The Constructed and the Real in Mediatization: Interpretation of the Second World War by the West and Russia

The construction of discourse as a method of influence in the modern media space is becoming increasingly widespread. The influencing potential of discourse is revealed through modelling the evaluative interpretation of a discursive attractor event in the mass media space. This study identifies and demonstrates the features of constructing new value systems of an attractor event in media discourse to shift ideological values and rewrite historical facts from a given ideological position. The object of the study is the referent of the events of the Great Patriotic War (World War II), the anti-Russian interpretation of which is presented in the resolution of the European Parliament “On the importance of preserving historical memory for the future of Europe” and the statement of M. Morawiecki to the response statement of V. V. Putin at the informal CIS summit. Axiological analysis, interpretive analysis in line with inference, cognitive modelling, critical discourse analysis and the deconstruction method have been used as the research methods. The study demonstrates how this resolution and Morawiecki's statement construct a false interpretation of the historical facts of the Second World War to shift the addressee's values, activating linguistic-cognitive mechanisms: spin-doctoring, focusing, defocusing, framing, reframing, positioning, imagineering. As a result of the study, conclusions are drawn about the potential of discursive tools for ideological influence on the addressee.

It has been revealed that the renomination and revaluation of catastrophic events in the past, which are the addresser’s imagination, are presented as reality. An alternative scenario of the past is constructed, which is presented as the real state of affairs, which can confuse the recipient with a reduced level of criticality when perceiving the suggested information. Consequently, it is assumed that the addresser’s manipulative influence is aimed at changing the addressee’s values. The development of discursive technologies to change the socio-political positions of the uncritically thinking addressee and the formation of anti-Russian axiological orientations of the younger generation contribute to the displacement of higher values, and the arbitrary interpretation of historical facts in the West is becoming regular. The presented cognitive models of new constructed political positions contain axiological attractors, linguo-cognitive mechanisms and discursive strategies identified in the process of analysis.

