with a constant lexical composition and certain semantics.

Phraseological expressions are only phrases with the literal meaning of the components. Phraseological expressions include numerous English proverbs and sayings that are used in their literal meaning and do not have a figurative allegorical meaning: live and learn - live forever, learn forever; better untaught than ill taught - it is better to be unlearned than to be incorrectly taught; many men, many minds - how many heads, so many minds; easier said then done - easier said than done; nothing is impossible to a willing heart - whoever wants will achieve it.

2. Political phraseology

Phraseological units are usually attached to one or another area human activity. Taking this into account, phraseological units related to science, history, art, economics, etc. are distinguished. Thus, computer science terms and computer terms are currently widely used. For example: a storage device, an inkjet printer, etc. Physics of the medical field: the plague of the 20th century, acupressure.

One of the richest layers of modern phraseology are phrases associated with the social and political life of the country. These are terminological names of phenomena of social and political life, traditional phraseological units used by politicians, as well as popular words and expressions belonging to one or another politician.

What is typical for communication in the political sphere? As studies note, communication in the sphere of politics is agonistic - it reflects a situation of struggle for power. Therefore, political means are usually evaluative, which is expressed, for example, with the help of idiologemes - words and expressions that evaluate the so-called phenomenon from the point of view of a particular political party. This is how the alienness of a person or phenomenon is marked.

It is extremely unprofitable for politicians to show the true state of things, and they strive to either improve or worsen it. To do this, they resort to euphemisms and dysphemisms. Dysphemisms “work” to worsen the denotation through exaggeration of its negative attribute or replacement of a positive assessment with a negative one. They are used to shape the perception of an object as suspicious and unwanted. Euphemisms “work” to improve an object, remove hostility towards it, and hide the truth about its negative aspects. Politicians resort to euphemisms, for example, when they talk about the results of their activities and dysphemisms, exaggerating the negative consequences of the actions of their political opponents.

These strategies for evading the truth become possible due to another feature of political communication, which is defined as the phantomism of denotation. Political judgment is a phantom that has no real object. It cannot be immediately verified, so politicians appeal not to reason, but to faith, including faith in the magic of words. This leads to the emergence of myths - a secondary reality that exists insofar as the masses believe in it. Linguistic carriers of myths are mythologems. As a rule, these are clichéd phrases reproduced in ready-made form, which, with a “broad” approach, are studied in phraseology.

Communication in the political sphere occurs both with the help of non-verbal signs (flag, emblem, building) and with the help of verbal ones (words and phrases).

We see that the peculiarities of political discourse allow unscrupulous politicians to manipulate human consciousness. That is why the role of verbal signs is so great in politics.

The features of political discourse are directly reflected in political phraseology. Phrases, like words, are often used to manipulate public consciousness. Thus, many phraseological units are idiologemes, that is, they not only name an object, but also evaluate it from the point of view of a particular person, group, or party.

Research shows that one of the important components of modern political communication is its metaphorical nature. Many metaphors are often repeated, reproduced in the speech of politicians and in the media.

Thus, we can conclude that in their speeches politicians call on people to feel alarm and change public life, which is very important for political struggle.

Features of debates as a genre of speech

Debate (eng. debate, debating) is a formal method of conducting a dispute in which the parties interact with each other, presenting certain points of view, in order to convince a third party (spectators, judges, etc.) Debate as a form of dispute , differs from mere logical argumentation, which only tests things for consistency in terms of axioms, and also from a dispute about facts, which is interested only in what happened or did not happen. Although both logical consistency and factual accuracy, as well as emotional appeal to the public, are important elements of persuasion, in a debate one side often prevails over the other by presenting a better “meaning” and/or structure for viewing the issue.

In a formal debate competition, there are specific rules for the conduct of the discussion, deciding who wins/loses, and the procedure/format for conducting it. Informal debate is more common, but the quality and depth of debate is enhanced by having specialized knowledge, skills and debating skills. Deliberative bodies (parliaments, legislatures) and assemblies of all kinds are involved in the process of debate. The results of the debate can be determined by votes from spectators or judges, or a combination of both. Formal debates between candidates for elected office, such as debates between party leaders or debates between candidates for the presidency, are normal procedure in a democracy.

What associations do we have when we hear the word “Debate”? Dispute, discussion, clash of opinions, presidential elections...

Over the past two or three centuries, society has been steadily moving towards democracy, dialogue and debate. This form of communication has proven its viability and effectiveness, since in modern times only an “open society” can exist and develop over time, adapting to rapidly changing conditions. Closed systems, where complete unanimity and stability reign, and people are obedient executors of the decisions of the “power vertical,” are doomed to self-destruction.

This dilemma was first formulated by the Austrian philosopher Karl Popper, who spent most of his life in England, where he wrote one of his main works, “The Open Society and Its Enemies” (1945). In it, Popper writes that he believes in the existence of absolute truth, but does not believe anyone who believes that he has it. He argues that knowledge is constantly increasing and conclusions are temporary and it is improved only through its refutation - strict public testing of ideas and opinions.

In this work, Karl Popper emphasizes the special value of developing critical (non-dogmatic) thinking in a free person, that is, a joint process of dialogue and open discussion of certain problems. Since human thinking is verbal in nature, it is necessary, according to Popper, to develop the ability to think independently and defend and prove one’s opinion, convincing others that one is right. This is where the importance of debate as a form of persuasion is emphasized. The panelist hopes to change others' opinions about what is best or right.

The negative evaluative component stands out from the studied phraseological units with condemnation fixed in the phraseological meaning as a statement of a socially established assessment of certain properties of the human personality.

Negative rating.

Identification of persons:

peanut politician - American petty politician;

ward heeler - amer. political intriguer, slander.

Designation of non-persons:

lay pipe (or pipes) - American. political jargon - engage in intrigue, buy votes, “process” voters (hence pipe - laying - political intrigue, “processing” voters) [the expression appeared during the construction of the Croton water supply in New York in 1848 and is associated with fraudulent tricks of officials and contractors];

the policy of pin pricks - the policy of pin pricks;

unparliamentary language - “unparliamentary expressions” (about rude, harsh expressions).

Phraseological units with a positive evaluative component include units whose phraseological meaning enshrines approval as a statement of a socially established assessment of certain properties of the human personality.

Positive review.

Identification of persons:

Similarity based on the degree of respect for someone:

the Grand Old Man (abbr. G.O.M.) - a venerable figure [nickname of the English politician W. Gladstone (W. Gladstone 1809 - 98)]

my honorable friend - parl. my honorable brother (an address from one member of parliament to another or a mention of him during a speech).

Designation of non-persons:

kid -gloves policy - moderate, cautious policy;

Well, haven't you always advocated a kid - gloves policy? Is that how you hide your lack of decisiveness? (D. Carter, “Tomorrow Is with Us,” ch. XXXIII).

But weren’t you yourself always a supporter of a cautious policy? Apparently they were covering up a lack of determination, huh?

Old Merry England - “good old England” (idealization of the English past, characteristic of the privileged classes);

parliamentary language - expressions allowed in parliament, “parliamentary language”; decomposition polite language.

Phrases with a neutral evaluative component do not have pronounced approval or condemnation. A.V. Kunin divides such phraseological units into two types:

· ambivalent units - phraseological units with a two-valued evaluative charge, which in different contexts can realize a positive or negative meaning. In this case, the positive or negative seme will be of an occasional nature.

