Suchergebnisse

The article touches upon the concept of manipulation, its basic characteristics, and its role in the modern informational society. The authors point out that alongside the informational function, media texts carry out the pragmatic function, namely, they manipulate the public opinion. According to the authors, manipulation is a more negative than positive phenomenon. Besides, there is a definition of radiotext and some considerations concerning its specific features as compared to other types of mediatexts, namely, wide audience, no video, but only audio, etcetera. British Broadcasting Corporation radiotexts have been chosen by the authors as the object of analysis. The authors have considered some historical aspects that determine the manipulative character of radio news. Also, special attention is paid to their structural and linguistic (grammatical, lexical, prosodic) features which are aimed at forming listeners' opinion about current events. A number of examples from radiotexts are given and their analysis is conducted. The authors state that alongside the text structure and the choice of material itself much attention should be paid to linguistic means, among which prosody is of the greatest importance. Such elements of prosody as tempo, loudness, the use of various tones in final and non-final prosodic groups and the speaker's timber influence the audience view of the world and draw the listeners' attention to particular aspects. At the end of the article the authors make a conclusion that taking into consideration the specific features of radiotexts, linguistic, mainly prosodic means play the leading role in the process of manipulation.

Introduction. This article exposes manipulative impact of the political media discourse of the Russian Internet resource sputniknews.com for September 2016, represented by English-language political media texts about events in Ukraine.Purpose. The purpose of the article is to disclose the role of language in exerting a manipulative impact in the frame of the political media discourse in question.Results. The article holds that immanent chacarteristics of language and its units, in particular lexical and syntactic, make it possible to covertly (manipulatively) affect public consciousness, shaping or changing it. It also shows that the language of the political media discourse differes from the ordinary, every-day language in the way information is presented, i.e. facts and events are named and assessed. Thus, a purposeful use of nominative, axiological, and rhetorical linguistic means makes it possible to covertly insert in people's mind certain ideas, values, and beliefs, which is a manipulative impact on the public consciousness. Originality. Originality of this article is provided by a complex approach to the analysis of the political media discourse. The article contributes to the discourse analysis, in particular to the studies of its communicative, pragmatic and linguistic-pragmatic characteristics.The perspective of the problem under discussion can be seen in the analysis of the role of quazi-linguistic and extra-linguistic means that, by accompanying linguistic means, are used to exert a manipulative impact on public consciousness.Conclusion. Thus, according to the obtained data, English-language political media texts about events in Ukraine that represent the political media discourse of the Russian Internet resource sputniknews.com for September 2016 typically exert a manipulative impact on public consciousness. It is done by a purposeful use of linguistic means that provide various interpretations of concrete facts, political events, and social reality with the aim to orchestrate their understanding and evaluation.

Introduction. This article gives reasons for recognizing the political media discourse a separate discourse type and it also examines linguistic realization of a manipulative function within the political media discourse. Purpose. The purpose of the article is to expose an integrative and complex nature of the political media discourse as a separate discourse type and to identify specificities of linguistic means used within it to exert a manipulative impact on the recipient. Results. The article holds that the political media discourse is a separate discourse type that, similar to any other type of the discourse, is a unity of the process and its result. Integrating typical features of the political and media discourses, it possesses a number of its own specific functional features, the main of which is instrumentality. Instrumentality is immediately connected with anguage – the main means (an instrument) of communication, which explains its paramount significance for formation of political media texts. Linguistic realization of the instrumental function molds in the receiver this or that emotional mood, thus affecting his/her train of thoughts in the way intended by the text producer. If such an impact on the receiver's mind is intentionally covert, it is qualified as manipulative, characteristic of political media texts. A manipulative impact is achieved by the use of pronouns: the personal pronouns "you","we", "they", when realizing their meaning of inclusiveness, create an illusion of positive and objective information; the personal pronouns "we" and "you", when realizing their meaning of generalization, create an illusion of a unified and commonly accepted opinion. A manipulative impact is also achieved by the use of rhetoric questions, declarative sentences used instead of interrogative ones, by the use of different kinds of repetition, by polysyndeton, parcelation, etc. A manipulative impact is a pragmatic effect of the political media text, which results employment of concrete communicative strategies embodied in different nominative, axiological, and rhetoric linguistic means. It is also done by a particular composition of the political media text. Originality. Originality of this article is provided by a complex approach to the analysis of the discourse. The article substantiates the necessity of recognition the political media discourse a separate discourse type and contributes to the discourse analysis, in particular to the studies of its cognitive and pragmatic characteristics. The perspective of the problem under discussion can be seen in the analysis of concrete manipulative techniques used within the political media discourse. Conclusion. Thus, the political media discourse is a separate discourse type that integrates typical features of the political and media discourses; it is a unity of the process and its result. Among its numerous functional features the main is instrumentality, which, from a linguistic perspective, presumes an impact, especially manipulative, on the receiver. Realization of such an impact is achieved by use of different linguistic means: nominative, axiological, and rhetoric

