MANIPULATIVE ARGUMENTATION IN ANTIUKRAINIAN DISCOURSE OF RUSSIAN POLITICIANS: INTEGRATION OF DISCOURSE-ANALYTICAL AND CLASSICAL RHETORICAL APPROACHES
MANIPULATIVE ARGUMENTATION IN ANTIUKRAINIAN DISCOURSE OF RUSSIAN POLITICIANS: INTEGRATION OF DISCOURSE-ANALYTICAL AND CLASSICAL RHETORICAL APPROACHES

Summary/Abstract: Anti-Ukrainian discourse of the Russian politicians is based on delegitimization of the images of Ukraine and the Western world while constructing a positive image of Russia in the narratives of Self-Defense, Liberation of Ukraine, and Liberation of the World, with roles of a Villain, a Hero-Liberator, a Victim-Hostage and Villain's accomplice in different configurations. These models of argumentation rely on specific topoi of Threat, Protection and Strength and their revealing subtopoi, underpinning the discourse-forming concepts of Empire of evil, Empire of good and Ukronazis. Delegitimizing strategies of transfer and over-generalization are based on metaphors, metonymy, and lexical semantic means to denote the recurrence, systematicity and regularity of negatively connotated actions of the “alien” group. At the pragmatic level "We"-"They" dichotomy is based on ideologemesbased intertextuality, as well as the flouting of the cooperative maxims triggering the discursive implicatures. Maxims violation is marked by such manipulative techniques as the role reversal, ambivalent interpretation of the same concept, words with diffuse semantics, "complexity reduction", the construction of presupposition and the use of contrasting evaluative names to designate the forces of evil and good. Manipulative devices correlate with general rhetorical topoi of peristalsis, Genus and Species, Subject – Adjuncts, Past Fact / Future Fact, Testimony, antitheton and truncated syllogism.

• Details
• Contents