Fabian policy (tactics) - a cautious, wait-and-see policy in the fight against the enemy [after the Roman commander Fabius, nicknamed the “Tardier”].

· Phraseological units whose phraseological meaning is neutral and does not depend on the context.

No rating

Identification of persons:

running mate - American political candidate for vice president;

reach the wool - sack - become Lord Chancellor (chairman of the House of Lords) [according to the ancient custom (from the time of trade rivalry between England and Holland), the Lord Chancellor, chairman of the House of Lords, sits on a sack of wool].

Designation of non-persons:

Union Jack is the state flag of the United Kingdom (i.e. England, Scotland and Ireland) [the name arose under James I. After the union of England with Scotland in 1603, the English flag was combined with the Scottish one, and after the union with Ireland in 1801. - with Irish];

And once more England"s back to the wall with one eye glued on the Union Jack and her world - encircling possessions and the other on America as her Empire - saving money bank (Th. Dreiser, "America is Worth Saving", ch. V).

Finding itself pressed against the wall, England looks with one eye at the British national flag and at its possessions encircling the world, and with the other at America, viewing it as a bank for saving the British Empire.

Some phraseological units can refer to both persons and non-persons, for example:

Brother Jonathan - American joking Yankees (nickname for Americans); US government [on behalf of Jonathan Trumbell, Governor of Connecticut, whom President Washington called Brother Jonathan;

...Not content with his own native religious machinery, the British bourgeois appealed to Brother Jonathan, the greatest organizer in the existence of religion as a trade, and imported from America revivalism... (F.Engeis, "Socialism: Utopian and Scientific ", Special introduction to the English Edition of 1892).

...Not content with their own religious apparatus, the English bourgeoisie turned to “Brother Jonathan,” the greatest organizer of religious speculation at that time, and imported revivalism from America...

The identification of negative, positive and neutral usual evaluative semes is of great importance when comparing the connotative macroelement of multilingual phraseological units to identify different types of phraseological correspondences.

Many terms and professionalisms acquire a rethought meaning and are included in idiomatic expressions:

fast counter - 1) Amer. watered clever vote counter; 2) transfer scoundrel, swindler.

The second phraseosemantic variant is a derivative of the first. All idiophraseomatisms have a living internal form.

We distributed the selected phraseological units into the following semantic groups:

Phrases denoting laws:

the Act of Settlement - law on succession to the throne in England (1701)

Phrases denoting the election procedure:

divide the House - parl. hold a roll call vote.

Phrases denoting the activities of parties and politicians:

loyalty purge - American purge of government agencies from employees suspected of political unreliability.

Phrases denoting political symbols:

the bird of Washington - colloquial American eagle (state emblem of the USA).

Zconclusion

While studying phraseology, we encountered many contradictions. As for the phraseology of the English language, we can talk about its formation as a linguistic discipline, which is facilitated by a wide range of phraseological studies in the field of the English language.

Based on the classification data of political phraseological units according to their evaluative component, we concluded that phraseological units with a negative evaluative component significantly prevail over phraseological units of two other types of assessment - positive and neutral. The general semantic asymmetry of the phraseological system (shift towards negative meanings) can be explained by a more acute and differentiated emotional and verbal reaction of people to negative phenomena, as well as characteristic of stressful ones, i.e. sharply negative emotional states with a tendency to use ready-made speech forms, including stable verbal complexes.

As a result of the study, it turned out that the phraseology of the English language is rich in phraseological units, the components of which are the names of the realities of political life. They represent one of the most significant layers of language.

We also analyzed the main sources of the emergence of phraseological units denoting the political sphere. Most constitute native English phraseological units. This can be explained by the importance that the monarchy and parliament have always played in the United Kingdom. Native English phraseological units are associated with the traditions, customs and beliefs of the English people, as well as with realities and historical facts.

Posted on Allbest.ru

Similar documents

Phraseological phrases of the Russian language. Classification of phraseological units. Phraseological fusions and unities. Phraseology in the context of culture. Main problems of linguoculturology. Russian phraseology in the mirror of national mentality.

thesis, added 08/18/2011


Classification of phraseological units of Russian and English languages. Characteristic features of phraseological semantics. Somatic phraseological units in modern English. Phraseological units with the somatism component “finger” / “finger”.

course work, added 04/12/2012


Different views philologists on the problems of phraseology. The main types of phraseological units: phraseological adhesions, unities and combinations. Biblical phraseological units in the Russian language system, their representation in the phraseological dictionary of A.M. Molotkov.

abstract, added 04/22/2011


Manifestation of the linguistic picture of the world of English and Russian languages ​​using the example of phraseological units with an adjectival component of color designation. Studying stable combinations of words with complex semantics. The emergence and development of color names in languages.

presentation, added 06/06/2015


The main types of phraseological units: phraseological adhesions (idioms), unities and combinations. Lexical indivisibility and integrity of phrases that perform the function of a separate lexeme. Grammatical forms and syntactic structure of phraseological units.

presentation, added 11/06/2013


Comparison of phraseological units of Russian and Polish languages ​​with a zoonym component. Systemic relations in phraseology: synonymy, antonymy, polysemy, homonymy of phraseological units, their origin and stylistic affiliation.

course work, added 03/20/2013


Structural-semantic and ideographic study of phraseological units used in business discourse. Identification of their pragmatic essence, cognitive, discursive and linguistic-cultural features. Methods of speech idiomatization of business communication.

thesis, added 02/25/2016


Phraseologisms, concept, essence, features and their classification. Phraseologisms with the somatic component “body part” in Russian and English. Classification of phraseological units of Russian and English languages ​​with the “body parts” component.

scientific work, added 02/25/2009


Directions for researching the most interesting aspects of the process of word creation in different sociocultural strata of society (based on the material of the English and Russian languages). Possibilities of folk etymology as a source of replenishment of the vocabulary of a language.

abstract, added 05/01/2013


Phraseology as a special system. Phraseological adhesions, combinations, expressions and unities in the works of A.P. Chekhov. Nominal, verbal and interjectional phraseological units. Lexico-grammatical types of phraseological units. Phrases consisting of an adverb and a verb.

The research analysis material is presented by 30 facts of phraseological units included in the political text (from newspapers of the special edition “Evening Chelyabinsk”, as well as newsletters and leaflets of the political parties of the Russian Federation “United Russia”, “A Just Russia”, “Yabloko”, “LDPR”) . (See Appendix A)

The choice of the above publications was determined by the intention to conduct an objective study: to consider phraseological units various types and determine their functions.

During the election campaign, plans and strategic plans published in various sources means of mass communication. The information is aimed at creating a positive image of the candidate and at destroying the image of rivals.

Let us give a brief description of the analyzed publications:

Propaganda, presentation, signaling and information sources of mass communication during the pre-election stage are usually intended for distribution into the hands of voters.

There are the following types of propaganda leaflets:

1.Fight-oriented - the first part creates an image of the enemy or a negative attitude towards the perception of the opponent. Main part: indicates the path to fight the enemy or forms a positive perception of the candidate.

2.Biographical – outlining a short biography of the candidate, creating the desired image of the latter.

3.Programmatic – with a brief summary of the program.

A campaign leaflet for distribution to voters often contains a minimum of useful information (leaflets with environmental telephone numbers, a calendar, rules of conduct in emergency situations, etc.).

A characteristic feature of leaflets is the dominant desire to consolidate the candidate’s image with the help of “key signals” (portraits accompanied by a phrase); as practice has shown, small-sized, intelligible in content, targeted color leaflets were better perceived.

