Home → Releases → 4 (56) →

INDICATORS OF THE CATEGORY OF RELIABILITY AND THEIR DISCURSIVE DETERMINANTS (BASED ON THE BOOK-CHRONICLE WITH ACCOMPANYING TEXT)

Linguistic Theory. Cross-cultural Communication Theory , UDC: 81`42 DOI: 10.24412/2076-913X-2024-456-118-134

Authors

  • Orlova Natalya V. D. Sc. (Philology), Professor

Annotation

The relevance of the study is due to the active development of communicative categories in linguistics, the need to test the idea of variable implementation of the category of reliability in different types of discourse. The purpose of the article is to identify representations of reliability in a polydiscursive speech product — a book about the Russian revolution of 1917, written in the genre of a chronicle, translated into Russian more than a hundred years after the release of the original edition in Italian, supplied in the translated edition with voluminous accompanying information. The problems of the article include the description of discursive determinants that determined the choice of subjects of different discourses (chronicle, scientific, translation) of the means of expressing this category. The research methods are aimed at identifying the variable semantics of the category of reliability (semantic analysis of statements, definitional analysis of words), the structure of this category (classification method, opposition method) and functioning (genre analysis). The qualitative and quantitative methods of content analysis and elements of discourse analysis are used. It is shown that the author of the chronicle positions himself as an eyewitness of the events, which is expressed in the predominance of direct access indicators («I saw», «I remember»); reliability is realized in his subordinate categories of informativeness, interpretativeness, impact. The accompanying block of the book conveys the collective knowledge of the modern scientific community; reliability is formed by the subordinate categories of objectivity, accuracy, rationality; informativeness and interpretativeness interact as facts and their comprehension as part of conclusions; the unconditional and problematic reliability of the specialist’s judgments is combined with the assessments «reliable», «possibly reliable» and «unreliable» in relation to the chronicler’s text. The degree of reliability of the chronicle is adjusted downwards in the scientific discourse, the «eyewitness» acquires the features of a «translator of a myth». The translation discourse is focused on problematic reliability, reflecting the difficulties of choosing an adequate translation option. The conducted study clarifies the ideas about the variability of the representation of one category within a polydiscursive text, in particular, it reveals non-trivial indicators specific to specific discourses.

How to link insert

Orlova, N. V. (2024). INDICATORS OF THE CATEGORY OF RELIABILITY AND THEIR DISCURSIVE DETERMINANTS (BASED ON THE BOOK-CHRONICLE WITH ACCOMPANYING TEXT) Bulletin of the Moscow City Pedagogical University. Series "Pedagogy and Psychology", 4 (56), 118. https://doi.org/10.24412/2076-913X-2024-456-118-134
References
1. 1. Vilchik, M. K. (2021). The Status of the Communicative Category of Egocentrism in American Linguistic Culture. Modern Studies of Social Issues, Vol. 13, 3, 274–292. (In Russ.).
2. 2. Credibility. (2000). The Great Encyclopedic Dictionary. 2nd ed. A. M. Prokhorov (Ed.). The Great Russian Encyclopedia. (In Russ.).
3. 3. Shilikhina, K. M., & Smirnova, V. V. (2021). Discursive Markers of Problematic Credibility in TED Talks: corpus analysis. Proceedings of Voronezh State University. Series: Linguistics and intercultural communication, 3, 30–38. https://doi.org/10.17308/lic.2021.3/3577 (In Russ.).
4. 4. Panchenko, N. N. (2010). Credibility as a communicative category. [Abstract of a Doctor of Philological Sciences Dissertation: 10.02.19. Volgograd]. (In Russ.).
5. 5. Zekhov, B. Z. (2023). The content of the category «credibility» in legal and other humanitarian sciences. Theory and Practice of Social Development, 3, 150–153. (In Russ.).
6. 6. Maksimchik, O. A. (2013). Credibility Scale in the English Language. V mire nauki i iskusstva: voprosy filologii, iskusstvovedeniya i kul’turologii, 2(25), https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/shkala-dostovernosti-v-angliyskom-yazyke/viewer (In Russ.).
7. 7. Seçkin, A. (2020). When the Owner of Information is Unsure: Epistemic Uncertainty Influences Evidentiality Processing in Turkish Lingua, Vol. 247, 1-20 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2020.102989
8. 8. Bybee, J. (1985). Morphology: a study of the relation between meaning and form. Benjamins, vol. 9.
9. 9. Paducheva, E. V. (2013). Is there grammatically expressed evidentiality in the Russian language? Russkij yazy`k v nauchnom osveshhenii, 2(26), 9–29. (In Russ.).
10. 10. Wiemer, B. (2010). Hearsay in European languages: Toward an integrative account of grammatical and lexical marking. G. Diewald, E. Smirnova (Eds.). Linguistic Realization of Evidentiality in European Languages (pp. 59–132). De Gruyter Mouton.
11. 11. Panchenko, N. N. (2014). Variability of credibility in scientific discourse. In A. G. Pastukhov (Editor-in-chief). Genres and types of text in scientific and media discourse (pp. 151–157). Interuniversity collection of scientific papers. Orlovskij gosudarstvenny`j institut kul`tury`. (In Russ.).
12. 12. Panchenko, N. N. (2015). Credibility as an interdiscursive category. Discourse-Pi, 3-4 (20-21), 169–171. (In Russ.).
13. 13. Mochalova, D. A., & Evtushenko, T. G. (2023). The communicative category of reliability in oral popular science discourse. Philological Sciences. Issues of Theory and Practice, 16(7), 2229–2234. (In Russ.).
14. 14. Chernyavskaya, V. E. (2017). Operationalization of context in discourse analysis. Perm University Herald. Russian and Foreign Philology, 9(4), 83–93. https://doi.org/10.17072/2037-6681-2017-4-83-93 (In Russ.).
15. 15. Zabugin, V. N. (2024). The Mad Giant: Documentary Chronicle of the Russian Revolution. Indrik. (In Russ.).
16. 16. Klyuev, A. I. (2024). Sine ira et studio: Vladimir Zabugin and his «Mad Giant». In V. N. Zabugin. The Mad Giant: A Documentary Chronicle of the Russian Revolution (pp. 9–54). Transl. with it. A. I. Klyueva, T. V. Kurinskaya. Comment A. I. Klyueva. Entry Art. A. I. Klyueva. Afterword J. P. Castelli. Lane with it. afterword A. A. Gulidova, A. I. Klyueva, T. V. Kurinskaya. Indrik. (In Russ.).
17. 17. Dmitriev, D. V. (Ed.) (2003). Chronicle. Explanatory dictionary of the Russian language. AST, Astrel. https://gufo.me/dict/dmitriev/chronicle (In Russ.).
18. 18. Dunaev, A. E. (2022). Semantic Dominants of the Discourse on Joan of Arc in E. Windeck’s «The Chronicle of Kaiser Sigismund». Evolution and Transformation of Discourses (рр. 112–123). Collection of Scientific Articles. Centr periodicheskix izdanij Samarskogo universiteta. (In Russ.).
19. 19. Trykov, V. P. (2021). Marcel Proust’s Secular Chronicles. New Philological Bulletin, 2(57), 312–321. (In Russ.).
20. 20. Paducheva, E. V. (2006). Introductory Verbs: Speech and Narrative Mode of Interpretation. A String of Letters (рр. 498–515). Yazyki slavyanskoj kul’tury. (In Russ.).
21. 21. Vlasenko, S. V. (2015). Translation discourse: dilemmas of definition and unification of the concept. Moscow state university bulletin. Series 22. Translation theory, 2, 124–144. (In Russ.).
Download file .pdf 410.52 kb