Подходы к исследованию мотивационного дискурса
Подходы к исследованию мотивационного дискурса
Аннотация
Статья посвящена изучению существующих подходов к изучению дискурса и мотивационного дискурса в частности. Анализ мотивационного дискурса позволяет увидеть, как меняются мотивационные стратегии и приоритеты в различных контекстах, помогает раскрыть механизм влияния культурных ценностей, норм и установок на восприятие мотивационных речей аудиторией. Мотивационный дискурс остается одним из малоизученных типов дискурса. Целью статьи является поиск подхода, в рамках которого возможно полноценное исследование всех аспектов мотивационного дискурса. Для проведения настоящего исследования были использованы общенаучные методы. Анализ речевых средств, которые обладают ярко выраженной ситуативной и социально-культурной характеристикой в английском и русском языках, представляется одной из важнейших составляющих исследования мотивационного дискурса. Это связано с тем, что мотивационный дискурс напрямую взаимодействует с живой речью в определенной коммуникативной ситуацией. Разнообразие подходов к изучению дискурса обусловлено прежде всего сложностью этого понятия. Проведенное исследование позволило сравнить и выделить ряд лингвистических подходов, наиболее подходящих для исследования мотивационного дискурса.
1. Introduction
Man is a social being and cannot exist outside of the society. In our time, the entire human community needs communication and interaction. It is speech that is the tool that is necessary to achieve this goal. Language itself determines the communication and thinking of people. It is difficult to imagine language outside human activity, since it is through the prism of human language that the objective world is seen. The current state of the language and its transformation is directly related to reality, social and individual consciousness, psychophysical and speech activity of a person. Thus, the whole mechanism of language is repelled from man. The motivational mechanism is the basis of human life. It is motivation that provides a person with the ability to navigate in the world, what is happening to them, in their own internal processes, encourages action, interaction and helps to survive . Nowdays, in the conditions of a fast pace of life and the need to achieve a quick result, the search for ways to effectively develop a person is in demand. In this regard, the so-called coaching or trainings could significantly enrich the study of language, since its impact on the personality and the possibility of transforming the personality by changing the language world of a person . Coaching is a method of personal development, where the main task is to unlock the potential of an individual or a group of people within a certain area of activity, as well as the realization of this potential in life . Discourse theory is included in many areas of the humanities, which allows not only to highlight the problems of communication that have arisen, but also to find ways to solve these problems. The concept of discourse is interdisciplinary in nature. Discourse is considered not only in linguistic studies, but also in psychological, cultural and pedagogical sciences.
The methodological basis of the study is founded on general scientific methods, namely induction, deduction, analysis, synthesis, and comparison. Also, a systematic approach was applied in the study, which makes it possible to identify all the key characteristics of approaches to the study of discourse. A number of approaches to the study of discourse were considered, and the application of these approaches in the study of motivational discourse was analyzed.
2. Main results
The variety of approaches to the discourse study is primarily due to the complexity of this concept. It is possible to identify several key approaches to the study of discourse: these are formal, functional, situational, linguocultural, communicative and sociolinguistic approaches.
A formal or structure-oriented approach to the concept of discourse sees it as an interconnection of several sentences, where their thematic combination is a characteristic of discourse. Thus, discourse is a complex syntactic field, which is based on a certain connection. From the point of view of formally oriented linguistics, discourse considered as a language above the level of a sentence or phrase . In this case, discourse is understood as two or more sentences that are in a semantic connection with each other . It can also be noted that discourse is a kind of formation that stands above the sentence . It is important to emphasize that with this approach, the discourse is considered outside the context of real communication and insists on the independence of form from function . In our opinion, such an approach to the study of discourse will not allow us to fully identify all of its main characteristics.
The functional approach acknowledges the relationship between form and function, analyzes the discourse in connection with the language functions, studies not only the structure of the language, but also its functioning in order to identify the correspondences between them. According to E. S. Kubryakova, discourse is interpreted as a complex communicative phenomenon, which includes the act of creating a certain text. At the same time, this phenomenon reflects the dependence of the created speech with a significant number of extralinguistic circumstances – knowledge about the world, opinions, attitudes and specific goals of the speaker as the creator of the text . This approach is focused on the semiotic understanding of language as a system of signs that serve and are used to achieve specific goals and perform specific functions. A characteristic feature of this approach is the allocation of a certain categorization and placement of the facts of the language in a certain typological field. This approach is aimed at studying the discourse in its sociocultural aspect, taking into account extralinguistic factors. Consideration of discourse as a process that takes place in the presence of at least two participants, where in the process of communication the statements of each other are corrected and at each moment of time the structure of the discourse is developed by joint efforts, predetermines the procedural nature of the discourse. According to the functional approach (E. Sapir, O. Jespersen, R. Jakobson, I. Baudouin-de-Courtenay), discourse is interpreted as the use of language in a broad sense. In the narrow sense, it is the establishment of a certain correlation in relation between the text – a sentence and discourse – a statement. Namely, the understanding of discourse as an integral set of functionally organized, contextualized units of language use. Thus, discourse is a speech built on the basis of grammar and style, developing a certain thought or idea that the speaker seeks to convey.
