International journal

Speech Genres

ISSN 2311-0759 (Online)
ISSN 2311-0740 (Print)


For citation:

Prom N. A. Dialogization of discourse and genre in media. Speech Genres, 2022, no. 2(34), pp. 146-155. DOI: 10.18500/2311-0740-2022-17-2-34-146-155

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC-BY 4.0).
Full text:
(downloads: 67)
Language: 
Russian
Article type: 
Article
UDC: 
81’42+004

Dialogization of discourse and genre in media

Autors: 
Prom Natalia Aleksandrovna, Volgograd State Technical University
Abstract: 

The article studies dialogization of media monologue messages aimed at intensifying the interiorization of new information into the addressee’s picture of the world by stimulating a dialogue with the audience. There have been singled out two levels of dialogization–discourse and genre. The analysis of the media content in the advertising and political types of communication, as well as discussions and talk shows on any topic, suggested that the most effective factor stimulating the recipient’s response is the provocativeness of the discourse, found in the topic under discussion, categorical statements, controversial points of view and defiant behavior of the participants. The author analyses communicative ways of dialogization of three genre types–informative, evaluative and incentive genres (according to L. Duskaeva’s classification). The study has found that important factors determining the dialogization of discourse and genre are the interactivity of the information and communication system and the convergence of genres, the product of which is, for example, such social network genres as a blog and a forum which in their modern form depend only on the creative potential of their authors. Particular attention is paid to the dialogization of the social advertising genre which does not imply interactivity, but the real objective indicator of its effectiveness is the audience’s awareness of the problem and their subsequent actions. The author presents two directions of dialogization: firstly, the strengthening of dialogueness and interactivity with the help of rhetorical means and techniques that appeal to the addressee; secondly, the verbal expression of the interaction of two or more semantic positions, a form of representation of media facts, which presupposes the reaction of the audience.