Through the press, a certain image of the candidate is formed (his human face - education, career, hobbies, the image of a good family man, services to the residents of the city/region, republic, photos with political leaders). A special issue of a newspaper is a special type of propaganda product that combines the advantages of a leaflet, poster and newspaper. On the one hand, it allows you to briefly introduce the candidate in the form of slogans, aphorisms, and a large photograph; on the other hand, it is possible to present a detailed program to an interested voter. Special editions of newspapers allow the candidate to sufficiently fully express his views and conduct a detailed monologue with voters.

Before developing election campaigns, there are four questions regarding the use of special editions of newspapers.

1. The need to use this type of campaigning, its role in the election campaign;

2. Selecting the type of special issue, either based on an existing publication, or publishing an original newspaper, determining its volume, circulation format;

4.Number of special issues, release time, distribution methods.

Ideally, during the campaign, all communication channels through which information about candidates for elected positions can reach voters should be used. However, in practice there are not always opportunities for this; you have to choose the most effective means of campaigning for the specific circumstances of the campaign, select sources of information that are most popular among the population, through which it is possible to more fully convey information about the candidate, with a minimum of costs.

Our research has shown that political texts use phraseological units with the following functions: (see Appendix B)

Nominative;

Communicative;

Aesthetic;

Figurative;

Estimated;

Expressive.

Nominative (nominative) function of a phraseological unit. Phraseologism appears in the context of the names of objects, for example: “ There will be no “bear corners” in our region - this is the position of the governor and the United Russia party."(Evening Chelyabinsk “One asphalt, two asphalt” November 7, 2011, p. 3).

Communicative is a function of transmitting a message, focused on the context of the message, for example: “ We must not put up with the fact that “people are getting into people’s pockets,” and management and utility companies are issuing unreasonable bills for heat, electricity and water.”(Information bulletin “United Russia” “Good deeds at the final stage” November 14, 2011 p. 6).

Aesthetic function is an irreplaceable specific ability of text construction that ensures the socialization of the individual, for example: “That’s when power will be intended not to cut off a piece of the pie that God gave to our country, but to rationally organize our lives.”(A Just Russia “Do what you must and come what may” November 25, 2011 No. 11(29) p. 2).

The figurative function of a phraseological unit is the formation of linguistic culture, mastery of the artistic and figurative richness of speech, for example: “The government’s erroneous and ineffective financial decisions are eating up the lion's share funds from the federal budget, limit partially or completely the basic social functions of the state: increasing salaries of public sector employees, increasing the amount of pensions and benefits, sufficient funding of such budget items as culture, science, education, healthcare.”(A Just Russia “they promised Russia a miracle” November 25, 2011 No. 11(29) p. 5).

Estimating function - aimed at obtaining estimates, in general, consists of introducing a numerical position depending on a number of variables, for example: “The vicious circle could be broken with just one amendment, by allocating an additional 50 billion rubles to provide high-tech medical care”(A Just Russia “voting on healthcare” November 25, 2011 No. 11(29) p. 7).

The expressive function reflects the speaker’s attitude to what is being expressed and contains a direct expression of feelings, for example: “We lend a helping hand to business through the rapid development of transport, energy and communications infrastructure”(Information bulletin "United Russia" "Party everyday life" November 14, 2011 p. 3).

Having analyzed the political texts of mass media, we can identify the main predominant functions of the use of phraseological units. If we consider the result of the study as a percentage, we will highlight the following gradation:

33% is a figurative function;

20% – evaluation function of phraseological units;

17% – expressive function of phraseological units;

13% – aesthetic function of phraseological units;

10% – nominative function of phraseological units;

7% – communicative function of phraseological units.

Our research has shown that in most cases the following functions of phraseological units appear in political texts of mass media: figurative, evaluative and expressive.

We have determined that the function is determined by the focus and information-thematic structure of the article in the political text. Thus, in election campaign media, phraseological units with a strong emotional (expressive, figurative) coloring and persuasive (evaluative) characteristics are most often used.

During the study, we distributed phraseological units taken from political texts of mass media according to the classification of N.M. Shansky into the following groups:

1) phraseological fusions (absolutely indivisible stable combinations, the general meaning of which does not depend on the meaning of their constituent words);

2) phraseological unities (stable combinations of words in which, in the presence of a common figurative meaning, the signs of semantic separation of components are clearly preserved);

3) phraseological combinations (stable phrases, which include words with free and phraseological associated meanings);

4) phraseology of expression (a phraseological phrase that is stable in its composition and use, which is not only semantically divisible, but also consists entirely of words with a free meaning) (see Appendix B).

Let us give some illustrative examples of phraseological units included in this typology.

Fusion:

Didn't see it in my eyes(Not at all) – Evening Chelyabinsk “One asphalt, two asphalt” November 7. 2011 page 3.

Vicious circle(No way out) – A Just Russia “vote on healthcare” 25 Nov. 2011 No. 11(29)p. 7.

Put at risk(Create a dangerous, threatening, risky situation for someone) - “Do what you must and come what may” 25 Nov. 2011 No. 11(29)p. 2.

Unity:

The lion's share(The biggest, best part of something) – A Just Russia “they promised Russia a miracle” 25 Nov. 2011 No. 11(29)p. 5.

Split grain for an elephant(Absolutely not enough, too little) – A Just Russia “Valery Hartung: Let’s destroy the monopoly - establish stable prices” Nov 25. 2011 No. 11(29)p. 4, etc.

Dirty business(Insidious act, crime) – A Just Russia “Have you fallen out of both?” 14 Nov. 2011 No. 10(28)p. 5.

Combination:

Fencing a vegetable garden ( Start some troublesome business ) – Evening Chelyabinsk “Once asphalt, two asphalt” 7 Nov. 2011 page 3.

Lend a shoulder(About a conscientious person, incapable of theft or trickery) - A Just Russia “Do what you must and, come what may” 25 Nov. 2011 No. 11(29)p. 2.

Turn up one's nose(Be arrogant) – “United Russia” newsletter “Medvedev and Putin gave farewell words to “United Russia”” November 14. 2011 page 3.

With a broad gesture(To perform any act with the intention of showing one’s generosity, magnanimity and) – Yabloko Party (leaflet) 31 Nov. 2011

Expression:

Without a hitch(Easy and smooth, without interference or complications) - Evening Chelyabinsk “Five inconvenient questions for opponents of United Russia” November 21. 2011 page 3.

Pull the wool over someone's eyes(Create a false impression of your capabilities) - Vecherny Chelyabinsk “He who is silent is not heard” 7 Nov. 2011 page 3

A drop in the sea(A negligible amount compared to what is needed) - United Russia Newsletter “Among the many issues is compensation for housing and communal services” Nov 14. 2011 page 6.

Having carried out an analysis between the characteristics of the text and the typology of phraseological units, we obtained data that is entered into the table. (see Appendix B)

We also tried to determine whether the functioning of phraseological units depends on their classification.

As a result, we obtained the following results: of the four groups of phraseological units, combinations and expressions are most often used in political texts. We decided to record the results as a percentage:

30% – combination phraseological units;

30% – phraseological units of expression;

20% – phraseological units of fusion;

20% – phraseological units of unity.