At the junction is a situational approach. Based on the name, this approach considers discourse within the framework of a specific situation in which it is carried out. Discourse flows in time and space, which also predetermines its situationally . The discourse reflects the mentality and culture, both national, universal, and individual. This approach is associated with the interpretation of discourse in the context of social, psychological and culturally significant conditions and circumstances. Thus, the discourse here manifests itself in connection with taking into account its premises, immediately before the communicative situation. Thus, discourse is considered as a speech flow, a language in its constant movement, which accumulates all the diversity of the historical era, individual and social characteristics of both the communicant and the communicative situation in which the conversation takes place . The situational approach to the definition of discourse makes it possible to use various extralinguistic factors in the process of research for its analysis. An important point of this approach is not so much the result of communication as its mechanisms. Namely, how people communicate with each other, what processes occur in their mind.
The communicative approach (S. Grigorieva, E. Temnova) to the definition of discourse singles out speech as its main element. At the same time, it considers speech in all aspects (the process of speech activity, the communicative situation, the process of live communication, etc.). The question is raised about the text as a process in which a certain communicative situation occurs. Attention is paid to the participants of this communication, their status, role and characteristics. Communication characteristics are realized in the communicative behavior of the participants, their active behavior, in the subjects of discussion, the situation of communication and the use of speech means. This approach sees discourse as a structured element that has the ability to be divided into subdiscourses and focused on studying the broad context of the communicative situation.
The linguoculturological approach (V. Vorobyov, E. Zinovieva, E. Yurkov) examines the features of communication within a certain ethnic group and highlights speech patterns and dominant characteristics of a linguistic group. Since any communication is contextual, the conditions under which it occurs affect the nature of its development. In this regard, the context is a dynamic system that is built as the communicative process unfolds, depending on the nature of discourse as a process of constructing and interpreting speech, taking into account pragmatic factors and subjects of discourse – representatives of a particular linguistic society.
The sociolinguistic approach is based on the analysis of communication participants as representatives of a certain social group. Its main difference from the linguoculturological approach is the shift in emphasis from the national characteristic to the social component. So, instead of studying the national and cultural affiliation of communicants in the process of communication, their personal status is studied. Tareva E. G. formulates the need to take into account the sociolinguistic parameters of communication as an indispensable condition for the quality of intercultural contacts . The sociolinguistic image of a person is determined by their status in society, which generalizes many social roles. These roles, ultimately, determine the behavior of the individual in the process of communication, which allows us to talk about a certain role behavior. The distance between the social roles of communicants complicates the process of communication . It is to overcome this distance that many speakers use certain speech strategies, the study of which will reveal the most effective approaches to reduce social distance and build high-quality communication.
3. Conclusion
In many ways, the choice of one or another approach is connected with the very concept of discourse, the exact definition of which has not yet been established. However, discourse is inherently a kind of a link between the text recorded in the course of communication, on the one hand, and a speech, as a communicative activity, on the other. The discourse is related to the actual living speech, and the text is tied to the language system. It is the study of living speech in all its sociocultural aspect that allows us to fully cover all the key characteristics of this phenomenon. Thus, discourse is a process of communication that unfolds over time and differs from a written text in its spontaneity, speed, attachment to a particular topic, and communicativeness. It occurs in a certain communicative space and correlates with a particular social group. Motivational speeches have a specific purpose and have a target audience. Thus, the process of interaction between the speaker and the audience is a key distinguishing feature of motivational discourse from other types. Motivational discourse directly interacts with living speech in a certain communicative situation. When analyzing this type of discourse, one should first of all take into account the communicative situation and the participants in this situation. Thus, the communicative approach seems to us the most suitable for the study of motivational discourse. However, it is worth noting that different approaches do not contradict each other, but rather complement. Thus, the need to use several approaches to discourse becomes obvious. The use of various approaches to the study of discourse allows not only to improve our understanding of the theory of discourse in general, but also opens up opportunities for creating a general linguistic approach to the study of discourse.