CC BY
11
КОММУНИКАТИВНЫЕ И ДИСКУРСИВНЫЕ ИССЛЕДОВАНИЯ
COMMUNICATION AND DISCOURSE STUDIES
Original Paper
DOI: 10.29025/2079-6021-2019-3-33-41
Discursive space of Spanish popular science IT-discourse: architectonics, content, functionality
Alexander Y. Bagiyan
Pyatigorsk State University, Pyatigorsk, Russian Federation ORCID: 0000-0002-3455-0516 Researcher ID: N-9069-2016 e-mail: alexander. 0506@mail.ru
Received: 15.07.2019 /Accepted: 31.07.2019 /Publishedonline: 25.09.2019
Abstract: The article is dedicated to the analysis of the 'discursive space' concept, in general, and its realization in Spanish popular science sphere of IT, in particular, as an indispensable element of substantial linguistic investigation. The paper gives rationale behind the investigation by justifying the fact that discursive space needs to be analyzed from three interrelated perspectives, namely: its structural composition, topical and linguistic content, and functional diapason of its discursive markers. Proving that Spanish popular science IT-discourse belongs to one of the most productive areas for multiplex linguistic research, the main focus of the article is on the analysis of discursive space formation. The main purpose of the article consists in the integrated analysis of contemporary Spanish popular science IT-discourse in order to single out the dominant features of this discursive space in terms of its textual and spatial architectonics, topical and linguistic content, as well as the functionality of those elements. In order to meet the objectives of the research, the author resorts to continuous sampling method with corpus data collection, functional analysis, discourse analysis, and statistical data analysis. The obtained results let us conclude that Spanish popular science IT-discourse has the following range of discursive markers which shape the perlocutionary effect of its discursive space: terminological units, colloquialisms, set phrases, discursive formulas (conversational gambits), inversions, intensifies, slang, idioms. The analysis of each given discursive marker allows us to state their pragmatic-communicative charge and reveals the whole functional spectrum, taking into account the functional diapason of both architectonic and discursive elements. It is also shown that all the discursive markers tend to collaborate with one another, leading to a strong functional synergistic effect, when the combined usage of several discursive markers provides the pragmatic charge of a much greater magnitude rather than a simple sum of pragmatic charges produced by each of the markers separately.
Keywords: discourse, discursive marker, discursive space, popular science discourse, popularization, function, architectonics, functional diapason.
Acknowledgements: The work was supported by the Council for Grants of the President of the Russian Federation (№ МК-6895.2018.6; project executive - Alexander Y. Bagiyan).
For citation: Bagiyan A.Y. Discursive space of Spanish popular science IT-discourse: architectonics, content, functionality. Current Issues in Philology and Pedagogical Linguistics. 2019; 3: 33-41. DOI: 10.29025/2079-6021-2019-3-33-41 (In Eng.).
Оригинальная статья УДК 81'42:81'27
DOI: 10.29025/2079-6021-2019-3-33-41
Дискурсивное пространство испанского научно-популярного дискурса информационных технологий: архитектоника, состав, функциональность
А.Ю. Багиян
Пятигорский государственный университет, г. Пятигорск, Российская Федерация ORCID: 0000-0002-3455-0516 Researcher ID: N-9069-2016 e-mail: alexander. 0506@mail.ru
Получена: 15.07.2019 /Принята: 31.07.2019 /Опубликована онлайн: 25.09.2019
Резюме: Данная статья посвящена комплексному анализу понятия «дискурсивное пространство», в целом, и рассмотрению его особенностей в рамках испанской научно-популярной сферы информационных технологий, в частности, как обязательному элементу обстоятельного лингвистического исследования. В работе дается мотивированное объяснение относительно проведенного анализа, а также аргументируется необходимость изучения дискурсивного пространства с трех взаимосвязанных точек зрения, а именно: его структурного состава, тематического и лингвистического содержания, а также функционального диапазона его дискурсивных маркеров. Обосновывая принадлежность испанского научно-популярного дискурса информационных технологий наиболее продуктивным областям многовекторного лингвистического исследования, основное внимание статьи сосредоточено на анализе формирования данного дискурсивного пространства. Основной целью статьи является осуществление интегрированного анализа современного испанского научно-популярного дискурса информационных технологий с целью выявления характерных особенностей исследуемого дискурсивного пространства с точки зрения его текстового и пространственного конструирования, тематико-лингвистического содержания, а также функциональности выявленных маркеров. Для достижения поставленной цели, автор обращается к методу сплошной выборки наряду с корпусным сбором данных, функциональным анализом, дискурс-анализом и статистической обработкой данных. Полученные результаты позволяют заключить, что испанский научно-популярной дискурс информационных технологий характеризуется следующим диапазоном дискурсивных маркеров, формирующих перлокутивный эффект данного дискурсивного пространства: терминологические единицы, коллоквиализмы, клише, дискурсивные формулы, инверсии, интенсификаторы, сленг и идиомы. Анализ каждого из приведенных дискурсивных маркеров позволяет выявить уровень их прагма-коммуникативного заряда и представить широкий функциональный спектр, принимая во внимание функциональный диапазон как архитектонических, так и дискурсивных элементов. В статье выявляется, что дискурсивные маркеры имеют тенденцию к взаимодействию друг с другом. Это приводит к сильному функциональному синергетическому эффекту, благодаря которому совместное использование нескольких дискурсивных маркеров обеспечивает прагматическое заряд гораздо большей величины, нежели простая сумма прагматических зарядов, закрепленных за каждым из маркеров отдельно.