Manipulation is one of the concepts that needs a more in-depth theoretical and practical examination. It is employed in many areas of life, including personal and social matters, intellectual and professional pursuits, and, of course, politics. This paper is an approach, the purpose of which is to study the concept of manipulation as a psychological and linguistic phenomenon where the central emphasis is on the manipulative techniques and tactics that are utilized for various reasons such as illegitimate domination and social abuse. At this level of investigation we find it essential to illustrate different approaches to the study of this phenomenon as well as certain dictionary definitions to be able to fully perceive and comprehend the properties of manipulation.

The present paper presents the discussion of scholars concerning speech impact, peculiarities of its realization, speech strategies and techniques in particular. Departing from the viewpoints of many prominent linguists, the paper suggests that manipulative argumentation be viewed as a most pervasive speech strategy with a certain set of techniques which are to be found in modern American political discourse. The precedence of their occurrence allows us to regard them as pragmatic patterns of speech impact realization in effective public speaking.

Problem setting. Manipulations are the main thing in «black rhetoric». Nowadays, it is not difficult to influence with the help of words, different techniques can be used, but they all act as a forced verbal influence on the listener. All of them are formulated and sound based on the power of words. However, where the coercion of submission to another's will is disguised and hidden, there is always contempt and speculation. Therefore, it is no coincidence that most experts raise the question of the moral side of the use of black rhetoric. However, it is fair to say that "black rhetoric" does not mean that it is "forbidden rhetoric." Most likely − this is the reverse side of the classic rules of the communicative process. These are two reverse sides of the same coin: on the one hand, argumentation and logic are clearly presented. On the other hand − rhetoric as a method of securing beliefs. It is believed that black rhetoric is constructive under certain conditions.Paper objectiv. An article devoted to the study of the problems of the application of manipulations with «black rhetoric», coverage of the technology of black rhetoric and methods of resistance to the means and technical manipulative influence on consciousness. The aim of the study is to reveal the techniques of «black rhetoric» and find ways to overcome several methods of manipulating consciousness. Paper main body. According to K. Bredemayer, "black rhetoric" is the manipulation of a complex of rhetorical, dialectical, polemical and rabid methods in order to direct the conversation in the desired direction and lead the opponent or the audience to the desired conclusion and result for the manipulator.
"Black rhetoric" and logic are interconnected, they are united not only by a common process of proof, but also by the fact that each of the sciences is based on thinking, in fact, the main type of rhetoric is verbal thinking, and the most important argument is manipulation.
Verbal thinking − thinking that operates with fixed concepts in words, thoughts, conclusions, analyzes and summarizes, builds hypotheses and theory. It takes place in forms that are constant in the language, ie carried out in the processes of internal or ("thinking aloud") external language. Communication through verbal means is nothing more than the use of a living word in the transmission of information. But in addition to language, speech, there are other means of communication. People exchange information through gestures, facial expressions, looks, postures, body movements, which are called non-verbal (non-verbal) means of communication.
Nonverbal communication is a system of nonverbal cues that serve as a means of exchanging information between people. There is no consensus on the composition of non-verbal components of communication, their classification is based on different criteria. Thus, the communicative nonverbal components of communication are praxodic, kinetic, toxic and proxemic means.
"Black rhetoric" uses primarily verbal manipulations. Manipulation is the covert control of people and their behavior. The peculiarity of all manipulative language techniques is that the speaker does not directly state his true purpose. The interlocutor seems to come to the conclusion that the manipulator needs.
Language manipulation can be found in almost all spheres of human life: in advertising, trade, politics, education, psychotherapy, jurisprudence, literature, family communication and more. In addition to language manipulation, there is also psychological manipulation, which has the following characteristics: the attitude of the manipulator to the objects of manipulation as a means to achieve one's own goal; the desire to gain a unilateral advantage; the latent nature of the influence (both the fact of influence and its direction); use of psychological vulnerability of the person.
The analysis of the listed manipulative techniques of "black rhetoric" shows the absence of logical methods of proof and refutation. Psychological factors, emotional influences, suggestive possibilities are emphasized − thinking avoids logical principles of proof and refutation.
Conclusions of the research. Strategies such as: take the initiative in the conversation to prevent manipulation; do not allow a skillful interlocutor-manipulator to disturb the normal course of your thoughts in his favor, because black rhetoric seeks to use linguistic means, the purpose of which is the ability to argue and discuss, emphasize and propagate so that the speaker always wins, despite the erroneous judgments.
To effectively counteract "black rhetoric", psychological influence through critical thinking and reflection should be avoided; emphasize the logical means of discussion; analyze the information by comparing the proposed facts to be verified.
Mastering the logical methods of introducing a discussion allows you to overcome the dangerous effects of "black rhetoric", to resist suggestions. Information security is thus achieved by mastering logical knowledge and skills of logical proof and refutation.

