Синонімія економічної термінології в американському політичному дискурсі (на матеріалі промов кандидатів у президенти США Х. Клінтон та Д. Трампа)

Abstract

The paper is devoted to the issue of synonymy in English economical terminology used within American political discourse. The research has been conducted on the basis of presidential election speeches of H. Clinton and D. Trump in 2016. Although, the notion of synonymy is not desirable in professional communication, real communicative situations prove its inevitability. Despite the fact that these units bear some specific status in linguistic sphere, they still derive from the natural language stratum and, thus, share the same features and follow the same language rules. That is why the synonymy is present in the sphere of terminological system. However, it should also be noted that the level of synonymy varies depending on the knowledge sphere this terminology serves. Thus, the domain of social science is more inclined to terminological synonymy that the sphere of exact science. The conducted analysis has shown that the use of economical terminology in presidential election speeches performs basic communicative role – informing voters about candidates’ economic agenda. The observed in these cases synonyms have demonstrated the absolute level of interchangeability. Their semantic meanings do not change or change slightly having no effect on the referred item and, subsequently, on the delivered message. Some of the registered synonyms of economic terms denote quite different notions in the realm of economics but have been used with no significant difference in transmitted messages within the same context. Such usage of synonyms shows that as far as these economic terms play pure communicative role, the addresser cares little about the shades in meanings. Those terms are mostly used as a background for other candidates’ intentions like proving its competence in sphere of economics. However, in some cases the difference in variants of terms’ meaning has been deliberately used by both politicians to achieve their political objectives. This effect has been achieved through metaphorization of denoting elements of some terms leading to unclear and vague term meaning, therefore providing the denoted item with some level of assessment and positive or negative connotation. Such features of economic terminology has been caused by the pragmatic nature of political discourse itself, where every element serves the overall purpose – to gain political dividends through manipulation of addressee’s mind.