Administrative Discourse: Structure, Volume, Production Practices and Legitimation of Texts

Abstract

The article is devoted to study of the basic characteristics of the administrative discourse of modern Russia: its structure, volume and basic discursive practices. Methods of research were documentary analysis and ethnographic observation. The empirical basis for the analysis of documents was the database of Russian legislation at the federal, regional and municipal levels. The included unstructured observation was carried out in the federal executive body in the period from 2013 to 2016 in Moscow. As a theoretical and methodological basis for the study, the concept of critical discourse analysis by N. Fairclough was adopted. The author’s definition of administrative discourse, as well as an understanding of the logic of the institution and autonomization of the bureaucratic space of modern Russia, is proposed. Along with autonomization, two other trends of administrative discourse have also been revealed: standardization and self-reproduction. The structure and volume of the formal basis of administrative discourse are shown, statistical data are provided on the number of federal, regional and municipal regulatory legal acts, of which there are more than 8 million units. Structural coeffi cients that reflect the elaboration and variability of the legal field have been developed. It is shown that the most stable and elaborated legal field is formed at the municipal level; least - at the regional level. The federal level of thoroughness and stability of laws and operational regulation occupies an intermediate position between the municipal and regional levels. The example of four basic discursive practices of administrative life: institution, control, assignment (resolution), reconciliation (visa) - shows how the production and legitimation of texts are carried out within departments, as a result of which they are enriched with history, gain administrative weight, acquire a conventional form, force and scale of action; and, in the end, become the influential actors of the administrative space. The role of discourse in the broader context of the struggle for power and resources within the bureaucratic environment is presented.