AbstractWe study contracting between a public good provider and users with private valuations of the good. We show that, once the provider extracts the users' private information, she benefits from manipulating the collective information received from all users when communicating with them. We derive conditions under which such manipulation determines the direction of distortions in public good provision. If the provider is non‐manipulative, the public good is always underprovided, whereas overprovision occurs with a manipulative provider. With overprovision, not only high‐valuation users, but also low‐valuation users may obtain positive rents—users may prefer facing a manipulative provider.

The economic and political crises of the last two decades have been greatly influenced by the factthat, impacted by manipulative effects, instead to follow their rational judgements people havemade their decisions under the influence of emotional and instinctive temtation, deception andmanipulation. So far, these manipulative influences dominate contemporary commercial or populist political communication. The paper below shares the author's hesitation that, whilenon-rational factors bias from rational arguing and reasoning, both in decision-making and incommunicative impacts on the other person inevitably present, is it acceptable to manipulatethe users/clients by assisting professionals/social workers while exercising influence on decision-making of their clients? And if so, under what conditions, what specific constraints could beexercised such impacts and "professional power"? Likewise, when and what can and should bedone to immunize clients against manipulation, to mitigate manipulative effects, to "gain back"rational mind and "empower" clients to follow rational consideration and make wiser decisions?The article does not undertake to provide "only" true and correct answers, rather gives insightsand tries to provoke its reader to contribute to clarifying this important issue.

I develop a signaling model of mass political action. I establish that rational, self-interested individuals may have incentives to engage in costly political action despite a free-rider problem. Their political actions are informative for a political leader who rationally takes a cue from the size of the protest movement. However, some information is trapped in extremist and rationally apathetic pockets of the society. Some extremists take political action regardless of their private information, to manipulate the political leader's decision. Others abstain hoping to benefit if the leader makes an uninformed decision. Rationally apathetic moderates abstain because, being nearly indifferent between the policy alternatives, they do not find it worthwhile to incur the cost of taking action. Only activist moderates take informative political action. The political leader discounts the observed turnout for extremist political action and shifts policy if the estimated number of activist moderates exceeds a critical threshold.

Preliminary Material /Karl A.E. Enenkel and Ilja Leonard Pfeijffer -- INTRODUCTION /Karl A.E. Enenkel and Ilja Leonard Pfeijffer -- PROPAGANDA IN PINDAR'S FIRST PYTHIAN ODE /Ilja Leonard Pfeijffer -- CHORAL AGONS IN DEMOCRATIC ATHENS, 510-400 BC /Simon R. Slings -- PROPAGANDA AND COMPETITION IN ATHENIAN ORATORY /C. Carey -- KINGS AGAINST CELTS: DELIVERANCE FROM BARBARIANS AS A THEME IN HELLENISTIC ROYAL PROPAGANDA /Rolf Strootman -- WHO ARE 'WE'? TOWARDS PROPAGANDISTIC MECHANISM AND PURPOSE OF CAESAR'S BELLUM GALLICUM /Stephan Busch -- EPIC PROPHECY AS IMPERIAL PROPAGANDA? JUPITER'S FIRST SPEECH IN VIRGIL'S AENEID /Karl A.E. Enenkel -- THE CREATION OF AN IMPERIAL TRADITION: IDEOLOGICAL ASPECTS OF THE HOUSE OF AUGUSTUS /Paul G.P. Meyboom -- THE PROPAGATION OF FORTITUDO: GLADIATORIAL COMBATS FROM CA. 85 BC TO THE TIMES OF TRAJAN AND THEIR REFLECTION IN ROMAN LITERATURE /Karl A.E. Enenkel -- THE PANEGYRICAL INVENTIO: A RHETORICAL ANALYSIS OF PANEGYRICUS LATINUS V /Susanna de Beer -- SUPPLEMENTS TO MNEMOSYNE /H. Pinkster , H.S. Versnel , I.J.F. de Jong and P.H. Schrijvers.