To identify the dependence, we correlated phraseological units by typology and by function, resulting in the following result:

1. Phraseologism combinations contain: 16% expressive, 7% communicative, 7% evaluative and 4% figurative functions;

2. Phraseologisms of expression account for: 16% figurative, 7% aesthetic and 3% evaluative functions;

3. Phraseologisms fusion contain: 7% evaluative, 7% figurative, 3% expressive and 3% communicative functions;

4. Phraseologisms of unity make up: 7% figurative, 7% nominative, 3% aesthetic and 3% evaluative functions.

So, in the process of research, we noticed that combination phraseological units most often contain an expressive function in political texts. Phraseologisms of expression are marked by the predominance of figurative function. Phraseologisms of fusion simultaneously combine the same number of evaluative and figurative functions. Phraseologisms of unity are most often determined by the functioning of the nominative and figurative functions.

Conclusions on the second chapter:

Having carried out the study, we found out that there are 6 functions of phraseological units in the political texts of the mass communication system: nominative, communicative, aesthetic, figurative, evaluative, expressive. The most common of them were: figurative, evaluative and expressive.

We also analyzed four types of phraseological units in the political texts of the QMS: adhesions, unities, combinations and expressions. The study proved that of the four, combinations and expressions are used most often (in 30% of cases). We also determined that each type of phraseological unit has a number of special functions. So, as a result, we received the following result: combination phraseological units most often contain an expressive function in political texts. Phraseologisms of expression are marked by the predominance of figurative function. Phraseologisms of fusion simultaneously combine the same number of evaluative and figurative functions. Phraseologisms of unity are most often determined by the functioning of the nominative and figurative functions.

Hypothesis No. 1 was confirmed. Indeed, in printed political texts of mass media, the expressive, figurative and evaluative functions of phraseological units predominate;

Hypothesis No. 2 was confirmed, since we were able to prove that there is a relationship between the type and function of phraseological units. This means that the assumption that the type of phraseological unit is used in accordance with its function is correct

CONCLUSION

Political election texts are one of the most important areas of election campaigning. The most common type of information transmission is printing. Any campaign materials have the goal of inducing voters to vote for a particular candidate. And many printed publications of the election campaign include phraseological units in the text. In political printed texts, phraseology is constantly changing.

Phraseologisms are highly informative units of language. Features of political discourse are reflected in political phraseology. Phraseologisms are a means of positive transformations in printed texts of mass communication. In our opinion, thanks to its metaphorical and expressive nature, phraseological turns are so actively used in mass media, namely in the press, creating a special expressiveness, accuracy, and imagery of the text.

In our work, we tried to reveal the functional role of phraseological units in political texts of mass media. Authors of periodical publications most often use phraseological units for expressive and emotional coloring of the text.

In accordance with the hypothesis, phraseological units perform certain functions in the text: expressive, figurative, evaluative, therefore the research hypothesis is correct.

Thus, after analyzing the texts of the above newspapers and considering the use of phraseological units by the authors of the articles, we can come to the conclusion that phraseological units enrich the text, emotionally coloring it, transforming it.

So, as a result of the study, we found out that the types of phraseological units are used in accordance with their function. Having analyzed phraseological units in this way, we obtained the following result: combination phraseological units most often contain an expressive function in political texts. Phraseologisms of expression are marked by the predominance of figurative function. Phraseologisms of fusion simultaneously combine the same number of evaluative and figurative functions. Phraseologisms of unity are most often determined by the functioning of the nominative and figurative functions.

So, phraseological units help construct the text more figuratively and more interestingly. A bright, figurative phraseological turn attracts attention and arouses interest in the publication, and, consequently, the party’s rating increases.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Altunyan A.G. Analysis of political texts: Textbook. – M.: University book; Logos, 2006. – 384 p.

2. Anisimova Z.N. Basics of phraseology/Z.N. Anisimova. – Leningrad University Publishing House, 1963. – 192 p.

3. Annushkin V.I. Rhetoric. Express course: textbook. allowance / V.I. Annushkin. – 2nd ed. – M.: Flinta: Nauka, 2008. – 224 p.

4. Arkhangelsky V.L. Set phrases in modern Russian. – Rostov-on-Don: Publishing house. – in RSU, 1964. – 315 p.

5. Bayramova L.K. Components-symbols in phraseological units as carriers of implicit pragmatic information // Communicative-pragmatic aspects of phraseology: Abstracts. report international conf. – Volgograd, 1999. – 54 p.

6. Birikh, A.K. Russian phraseology. Historical and etymological dictionary: Ok. 6000 phraseological units / A.K. Birikh, V.M. Mokienko, L.I. Stepanova; edited by V. M. Mokienko; Saint Petersburg. state University, Interdepartment. words cab. them. B. A. Larina M.: Astrel, 2007 – 926 p.

7. Vvedenskaya L.A. Russian language and speech culture: textbook for universities / L.A. Vvedenskaya, L.G. Pavlova, E.Yu. Kashaeva. – ed. 29th. – Rostov-on-Don: Phoenix, 2010. – 539 p.

8. Volkov A.G. Use of political text by government institutions// http://www.nbuv.gov.ua/Articles/KultNar/knp47/knp47_140-42.pdf

9. Gavrilova M.V. Presidential discourse as a subject of political linguistics // Abstracts of reports. IV All-Russian Congress of Political Scientists "Democracy, security, effective governance: new challenges to political science." M., 2006. – 65 p.

10. Gvozdarev, Yu. A. Modern Russian language. Lexicology and phraseology: textbook. manual for universities / Yu. A. Gvozdarev M.; Rostov n/a: March, 2008 – 348 p.

11. Goykhman O.Ya., Nadeina T.M. Speech communication: Textbook. – 2nd ed., revised. and additional - M.: Infra-M, 2008. - 272 p.

12. Golub, I.B. Stylistics of the Russian language / I.B. Blue – 11th edition – M.: Iris-press, 2010. – 448 p.

13. Demyanov V.Z. Interpretation of political discourse in the media// http://evartist.narod.ru/text12/09.htm

14. Zhukov, V.P. Russian phraseology: Textbook. manual / V.P. Zhukov, A.V. Zhukov M.: Higher School, 2006 - 408 p.

15. Zemskaya, E.A. Language as an activity / E.A. Zemskaya. – M., 2004. – 551 p.

16. Karaulov, Yu.N. Russian language and linguistic personality / Yu.N. Karaulov. – M.: Publishing house LKI/URSS, 2007. – P. 220.

17. Kozhina M.N. Stylistics of the Russian language: textbook / M. N. Kozhina, L. R. Duskaeva, V.A. Salimovsky. – M.: Flinta: Nauka, 2008. – 464 p.

18. Krasnykh, V.V. Cognitive base and precedent phenomena in the system of other units and in communication / V.V. Krasnykh, D.B. Gudkov, I.V. Zakharenko, D.V. Bagaeva // Bulletin of Moscow State University. Philology. – 1997. Ser. 9. – No. 3. – 75 p.

19. Krysin, L. P. Modern Russian language. Lexical semantics. Lexicology. Phraseology. Lexicography: textbook. manual for universities / L. P. Krysin; Ross. acad. Sciences, Institute of Rus. language them. V. V. Vinogradova M.: Academy, 2007. – 239 p.

20. Kuznetsova N.V. Russian language and culture of speech: textbook / N.V. Kuznetsov. – 3rd ed. – M.: FORUM, 2010 – 368 p.

21. Lisochenko O.V. Rhetoric for journalists: precedent in language and speech: A textbook for university students / Ed. prof. L.V. Popovskaya. – Rostov-on-Don: “Phoenix”, 2007. – 318 p.