Ключевые слова: дискурс, дискурсивный маркер, дискурсивное пространство, научно-популярный дискурс, популяризация, функция, архитектоника, функциональный диапазон.
А.Ю. БАГИЯН
Благодарности: Работа выполнена при поддержке Совета по грантам Президента Российской Федерации (№ МК-6895.2018.6; руководитель - А.Ю. Багиян).
Для цитирования: Багиян А.Ю. Дискурсивное пространство испанского научно-популярного дискурса информационных технологий: архитектоника, состав, функциональность. Актуальные проблемы филологии и педагогической лингвистики. 2019; 3: 33-41. DOI: 10.29025/2079-6021-2019-3-33-41.
Introduction
Discursive space as a research subject has long been in the center of attention among the linguistic scientific community. The exploration of this concept, as well as its linguistic implementation, belong to the realm of discourse analysis.
"The principal mechanism of both the social knowledge system and group praxis is discourse. Discourse analysis therefore involves the investigation of the relationships between discourse and the social knowledge of the system on the one hand, and discourse and communicative practices on the other" [26, p. 6]. Therefore, the research of popularization as both a socio-cultural and linguo-cognitive phenomenon is inextricably connected with discursive space.
Taking into account that the sphere of IT has been gaining enormous popularity in recent years, and the Internet has long become a globalized site for communication capable of disseminating and appropriating cultural and scientific flows to display and mediate identity options and lifestyles of humanity [21, p. 233-234], it is reasonable that the research of popular science IT-discourse is relevant as never before. Since Spanish is one of the most widespread languages in the world, along with the fact that Spanish popular science discourse in general has not been given enough attention in the field of linguistic research, we have chosen Spanish popular science IT-discourse as one of the most efficient sources for shaping popular science discursive space.
We believe that discursive space is to be analyzed from three interrelated perspectives: its structural composition, topical and linguistic content, and functional range of its discursive markers. For this reason, we first sketch out some of the crucial elements to take into account when describing Spanish popular science IT-discourse, and then survey the key architectonic components, discursive markers and their functional scope in order to establish a well-rounded descriptive picture of the analyzed discursive space.
The aim of the article
The purpose of the article consists in the integrated analysis of contemporary Spanish popular science IT-discourse in order to single out the dominant features of this discursive space in terms of its textual and spatial architectonics, topical and linguistic content, as well as the functional range of those elements.
A review of the literature
Discursive space is a diversified phenomenon which should be studies from different perspectives and involve not only linguistic, but extra-linguistic features as well. Due to the complexity of the matter at hand, within the framework of this research we resorted to scientific literature on such aspects of linguistics as scientific/professional discourse analysis [19; 22; 24; 27], discursive space analysis [8; 9; 11], architectonics and compositional structuring of discourse/text [14], functional linguistics [5; 16], and functional stylistics [13; 23].
As for the theoretical background on popularization and popular science discourse, we follow the concept, according to which this type of discourse is treated as a heterogeneous linguistic phenomenon based on the interdependence of scientific and mass media discourse, where special knowledge is transferred though the prism of pragmatic-communicative and socio-cognitive deconstruction of initial purely scientific discursive space [1; 2].
