Hybridity of crisis communication professional discourse in Russia
The main goal of this research is to identify specific sociolinguistic patterns in Russian professional crisis communication discourse. This chapter addresses hybridity of Russian crisis communication professional rhetoric, primarily focusing on a combination of two types of discourses: black public relations defense and crisis communication. The study contains a qualitative pilot analysis of nonacademic expert texts on crisis communication. Critical discourse analysis applied to professional discourse provides insight into culture-related specifics of this field in Russia. The research is followed by two case descriptions of organizational crises to illustrate possible interference of black public relations defense discourse into crisis communication practice in Russia. The results provide practical implications for cross-cultural communication with Russian public relations professionals and set direction for future research in this field.
This book brings together academics and practitioners from a range of disciplines from more than twenty countries to reflect on the growing importance of transparency, power and control in our international community and how these concerns and ideas have been examined, used and interpreted in a range of national and international contexts. Contributors explore these issues from a range of overlapping concerns and perspectives, such as semiotic, sociolinguistic, psychological, philosophical, and visual in diverse socio-political, administrative, institutional, as well as legal contexts.
The collection examines the ways in which 'actors' in our society - legislators, politicians, activists, and artists - have provoked public discourses to confront these issues.
The series "Modern Linguistic-and-Didactic Researches" presents the results of the research in the area of teaching foreign languages in view of contemporary concepts of education, intercultural communication, theory and paractice of translation.
The article presents discourse analysis of media texts concerning the intercultural (diplomatic) conflict on both macro- and micro- levels. The research shows that in conflict situations official spokesmen prefer to use inductive reasoning in argumentation while journalists orient towards deductive and emotional reasoning. Discourse micro-analysis reveals that the sources of intercultural conflict are historical perspectives of two parties, legal system differences, and involvement of law enforcement agents in conflict resolution.
The research applied for research abilities of critical discourse analysis for new religious movements’ analysis. A long tradition of religion research in social sciences had a lot of theoretical issues. In this paper we show how theory is used for empirical survey.
This article addresses a subject that can in the broadest sense be stated as interplay of language and ideology in process of instantiating historical knowledge in texts of political significance. It is presumed that historical representations are not static; they are flexible and more than prone to distortion when values come into play. A clash of different political perspectives is a clash of different historical descriptions. And in this clash a power-wielding social agent has the power to reinterpret the history that will fit their political narrative with other interpretations outlawed and rendered unhistorical. The aim is to discuss how history is recontextualized in national political discourse in the framework of biased representation of historical f acts and to see how national historical discourse is reinstantiated vis-а-vis a newly acquired national identity. The evidence for this contention is provided through linguistic analysis of a chunk of texts produced by those claiming to be professional historians. An example of such discourse would be texts by Ukrainian historians writing on Great Patriotic War/World War II. Second, texts of public figures, state leaders among them, instantiating post-Soviet geopolitical situation in the Caucasus, in particular, tension between Armenia and Azerbaijan over Nagorny Karabakh were looked into. Linguistic analysis is neither meant to substitute historical analysis, nor claims that all historical permutations are of discursive nature solely. Instead, we see the role of discourse analysis in placing a broader question: To what extent that which has really happened is displaced by its recontextualization in discourse, i.e. by its description?
The article analyzes the frames of representation of collective identity of macro political (national) community the “constitutes” the Russian state in electoral rhetoric of Vladimir Putin. Following the patterns of representation of Us and Others in the seven articles, published during the campaign in the major newspapers, the author reveals the dynamics of the campaign. A special attention is devoted to the public reaction to the article about “national question”.