The Concepts-Constants of Political Discourse

Introduction. The paper considers the specifics of the cognitive concepts from the world of politics. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the concepts of political discourse and their constant structures. Scientific novelty lies in the new approach, exploring concepts of political discourse carried out on a cognitive level, given the structures of the concepts and at the level of consciousness, a thorough analysis of their. The object of this research is the concepts and constants of political discourse. Actuality of work is determined by the great interest on the part of linguists to the study of the relationship of language and society, language and politics, in which language becomes the main tool of understanding political battles and victories.

Methodology and sources. Cognitive-discourse approach to the analysis of the concepts of political discourse is used in the paper, experimental methods creating a picture of use of concepts and their constant structures in political debates and speeches. Any concept is a part of the information about the real situation in society, politics, and the world.

Results and discussion. The analysis of the concepts of political discourse and their constant structures based on systemic functional approach, the essence of which is the consideration of the object as a system – a coherent body of interrelated elements operating within the framework of political discourse. Analysis of the concepts and their structures was achieved through the establishment of a connection with history and etymology, through the creation of associative, relying on various dictionaries (historical, explanatory, etymological). These data were obtained by using experimental methods that determine the frequency of use of any concept and its constant structure in the speeches of political figures, for example, the political leaders of Great Britain. In addition, the analysis of concepts and their structures must identify the units of lexical meanings of concepts. The concept is necessary to be studied not only at the linguistic level but also at the level of consciousness.

Conclusion. The use of experimental methods for the analysis of concepts and their constant structures allowed to discuss elements of the concepts and their relationships. The results of the paper were to build systematic structures concepts of political discourse on the example of the use of basic concepts: “power”, “people”, “nation”, “state”, “unity” in the speeches of political leaders in the UK.

1. Sheigal, E.I. (2002), “Cultural Concepts of Political Discourse”, Communicating Across Differences, Pyatigorsk, RUS, June 3–6, 2002, pp. 24–26.

2. Likhachev, D.S. (1993), “The conceptosphere of the Russian language”, Izvestija Rossijskoj Akademii nauk. Serija literatury i jazyka [Proceedings of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Literature and Language Series], Moscow, RUS, vol. 52, no. 1, pp. 3–9.

3. Kolesov, V.V. (1992), “Culture concept: image – concept – symbol”, Vestnik SPbGU [Vestnik of Saint-Petersburg University], Series 2, iss. 3, no. 16, pp. 3–40.

4. Kubrjakova, E.S. (ed.) (1996), Kratkij slovar' kognitivnyh terminov [A Brief Dictionary of Cognitive Terms], MSU Publishing House, Moscow, RUS.

5. Askol'dov-Alekseev, S.A. (1997), “Concept and word”, Russkaja slovesnost'. Ot teorii slovesnosti k strukture teksta: antologija [Russian literature. From the theory of literature to the structure of the text: an anthology], in Neroznak, V.P. (ed.), Akademija, Moscow, RUS, pp. 267–279.

6. Alefirenko, N.F. (2000), “Phraseological meaning and concept”, Kognitivnaja semantika [Cognitive semantics], vol. 2, Tambov, RUS, 11–14 Sept., 2000, pp. 33–36.

7. Stepanov, Ju.S. and Proskurin, S.G. (1993), Konstanty mirovoj kul'tury [World culture constants]. Nauka, Moscow, RUS.

8. Andor, J. (1985), “On the psychological relevance of frames”, Quaderni di semantic, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 344–352.

9. Fillmore, Ch.J. and Atkins, В.Т. (1992), “Toward a Frame-Based Lexicon: The Semantics of RISK and Its Neighbors”, Frames, Filds, and Contrasts, Hillsdale, N. J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc., pp. 75–102.

10. Boldyrev, N.N. (1998), “Systemic and functional relationships of language units as a result of the categorizing activity of language consciousness”, Svjazi jazykovyh edinic v sisteme i realizacii [Relations of language units in the system and implementation], TSU Publishing House, Tambov, RUS, pp. 5–16.

11. Telija, V.N. (1996), Russkaja frazeologija. Semanticheskij, pragmaticheskij i lingvokul'turologicheskij aspekty [Russian phraseology. Semantic, pragmatic and linguocultural aspects], Jazyki slavjanskoj kul'tury, Moscow, RUS.

12. Popova, Z.D. and Sternin, I.A. (2007), Kognitivnaja lingvistika [Cognitive linguistics], Moscow, AST “Vostok-Zapad”, RUS.

13. Stepanov, Ju.S. (2004), Konstanty: slovar' russkoj kul'tury [Constants: Dictionary of Russian Culture], 3rd ed., Akadem. proekt, Moscow, RUS.