On the basis of the scientific literature analysis on different approaches to investigating discursive space, we define this phenomenon as a partially cognitive and partially material element of social communication, where communicators coexist with certain discourses they create and exchange [6, p. 242; 10, p. 103-104]. With this in mind, we come to the conclusion that it is to be handled from three points of view: structural, content (both topically and linguistically), and functional.
Research methods
In accordance with the main objective of this paper, the following methods of analysis have been implemented in the research: continuous sampling method and corpus data collection (to simplify further analysis of data and minimize impresisions); discourse analysis (to discriminate and analyse the set of discursive markers), functional analysis (to shape the functional spectrum of the analysed discursive markers and architectonic elements), statistics analysis (to evaluate all the amount of presented data in order to uncover the underlying patterns and trends).
All the research methods are implemented on the original language material which has been selected into a discursive data corpus after the analysis of 40 Spanish popular science articles on various IT topics. The overall corpus collection consists of 1500 discursive markers. Since the aim of the paper is the analysis of the given discursive space, and all the materials are taken from one and the same online source (Revista "Computer Hoy" - https://computerhoy.com/*). We are to use this particular site as a reference for the examples in the article, without further specifications as to separate articles and their authors.
Results and discussion
Architectonics
From the standpoint of structural disposition, the analysed popular science IT-discourse has a relatively straightforward architectural layout in terms of special knowledge transfer per se: each article has a heading, main body divided into sections with subheadings and paragraphs, and visual support in the form of multimedia.
Even though the main structural elements coincide with those of a classical mass media architectonics, there are certain elements which make the analysed discursive space much more attractive and appealing to a public:
(1) main body division into paragraphs is accompanied by additional information represented by not only photos, but also videos and different links on the topic of the article, which serve as examples and/or the material for knowledge extension;
(2) depending on the information covered, some paragraphs have hyperlinks both to internal (other articles on the topic) and external (additional information from other sites) sources;
(3) lateral sides of the page are filled with advertisements on IT topic (even though, not necessarily related to the topic of the article), another advertisement section being at the very bottom of the page is called "Y además"/ "Andalso";
(4) at the end of each article there is a "Recomendado para ti" / "Recommended for you" section dedicated both to the articles on the same topic and to those having the same issue date. Thus, each piece of information does not only establish knowledge transfer but provides topical and temporal interconnection as well.
Judging by all the above mentioned structural elements of Spanish popular science article on IT, we can conclude that the architectonics of this discourse type is characterised by the following functions: information, education, entertainment, intellectualization, persuasion, popularization, socialization, and linkage. It is worth mentioning that the combination of the first three functions should not be identified with infortainment as an extremely simplified version of special knowledge popularisation.
Content (Topicality)
Topical range of the analysed type of discourse is significantly restricted because of its initial thematic presuppositions - all the articles within this discursive space are dedicated to the IT-sphere. Nevertheless, the scope of knowledge is channelled through two different ways of presenting the material: 1. Main subdivisions: 1.1. "Technología" / "Technology", 1.2. "Entretenimiento" / "Entertainment", 1.3. "Gaming", 1.4. "Life", 1.5. "Motor", 1.6. "Industria" / "Industry", 1.7. "Productos" / "Products"; 2. Section subdivisions: 2.1. "Noticias" / "News", 2.2. "Análisis" / "Analysis", 2.3. "Tutoriales" / "Tutorials", 2.4. "Listas" / "Lists", 2.5. "Reportajes" / "Reports", 2.6. "Especiales" / "Specials". Apart from these subdivisions, there is also a 3. "Lo último"/ "The latest" category which provides the readers with all the cutting-edge IT-new and is usually divided into the following subsections: 3.1. "Tendencias" / "Tendencies", 3.2. "Negocio" / "Business", 3.3. "Eventos" / "Events".
Content (Discursive markers)
According to the conducted research and the collected corpus, Spanish popular science IT-discourse has the following range of discursive markers which shape the perlocutionary effect of its discursive space: terminological units, colloquialisms, set phrases, discursive formulas (conversational gambits), inversions, intensifi-ers, slang and idioms.
Terminological units (41,8%) - versión beta, aplicación, sistema de protección, chat archivado, bandeja de entrada, sincronización, consumo energético, inalámbrico, etc.
