Linguistic rhetoric of Soviet discourse: official vs personal register (J. Stalin – A. Dovzhenko)

  • Aleksandra A. Vorozhbitova Sochi State University.
  • Serhiy I. Potapenko Kyiv National Linguistic University.
  • Natalya Yu. Khachaturova Sochi State University.
  • Yuliya Khoruzhaya N. Sochi State University.
Keywords: Soviet discourse, official register, personal register, Sochi Linguistic & Rhetorical School, Stalin, Dovzhenko.

Abstract

Within the conception of the Sochi Linguistic & Rhetorical School the paper discusses the diglossia of the Soviet discourse employed in the former USSR, distinguishes official and personal registers as well as shows their difference drawing on Joseph Stalin’s speech of 31 January 1944 to the Politburo of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks concerning Alexander Dovzhenko’s screenplay “Ukraine in Flames” and in the writer’s diaries. The comparison reveals a few specific linguistic rhetorical features of cognitive communicative type ontologically characteristic of the Soviet linguistic personality’s communicative cognitive activity in a totalitarian state. The cognitive features of Stalin’s individual discourse representing the official register and his system of argumentation rest on the significative component of linguistic units, arguments from literature to illustrate the postulates and dogmas of Marxist-Leninist doctrine forming the foundation of the Soviet discourse. It is also found that the official register represented by Stalin’s speech is characterized by the following features: 1) repetition; 2) sarcastic remarks; 3) dramatic mutually exclusive contrast of mental spaces (“our own, true in the last resort” and destructed, represented by the opponent’s discourse); 4) rigidly adversarial characteristic of the alternative linguistic rhetorical worldview; 5) appeal to the Soviet collective linguistic personality’s opinion; 6) ideological translation from one subdiscourse into the other, from personal register into the official one; 7) biased retelling of the discourse regarded as anti-Soviet; 8) appeal to the facts lacking in the discourse under criticism; 9) “ideological editing” taking on the form of peremptory lecturing with consequences threatening the liberty of the person under criticism. The personal register of the Soviet Ukrainian writer Dovzhenko is characterized by a broad interpretation of reality devoid of the “Marxist-Leninist blinds” and a more objective interpretation of the world due to a bigger ratio of denotative references (“evidential arguments” like “I say” and “I heard” etc) and communicative cognitive activity relative to two axiological hierarchies: national and Christian, i.e. the dominance of human values over class morality. It is proved that Dovzhenko’s screenplay was criticized within Stalin’s official register for its deviation from the cognitive schemas and the model of the Soviet discourse, for the focus on Ukraine and its citizens rather than on class struggle.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Aleksandra A. Vorozhbitova, Sochi State University.

Doctor of Pedagogy, Doctor of Philology, Professor, Professor of the Department of Roman-German and Russian Philology, Sochi State University.

Serhiy I. Potapenko, Kyiv National Linguistic University.

Doctor of Philology, Professor, Professor of the Department of English Philology, Translation and Language Philosophy named after Professor O.M. Morokhovsky, Kyiv National Linguistic University.

Natalya Yu. Khachaturova, Sochi State University.

Ph. D. of Philology, Associate Professor, Associate Professor of the Department of Roman-Germanic and Russian Philology, Sochi State University.

Yuliya Khoruzhaya N., Sochi State University.

Ph. D. of Philology, Associate Professor of the Department of Roman-Germanic and Russian Philology, Sochi State University.

References

Abbasi, R. & Salahi, A. (2019). Illustrative techniques of "Khavaran Hint" in relation to expression and rhetoric. Amazonia investiga, 8 (18), 83-93.

Aczél, P. (2016). Virtual rhetoric. A theoretical approach. Res Rhetorica, 3 (4), 1-15.

Barabash, V. V., Kotelenets, E. A., Karabulatova, I. S., Lavrentyeva, M. Y. & Mitina, Yu. S. (2019). The confrontation between the Eastern and Western worldviews in the conceptual space of the information war against Russia: the genesis and evolution of the terminological apparatus. Amazonia Investiga, 8 (19), 246-254.

Bartes, R. (1994). Selected papers: Semiotics. Poetics. Moscow: Progress.

Borev, Yu. B. (1990). Staliniada, Moscow: Soviet writer.

Browse, S. (2018). Cognitive Rhetoric: The Cognitive Poetics of Political Discourse. Amsterdam (Phil.): John Benjamins.

Burke, M. (2016). Discourse implicature, Quintilian and the Lucidity Principle: rhetorical phenomena in pragmatics. Topics in Linguistics, 17 (1), 1-16.

Galinskaya, I. L. (2013). R. Linton. Cultural foundations of personality. Culturology. No. 4 (67), 51-53.

Hastürk, M. (2019). Structural and spiritual influence of music on art. Amazonia investiga, 7 (16), 111-117.

Kakasoltani, H. & Ardalani, H. (2019). Study the role of imagination and the principles of its evaluation in cinema from the point of view of Jacques Lacan. Amazonia investiga, 8 (18), 76-82.

Karabulatova, I., Vildanov, Kh., Zinchenko, A., Vasilishina, E. & Vassilenko, A. (2017). Problems of transformation matrices modern multicultural identity of the person in the variability of the discourse of identity Electronic Information Society. Pertanika Journal of Social Science & Humanities, 25 (S). Jul., 1-16.

Khachetsukova, Z. K. & Vorozhbitova, A. A. (2019). Linguistic rhetorical parameters of Soviet official discourse during the period of the Great Patriotic War (a case of lead articles of the Pravda newspaper). Sochi: University Publishing House.

Khachmafova, Z. R., Karabulatova, I. S., Serebryakova, S. V., Zinkovskaya, A. V. & Ermakova, E. N. (2017). The Specifics of an Estimate discourse of gender stereotypes in small forms of Folklore in a Network Discourse of Electronic and Information society at the Beginning of 21ct Century. Pertanika Journal of Social Science & Humanities, 25 (S) Jul., 137-150.

Kharlamov, V. I. (2013). Concepts and ideologies of Stalinism: Stalin and the war. Space and Time, 4 (14), 155-162.

Marinenko, L. E., Kattsina, T. A., Karabulatova, I. S. & Mezit, L. E. (2019). Historical Experience in Dealing with Epidemics in the Yenisei Province in the late XIX – early XX centuries. Bylye Gody, 54 (4), 1737-1744.

Perelman, Ch. & Olbrechts-Tyteca, L. (1969). The New Rhetoric: A Treatise on Argumentation. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.

Potapenko, S. (2019). Ukrainian cognitive linguistics: from analytical to integrational study of language. Human and cultural priorities in modern linguistics. Pereyaslav-Khmelnitsky: University Press.

Vorozhbitova, A. A. (2018). Linguistic rhetoric of Soviet discourse: Stages of development and typology in polyethnosociocultural and educational space. Language: history and modernity, 2, 37-47.

Vorozhbitova, A., Karabulatova, I., Bzegezheva, Z., Druzhinina, V. & Pyankova, T. (2019). A glossy magazine discourse of the early twenty-first century as a tool of globalization: Sochi school of linguistics and rhetoric. Amazonia Investiga, 8 (24), 170-180.

Vorozhbitova, A., Potapenko, S., Berezovskaya, L., Lebedeva, E. & Kushko, N. (2019). Discourse of Communism and Socialist linguistic personality: Rhetorical perspective. Amazonia Investiga, 8 (23), 739-748.
Published
2020-05-18
How to Cite
Vorozhbitova, A., Potapenko, S., Khachaturova, N., & N., Y. (2020). Linguistic rhetoric of Soviet discourse: official vs personal register (J. Stalin – A. Dovzhenko). Amazonia Investiga, 9(29), 224-233. https://doi.org/10.34069/AI/2020.29.05.25
Section
Articles