22. Nakhimova, E.A. On the criteria for identifying precedent phenomena in political texts / E.A. Nakhimova // Linguistics: Bulletin of the Ural Linguistic Society. – Ekaterinburg: Ural. state ped. univ., 2004. – 174 p.

23. Nikolenko, L. V. Lexicology and phraseology of the modern Russian language: Textbook. manual for universities / L. V. Nikolenko M.: Academia, 2005 – 140 p.

24. Perchik, L. S. Practical and functional stylistics of the Russian language: textbook. allowance / L.S. Pepper; Chelyab. state acad. culture and arts. – 2nd ed., rev. and additional – Chelyabinsk, 2006. – 85 p.

25. Radchenko, E. V. Russian phraseology and culture of speech: Textbook. allowance for self-employed people. student work / E. V. Radchenko; South-Ural. state University, Dept. General linguistics; SUSU Chelyabinsk: SUSU Publishing House, 2004 – 27 p.

26. Rakhmanova, L. I. Modern Russian language: Lexicon. Phraseology. Morphology: textbook. for universities / L. I. Rakhmanova, V. N. Suzdaltseva M.: Aspect Press, 2007. – 462 p.

27. Repina E.A. Political text as a means of speech influence // http://www.psyh-portret.ru/collection/ repina.html

28. Rosenthal, D. E. Modern Russian language / D. E. Rosenthal, I. B. Golub, M. A. Telenkova. – M.: Iris-press, 2004. – 448 p.

29. Russian language and speech culture: textbook / A.I. Dunev; under general edited by V.D. Chernyak. – M.: Yurayt Publishing House; Publishing house Jurayt, 2011. – 493 p.

30. Russian language and speech culture: textbook / pod. Ed. V. I. Maksimova, A. V. Golubeva. – 2nd ed., revised. and additional – M.: Yurayt Publishing House, 2011. – 358 p.

31. Russian language and speech culture: Textbook / Under. ed. prof. V. I. Maksimova. – M.: Gardariki, 2001. – 413 p.

32. Russian language and speech culture: Workbook. Part 1. Reference materials / under general. ed. E.V. Kharchenko, L.B. Kabtsyuba, V.N. Goncharova, L.V. Vybornova. – Chelyabinsk, 2008. – 48 p.

33. Savko, I. E. Russian language Part 1: Phonetics. Word formation. Lexicology. Phraseology. Lexicography. Morphology. Spelling: A manual for students Art. class and applicants / I. E. Savko Minsk: Harvest, 2005 – 478 p.

34. Semenets, O.P. Precedent text in newspaper language: dynamics of discourse of the 50s-90s. – Thesis. Ph.D. – St. Petersburg, 2004. – 266 p.

35. Modern Russian language: Theory. Analysis of linguistic units Part 1: Phonetics and orthoepy. Graphics and spelling. Lexicology. Phraseology. Lexicography. Morphemics. Word formation: textbook. for universities: 2 hours / E. I. Dibrova, L. L. Kasatkin, N. A. Nikolina, I. I. Shcheboleva; edited by E.I. Dibrova M.: Academy, 2006 – 479 p. : table

36. Modern Russian language: Phonetics. Vocabulary. Phraseology. Morphology (names): Lecture notes / Author's compilation. E. Nazarenko Rostov-on-Don: Phoenix, 2003 – 158 p.

37. Solganik G.Ya. Practical stylistics of the Russian language: textbook. A manual for students. Philol. and zhur. fak. higher textbook institutions / G.Ya. Solganik. – 4th ed., erased. – M.: Publishing Center “Academy”, 2010. – 304 p.

38. Stylistics and literary editing / ed. IN AND. Maksimova. - M.: Gardariki, 2004. – 516 p.

39. Suzdaltseva, V. N. Workshop on the modern Russian language: Lexicon. Phraseology: Textbook. manual / V. N. Suzdaltseva M.: Aspect Press, 2004 - 126 p.

40. Telia V.N. Phraseology in the context of culture/V.N. Telia. – M., 1999. – 71 p.

41. Chernysheva, I. I. Phraseology of the modern German language / I. I. Chernysheva / I. I. Chernysheva. – M.: Higher School, 1970. – 200 p.

42. Shansky N.M. Phraseology of the modern Russian language. – M.: Higher School, 1985. – 160 p.

APPLICATIONS

Appendix A

Table No. 1 Phraseologisms in political texts of the QMS

Appendix B

Table No. 2 Functions of phraseological units in political texts of the QMS

Appendix B

Table No. 3 Typology and functions of phraseological units

Related information.

Annotation: This article is devoted to the peculiarities of the translation of phraseological units found in the speeches of V.V. Putin. The article presents an analysis of the main methods of translating phraseological units, as well as the difficulties that the translator has to face.

UDC: 811.111’373.74’42:321.02

Authors): Egorova Olga Anatolevna
Candidate of Philological Sciences, Associate Professor, Department of English No. 1, Moscow State Institute of International Relations of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia, Moscow
[email protected]

Shirchkova Anna Vitalievna
student, Faculty of Foreign Languages, Mordovian State Pedagogical Institute named after. M. E. Evsevieva, Saransk

A country: Russia

Bibliographic description of the article for citation: Egorova O. A. Specifics of translating phraseological units in political discourse from Russian into English (based on the speeches of V. V. Putin) [Electronic resource] / O. A. Egorova, A. V. Shirchkova // Scientific review: electronic. magazine – 2018. – No. 3. – 1 electron. wholesale disk (CD-ROM). – System. requirements: Pentium III, processor with a clock frequency of 800 MHz; 128 MB; 10 MB; Windows XP/Vista/7/8/10; Acrobat 6 x.

Political discourse has become the object of close attention of linguists in the last twenty years, during which a whole direction in linguistics has emerged - political linguistics.

In order for a political text to have the desired impact on listeners, it must meet certain requirements, such as vividness of presentation, political passion and imagery. All this can be achieved using certain stylistic, rhetorical and linguistic means, including stable combinations of words or phraseological units.

Studying the specifics of the translation of phraseological units in political discourse seems important, since new trends in the development of language arise and manifest themselves in the political sphere.

Phraseologism is a complex linguistic unit. It contains not only the meaning, but also the external form and assessment of an object or phenomenon. This leads to the fact that the translation of phraseological units into foreign language becomes a challenging and creative task.

The translation of phraseological units is conventionally divided into two types: phraseological and non-phraseological translation. The first includes translation by selecting an equivalent (full or partial), and the second includes translation by other means due to the lack of phraseological equivalents and analogues. In addition, there may be many intermediate translation methods between them, for example, translation taking into account style, different translation figurative and non-figurative phraseology and so on.

Most researchers, such as V. N. Komissarov (2002), L. F. Dmitrieva (2005), S. E. Kuntsevich (2004), identify four main ways of translating phraseological units. These include:

–method of phraseological equivalent;

–method of phraseological analogue;

– literal translation of phraseological units or tracing;

– descriptive translation of phraseological units.

Let's consider the first method of translating phraseological units - phraseological equivalent method.

« We met and talked. It turns out that he took a voice recorder with him, secretly recorded the conversation, and then published it in the press. I couldn't believe my ears and eyes». (An example taken from a conversation between V.V. Putin and NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen)

“We met and talked (with NATO chief Anders Fogh Rasmussen), and it turned out he had brought a voice recorder with him and secretly recorded our conversation and then published it in the press. I couldn't believe my eyes and ears. That’s some kind of nonsense, you understand.”

