CC BY
57
т.п. ПАЛИЙ, Е.н. ПРОНЧЕНКО
Original Paper УДК 811.111
DOI: 10.29025/2079-6021-2019-3-73-80
The Role of Linguistic Tolerance in the Conflict Communication Paradigm
Tatyana P. Pali/7"^
Pyatigorsk State University, Pyatigorsk, Russian Federation ORCID ID: 0000-0002-6334-1780; e-mail: paliy.tp@yandex.ru
Elena N. Pronchenko
Pyatigorsk State University, Pyatigorsk, Russian Federation e-mail: Pronchenko.helena@yahoo.com
Received: 16.07.2019 /Accepted: 6.08.2019 /Publishedonline: 25.09.2019
Abstract: The processes of globalization occurring in the information environment and the active introduction of modern information technologies have marked a new era in the development and functioning of relevant mass media. Mass media is a complex system of information sources, recipients and addressees, which are interconnected by various communication channels and information flows. In modern society, the media resources are widely used to achieve various goals, ranging from reporting facts and events and ending with entertainment and advertising. Mass media accumulates the experience, desires and needs of millions, and at the same time affects not only the worldview, ideals and values of the audience, but also the actions of individual citizens and the collective actions of society as a whole.
At all times, special media attention has been drawn to various kinds of conflicts. Conflict coverage in the media belongs to complex multi-level sociopolitical processes. And this is not accidental, since the media can serve as a tool for the emergence and development of a conflict, on the one hand, and, on the other hand, contribute to its prevention and resolution.
This article focuses on this vital topic of contemporary sociolinguistics as a communication conflict. Media discourse is often the scene of the development and escalation of the conflict. Taking into consideration the large number of local and international conflicts, media coverage, principles and basic concepts of the foundations of conflict-communication come to the fore. Different types of conflicts are analyzed and systematized in the article, as well as real examples of functioning of conflicts in real situations are provided. A comparative study of the principles of linguistic tolerance is an extremely promising direction in view of the great variability of linguistic models serving to implement the principles of tolerance in different linguistic cultures, as well as the actual social order of modern society, which is compelled to function in conditions of various kinds of conflicts.
Keywords: conflict communication, mass media, linguistic tolerance, conflict-provoking issues, speech strategies, linguoculture, hostility, escalation.
For citation: Paliy T.P., Pronchenko E.N. The Role of Linguistic Tolerance in the Conflict Communication Paradigm. Current Issues in Philology and Pedagogical Linguistics. 2019; 3: 73-80. DOI: 10.29025/20796021-2019-3-73-80 (In Eng.).
актуальные проблемы филологии и педагогической лингвистики, 2019, № 3
Оригинальная статья
DOI: 10.29025/2079-6021-2019-3-73-80
Роль лингвистической толерантности в парадигме конфликтогенной коммуникации
Т.П. Палий^ Пятигорский государственный университет, Г. Пятигорск, Российская Федерация
ORCID ID: 0000-0002-6334-1780; e-mail: paliy.tp@yandex.ru
Е.Н. Пронченко
Пятигорский государственный университет, Г. Пятигорск, Российская Федерация
e-mail: Pronchenko.helena@yahoo.com
Получена: 16.07.2019 /Принята: 6.08.2019 /Опубликована онлайн: 25.09.2019
Резюме: Процессы глобализации, происходящие в информационной среде и активное внедрение современных информационных технологий ознаменовали собой новую эру в развитии и функционировании актуальных средств массовой информации. Средства массовой информации и коммуникации -это сложная система источников информации, адресатов и адресантов, которые связаны между собой различными каналами связи и потоками информации. В современном обществе СМИ широко используются для достижения различных целей, начиная от сообщения о фактах и событиях и заканчивая развлечениями и рекламой. Масс-медиа аккумулирует опыт, желания и потребности миллионов, и в то же самое время воздействует не только на мировоззрение, идеалы и ценности аудитории, но и на поступки отдельных граждан и коллективные действия общества в целом.
Во все времена особое внимание СМИ было обращено на различного рода конфликты. Освещение конфликтов в СМИ принадлежит к сложным многоуровневым общественно-политическим процессам. И это не случайно, так как средства массовой информации могут служить инструментом возникновения и развития конфликта, с одной стороны, а с другой - способствовать его предотвращению и урегулированию.