Taking into account that science popularization originates from science and, partially, academic discourse, it is no surprise that this particular discursive marker stands out as the most prominent one. Further analysis of this section reveals the following terminological specifications [according to: 4]: standard terms (56,5%), among them - simple terms (14,1% - interfaz, conectividad, resolución, cobertura), compound terms (5,8% -criptomoneda, videojuego), word-combination terms (29,2% - red social, triple cámara, consumo de la batería, notificación sincronizada, terminales de gama alta), derivative (4,1% - cargador, descargar, adaptador)
and compound derivative terms (3,3% - multiplataforma), ; acronyms (8,2% - NFC, PC, iOS, GPS); English borrowings (18,9% - smartband, smartphone, bluetooth, jack, software); nomenclature (16,4% - Android, FullVision).
The results of statistical data analysis show that terminological units are the most frequently used discursive markers in Spanish popular science IT-discourse, the most commonly used among them being word-combination terms and borrowings. The latter can be explained by the fact that both word-combination terms and borrowings are much easier to understand by the public.
"Con eso en mente, podríamos estar ante un dispositivo con pantalla AMOLED de 6,1" a resolución HD+ y que iría acompañado en su interior de un procesador snapdragon 675 de ocho núcleos, y fabricado en proceso de 11nm. Destacaría por su cámara, dado que traería una configuración triple de cámara trasera de 48 Mpx + 8 Mpx + 2 Mpx, y con una cámara delantera pensada para los selfies de 32 Mpx"*.
The example not only demonstrates almost full range of terminological functioning within the analysed discursive space, but also shows that the majority of terms used are either despecialized or determinalized, which makes it much easier for the addressee to absorb special information [3, p. 128-129].
Colloquialisms (8,9%) - nuestro día a día, cobrar vida, normal y corriente, sí rotundo, se nota, etc .
Before analysing the subject, let us remind that this paper differentiates between colloquialisms, set phrases, and idioms. Colloquialisms are lexical units used in colloquial speech, but with their motivational component left untouched. Set phrases are lexical units with less motivation charge, but the meaning can still be drawn out of them without much difficulty; whereas idioms are purely phraseological units completely devoid of any motivation charge.
The example below shows the usage of colloquialisms along with terminological units and discursive formulas. The final positioning of the colloquialism ('correr el riesgo de') is mainly used to intensify the pragmatic-communicative effect, previously established by terms and discursive formulas.
"La versión en pruebas de esta aplicación, por su parte, se puede conseguir de dos formas: convirtiéndonos en 'beta tester' oficial, un proceso que está disponible desde este enlace, o descargando la APK desde fuentes extra-oficiales, una opción que nos hace correr el riesgo de acabar descargando un archivo malicioso" *.
Set phrases (15,2%) - moldear el futuro, sumirse a la moda de, llamar la atención, darse cuenta de, destacar un ápice, mejor dicho, merecer la pena, en cuestión de segundos, etc.
"Si no sabéis nada de programación, hay algunos lenguajes sencillos que nos van 'ayudando' a aprender poco a poco, pero si queréis empezar por la puerta grande, lo mejor es empezar con los lenguajes más populares actualmente... y también los que tienen más proyección" *.
Both colloquialisms ('poco a poco') and set phrases ('empezar por la puerta grande') serve to enhance the overall emotional-expressive level of the passage [cf.: 15, p. 71-72]. Once again, the use of terms is almost inevitable in the stated discursive space ('lenguage de programación').
It needs to be mentioned that colloquialisms are often accompanied by set phrase or idioms to increase the pragmatic charge of the passage. For this reason, the attractiveness of these discursive markers ('vale la pena' -colloquialism, 'dar el salto' - set phrase) is frequently used in headings of popular science articles:
"Xiaomi Mi A2 vs Xiaomi Mi A1, ¿vale la pena dar el salto?" *
Discursive formulas (21,2%) - lo importante es, sobre todo, de hecho, a lo largo de, a partir de, además, del mismo modo, por tanto, es muy habitual que, por suerte, en el caso de, etc.
Within the framework of our research, discursive formulas equal to conversational gambits, since along with some elements of formalism particular to scientific discourse, the style of knowledge transfer used in Spanish popular science IT-discourse has many pragmatic-communicative features of spoken everyday communication [cf.: 7].
"Steam estrena hoy sábado el Préstamo Familiar. Un nuevo servicio que te permite prestar todos tus juegos digitales a tus familiares y amigos cercanos. Del mismo modo, ellos pueden prestarte los suyos" *.