In the examples above, you can see the complete correspondence of the stable expression in the FL and TL. In Russian, phraseological units « Not believe eyes And ears» with meaning « strongly be surprised, be amazed, be amazed heard (usually why— or unexpected)» has a phraseological equivalent in English “not believe someone’s eyes and ears” – “to be so surprised by what you see or hear that you think you are imagining it” (Longman English Dictionary).

Consider the following example from V.V. Putin’s speech at the annual big press conference in February 2008:

"I think that at leasta statesman must have a head. Of course, but, unfortunately, we are forced to live by the principle"trust but check". But all these checks should not be humiliating for citizens, I absolutely agree with you.

“I think that at the very least a statesman should have a head.Of course, but unfortunately we are obliged to live by the principle of “ trust but verify.” However, all these checks should not be demeaning for citizens, I absolutely agree with you.”

This example illustrates the use of the phraseological equivalent method with full correspondence in both languages. Both combinations matter “You need to check everything and not trust words.”

A similar method of translation is observed in the following expression by V.V. Putin, said during an interview with Oliver Stone in 2016:

“Do you know what people say here? We say this: “ He who is destined to be hanged will not drown».

“Do you know what they say among the Russian people? They say that those who are destined to be hung are not going to drown”.

As in the previous example, the method of complete phraseological equivalent is used here. The Russian proverb has an equivalent in English with the exact same meaning.

The second method of translating phraseological units is phraseological analogue method. Below are examples illustrating this type of translation of phraseological units.

During his speech at the 70th session of the UN General Assembly on September 28, 2015, Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin said:

“ And they did not have to reckon with the U.N., which, instead of acting to automatically authorize and legitimize the necessary decisions, often creates obstacles or, in other words, stands in the way” .

This example presents the phraseological phrase “ get underfoot", which means " being nearby, disturb with your presence, distract from business" When translating, the equivalent correspondence “to stand in the way”, meaningful “to try to stop or prevent something or someone.” This English idiom means " try to stop someone, hinder someone”, which does not completely coincide with the Russian phraseological unit, therefore the method of phraseological analogue was used.

“And in the case of Ukraine, our Western partners crossed the line, behaved rudely, irresponsible and unprofessional."

“And with Ukraine, our western partners have crossed the line, playing the bear and acting irresponsibly and unprofessionally”.

In the example above, the phrase " behave rudely" replaced by a similar idiomatic expression “ to play the bear”. However, we note that the definition of this expression “ act like a bear/rude/impolite/" is given only in English-Russian dictionaries (Multitran, Lingvo). This idiom was not recorded in the English-English dictionaries Oxford online Dictionary and Longman online Dictionary.

Speaking about the return of capital to Russia, President V.V. Putin used the following phrase:

“We are not convinced that we will freeze the accounts, but you will be tormented swallow dust, running around the courts, trying to unfreeze these funds.”

“We are not sure that we’ll freeze the accounts but you’ll have to run around till you're dead asking the courts to unfreeze these funds”.

In this example, a bright Russian idiomatic expression is translated into neutral English. In Russian FE "swallow dust" has the meaning “doing something for a long time and experiencing great difficulty” English “ to run around till you’ redead” – “to be very busy doing a lot of different things no longer alive.” It follows that the phraseological analogue used by the translator has a different form with a similar meaning. In addition, the lost units of the original language are compensated in translation, in a word dead in the same sentence.

The third type of translation of phraseological units is literal translation or tracing. This method has many advantages, as it allows one to overcome translation difficulties. However, such a translation can be used only if, as a result of tracing, an expression is obtained, the imagery of which is easily perceived by the Russian reader and does not create the impression of unnaturalness and unusualness of the generally accepted norms of the Russian language.

Let's look at a few examples reflecting the third translation method. For example, at a big press conference in December 2017, Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin said:

“Vladivostok is far from the capital, but, as we have always said in Russia,« The Lord is high, the king is far away». AND there There is problem, which Bye Not managed decide».

“Vladivostok is far away from the capital but, as they have always said in Russia,” it is too high to the Lord and too far to the Tsar" There is a problem there that has not been solved yet”.

The Russian proverb means " they say this to emphasize that a lot depends on the people or circumstances that a person directly faces"and translated into English with tracing paper, since there is no phraseological unit in the TL that could fully convey the meaning of the statement. However, in this case the word Lord in Russian in English it is replaced by the word Lord, one of the values ​​of which is “(in the Christian religion) Godor Jesus Christ”

Another striking expression was used by the President of Russia, speaking about the territorial claims put forward by Latvia:

« We will not negotiate (with the Baltic countries) on the platform of any territorial claims. They will not receive the Pytalovsky district, but from dead donkey ears».

“What they’ll get is not the Pytalovo district but the dead donkey's ears” .

Collocation "dead donkey ears" has the meaning - " refusal to a request; an offer to get something absolutely unnecessary in return for what you want.” We did not find the meaning of this expression in English-English or English-Russian dictionaries. It was first used in the Russian satirical novel "12 Chairs", which eventually became idiomatic. The translator decided to translate it literally. Despite the fact that the expression is originally Russian and has no equivalent in English, for English-speaking listeners it becomes clear from the meaning of the statement itself that we are talking about something unnecessary.

However, there are situations when a literal translation does not reflect the essence of the statement and does not produce the desired effect on the addressee. An example is the following situation. During a press conference following one of his first meetings with British Prime Minister Tony Blair in St. Petersburg, President Putin said that federal troops during the 1999–2001 war. We often saw inscriptions written by bandits on the walls of houses and on fences in Chechnya: “Allah is above us, goats are below us.” The translator had to translate this phrase orally, and he translated it into English word for word. “ Allah is above us, below us are goats”. But as we see, not a single meaning of the English word goat does not reflect the offensive meaning of the Russian word goat. Due to the purely literal translation of the word "goats" into English, the phrase did not have the expected effect on the British delegates, as the insult sounds much milder in the translation than in the original.

TO the last type translation of phraseological units refers descriptive translation. This method is applicable when the methods described above cannot be used, largely due to cultural differences between the two languages.

“Well, Russia? Lowered my head And I resigned myself and swallowed this insult.”

“What about Russia? It humbly accepted the situation” .

In this example, descriptive translation is used. In addition, repetition of metaphorical expressions and words similar in semantics put your head down / reconcile / swallow your offense here it functions as a logical underscore. In TP, homogeneous members are abolished to one word or expression, which reduces the communicative effect of the utterance and makes it more neutral.

The following example is taken from V.V. Putin’s speech at a press conference after a meeting with the Chancellor of Germany in February 2003:

“Why can’t we do it this way (like the EU)? Because, I'm sorry, that's it chewing snot and make political corrections.”

“Why can’t we do it? Because, we are, sorry to say so, like suckers and playing politics”.

In this example we see that the phraseological unit "chew snot" which matters “Why waste time; to hesitate, to be inactive", in TL replaced by comparison “ like suckers” – “ someone who is easily tricked or easily persuaded to do something”. The translation retains a reduced stylistic register, but the phraseological translation is carried out using a descriptive method in order to achieve the necessary impact on the addressee.

We can observe a similar method of translation in the following example, taken from the speech of Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin at the 70th session of the UN General Assembly on September 28, 2015:

« But I'm afraid this question will hang in the air".