Данная статья посвящена такой актуальной теме современной социолингвистики как конфликто-генная коммуникация. Медиадискурс часто является ареной развития и эскалации конфликта. В свете большого количества локальных и международных конфликтов, освещающихся в СМИ, принципы и основные понятия основ конфликтогенной коммуникации выходят на первый план. В статье систематизируются и анализируются различные типы конфликтогенов, а также приводятся актуальные примеры функционирования конфликтогенов в реальных ситуациях. Сопоставительное исследование принципов лингвистической толерантности также является крайне перспективным направлением ввиду большой вариативности языковых моделей, служащих для реализации принципов толерантности в разных лингвокультурах, а также актуальный социальный заказ современного общества, вынужденного функционировать в условиях различного рода конфликтов.
Ключевые слова: конфликтогенная коммуникация, средства массовой информации, лингвистическая толерантность, конфликтогены, речевые стратегии, лингвокультура, враждебность, эскалация.
Для цитирования: Палий Т.П., Пронченко Е.Н. Роль лингвистической толерантности в парадигме конфликтогенной коммуникации // Актуальные проблемы филологии и педагогической лингвистики. 2019; 3: 73-80. DOI: 10.29025/2079-6021-2019-3-73-80.
Introduction. Communication is a key characteristic of any relationship. In interpersonal relationships, communication flows usually convey information and are set up to establish relationships. Although communication can also take place even in the absence of transmitted information and interaction, when, for example, a
т.п. ПАЛИЙ, Е.Н. ПРОНЧЕНКО
group of a certain nationality is aware of the existence of such a group in another, remote region, and even feels sympathy for it, without having direct contact [2, p. 354]. There is a communication of small national groups, confessional and ideological groups separated by borders, political and economic barriers. Moreover, more and more often, we, unfortunately, observe the communication of antipathy, when a demonstration of hostility and rejection blocks the flow of any other information, makes interaction almost impossible and affects the point of view and behavior of other people [13, p. 95].
In this context, more and more attention is paid to such a sociolinguistic phenomenon as linguistic tolerance. In the most general sense, tolerance is the desire and ability to establish and maintain relationships with people who differ to a certain degree from the prevailing type of people in a given society and (or) do not adhere to generally accepted norms and rules [4, p. 273]. It is obvious that the commonality of one language as an instrument of communication is one of the main principles of uniting people, while there is a feeling of mistrust, fear or even hostility towards those who differ from us in the language of communication, ethnic group or cultural code.
At the same time, many fundamental features of the language as a communication tool are alien to tolerance. Here we can note the conflict of the ontological foundations of the speech act, where the form with its limited capabilities "conflicts" with the content and its unlimited needs. We also observe a conflict in the communicative act, where the addressee and the addresser often have opposite goals - the author strives for unlimited self-expression, the listener has a desire to receive only information that is clear to him in the communicative aspect and is comfortable in the moral-psychological one [12, p. 57]. That is why verbal and communicative conflicts, being embedded in the very essence of the language, can arise by themselves, and tolerance is the phenomenon that requires special efforts and special strategies to achieve it.
The aim of this article is a comparative study and analysis of various types of conflict-provoking issues, as well as language models that serve to implement the principles of linguistic tolerance in various linguistic cultures.
A review of the literature. Theoretical and methodological provisions. First of all, speaking of conflicting communication, it is necessary, to define the conflict itself. As a working definition, modern science most often uses the definition of Lewis Kozer, who defines conflict as "the confrontation of social subjects (individuals, groups) arising from the lack of power, status or means necessary to satisfy value claims, and implying neutralization or destruction (symbolic, ideological, practical) of the enemy "[7, p. 40]. Thus, the conflict is communication, in which there is a transfer of partially or completely distorted (false) information, as well as its receiving and interpretation are not in the same form in which it was supposed to be during its transmission. In addition, the subsequent use of distorted information and its role in shaping and changing the values, interests and goals of society is also the main feature of conflict-provoking communication.
The dynamics of any conflict is the movement and development of a conflict in the time plane.
There are four main stages:
1. Hidden - there is a conflict situation, but the interests and goals of potential participants are not completely clear or are not clearly demonstrated;
2. Escalation - an increase in the scale and intensity of conflict behavior;
3. Open stage - the conflict is clear and obvious, the conflicting parties are in direct interaction or confrontation;
4. De-escalation - a decrease in the intensity of a conflict confrontation, a gradual or dramatic reduction in its scale.