This discursive marker is crucial for the proper discourse structuring, making the analysed discursive space both coherent and cohesive in its topicality as well as in its linguistic representation [20].
Inversions (2%).
The predominance of the 'subject <-> predicate <-> object' relation in the order of the words makes any change conspicuous in the discourse structure and inevitably leads to a modification in the design of its pragmatic modulation. According to our analysis, one of the main ways of forming inversion in popular science IT-discourse is using cleft sentences:
"Es por ello por lo que ya podemos hablar de las novedades que recibiremos más pronto que tarde en la aplicación" *.
The second most common way is negative inversion:
"No ocurre eso en este caso: es un reloj que apenas notas si lo llevas puesto" *.
Intensifiers (4,4%) - especialmente, tan, extremadamente, muy, completamente, totalmente, etc.
Within the collected corpus data, we can single out two types of intensifiers. The first type is a classical intensifier, often expressed by one word only:
"Tan particular que se califica como smartwatch híbrido". *
"Muy a su favor hay que decir que las notificaciones llegan de forma prácticamente instantánea" *.
The second type is usually expressed with a word combination:
"Puede parecer un detalle sin importancia, pero cuando debes llevar todo el día un portátil encima, cada gramo cuenta y lo que sobre el papel apenas es apreciable, al cabo de las horas se convierte en todo un inconveniente" *.
It is also important to mention that, in order to establish a more effective perlocutionary effect, the addresser resorts to the combination of one or several discursive markers with such a latent intensifier as a humorous remark or irony:
"Especialmente sobresaliente es el caso del sueño, que detecta con una precisión que casi asusta" *.
Slang (1,1%) - es la cala, me importa un pimiento, qué chulo, me cae gordo, mala pata, pijo, qué fuerte, ser la leche.
Judging by the percentage of slang usage in the analysed discourse, it is the least widespread discursive marker. The situation can be explained: slang is extremely heavily charged in terms of style and pragmatics [12], therefore it should be used with utmost care, especially in the texts of partially scientific discourse (such as science popularization).
"Linus Torvalds es conocido por ser el creador del Kernel de Linux, germen de este sistema operativo. También por su legendaria mala leche y lo mal que lleva eso de que sus colaboradores cometan errores, y si no que se lo pregunten a los desarrolladores que trabajan con él" *.
Apart from using strictly Spanish slang, more often than not the addresser of popular scientific texts resorts to English slang borrowings:
"Usarlo cómodamente con una mano, jugar a toda pantalla, ver tus vídeos o series favoritas o cotillear el perfil de Instagram de tu crush, etc. Usarlo, al fin y al cabo, para todo aquello que te guste hacer" *.
Idioms (5,4%).
This discursive marker is, arguably, one of the most expressive means of emotional colouring of Spanish popular science IT-discourse, which both encapsulates an impressive amount of background information and softens the initial purely scientific tone of special knowledge transfer, deconstructing its pragmatic and architectonic features [25, p. 54-55].
"Opera no quiso quedarse de brazos cruzados, y decidió rechazar el resultado presentando su propio experimento, aunque en un dispositivo diferente" *.
As well as colloquialisms and set phrases, idioms are frequently used in heading due to their high emotional-expressive charge and attractiveness for the addressee:
"Project Sol, la demo de ray tracing de Nvidia que os dejará con la boca abierta" *.
Along with that, idioms are also commonly used to produce humorous or ironic effect [18]:
"Por último, pero no menos útil, coloca tu despertador en un lugar de la habitación que te obligue a levantarte de la cama para apagarlo. Mano de santo" *.
Functionality
The analysis of discursive markers in Spanish popular science IT-discourse revealed the following set of functions peculiar to these language elements: terminological units - intellectualization, information, knowledge dissemination, popularization, explanation, word economy; colloquialisms - emotional colouring, entertainment, word economy; set phrases - explanation, emotional colouring, word economy; discursive formulas - topic introduction, discourse structuring, persuasion, socialization, exemplification; inversions -popularization, exemplification, emotional colouring; intensifiers - evaluation, popularization, emotional colouring; slang - popularization, emotional colouring, word economy; idioms - evaluation, popularization, explanation, emotional colouring, word economy.
"Todo lo que tenemos entre manos, desde cualquier aplicación del día a día hasta los videojuegos, el sistema operativo de la televisión, las páginas web, los sistemas de música por streaming... en definitiva, todo lo que usamos cada minuto, ha sido programado por alguien, sin dejar nada al azar" *.