discourse construction, interpretation, axiology, assessment, war

1. Arutyunova N. D. Tipy jazykovyh znachenij: Ocenka. Sobytie. Fakt. [Types of language values: Evaluation. Event. Fact]. Moscow, Nauka, 1988: 341 (in Russ.).
2. Arutyunova N. D. Jazyk i mir cheloveka [Language and the human world]. Moscow, YaRK, 1999: 896 (in Russ.).
3. Volodina M. N. Social and information-linguistic role of texts of mass communication. Genres and types of text in scientific and media discourse. Ed. by A. G. Pastukhov. Orel, OrGIK, 2015: 20–26 (in Russ.). EDN: WEWJEN.
4. German I. A. Lingvosinergetika [Linguistics]. Barnaul, AlAEP , 2000: 161 (in Russ.).
5. German I. A., Pishchalnikova V. A. Vvedenie v lingvosinergetiku [Introduction to linguosynergetics]. Barnaul, 1999: 130 (in Russ.).
6. Derrida J. O grammatologii [About grammar]. Transl. from fr. and introd. by N. Avtonomova. Moscow, Ad Marginem, 2000: 512 (in Russ.).
7. Derrida J. Pis'mo japonskomu drugu [Letter to a Japanese friend]. Voprosy filosofii, 1992: 4: 53–57 (in Russ.).
8. Ivanov V. N., Sergeev V. K. Always a great victory. 3^rd ed., rev. and expand. Moscow, FNISC RAN, 2020: 264 (in Russ.). EDN: FSRPHN.
9. Iriskhanova O. K. Igry fokusa v jazyke. Semantika, sintaksis i pragmatika defokusirovanija [Focus games in language. Semantics, syntax and pragmatics of defocusing]. Moscow, YaSK, 2014: 320 (in Russ.).
10. Karasik V. I. Jazyk social'nogo statusa [Language of social status]. Moscow, Gnosis, 2002: 333 (in Russ.).
11. Kim L. G. Variational-interpretative functioning of the text: theoretical and experimental research. dis. ... dr. philol. sc. Kemerovo, 2010: 405 (in Russ.).
12. Kim L. G., Belyaeva E. S. Pre-text expectations of the addressee as a factor in the variability of the interpretation of a political text. Vestnik TomGU. Philologiya, 2019: 57: 48–62 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.17223/19986645/57/3; EDN: ZAYFML.
13. Leontiev A. A. Psihologija obshhenija [Psychology of communication]. 5^th ed. Moscow, Smysl; Akademija, 2008: 368 (in Russ.).
14. Linguistics of information-psychological warfare: monograph. Book III. Ed. by A. P. Skovorodnikov. Krasnoyarsk, SFU, 2020: 344 (in Russ.). EDN: YWMHLD.
15. Lotman Yu. M., Gasparov M. L. O pojetah i pojezii: Analiz pojeticheskogo teksta [About poets and poetry: Analysis of the poetic text]. St. Petersburg,: Iskusstvo-SPb, 1996: 846 (in Russ.).
16. Minsky M. Frejmy dlja predstavlenija znanij [Frames for knowledge representation]. Moscow, Jenergija. 1979: 151 (in Russ.).
17. Nazariya S. M. June 1940 events in Bessarabia and their interpretation in modern historiography. Vestnik LGU im. A. S. Pushkina, 2013: 4: 3: 92–101 (in Russ.).
18. Plotnikova S. N. Tehnologizacija diskursa v sovremennom obshhestve [Technologization of discourse in modern society]. Ed. by S. N. Plotnikova. Irkutsk, IGLU, 2011: 320 (in Russ.).
19. Romanov A. A., Morozova O. N., Romanova L. A. Spin-doctoring construction of mental representations in the system of public communication. Mir lingvistiki i kommunikacii, 2015: 2: 39: 1–31 (in Russ.). EDN: TWAIWX.
20. Serebrennikova E. F. Aksiologicheskaja parametrizacija social'nogo diskursa [Axiological parametrization of social discourse]. Vestnik IGLU, 2013: 3 (24): 13–18 (in Russ.). EDN: RBWOPZ.
21. Skripnikova A. I. Frejmirovanie i refrejmirovanie v mass-media [Framing and reframing in mass media]. Molodoj uchenyj, 2014: 4: 1235–1238 (in Russ.).
22. Toldova S. Yu. Struktura diskursa i mehanizm fokusirovanija kak vazhnye faktory vybora nominacii ob’ekta v tekste [The structure of discourse and the focusing mechanism as important factors in choosing the nomination of an object in a text]. Abstract dis. ... cand. philol. sci.: 10.02.19. Moscow, 1994: 22 (in Russ.).
23. Phillips L., Jorgensen M. V. Discourse analysis. Theory and method. Transl. from Eng. Kharkov, Gum. Centr, 2004: 336 (in Russ.).
24. Haken G. Synergetics. Hierarchies of instabilities in self-organizing systems and devices. Moscow, Mir, 1985: 424 (in Russ.).
25. Haken G. Synergetics. Transl. from Eng. by V. I. Emelyanov. Moscow, Mir, 1980: 404 (in Russ.).
26. Eco U. Missing structure. Introduction to semiology. Transl. by A. G. Pogonyaylo, V. G. Reznik. Moscow, Petropolis, 1998: 432 (in Russ.).
27. Eco U. The role of the reader. Studies in the semiotics of the text. Transl. from Eng. and ital. S. Silver. St. Petersburg, Symposium, 2005: 502 (in Russ.)
28. Iakoba I. A. External and internal parameters of media discourse. Uchenye zapiski PetrGU, 2019a: 3 (180): 94–100 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.15393/uchz.art.2019.315; EDN: SWJYGM.
29. Iakoba I. A. Deconstruction of the Overton Window Technology in American Media Discourse. Vestnik CherGU, 2019b: 5 (95): 175–187 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.23859/1994-0637-2019-5-92-14; EDN: OZJLBP.
30. Yanou D., Hulst M. van. Frejmy politicheskogo: ot frejm-analiza k analizu frejmirovanija [Frames of the political: from frame analysis to framing analysis]. Sociologicheskoe obozrenie, 2011: 10: 1-2: 87–110 (in Russ.). EDN: NYKOBH.