The fifth and final stage is also pointed out - the post-conflict - conflict has been settled, it is possible to analyze the consequences of the confrontation.
Currently, in the Western Anglo-Saxon model of society, tolerance is promoted as the vital feature of a modern society on the terms of pluralism [5, p. 33]. In many countries, state and federal programs aimed at shaping attitudes of tolerant consciousness are being implemented. According to these programs, there are three main types of tolerance: ethnic, political and interpersonal.
N.D. Golev defines "linguistic tolerance" as "a model of the behavior of communication participants, offering a solution to a certain conflict with the help of mutual concessions, accepting the diversity of principles and norms of each other and peaceful coexistence with each other taking into consideration everything mentioned above." [3, p. 178].
L.A. Akulova means by the term "linguistic tolerance" a peculiarity of translation activity "that denies the possibility of direct correspondence between lexical units in the source language and the translation language" [1].
According to M.S. Matskovsky, "linguistic tolerance is a language of communication, which involves the use of a certain lexicon (the absence of degrading, offensive, mocking words) and the expression of positive judgments (weighted, unbiased, evidence-based, constructive elements which completely exclude stereotyping, provocation, and hostility)" [ 9, p. 141].
Based on the foregoing, it can be concluded that "language tolerance" and "linguistic tolerance", when both are understood as definite patterns of behavior of participants in communicative acts, are almost identical. The concepts of "language tolerance" and "linguistic tolerance", when they are understood as the professional qualities of a linguist and peculiarities of translation activity, are related but not identical.
Taking as the working definition of M.S. Matskovsky, it should be noted that linguistic tolerance is, above all, a manifestation of internal behavioral attitudes in speech and written texts. The basis of tolerant speech behavior is the Principle of Cooperation, that is, a set of rules according to which participants in a communicative act set a goal to achieve a common understanding.
Based on the Principle of Cooperation, the American logician and philosopher of language Paul Grice in his work "Logic and Conversation" defined and described four basic postulates of communication. They are also called "maxims of discourse". This is a kind of set of rules and regulations, allowing interlocutors to ensure the successful flow of the communicative act. Grice outlined four basic postulates:
1. Quantity postulate (information value) - the reported information should be carefully normalized and adequately metered, i.e. do not contain anything extra;
2. Postulate of quality (truth) - the message should contain only true, verified, proven information. According to Grice, it is better to remain silent than to report something for which there are no sufficient grounds;
3. Postulate of attitude (relevance) - the information reported must be relevant and strictly related to the topic of conversation;
4. Postulate of expression (manner of speech) - speech should be clear, transparent, unambiguous and consistent [14, p. 48].
Of course, describing the postulates of communication, Grice relied on the general logical principles of communication. In real life, the huge variability of situations of speech interaction leads to the fact that these postulates are either not observed or consciously violated.
M. Melnikov in the "Practical Conflictology" develops two opposing models of information support of the conflict - positive (ideal) and negative (real) [10, p. 22]. At the same time, the author points to the close relationship of the positive model with the final de-escalation of the conflict, thereby demonstrating that, ideally, any covering of a conflict situation should lead to a decrease in tension and a reduction in confrontation. The basic principles of this model: coverage of the true problems that caused the conflict; real assessment of the conflict stage; creation of an objective image of conflict parties; accurate, complete retrospective description of all key events; coverage of only real initiatives of the parties to the conflict to resolve it.
The negative model, by contrast, aims to increase the degree of tension in a conflict situation and includes: coverage of the imaginary problems that led to the conflict; incorrect assessment of the conflict stage; creating a false image of conflict; demonstration of a selective retrospective of the conflict; biased reporting of conflict events; supporting initiatives to escalate the conflict.
Also, any event can be covered either as an independent and isolated phenomenon, or as part of a whole, complex, multi-level process. Accordingly, the audience can receive the product in varying degrees reflecting reality.
In particular, sometimes journalists can cause the escalation of a conflict by using such conflict-provoking issues as words, gestures, assessments, judgments that can aggravate a conflict situation, to its transformation into real conflict behavior [10, p. 12]. It also does not require proof of the fact that a reporter who covers a conflict situation and at the same time bravely associates himself with the views of only one of the parties to the conflict, becomes the carrier of conflict subjects.
