On the Issue of Conflict Potential of Socio-Political Discourse in the Russian Blogosphere

This article examines the features of socio-political discourse based on the texts of online blogs of public opinion leaders —I. Varlamov, Yu. Latynina, R. Kadyrov, N. Mikhalkov, S. Mikheev, and M. Simonyan. The purpose of the article is to determine the degree of conflictogenicity of the texts of the Russian blogosphere, specifically the blogs of media personalities, public opinion leaders; the results obtained will provide for predicting and preventing the occurrence of conflict situations by establishing and reducing the conflict index of the text, the main indicator of which is frequency of the corresponding lexical markers. The authors distinguish several subtypes of socio-political discourse and their features. The genre specificity of such new media phenomenon as Internet blog is considered. There is a high degree of conflictogenicity in analytical texts, signaled by specific lexical markers identified with the help of the content analysis method. Foreign policy texts, regardless of their authors’ personal views, appear to have the greatest number of conflict markers, which means that political analytics, the object of consideration of which lies in the plane of international and intercultural communication, has a significant degree of conflict potential. In the Internet, as in journalism in general, the addressees of texts and the addressees of conflicting vocabulary are not the same due to the specificity of discursive space, in which direct recipients of information are blog subscribers, who as a rule have a political orientation close to that of the author. The very same conflicting vocabulary refers to persons who occupy the opposite position. The manifestation of conflictogenicity in blog texts is analyzed at three levels: stylistic, semantic and pragmatic, which makes it possible to identify all the features of conflictogenicity markers in the liberal, patriotic and official subtypes of socio-political discourse. The specificity of such features is revealed in each of the three main subtypes of the Internet discourse: liberal, patriotic and official. In the authors’ blogs under analysis, the highest index of conflict is characteristic of texts belonging to the liberal subtype of socio-political discourse due to the greater frequency of use of the units related to lexical markers of conflict, their stylistically reduced modality—up to obscene words. At the same time, the conflict nature of the patriotic and official subtypes is closer to the traditional journalism style and shows less expressiveness in the use of metaphors, irony, phraseology, words with a seme of direct negative evaluation.

1. Dondo, S. A. Basic principles of determining the types of socio-political discourse. Political Linguistics, 2015, No. 1, pp. 87–91. (in Russ.)

2. Ilyin, D. N. Development of lexical semantics: processes of positivation/negation of the meaning of a word in the Russian language. Rostov-on-Don, 2018. 150 p. (in Russ.)

3. Ilyin, D. Position of the evaluative component in semantics. Process management and scientific developments. October, 13, 2021. Pt 2. Birmingham, United Kindom, 2021, pp. 91–97.

4. Karpovskaya, N. V., Abkadyrova, I. R., Davtyants, I. I. On conflict discourse, lexical markers of conflictogenicity and their cognitive-pragmatic potential. Bulletin of Humanitarian studies in interdisciplinary scientific space, 2022, no. 1(2), pp. 14–25. (in Russ.)

5. Krasilnikova, N. A. Society and non-institutional political discourse on the web. Political Linguistics, 2012, no. 4(42), pp. 130–138. (in Russ.)

6. Kubryakova, E. S. On the concepts of discourse and discursive analysis in modern linguistics. Discourse, speech, speech activity: functional and structural aspects. Moscow, 2000, pp. 7–25. (in Russ.)

7. Kuznetsov, S. A. Big explanatory dictionary of the Russian language; Comp. and ch. ed. S. A. Kuznetsov [Online]. St. Petersburg, 1998. 1536 p. Author's edition of 2014. (in Russ.) URL: http://www.gramota.ru/slovari/info/bts/ (accessed on: 30.11.2022)

8. Lavrentiev, A. M., Solovyev, F. N., Suvorova (Ananyeva), M. I., Fokina, A. I., Chepovskiy, A. M. A. New Toolkit for Natural Text Processing with the TXM Platform and its Appliсation to a Corpus for Analysis of Texts Propagating Extremist Views. Vestnik NSU. Series: Linguistics and Intercultural Communication, 2018, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 19–31. (in Russ.)

9. Levikova, S. I. Big dictionary of youth slang [Online]. Moscow, 2003. 923 p. URL: https:// znachenieslova.ru/slovar/youthslang/ (accessed on: 30.11.2022)

10. Makarenko, G. S. Explicit and implicit conflictogenity markers in a publicistic text. Vestnik Bashkirskogo universiteta, 2016, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 192–195. (in Russ.)

11. Marakulina, P. A. Linguistic markers of conflict. Karpov scientific readings: collection of scientific articles. Iss. 10: in 2 pts. Pt 1. Minsk, 2016, pp. 317–321. (in Russ.)

12. Multimodal Discourse Analysis. Systemic-Functional Perspectives; Ed. K. L. O’Halloran. New York; London: Continuum, 2004. 252 p.

13. Tertichny, A. A. Internet journalism: genre profile. Scientific notes of Kazan University. Humanities, 2014, vol. 156, book 6, pp. 7–16. (in Russ.)

14. Tretyakova, V. S. Speech communication: harmony and conflict. Ekaterinburg, 2009. 230 p. (in Russ.)

15. Ulyanova, M. A. Classification of genres of Internet discourse. Lingua mobilis, 2014, no. 3(49), pp. 102–110. (in Russ.)