“But I am afraid no one is going to answer that” .

Phraseologism " hang in the air" is an element of expressive syntax. Use of the phrase “ is going to answer that” , interprets the logical consequence of the meaning of a given stable IT expression, thereby explaining it. Which indicates the use of a descriptive method of translating phraseological units.

The study showed that, although phraseological units receive a lot of attention in linguistic research, there is still no uniform, standard approach to the translation of phraseological units. The use of such techniques for updating phraseological units as expanding the component composition or breaking, the purpose of which is to enhance the effect on society, giving greater liveliness and expressiveness to speech, inevitably creates additional difficulties for the translator.

When conducting a comparative component analysis, we analyzed the methods of translating phraseological units and identified the main problems that arise when translating them using the example of transcripts of speeches of the President of the Russian Federation. A total of 100 FL and TL segments were considered. Based on the results of the study, the ratio of the use of a certain method of translating phraseological units used by V.V. Putin was calculated.

The most commonly used method is the phraseological analogue method (41%). This is explained by the fact that in the Russian and English languages, there are a large number of phraseological units that have a different form, but similar content and meaning.

In second place is the descriptive method (25%). Very often, V.V. Putin uses native Russian stable combinations in his speech, which are translated into English only by the descriptive method.

The phraseological equivalent method was used with almost the same frequency (21%). There is a fairly large number of phraseological units that have a full equivalent in the target language. One of the reasons may be common origin similar FE.

The least commonly used method is tracing or literal translation (12%). This is due to the fact that in Lately Translators are increasingly trying to avoid using this method and select the closest dictionary matches. In addition, the use of the tracing method when translating phraseological units in most cases does not guarantee a complete understanding of the idea that the author of the statement wanted to convey.

Currently, translation is viewed as not so much a linguistic phenomenon as a cultural one. A new understanding of the essence and nature of translation is called the “cultural turn” in translation theory. In essence, this term means a shift in emphasis in the study of translation to its cultural aspects.

Within the framework of this approach, the translation process cannot be interpreted narrowly as a switch from one language code to another, since it consists in the transfer of a phraseological unit from the native cultural environment to the environment of the receiving culture.

Based on the results of the study, we can conclude that the translator, in order to achieve a natural translation, must follow certain rules and principles. When translating, he must use modern vocabulary and syntax, determine the exact meaning of a phraseological unit, and be familiar with the culture of the country of the text he is translating.

List of sources used

1. Alysheva Yu. S. Speech portrait of a modern political leader: abstract. dis... cand. Phil. Sci. Volgograd, 2012. 21 p.
2. Barkhudarov L. S. Language and translation: Questions of general and particular theory of translation. M.: Publishing house LKI, 2010. 240 p.
3. Vinogradov V.V. On the main types of phraseological units in the Russian language // Selected works: lexicology and lexicography. M.: Nauka, 1977. P. 221.
4. Vladimir Putin submitted an appeal to the Federation Council [Electronic resource]: [website of the President of Russia]. URL: http://www.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/20353 (access date: 03/11/2018).
5. Meeting with NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen [Electronic resource]: [website of the President of Russia]. URL: http://kremlin.ru/events/president/news/9412 (access date: 03/11/2018).
6. Annual big press conference of Vladimir Putin, February 2008 [Electronic resource]: [website of the President of Russia]. URL: http://www.kremlin.ru/events/president/transcripts/24835#sel (access date: 03/12/2018).
7. Annual press conference, December 2017 [Electronic resource]: [website of the President of Russia]. URL: http://www.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/56378#sel (access date: 03/12/2018).
8. Komissarov V. N. Modern translation studies. M.: ETS, 2001. 424 p.
9. Ozhegov S. I., Shvedova N. Yu. Bolshoi Dictionary. M.: Az, 1992. 660 p.
10. Seventieth session of the UN General Assembly [Electronic resource]: [website of the President of Russia]. URL: http://www.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/50385 (access date: 03/14/2018).
11. Stone O. Interview with Vladimir Putin. M.: Alpina Publisher, 2017. 456 p.
12. Ter-Minasova S.G. War and the world of languages ​​and cultures. M.: Slovo, 2008. 334 p.
13. Explanatory dictionary of the Russian language [Electronic resource]. URL: https://www.vedu.ru/expdic/ (access date: 03/16/2018).
14. Cambridge Dictionary [Electronic resource]. URL: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/ (access date: 03/17/2018).
15. Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English Online [Electronic resource]. URL: https://www.ldoceonline.com/ (access date: 03/17/2018).
16. Stone O. The Putin Interviews. Hot books, 2017. 220 p.

Egorova Olga

Doctor of Philology, associate Professor, Department of English language Nr.1, Moscow state Institute of international relations, Ministry of foreign Affairs of Russia, Moscow

Shirchkova Anna

student, faculty of foreign languages, Federal state budgetary educational institution of higher education “M. E. Evsevev Mordovian state pedagogical Institute, Saransk

SPECIFICS OF TRANSLATING PHRASEOLOGICAL UNITSIN POLITICAL DISCOURSE (BASED ON V. PUTIN’S STATEMENTS)

The article is devoted to the peculiarities of translating phraseological units (based on V. Putin’s statements and remarks). The article presents an analysis of the main ways of translating phraseological units and the difficulties that the translator has to face translating V. Putin’s speeches.

Keywords: political discourse, phraseology, translation method, phraseological equivalent, phraseological analogue, calculating, descriptive translation.

© ANO SNOLD “Partner”, 2018

© Egorova O. A., 2018

© Shirchkova A. V., 2018

The article is devoted to the study of the role of phraseological units in the political discourse of Russian prominent political figures, such as V.V. Putin, S.V. Lavrov, M.V. Zakharov and others, as well as one of the influential politicians of the People's Republic of China - Xi Jinping. The authors identify the signs of political discourse and examine the main components of phraseological meaning. Phraseologisms used in official statements of Russian and foreign political figures are analyzed. Based on materials from television programs and central newspapers, the authors come to the conclusion that in political texts there is a tendency to expand the scope of functioning of idioms. When analyzing such a linguistic phenomenon as phraseological units in the speech of politicians, it becomes obvious that the text generated by a person depends on his individual characteristics, the uniqueness of the individual’s discursive thinking.

1. Vesti FM. Putin answered new questions about the main thing on December 16, 2011. Electronic resource [Access mode]: http://radiovesti.ru/brand/61178/episode/1392582/

2. News. A session of the National People's Congress has opened in China. Electronic resource [Access mode]:

http://www.vesti.ru/doc.html?id=2862737

3. Speech by Xi Jinping at the 70th session of the UN. Electronic resource [Access mode]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7cFC9UtztCs

4. Kostomarov, V.G. Russian language on the newspaper page Text. / V.G. Kostomarov. M.: MSU, 1971. – 340 p.

5. Komsomolskaya Pravda. Interview with A. Dugin. 08/12/2008. Electronic resource [Access mode]: http://www.volgograd.kp.ru/daily/24144/361726/

6. Media forum of regional and local media “Truth and Justice” Apr 3, 2017 https: //www.youtube.com/watch?v=AdPO1WcSMAs

7. World of East Asia. Chinese President Xi Jinping. Electronic resource [Access mode]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ahXPKnuPA4Y

8. Official You Tube channel of the Russian Foreign Ministry. Electronic resource [Access mode]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_d2OqL455Gw&list=PLCoAQHH-Icbi_fvkS0pDn7IV4jWbqEi1e

9. Official You Tube channel of the Russian Foreign Ministry. Weekly briefing by M.V. Zakharova, May 19, 2017, January 19, 2017. Electronic resource [Access mode]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NFSPlCeppQw

10. Economic Forum in Davos: who will lead humanity? Electronic resource [Access mode]: http://www.bbc.com/russian/features-38682545

The use of phraseological units in modern political discourse is an everyday phenomenon, therefore discourse on the fields of political action deservedly becomes the object of linguistic research. Linguists pay attention to the manipulative nature of modern political discourse and try to describe the arsenal of means of influencing mass consciousness, among which a special place is occupied by phraseological units that are introduced into the text either completely or in a transformed form, with the replacement of components, etc.