All of these categories, of course, have a verbal expression. For example, the permanently used media stamp "Islamic terrorism". Repeatedly, politicians and top officials of various military departments have stated that terrorism has no religion or nationality; Muslim spiritual leaders endlessly repeat that Islam is a religion of peace and good, and has nothing in common with terrorism [19, p. 256]. However, this cliché continues to be actively used by journalists. The same situation is with the illiterate lexeme "the face of Slavic nationality", although it is obvious that there is no single Slavic, as well as, Caucasian, nationality.
Research methods. Psychologists and sociologists who study the motivations of engaging in journalism, in general, agree that the key factor in forcing a journalist to choose a particular professional activity is the
desire to "influence" [6, p. 58]. Here the obvious questions arise: To influence for what purpose? What means? What are the potential consequences? To what extent can a journalist's influence be positive or where is the line beyond which the negative effect of the media on the conflict begins?
The implementation of this study was based on the method of contextual analysis in order to establish the communicative intentions of the speakers; descriptive method to interpret the research material, classify the selected language tactics and means of linguistic tolerance in the framework of various social conflicts.
Transcripts of English-language interviews with prominent public and political figures of modern society, as well as statistical data from independent centers for public opinion polls, serve as a source of factual material.
Results and discussion. One of the most vivid examples of recent times is the statement, at that time, of another candidate for the presidency of the United States from the Republican Party, Donald Trump, banning Muslims from entering the country. As one can remember, on December 8, 2015, the presidential candidate published a statement calling for "completely banning Muslims from entering the US until the representatives of our country understand what is happening" [15]. Media all around the world came up with the news on the front pages, condemning and sharply criticizing this statement. Officials in almost all European countries, as well as countries in the Middle East, said that such rhetoric was a sign of religious prejudice and discrimination. It would seem complete unity, but on December 11, 2015, the New York Times will publish the results of a public opinion poll, which states that 44% of the US population is convinced that a terrorist attack on the United States is "very likely" and the threat comes, first and foremost from "ISIL", that is - Muslims. Thus, 25% of Americans agreed with the claims that Muslims teach their children to hate others or that they value human life less than other people. In this model of conflict development, it is clearly demonstrated, moreover, the collision of opinions and positions is dramatized - on the one hand, the false-primitive image of one side of the conflict and the positive-stereotypical image of the other. The most potentially dangerous factor in this phenomenon is the formation of clichés and labels, which are a direct reflection of negative intentions, and sometimes specific belligerent appeals.
The Research Director of the American-Islamic Relations Council, Mohammed Naymer, said that public opinion survey data is a matter of concern if we recall that there are six million Muslims living in the United States. "It is very uncomfortable to live with the thought that one of your neighbors thinks of you as not about being as humane as they are," Nymer noted [11].
The study also showed that, on the whole, the respondents did not know the basics of Islam quite well; most often, white men with low or secondary education, who adhere to conservative policies, demonstrate negative attitudes towards Muslims and Islam. It should be clearly understood that there is only one step from labeling to the image of the enemy, and, judging by the result of the survey, for many US residents, this step, unfortunately, has already been passed.
In general, regardless of the linguistic culture in which the communicative act occurs, for the implementation of linguistic tolerance it is necessary to observe the following principles of verbal interaction:
1. Equality, mutual respect and ethical consistency of communicants with a clear understanding of each participant's own relevance;
«Some said it was a snub to Britain. Some said it was a symbol of the part-Kenyan President's ancestral dislike of the British Empire - of which Churchill had been such a fervent defender» [16].
The violation of this principle can be easily observed in the statement said by the former British Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson about Barack Obama, in which the British called the latter a "part-Kenyan president" and arrogantly opposed it to the inhabitants of the great British Empire.
2. Awareness and acceptance of the full and equal role of the interlocutor in a dialogue;
"Well, I think he's racist," Navarro said, talking over Cortes who claimed Trump was defending American citizens. "He called Mexicans criminals and rapists."
She added: "Sign me up in the category of the people who think he's racist. He has said so many racist things."
"You call him a racist when you don't want to talk about policy, " Cortes replied.
"He is a racist pig!" Navarro continued on before Cuomo brought the segment to a close.» [18].
It is the characteristics of Donald Trump in the context of his anti-immigrant policies. This example demonstrates a violation of both the first and second principles of linguistic tolerance, which can potentially lead to an escalation of the conflict.