This example is a demonstration of how several discursive markers function, setting in motion synergistic functional effect and shaping Spanish popular science IT-discourse. The passage begins with two colloquialisms ('tener entre manos', 'día a día'), is strengthened by terminological elements ('página web', 'sistema operativo', videojuego', 'streaming) logically formed by a concluding discursive formula ('en definitiva'), and emotionally intensified by a set phrase ('sin dejar nada al azar').
Such a collaborative usage of discursive markers serves to fulfill the addresser's intention [17], significantly intensify the overall emotional-expressive level of the popular science discursive space and eventually deconstruct the initially rigid and formalistic purely scientific discursive space as the primary source of special knowledge.
Conclusion
Taking into account all the results mentioned above, it is fair to define Spanish popular science IT-discourse as a heterogeneous phenomenon, characterized by (1) its diverse and highly information-loaded architectonics; (2) a wide-ranging content represented, on the one hand, by a high level of topicality and, on the other, by an impressive spectrum of discursive markers used to shape the analysed discursive space via forming its pragmatic-communicative charge; (3) vast functional range, distinguished by the synergistic functional effect, when the combined usage of several discursive markers provides the pragmatic charge of a much greater magnitude rather than a simple sum of pragmatic charges produced by each of the markers separately.
In the context of fast-growing interest of the society in every aspect of science and technology, we find it necessary to conduct further research in the sphere of critical discursive space analysis from the point of view of cognitive linguistics and psycholinguistics in order to put forward the underlying forming elements of Spanish popular science IT-discourse, responsible for shaping not only the discursive, but the cognitive-communicative space as well.
References
1. Bagiyan, A.Y. (2017). Discursive mechanisms for popularization of elements of scientific knowledge: cognitive-linguistic aspect (on material of the English language). Nauchnyi dialog, no. 6, pp. 9-28. (In Russ.)
2. Bagiyan, A.Y., Natkho, O.I, Shiryaeva, T.A. (2017). Wisdom of centuries in the language of business. Paroemias in the English-speaking popular scientific business discourse: cognitive and discursive aspect. Kazan: Book, 184 p. (In Russ.)
3. Bagiyan, A.Y., Shleyvis, P.I. (2017). Explanatory determinologization as the element of cognitive syntax: an overview of the problem (on the material of popular science discourse). Cognitive Studies of Language, no. 31, pp. 124-130. (In Russ.)
4. Davydova, M.L., Filimonova, N.Y. (2016). Legal terms - professional terms -professional legal jargon: distinguishing of concepts and functions. Humanities and Education, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 102-106. (In Russ.)
5. Murashova, L.P. (2017). Functional studies in Russian linguistics. Scientific bulletin of the Southern Institute of Management, no. 1, pp. 80-87. (In Russ.)
6. Kazydub, N.N. (2006). Discursive space as a fragment of worldview (a theoretical model). Irkutsk: ISLU, 216 p. (In Russ.)
7. Radyuk, A.V., Khramchenko, D.S. (2018). Speech markers of identity in economic discourse. PNRPU Linguistics and Pedagogy Bulletin, no. 4, pp. 53-65. (In Russ.)
8. Rakitina, S.V (2007). Cognitive-discursive space of scientific text [dissertation]. Volgograd. Available from: https://www.dissercat.com/content/kognitivno-diskursivnoe-prostranstvo-nauchnogo-teksta. Access at: 01.07.2019. (In Russ.)
9. Raspopina, E.Y. (2010). The discursive space of the internet: general differential features. The ISLU Philological Review, no. 4, pp. 43-49. (In Russ.)
10. Plotnikova, S.N., Domysheva, S.A. (2009). Political Discourse Space and its Structural Organization. Political Linguistics, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 103-108. (In Russ.)
11. Zavrumov, Z.A., Bagiyan, A.Y. (2016). Discursive space: intrinsic characteristics and functional range. New ideas in linguistics of the 21st century: Current problems and trends within the modern directions of linguistic thought. Pyatigorsk, pp. 108-117. (In Russ.)
12. Agha, A. (2015). Tropes of slang. Signs and Society, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 306-330. DOI: https://doi. org/10.1086/683179 (In Eng.)