Reference: 
  1. Alexandrova I. B., Slavkin V. V. Dialogueness as a categorical characteristic of the speech of modern society]. MediaScope, 2015, no. 4. Available at: http://mediascope.ru/ 2029 (accessed 14 May 2017) (in Russian).
  2. Annenkova I. V. Modern media picture of the world : A neorhetorical model (linguo-philosophical aspect) : Thesis Diss. Dr. Sci. (Philol.). Moscow, 2012. 41 p. (in Russian).
  3. Arutyunova N. D. The addressee’s factor. News of the USSR Academy of Sciences. Series of literature and language, 1981, vol. 40, no. 4, pp. 356–367 (in Russian).
  4. Balakireva T. A. Construction of media reality (on the example of Russian television shows). Veche, 2016, no. 28, pp. 254–263 (in Russian).
  5. Balyasnikova O. V. Psychosemantics of conflict in Internet texts. In: Materials of the X international Congress of the International Society for Applied Psycholinguistics. Moscow, RUDN Publ., 2013, pp. 169 (in Russian).
  6. Buryakovskaya V. A. Communicative characteristics of mass culture in media discourse (based on the Russian and English languages). Diss. Dr. Sci. (Philol.). Volgograd, 2014. 326 p. (in Russian).
  7. Dementyev V. V. Axiological genre study : aspects of the problem “assessment and genre”. Speech Genres, 2016, no. 2 (14), pp. 9–24 (in Russian).
  8. Dementyev V. V. Communicative genres : speech genres as a means of formalizing social interaction]. Speech Genres : coll. of sci. art. Saratov, GosUNTs “Kolledzh”, 2002, iss. 3, pp. 18–40 (in Russian).
  9. Dridze T. M. Ecoanthropocentric paradigm in social cognition and social management. Man, 1998, no. 2, pp. 95– 105 (in Russian).
  10. Duskaeva L. R. On genre text categories. Speech Genres, 2016, no. 2 (14), pp. 25–32 (in Russian). https:// www.doi.org/10.18500/2311-0740-2016-2-14-25-32
  11. Filatova O. G. Sotsiologiya massovoj kommunikatsii [Sociology of mass communication]. Moscow, Gardariki Publ., 2006. 303 p. (in Russian).
  12. Henne H., Rehbock H. Einfuhrung in die Gespachsanalyse. Berlin, New York, Walter de Gruyter, 2001. 336 p.
  13. Kaida L. G. Dialogue “reader-author” : stylistic concept. In: Mysl’. Tekst. Stil’ : sb. nauch. st., pod red. L. R. Duskaevoi, V. I. Kon’kova [Duskaeva L. R., Konkov V. I., eds. Thought. Text. Style : coll. of sci. art.]. Saint Petersburg, SPbGU Publ., 2011, pp. 82–91 (in Russian).
  14. Kaminskaya T. L. The image of the addressee in the texts of mass communication : semantic and pragmatic research. Diss. Dr. Sci. (Philol.). Saint Petersburg, 2009. 284 p. (in Russian).
  15. Karadzhev B. I. The addressee and addressee factor in the media discourse. RUDN Journal. Ser. Educational issues : languages??and specialties, 2014, no. 3, pp. 40–46 (in Russian).
  16. Khorolskiy V. V. Mediaism and Science : Siamese Twins or Distant Relatives? Bulletin of the Volgograd State university. Ser. 8. Literary criticism, 2015, no. 1, pp. 42–51 (in Russian).
  17. Kokhanov E. F. Political Talk Shows : Dialogue and Interactivity? Questions of Theory and Practice, 2013. vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 50–59 (in Russian).
  18. Kolokoltseva T. N. Dialogue in the genres of Internet communication (chat, forum, blog). Speech Genres, 2016, no. 2 (14), pp. 95–104 (in Russian). https://www.doi.org/10.18500/2311-0740-2016-2-14-95-104
  19. Kormilitsina M. A. Trends in the stylistic appearance of traditional journalistic genres in the modern press]. Speech Genres, 2018, no. 1 (17), pp. 67–72 (in Russian). https://www.doi.org/10.18500/2311-0740-2018-1-17-67-72
  20. Kuzin V. I. Psihologicheskaya kul’tura zhurnalista [Psychological culture of a journalist]. Saint Petersburg, SPbGU Publ., 2004. 205 p. (in Russian).
  21. Lasswell H. D. The structure and function of communication in society. In : Bryson L., ed. The Communication of Ideas. New York, Harper and Brothers, 1948, pp. 37–51.
  22. Leve I. Logovisualization as a written version of the word in television discourse. Medialinguistics, 2019, no. 6 (1), pp. 19–34 (in Russian).
  23. Lutovinova O. V. Lingvokul’turologicheskie kharakteristiki virtual’nogo diskursa [Linguoculturological characteristics of virtual discourse]. Volgograd, Peremena Publ., 2009. 477 p. (in Russian).
  24. MacKuen M. B. Social communication and the mass policy agenda. In : MacKuen M. B., Coombs S. L., eds. More than news : Media power in public affairs. Newbery Park, CA, Sage, 1981, pp. 19–144.
  25. Marchi R. With Facebook, blogs, and fake news, teens reject journalistic “objectivity.” Journal of Communication Inquiry, 2012, vol. 36, no. 3, pp. 246–262.
  26. Nišič V., Plavšič D. The role of media in the construction of social reality. Sociological Discourse, 2014, vol. 4, no. 7, pp. 73–81 (in Russian).
  27. Nikitin M. I. Dialogue of the language of marketing communications : “talking” slogans. In : Journalism in 2014 : Mass media as a factor of public dialogue : materials of Intern. sci. and pract. conf. Moscow, Mediamir Publ., Faculty of Journalism, Moscow State University, 2015, pp. 101–102 (in Russian).
  28. O’Keeffe A. Media and discourse analysis. In : Gee J., Handford M., eds. The Routledge Handbook of Discourse Analysis. London, Routledge, 2011, pp. 441–454.
  29. Pak E. M. Genre education in online media : technological and creative factors. Diss. Cand. Sci. (Philol.). Saint Petersburg, 2014. 261 p. (in Russian).
  30. Prom N. A. Modern newspaper sports report : genre and stylistic aspects. Diss. Cand. Sci. (Philol.). Volgograd, 2011. 240 p. (in Russian).
  31. Shils E. A., Janowitz M. Cohesion and Disintegration in the Wehrmacht in World War II. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 1948, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 280–315.
  32. Shmeleva T. V. “‘Density of genres” as a tendency in the media sphere. Speech Genres, 2018, no. 4 (20), pp. 270–276 (in Russian). https://www.doi.org/10.18500/2311-0740-2018-2-20-270-276
  33. Steksova T. I. Comment as a speech genre and its variability. Speech Genres, 2014, no. 1–2 (9–10), pp. 81– 88 (in Russian). https://www.doi.org/10.18500/2311-07402014-1-2-9-10-81-88
  34. Tekhtmayer B. Dialogue : problems of analysis. In: Obshchenie. Tekst. Vyskazyvanie [Communication. Text. Statement]. Moscow, Nauka Publ., 1989.175 p. (in Russian).
  35. Vinokur T. G. Govoryashchij i slushayushchij. Varianty rechevogo povedeniya [Speaker and Listener. Variants of speech behavior]. Moscow, Nauka Publ., 2005. 172 p. (in Russian).
  36. Volodina L. V. Constructing reality by means of mass communication. In : Symposium series, Russian mass culture of the late XX century, iss. 15. Saint Petersburg, St. Petersburg Philosophical Society, 2001, pp. 27 (in Russian).
  37. Zheltukhina M. R. Political and mass media discourses : impact – perception – interpretation. In : Krasnykh V. V., Izotov A. I., eds. Language, consciousness, communication : collection of articles. Moscow, MAKS Press, 2003, iss. 23, pp. 38–51 (in Russian).
Received: 
29.04.2021
Accepted: 
23.06.2021
Published: 
31.05.2022