3. Compliance with the ethical integrity of the dialogue, regardless of internal or external confrontation;
The scandalous response of the Minister of Defense of Great Britain to the question of journalists about
what the Kremlin should do in response to the expulsion of 23 Russian officers suspected of espionage: "Russia should go away and shut up" [21]. The ethical principles of a dialogue are clearly not observed.
4. Symmetrical position of communicants - everyone has the right to speak and everyone accepts the obligation to listen carefully to the interlocutor;
«We are sending a simple message to the lawless caravans and the illegal trespassers marching towards our borders. It is very simple: Turn back now! Go back home!» [20].
It is obvious that the positions of communicants are not symmetrical - the statement of Donald Trump about illegal migrants does not imply an answer. The use of imperative structures further undermines the principles of linguistic tolerance.
5. Neutral phonetic accompaniment - adequate tone and pace of speech;
No doubt that a heightened tone in conversation is one of the signs of a nascent conflict and cannot be a component of any speech model that implements the principles of linguistic tolerance.
6. The relevance of the information reported - the appropriate time, place, purpose of communication.
"She s got dyed blonde hair andpouty lips, and a steely blue stare, like a sadistic nurse in a mental hospital." [16].
The answer of Boris Johnson to the question of what he thinks about Hillary Clinton is a vivid example of the violation of both ethical norms and the principles of linguistic tolerance.
Due to a large set of various communication techniques and practices that the media own, in most cases they become the main actors in the arena of local and international conflicts with the unique right to stop the opposition or bring it to a dangerous limit [8, p. 133].
Conclusion Thus, the principle of linguistic tolerance is one of the most successful and effective ways of overcoming a conflict situation, which allows, through the impact of language and speech-behavioral norms, to transform a statement with language aggression (implicit and explicit) or simply a negative assessment of the addresser into a statement corresponding to these norms. It also allows one to smooth over the differences, lower the degree of tension, and prevent the development of the conflict.
References
1. Akulova, L. (2001). Features of linguistic communication, The theory of Communication [Electronic resource]. URL: http://www.norma-tm.ru/lang_education6.html (access at 02 July 2019). (In Russ.).
2. Berton, D. (2002). Conflict and communication: the use of controlled communication in international relation, Theory of International Relations, Moscow: Gardariki, pp. 353-361 (In Russ.).
3. Golev, N. (2003). Tolerance as a Vector of the Antinomic Life of a Language, Philosophical and Linguo-cultural Problems of Tolerance, Yekaterinburg: Ural State University, pp. 174-191 (In Russ.).
4. Efremova, T. (2006). Modern explanatory dictionary of the Russian language: in 3 vol., Moscow: ACT, Harvest, vol. 3, p. 273 (In Russ.).
5. Zgonnikova, A. (2014). Cliché phrases in business discourse, Professional communication: actual problems of linguistics and methods, Pyatigorsk: PSLU, no 7, pp. 32-41 (In Russ.).
6. Karasik, V. (2016). Discursive manifestation of personality, Bulletin of Peoples' Friendship University of Russia, Series: Linguistics, vol. 20, no 4, pp. 56-77 (In Russ.).
7. Kozer, L. (2000). Functions of social conflict, Moscow: Idea Press, 208 p. (In Russ.).
8. Koshkarova, N., Ruzhentseva, N. (2016). Confrontation or war: how information in the Western media creates the destruction of discourse: Questions of cognitive linguistics, no 4 (49), pp. 129-134 (In Russ.).
9. Matskovskiy, M. (2004). Tolerance as an object of sociological research, Intercultural dialogue: research and practice, Moscow: Media centre MSU, 2004, p. 141 (In Russ.).
10. Melnikov, M. (2006). Practical Conflictology for Journalists, Moscow: Humans' Rights, 158 p. (In Russ.).
11. Naimer, M. (2015). Public opinion poll reveals American attitudes towards Muslims: Islam News [Electronic resource]. URL:https://islamnews.ru/news-opros-obshhestvennogo-mneniya-vy-yavil-ot/ (In Russ.). (access at 02 July 2019).
12. Shiryaeva, T., Avakova, M. (2018). The gender aspect of communicative dominance (of the English-language interview discourse): Current issues in philology and pedagogical linguistics, Vladikavkaz, North Osse-tian State University, no 3(31), pp. 54-60. DOI: 10.29025/2079-6021-2018-3 (31)-54-60 (In Russ.).
