COMMUNICATIVE EFFECT ACHIEVED THROUGH SPEECH ACTS OF MANIPULATION

Authors

  • Oksana Grischechko Faculty of Linguistics of the South Federal University, Russia, Rostov-on-Don

Keywords:

theory of speech acts, speech acts of manipulation, communicative effect, pragmatics, illocutionary aim

Abstract

Linguistic manipulation is a relatively new trend studies in the framework of pragmatics and generally defined as any verbal interaction viewed as goal-oriented and goal-preconditioned phenomenon. It is verbal communication described from the perspective of one of the speakers when he sees himself as a subject of manipulation, while his interlocutor plays the role of an object. Speech acts of manipulation expressed through a variety of utterances having a number of specific aims are used to directly or indirectly convey certain meanings. The article suggest a comprehensive analysis of linguistic means used to construct various types of manipulating and motivating speech acts aimed at conveying different tinges of meaning.   

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Akimova T. (1992). Imperative Mood in the English Language, Typology of Imperative Constructions. Saint Petersburg.

Austin J. How to Do Things With, New in the Foreign Linguistics. Vol. XVII: Theory of Speech Acts. Moscow.

Brusenskaya L., Gavrilova G., Malycheva N. (2005). Dictionary of Linguistic Terms. Rostov University Press. Rostov-on-Don.

Haimovich B., Rogovskaya B. (1967). Theoretical Grammar of the English Language. High School Publishing. Moscow.

Ivanova I., Burlakova V., Pocheptsov G. (1981). Theoretical Grammar of the Modern English Language. High School Publishing. Moscow.

Kiseleva L. (1978). Problems of the Theory of Speech Manipulation. Leningrad University Publishing. Leningrad.

Korolev V. (1992). Full Forward Towards Success! The Best of Dale Karnegie. RostovUniversityPress. Rostov-on-Don.

Kudryashov I. (2005). The Phenomenon of Communicative Freedom in the Oral and Written Discourse. RostovUniversityPress. Rostov-on-Don.

Leontyev A. (1981). Psychological Peculiarities of the Lecturer. Knowledge Press. Moscow.

Matveeva G. (1981). Problems of Scientific Text Pragmatics. Leningrad University Press. Leningrad.

Ozhegov S. (1984). Dictionary of the Russian Language. High School Publishing. Moscow.

Slobin D., Greene G. (1976). Psycholinguistics. Progress Publishing. Moscow.

Sytnik L., Krivulya V. (1989). On Indirect Pragmatic Influence in ScientificText, Pragmatics and Typology of Linguistic Communicative Units. Dnepropetrovsk University Press. Dnepropetrovsk.

Tarasov E. (1990). Speech Manipulation: Methodology and Theory, Optimization of Speech Influence. MoscowUniversityPress. Moscow.

Thomas J. (1995). Meaning in Interaction. An Introduction to Pragmatics. Pearson Education. London.

Veihman E. (2000). New in the English Grammar. Astrel – Ast Publishing. Moscow.

Vinokur T. (1989). On characterizing the speaker. Intention and Reaction, Language and Identity. SciencePublishing. Moscow.

Zheltuhina M. (2004). Specifics of Speech Influencing Means in The Language of the Media, PhD thesis abstract. Moscow.

Downloads

Published

2013-12-20

How to Cite

Grischechko, O. (2013). COMMUNICATIVE EFFECT ACHIEVED THROUGH SPEECH ACTS OF MANIPULATION. International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 1(2), 144–151. Retrieved from https://ijcrsee.com/index.php/ijcrsee/article/view/15