13. Burke, M. (2017). The Routledge handbook of stylistics. London: Routledge, 558 p. (In Eng.)
14. Cappelli, A., Giovannetti, E., Michelassi, P. (2004). Ontological knowledge and language in modelling classical architectonic structures. Ontology and Lexical Resources. OntoLex. Available at: https://pdfs.seman-ticscholar.org/5303/c7a18e25eb5170e5411d9d370bf56ed86510.pdf (access at: 05 July 2019) (In Eng.)
15. Darwin, C.M., Gray, L.S. (1999). Going after the phrasal verb: An alternative approach to classification. Tesol Quarterly, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 65-83. (In Eng.)
16. Eggins, S. (2004). An introduction to systemic functional linguistics. New York; London: Continuum, 384 p. (In Eng.)
17. Farrell, J. (2005). Intention and intertext. Phoenix, vol. 59, no. 1-2, pp. 98-111. (In Eng.)
18. Giora, R., Fein, O. (1999). Irony comprehension: The graded salience hypothesis. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, no. 12(4), pp. 425-436. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/humr.1999.12.4.425 (In Eng.)
19. Irimiea, S.B. (2017). Professional Discourse as Social Practice // European Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 108-119. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.26417/ejis.v9i1.p108-119 (In Eng.)
20. Keller, E. (1979). Gambits: Conversational strategy signals. Journal of pragmatics, vol. 3, no. 3-4, pp. 219-238. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(79)90032-8 (In Eng.)
21. Leppänen, S. (2012). Linguistic and discursive heteroglossia on the translocal internet: the case of web writing. Language mixing and code-switching in writing: Approaches to mixed-language written discourse. London: Routledge, pp. 233-254. (In Eng.)
22. LeVine, P., Scollon, R. (2004). Discourse and technology: Multimodal discourse analysis. Washington: Georgetown University Press, 229 p. (In Eng.)
23. Lin, B. (2015). Functional stylistics. In The Bloomsbury Companion to Stylistics. London: Bloomsbuy, pp.57-77. (In Eng.)
24. McCarthy, M., Matthiessen, C., Slade, D. (2013). Discourse Analysis. In An Introduction to Applied Linguistics. London: Routledge, pp. 63-79. (In Eng.)
25. Naciscione, A. (2010). Stylistic use of phraseological units in discourse. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 292 p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/z.159 (In Eng.)
26. Riley, P. (2007). Language, culture and identity: An ethnolinguistic perspective. London: Continuum Academic, 276 p. (In Eng.)
27. Shiryaeva, T.A., Gelyaeva, A.I., Alikaev, R.S., Huchinaeva, D.D., Toguzaeva, M.R. (2018). A theory-driven framework for the study of language in business. XLinguae, vol. 11, no. 1. pp. 82-90. (In Eng.)
Список литературы
1. Багиян А.Ю. Дискурсивные механизмы популяризации элементов научного знания: когниолинг-вистический аспект (на материале английского языка) // Научный диалог. 2017. №6. С. 9-28.
2. Багиян А.Ю., Натхо О.И., Ширяева Т.А. Мудрость веков в языке бизнеса. Паремии в англоязычном научно-популярном деловом дискурсе: когнитивно-дискурсивный аспект. Казань: Издательство «Бук», 2017. 184 с.
3. Багиян А.Ю., ШлейвисП.И. Экспланаторная детерминологизация как элемент когнитивного синтаксиса: постановка проблемы изучения (на материале научно-популярного дискурса) // Когнитивные исследования языка. 2017. №31. С. 124-130.
4. ДавыдоваМ.Л., Филимонова Н.Ю. Юридические термины - профессионализмы - профессиональный жаргон: разграничение понятий и соотношение функций // Гуманитарные науки и образование. 2016. № 3 (27). С. 102-106.
5. Мурашова Л.П. Отечественная функциональная лингвистика // Научный вестник Южного института менеджмента. 2017. № 1. С. 80-87.
6. Казыдуб Н.Н. Дискурсивное пространство как фрагмент языковой картины мира (теоретическая модель). Иркутск: ИГЛУ, 2006. 216 p.
7. РадюкА.В., ХрамченкоД.С. Речевые маркеры идентичности в экономическом дискурсе // Вестник Пермского национального исследовательского политехнического университета. Проблемы языкознания и педагогики. 2018. № 4. С. 53-65.