13. Shiryaeva, T., Avsharov, A. (2018). Socio-cognitive modeling as a methodological basis for the study of business discourse: Questions of cognitive linguistics, no 1 (54), pp. 94-102. DOI: 10.20916/1812-3228-20181-94-102 (In Russ.).
14. Grice, H.P. (1975). Logic and Conversation, Studies in the Way of Words, Harvard University Press, pp. 41-58 (In Eng.).
15. Johnson, J., Weigel, D. (2015). Donald Trump calls for 'total' ban on Muslims entering United States, The Washington Post [Electronic resource]. URL:https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2015/12/07/ e56266f6-9d2b-11e5-8728-1af6af208198_story.html (In Eng.). (access at 02 July 2019).
16. Johnson, B. (2016). UK and America can be better friends than ever Mr Obama if we LEAVE the EU: The Sun [Electronic resource]. URL: https://www.thesun.co.uk/archives/politics/1139354/boris-johnson-uk-and-america-can-be-better-friends-than-ever-mr-obama-if-we-leave-the-eu/ (In Eng.). (access at 02 July 2019).
17. Kobyakova, I.A., Filatova, N.I. (2019). Communicative and Pragmatic Distinctive Features of Spanish Weather-Forecast , Perspectives on the Use of New Information and Communication Technology (ICT) in the Modern Economy: Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, vol 726, Springer, pp. 1124-1133.
18. Navarro, A. (2018). During Heated CNN Panel: Trump is a 'Racist Pig', [Electronic resource] URL: https://www.mediaite.com/tv/ana-navarro-during-heated-cnn-panel-trumpisaracistpig/?fbclid= IwAR0kPfee Nhr V0iV0bvSrvz00UdHY_qPb7ATzjt8AbBeH75oEDRosw4j0v2g (In Eng.). (access at 02 July 2019).
19. Shyryaeva, T., Trius, L. (2013). A call for cultural awareness and tolerance in higher education, Revista de Cercetare si Interventie Sociala, v. 43. Pp. 255-265.
20. Trump, D. (2018). Twitter post [Electronic resource]. URL:https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump (In Eng.). (access at 12 July 2019).
21. Williamson, G. (2018). Gavin Williamson was asked how Moscow should respond to spy expulsions after Salisbury attack, The Guardian [Electronic resource]. URL:https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/mar/15/ russia-ripping-up-the-international-rule-book-says-defence-secretary (In Eng.). (access at 12 July 2019).
Список литературы
1. Акулова Л.А. Особенности лингвистического общения // Теория коммуникации, 2001 [Электронный ресурс]. URL: http://www.norma-tm.ru/lang_education6.html (дата обращения: 02.07.2019).
2. Бертон Д. Конфликт и коммуникация: использование контролируемой коммуникации в международных отношениях // Теория международных отношений: хрестоматия / под ред. П. Цыганкова. М.: Гардарики, 2002. С. 353-361.
3. Голев Н.Д. Толерантность как вектор антиномического бытия языка // Философские и лингвокуль-турологические проблемы толерантности: Коллективная монография / отв. ред. Н.А. Купина и М.Б. Хомяков. Екатеринбург: Изд-во Урал. ун-та, 2003. С. 174-191.
4. Ефремова Т.Ф. Современный толковый словарь русского языка: в 3 т. М.: АСТ, Астрель, Харвест, 2006. Т. 3. С. 273.
5. Згонникова А.А. Клишированные фразы в деловом дискурсе // Профессиональная коммуникация: актуальные проблемы лингвистики и методики: межвузовский сборник научных статей. Пятигорск: ПГЛУ, 2014. № 7. С. 32-41.
6. Карасик В.И. Дискурсивное проявление личности // Вестник Российского университета дружбы народов. Серия: Лингвистика. 2016. Т. 20, № 4. С. 56-77.
7. Козер Л. Функции социального конфликта. М.: Идея пресс, 2000. 208 с.
8. Кошкарова Н.Н., Руженцева Н.Б. Противоборство или война: как информация в западных СМИ создает деструкцию дискурса // Вопросы когнитивной лингвистики. 2016. № 4 (49). С. 129-134.
9. Мацковский М.С. Толерантность как объект социологического исследования // Межкультурный диалог: исследования и практика / под ред. Г.У Солдатовой, Т.Ю. Прокофьевой, Т. Л. Лютой. М.: Центр СМИ МГУ им. М.В. Ломоносова, 2004. С. 141.
