Axiological aspect of confrontational communicative strategies in american political discourse

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to analyze how the axiological aspect of confrontational communicative strategies is realized in American political discourse. The problem of intensified conventional and destructive elements in American political speech requires thorough linguistic investigation as political discourse is becoming more subjective and negative. The evaluation category allows discourse participants to construct some hierarchy of objects based on the “good vs. bad” predicates. The author analyzes different types of evaluations and their realizations in confrontational strategies, e.g. instrumental, technical, conductive, utilitarian, medical, hedonic evaluations. The paper puts special focus on construction of evaluation act, which includes the subject of speech, the object of speech and the predicate. The subject of speech is expressed through personal pronouns, appeals to authority or majority. The object of speech can be specified directly (using, for example, proper nouns, familiar constructions and verbal labels) or indirectly (using deixis). The predicate is expressed through nouns, adjectives, modal and emotional verbs and infinitives. The negative evaluation comprises such typical means as modified personal pronouns, contextual metaphors, pun, indexical phrases etc., which are used for confrontational speech tactics of mockery, discrediting, exposing, prosecution, negative analysis and vulnerability.