DISCURSIVE CRITICISING TACTICS IN THE ELECTORAL DISCOURSE OF GERMANY AND UKRAINE (A CONTRASTIVE PERSPECTIVE)

Abstract

The article deals with discursive criticising strategies in the electoral discourse of Germany and Ukraine from a contrastive perspective. The leading features of criticism in the political electoral discourse are appraisal, agonalism, aggressiveness and persuasiveness. The value of criticism in the pre-election period is because voters have the right and want to assess critically all the abilities of the potential winner in the races, even one they sympathize with and tune in to his liking. The agnostic nature of critical statements can be most clearly traced in the creation of the opposition WE:THEY, which serves to denote the boundary between friends and foes as the most prototypical for pre-electoral communication. Criticism of an opponent may by aggressive and manifest itself in discrediting the opponent in order to prove his/her professional and personal incapacity. Furthermore, criticism can be used as a means of persuasion in order to assert, persuade, induce, incline, or encourage the addressee to take a certain action in the election race. The article determines the types, forms and functions of criticism in electoral discourse as a type of political discourse, describes the in-depth structure of critical utterances and their semantic conditions, identifies four models of the addressee-targeted configuration of criticism, traces the expressions of constructive and destructive criticism in speeches of German-speaking and Ukrainian-speaking politicians in public electoral discourse. The strategy of destructive criticism is implemented by tactics of criticism-reproach, criticism-condemnation and criticism-defeat, which is perceived as by the addressee as adverse. In turn, the strategy of constructive criticism is implemented by the tactics of criticism-discussion, criticism-examination and criticism-analysis, which create a favorable impression on the addressee of the criticism.