10. Мельников М. Практическая конфликтология для журналистов. М.: Права человека, 2006. 158 с.
11. Наймер М. Опрос общественного мнения выявил отношение американцев к мусульманам // Islam News, 2015 [Электронный ресурс]. URL:https://islamnews.ru/news-opros-obshhestvennogo-mneniya-vy-yavil-ot/ (дата обращения: 02.07.2019).
12. Ширяева Т.А., АваковаМ.Л. Гендерный аспект коммуникативного доминирования (на материале англоязычного дискурса интервью) // Актуальные проблемы филологии и педагогической лингвисти-
ки. Северо-Осетинский государственный университет. Владикавказ. Владикавказ: Изд-во СОГУ, 2018, № 3(31). С. 54-60.
13. Ширяева Т.А., Авшаров А.Г. Социокогнитивное моделирование как методологическая основа изучения делового дискурса // Вопросы когнитивной лингвистики. 2018. № 1 (54). С. 94-102. DOI: 10.20916/1812-3228-2018-1-94-102.
14. Grice H.P. Logic and Conversation // Studies in the Way of Words. Harvard University Press, 1975. Pp. 41-58.
15. Johnson J., Weigel D. Donald Trump calls for 'total' ban on Muslims entering United States // The Washington Post, 2015 [Электронный ресурс]. URL:https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2015/12/07/ e56266f6-9d2b-11e5-8728-1af6af208198_story.html (дата обращения: 02.07.2019).
16. Johnson B. UK and America can be better friends than ever Mr Obama... if we LEAVE the EU // The Sun, 2016 [Электронный ресурс]. URL: https://www.thesun.co.uk/archives/politics/1139354/boris-johnson-uk-and-america-can-be-better-friends-than-ever-mr-obama-if-we-leave-the-eu/.
17. Kobyakova I.A., Filatova N.I. Communicative and Pragmatic Distinctive Features of Spanish Weather-Forecast // Perspectives on the Use of New Information and Communication Technology (ICT) in the Modern Economy / Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing. Vol. 726. Springer. Pp. 1124-1133.
18. Navarro A. Ana Navarro During Heated CNN Panel: Trump is a 'Racist Pig', 2018 [Электронный ресурс]. URL:https://www.mediaite.com/tv/ana-navarro-during-heated-cnn-panel-trump-is-aracistpig/?fbclid= IwAR0kPfeeNhrV0iV0bvSrvz00UdHY_qPb7ATzjt8AbBeH75oEDRosw4j0v2g.
19. Shyryaeva T., Trius L. A call for cultural awareness and tolerance in higher education // Revista de Cer-cetare si Interventie Sociala. 2013. Т. 43. Pp. 255-265.
20. Trump D. Twitter post, 2018 [Электронный ресурс]. URL:https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump.
21. Williamson G. Gavin Williamson was asked how Moscow should respond to spy expulsions after Salisbury attack // The Guardian, 2018 [Электронный ресурс]. URL:https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/ mar/15/ russia-ripping-up-the-international-rule-book-says-defence-secretary.
Палий Татьяна Павловна, кандидат филологических наук, доцент, доцент кафедры английского языка и профессиональной коммуникации, Пятигорский государственный университет; 357502, пр. Кирова, 63, г. Пятигорск, Российская Федерация; e-mail: paliy.tp@yandex.ru
Tatyana P. Paliy, Candidate of philological sciences, associate professor Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution of Higher Education "Pyatigorsk State University", English language and professional communication department, associate professor; 357502, 63, Kirov Ave., Pyatigorsk, Russia; e-mail: paliy. tp@yandex.ru
Пронченко Елена Николаевна, кандидат педагогических наук, доцент, профессор кафедры испанистики и межкультурной коммуникации, Пятигорский государственный университет; 357502, пр. Кирова, 63, г. Пятигорск, Российская Федерация; e-mail: Pronchenko.helena@yahoo.com
Elena N. Pronchenko, Candidate of pedagogical sciences, associate professor Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution of Higher Education "Pyatigorsk State University", Spanish language and intercultural communication department, professor; 357502, 63, Kirov Ave., Pyatigorsk, Russia; e-mail: Pronchenko.hele-na@yahoo.com