А.Ю. БАГИЯН
8. Ракитина С.В. Когнитивно-дискурсивное пространство научного текста: автореф. дисс. ... д-ра филол. наук. Волгоград, 2007. 44 с. Режим доступа: https://www.dissercat.com/content/kognitivno-diskur-sivnoe-prostranstvo-nauchnogo-teksta. Дата обращения: 01.07.2019.
9. Распопина Е.Ю. Дискурсивное пространство интернет: основные дифференциальные признаки // Вестник Иркутского государственного лингвистического университета. 2010. № 4. С. 43-49.
10. Плотникова С.Н., Домышева С.А. Политическое дискурсивное пространство: принципы структурирования // Политическая лингвистика. 2009. № 1 (27). С. 103-108.
11. Заврумов З.А., Багиян А.Ю. Дискурсивное пространство: сущностные характеристики и функциональный диапазон // Новые идеи в лингвистике XXI века: Актуальные проблемы и тенденции в рамках современных направлений лингвистической мысли. Пятигорск, 2016. С. 108-117.
12. Agha A. Tropes of slang // Signs and Society. 2015. Vol. 3. No. 2. Pp. 306-330. DOI: https://doi. org/10.1086/683179 (In Eng.)
13. BurkeM. The Routledge handbook of stylistics. London: Routledge, 2017. 558 p. (In Eng.)
14. Cappelli A., Giovannetti E., Michelassi P. Ontological knowledge and language in modelling classical architectonic structures // Ontology and Lexical Resources. OntoLex, 2004. Available at: https://pdfs.semantic-scholar.org/5303/c7a18e25eb5170e5411d9d370bf56ed86510.pdf (access at: 05 July 2019)
15. Darwin C.M., Gray L.S. Going after the phrasal verb: An alternative approach to classification // Tesol Quarterly. 1999. Vol. 33. No. 1. Pp. 65-83.
16. Eggins S. An introduction to systemic functional linguistics. New York; London: Continuum, 2004. 384 p.
17. Farrell J. (2005). Intention and intertext // Phoenix. 2005. Vol. 59. No. 1-2. Pp. 98-111.
18. GioraR., Fein O. Irony comprehension: The graded salience hypothesis // Humor: International Journal of Humor Research 1999. No. 12(4). Pp. 425-436. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/humr.1999.12.4.425
19. Irimiea S.B. Professional Discourse as Social Practice // European Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies. 2017. Vol. 9. No. 1. Pp. 108-119. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.26417/ejis.v9i1.p108-119
20. Keller E. Gambits: Conversational strategy signals. Journal of pragmatics. 1979. Vol. 3. No. 3-4. Pp. 219-238. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(79)90032-8
21. Leppanen S. Linguistic and discursive heteroglossia on the translocal internet: the case of web writing. Language mixing and code-switching in writing: Approaches to mixed-language written discourse. London: Routledge, 2012. Pp. 233-254.
22. LeVine P., Scollon R. Discourse and technology: Multimodal discourse analysis. Washington: Georgetown University Press, 2004. 229 p.
23. Lin B. Functional stylistics // The Bloomsbury Companion to Stylistics. London: Bloomsbury, 2015. Pp.57-77.
24. McCarthyM., Matthiessen C., Slade D. Discourse Analysis. In An Introduction to Applied Linguistics. London: Routledge, 2013. Pp. 63-79.
25. Naciscione A. Stylistic use of phraseological units in discourse. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2010. 292 p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/z.159
26. Riley P. Language, culture and identity: An ethnolinguistic perspective. London: Continuum Academic, 2007. 276 p.
27. Shiryaeva T.A., GelyaevaA.I., AlikaevR.S., Huchinaeva D.D., ToguzaevaM.R. (2018). A theory-driven framework for the study of language in business. XLinguae. 2018. Vol. 11. No. 1. Pp. 82-90.
Alexander Y. Bagiyan, Candidate of Philology, associate professor, Pyatigorsk State University, English Language and Professional Communication Department, associate professor; 357532, 9 Kalinin Avenue, Pyatigorsk, Stavropol Krai, Russia; e-mail: alexander. 0506@mail.ru
Багиян Александр Юрьевич, кандидат филологических наук, доцент кафедры английского языка и профессиональной коммуникации, Пятигорский государственный университет; 357532, пр. Калинина, 9, г. Пятигорск, Ставропольский край, Российская Федерация; e-mail: alexander. 0506@mail.ru