When analyzing this linguistic phenomenon, it becomes obvious that the text generated by a person depends on its individual characteristics and the uniqueness of discursive thinking.

By their nature, phraseological units are intended to convey a figurative representation. Information is transmitted in idioms using economical means, brightly, expressively, expressing states, qualities, assessment, etc.

It is known that the relevant features of political discourse, along with its informativeness, include expressiveness and imagery, an appeal not to logically impeccable evidence, but to emotions, because any mass information should be emotionally contagious, and not just content-rationalistic. This characteristic also applies to political texts, and is due to the fact that they are characterized by the unity of organizing-influential and information-content functions, where language implementation is a consistent correlation of standards and expresses, while neutral evaluative language units, marked and unmarked, constantly alternate components of speech.

The figurative basis of phraseological units serves as a source not only for their semantics, it can play the role of the “main nerve” in their functioning in speech.

Based on materials from television programs and central newspapers, one can notice that in political texts there is a tendency to expand the scope of functioning of idioms.

Firstly, “traditional” usual phraseological units, recorded phraseological dictionaries, for example: “We often we're scratching our heads“how to find local managers in the constituent entities of the Russian Federation” (D.A. Medvedev); “I never cease to be amazed at how our partners, time after time, as we say in Russia, step on the same rake, that is, they make the same mistakes” (V.V. Putin); “Yes, of course, politicians in the USA benefit greatly from the elections in their country put Russia on knees(politician and philosopher A. Dugin);

Secondly, the use of proverbs is noticed: “Unfortunately, we are forced to live by the principle: trust but check"(V.V. Putin);

Thirdly, precedent phrases or remarks known from other sources are used, for example: “I would really not like the press and bureaucrats walked Each other wall to wall" ; “You and I know that You can't understand Russia with your mind"(V.V. Putin);

And finally, phraseological expressions or colloquials are used that have not yet been sufficiently mastered by the phraseological system of the Russian language, for example: “McCain, as you know, was captured in Vietnam, and not only spent time in prison, but they put him in a hole, he sat there for several years , for any person the roof will move off". As can be seen from the above examples, for the political discourse of V.V. Putin is characterized by a variety of linguistic units.

Another prominent representative of political discourse, whose vocabulary contains many phraseological units, is S.V. Lavrov. Our attention came to his joint press conference following negotiations with the Federal Minister of European, Integration and Foreign Affairs of Austria S. Kurz on January 18, 2017. Commenting on accusations from European countries about Russian interference in the US election campaign, Lavrov said: “We We don’t get involved in these squabbles., we stand on the sidelines on principle.” Further, in the same speech, Sergei Viktorovich noted: “We believe that those who make such accusations against us, trying to get off your sick head and onto your healthy one"(about elections in the USA). Also, speaking about the Eastern Partnership policy, he emphasized: “Despite all the assurances, this partnership is being used by the European Union in order to pull to one's side focal states". Note that this is an example of only one speech by S.V. Lavrova.

As an active user social networks, in his speeches on the Internet quite often uses phraseological units and M.V. Zakharova is Director of the Department of Information and Press of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation. At the weekly briefing on May 19, 2017, commenting on the next round of paranoid publications in the American media, following the visit of S.V. Lavrov in the USA, she said: “In more than 90% of cases, all of them (meetings and telephone conversations) took place on the American initiative, this is a question of who has whom lying at my feet". And, further, she noted that “The previous (US) administration did not listened to the voice of reason" Zakharova pointed out that the information presented by the US media is accepted in Europe at face value: “For European media, the US media acts as big brother" And in a briefing dated January 19 this year, discussing Samantha Power’s statement that the United States defeated fascism, M. Zakharova emphasized: “She should have added then: “On her territory,” so that she could completely admit your ignorance» .

The modern world is complex and contradictory. The influence of developing countries, among which China is the leader, is growing. Today, China is a powerful generator of capital for many developed countries. Russian President Vladimir Putin, speaking about this country, quoted Napoleon Bonaparte: “As Napoleon once said: China is sleeping, let it continue to sleep, God forbid that China wakes up,” Putin said. But, as the Russian President noted , " China woke up" Our attention was drawn to a leader capable of leading such a huge, strong state. Xi Jinping has been President of the People's Republic of China since March 14, 2013. During this time, he proved himself to be a fair, competent politician. Let us note that he has a masterful command of words and often resorts to phraseological units. On March 3, 2017, at the National People's Congress (NPC), the President of the People's Republic of China said: “上海等大型城市的管理应该 像绣花一样 精细" - Shanghai and other major cities need to be managed just as carefully, how to embroider.

And during the traditional speech on the occasion of the Chinese New Year 2017, Xi Jinping used the phraseology familiar to the Russian people “ work with your sleeves rolled up»: «要 撸起袖子加油干 " - Need to work, rolling up my sleeves.

The speech of the Chairman, held on September 28, 2015 at the 70th session of the UN in New York, was striking. Thus, speaking about the need to adhere to the principle of cooperation between countries, he noted:

«弱肉强食是丛林法则，不是国与国相处之道。穷兵黩武是霸道做法，只能 搬起石头砸自己的脚 " - The law of the jungle means that the weak are subject to the strong, countries cannot behave this way, those who arrogantly use force - in fact picks up a stone that will fall on their feet.

On January 17, 2017, speaking at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, Xi Jinping spoke out in defense of economic globalization and said: “搞保护主义如同把自己 关入黑屋子 “Following the policy of protectionism is like lock yourself in a dark room. Yes, it may be windy and rainy outside, but there is still light and Fresh air. No one can emerge victorious from a trade war.

« 中国梦 归根到底是人民的梦，必须紧紧依靠人民来实现，必须不断为人民造福» - Chinese dream, Ultimately, this is the dream of the people, to achieve it we must rely on people... .

The expressions used by the leader of the PRC are laconic and express the depth of the national worldview: “ 打铁还需自身硬 » (To forge iron, you need to shoe yourself) .

On May 17, 2017, Vladimir Putin, together with the leaders of 29 countries, took part in the “One Belt, One Road” summit. The Asian analogue of the G20 is a platform for discussing the economic future of a huge region and an opportunity for formal and informal contacts at the highest level.

Xi Jinping, the head of the People's Republic of China, in an elegant oriental manner hinted that he and V. Putin should meet more often: “The Russian proverb says: “ One swallow does not make spring", and here they say: " One tree is not a forest", - The development and deepening of our relations is our strategic choice. No matter how the international situation changes, we must strengthen our spirit and move forward shoulder to shoulder.”

So, the modern world is experiencing political instability, rapid changes in socio-economic situations, and, as a result, experiencing tough, intense political struggle. This gives rise to the need for a qualitative transformation of political discourse.

Bibliographic link