Tambov
All-Russian academic journal
“Issues of Cognitive Linguistics”

IMPLICIT AND EXPLICIT TACTICS OF EVASION STRATEGY IN RUSSIAN AND CHINESE POLITICAL INTERVIEW

IMPLICIT AND EXPLICIT TACTICS OF EVASION STRATEGY IN RUSSIAN AND CHINESE POLITICAL INTERVIEW


Author:  1 - Lu Tingting, 2 - A.P. Chudinov

Affiliation:  1 - Beijing International Studies University, 2 - Ural State Pedagogical University

Abstract:  The article reveals the general trends and national peculiarities of implicit and explicit tactics of evasion strategy used by politicians, the observasions being based on the analysis of 122 instances. Traditionally, either structural-semantic, or communicative method is used to analyze the subject. The present study combines cognitive-discursive methodology (introduced by E.S. Kubryakova) with the elements of communicative method. In the first part of the study, the authors differentiate between the explicit and the implicit types of evasion. In case of the former (explicit evasion), the politician refuses to cooperate more or less unambiguously. In the case of the latter (implicit evasion), evasion is not expressly manifest, as the politician does provide an answer (oftentimes, after a while), but this answer is not quite straightforward or unequivocal. The next part of the paper singles out the tactics typical of politicians trying to evade an answer. The following points of difference between Russian and Chinese political interviews are revealed: 1) Russian politicians use the evasion strategy twice as often as Chinese politicians; 2) Russian politicians more often disagree with the journalist’s opinion rather than answer the question, which is not common for Chinese politicians; 3) Chinese politicians as compared to Russian politicians more frequently use the evasion tactics by paraphrasing the question.

Keywords:  political discourse; political interview; evasion strategy; implicit evasion tactics; explicit evasion tactics.

References:  Bull P. & Mayer K. How not to answer questions in political interviews // Political Psychology, 1993 (14): 651-666.  
Galasinski D. The Language of Deception:
A Discourse Analytical Study. California: Sage Publication, 2000.
Leech G.N. Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longman, 1983.
Wilson J. Politically Speaking: The Pragmatic Analysis of Political Language. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1990.
Baranov A.N. Lingvisticheskaya teoriya argumentatsii (kognitivnyy podkhod): dis. ... d-ra filol. nauk. M., 1990.
Golovash L.B. Kommunikativnye sredstva vyrazheniya strategii ukloneniya ot pryamogo otveta: avtoref. dis. ... kand. filol. nauk. Kemerovo, 2008.
Grays G.P. Logika i rechevoe obshchenie // Novoe v zarubezhnoy lingvistike. Vyp. XVI (Lingvisticheskaya pragmatika). M.: Progress, 1985.
S. 217-237.
In'igo-Mora I., Delidzhordzhi K. Strategiya ukloneniya v politicheskom interv'yu: analiz televizionnykh interv'yu Toni Blera // Politicheskaya lingvistika. 2007. Vyp. 3. S. 78-90.
Lu Tintin. Sopostavitel'noe issledovanie politicheskogo i kul'turnogo konteksta russkoyazychnogo i kitayskoyazychnogo politicheskogo interv'yu // Politicheskaya lingvistika. 2014. № 4. S. 148-152.
Churikov M.P. Soglasie, nesoglasie i uk-lonenie v aspekte rechevogo obshcheniya: na materiale tekstov nemetskikh politicheskikh interv'yu: avtoref. dis. ... kand. filol. nauk. Pyatigorsk, 2005.
Sheygal E.I. Semiotika politicheskogo diskursa. M.: ITDGK «Gnozis», 2004.
Yurina M.V. Kommunikativnye strategii partnerov v politicheskom interv'yu: na materiale sovremennoy pressy FRG: avtoref. dis. ... kand. filol. nauk. Samara, 2006.
庞建荣、周流溪,政治修辞中的闪避回答[J],《外语教学与研究》,2005年第2期,119-123页。
陈丽江,《文化语境与政治话语――政府新闻发布会的话语研究》[M],北京,中国广播电视出版社,2007年

For citation:  Tingting, Lu, & Chudinov, A. P. (2018). Implicit and explicit tactics of evasion strategy in Russian and Chinese political interview. Voprosy Kognitivnoy Lingvistiki, 1, 76-82.

Pages:  76-82

Back to the list



Login:
Password: