Search

Cilj ovog rada je analiza polemičkog diskursa Zorana Milanovića u mandatu predsjednika Republike Hrvatske. Analiza je provedena zbog povratka Zorana Milanovića na političku scenu te njegovog polemiziranja s brojnim sudionicima javne sfere što se nije moglo vidjeti u tolikoj mjeri u prethodnim mandatima bivših predsjednika. Za istraživanje je korištena kvalitativna stilska i sadržajna diskursna analiza koja je provedena na temelju predsjednikovih izjava koje se mogu pronaći na većini hrvatskih portala te na društvenoj mreži Facebook, koju Milanović učestalo koristi. S pomoću analize može se vidjeti kako predsjednik Republike Hrvatske često koristi stilske figure koje su prožete ironijom i disfemizmima. S pomoću polemike i brojnih stilskih figura Milanović pokušava suprotstaviti se svojim protivnicima i tako stvoriti dosljedan polemički diskurs koji ga prati kroz cijeli mandat kao predsjednika Republike Hrvatske., The aim of this paper is to analyze the polemical discourse of Zoran Milanović in the mandate of the President of the Republic of Croatia. The analysis was conducted due to the return of Zoran Milanović to the political scene and his polemics with numerous participants in the public sphere, which could not be seen to such an extent in the previous terms of the former presidents. The research used qualitative stylistic and content discourse analysis, which was conducted on the basis of the president's statements that can be found on most Croatian portals and on the social network Facebook, which Milanović often uses. With the help of the analysis, it can be seen that the President of the Republic of Croatia often uses stylistic figures that are imbued with irony and dysphemism. With the help of polemics and numerous stylistic figures, Milanović tries to oppose his opponents and thus create a consistent polemical discourse that accompanies him throughout his term as President of the Republic of Croatia.

The article was submitted on 10.12.2021. Исследуются речевые стратегии и тактики религиозной коммуникации в условиях пандемии коронавируса. Цель работы – рассмотрение особенностей речевого поведения коммуникантов в кризисной ситуации пандемии. Методология исследования базируется на принципах теории речевой коммуникации, в той или иной мере представленных в современных работах, посвященных исследованиям дискурсов разного типа, изучению специфики религиозной коммуникации, коммуникативных (речевых) стратегий и тактик применительно к разному речевому материалу. Источниками исследования являются тексты, опубликованные в православных СМИ и на православных сайтах, проповеди, комментарии на православных форумах, посты в соцсетях. Констатируется полемический характер данного сегмента религиозного дискурса. В нем представлены неологизмы с оценочной коннотацией: цифровой концлагерь, псевдопандемия, коронобесие, коронокризис, ковид-диссиденты, антипрививочники, антиваксеры, ковидиоты, антивакс-сектанты, ковидофобы, вакциноборцы, вакцина каннибала, вакциноскептики и др. Охарактеризованы два типа адресантов: 1) отрицающие наличие пандемии, необходимость профилактических мер и/или вакцинации; 2) признающие факт пандемии, необходимость профилактических мер и/или вакцинации. Для первых характерен конфронтационный тип общения, они избирают речевые стратегии дискредитации и манипулирования, которые реализуются в речевых тактиках обвинения, оскорбления, клеветы, сарказма, апелляции к авторитету и др. Они нарушают принципы кооперативного общения, проявляют речевую агрессию. Различные фобии, которые демонстрируют коммуниканты этой группы, обусловлены неправильным пониманием сотериологического и эсхатологического учений Церкви. Адресанты второй группы используют речевую стратегию убеждения, реализуемую речевыми тактиками интерпретации, разъяснения, свидетельства очевидцев и др. У коммуникантов этой группы очевидна установка на бесконфликтное общение. This article examines speech strategies and tactics in religious communication in the context of the coronavirus pandemic. The purpose of the work is to consider the features of the speech behaviour of communicants during the pandemic crisis. The research methodology is based on the theory of speech communication to some extent present in modern works on the study of discourses of various types, the study of the peculiarities of religious communication, communicative/ speech strategies, and tactics applied to different speech material. The researcher refers to texts published in Orthodox media and on Orthodox websites: sermons, comments in Orthodox forums, and posts in social networks. As a result, the author reveals the polemical nature of this segment of religious discourse. For instance, it contains neologisms with evaluative connotations, such as цифровой концлагерь (digital concentration camp), псевдопандемия (pseudo-pandemic), коронобесие (corona-frenzy), коронокризис (corona-crisis), ковид-диссиденты (covid-dissidents), антипрививочники (anti-vaccinators), антиваксеры (antivaxers), ковидиоты (covidiots), антивакс-сектанты (anti-vax sectarians), ковидофобы (covidophobes), вакциноборцы (vaccine fighters), вакцина каннибала (cannibal vaccine), вакциноскептики (vaccine sceptics), etc. The author characterises two types of addressees: 1) those denying the existence of the pandemic and/or the need for preventive measures and/or vaccination; 2) those recognising the fact of the pandemic and/or the need for preventive measures and/or vaccination. The former are characterised by a confrontational type of communication, as they choose strategies of discrediting and manipulation by means of accusations, insults, slander, sarcasm, appeals to “authority”, etc. They violate the principles of cooperative communication and show verbal aggression. The various phobias that the communicants of this group demonstrate are due to a misunderstanding of the soteriological and eschatological teachings of the Church. The addressees of the second group use a speech strategy of persuasion through interpretation, explanation, references to their own experience, and the authority of the Church. The communicants of this group obviously aim for conflict-free communication.

International audience; This article offers some insight into the controversy stirred by Professor Didier Raoult’s recommendations about the use of hydroxychloroquine to treat patients suffering from SARS-CoV-2. We wish to show that the displacement of a scientific controversy into the media spheres and the intersection of several socio-professional worlds and the interweaving of different types of discourse have contributed to the blurring of communication, fostering the polarisation of positions. The encroachment of strategies of attack and self-promotion on scientific questioning has blocked the capacity for dialogue and aroused excessive passions. The media have fueled and sustained the polemic from which they have benefited greatly.; Cet article propose quelques éléments de compréhension de la polémique née autour du Professeur Didier Raoult et de l’hydroxychloroquine qu’il préconise pour traiter les malades atteints du SARS-CoV-2. Nous souhaitons montrer que le déplacement d’une controverse scientifique dans l’espace médiatique, le croisement de plusieurs mondes socio-professionnels et l’imbrication de différents genres de discours ont contribué au brouillage de la communication, favorisant la polarisation des positionnements. L’empiètement des stratégies d’attaques et d’autopromotion sur les questionnements scientifiques a bloqué la capacité de dialogue et suscité des passions démesurées. Les médias ont alimenté la polémique et ils en ont largement profité.

From 2011, an apparently unprecedented controversy has held a place in the French public sphere. This controversy centres on the concept of gender, specifically its use in school programmes and legislation. The constitution – rather than construction –, between 2011 and 2014, of what is here considered as an event is the focus of this study. The particular aim of this thesis is to understand the role played by folk actor-speakers’ metalinguistic activity about words related to gender in the constitution of such an event. A corpus of web-native francophone utterances (websites, blogs, social networks) was gathered, along with a more heterogeneous reference corpus (books, tweets, emails, transcripts of parliamentary sessions, etc.), in order to analyse, in terms of nomination and definition, how words related to gender became conflictual.The study thus proposes an analysis of polemical discourses which uses words as a point ofentry, and is supported by argumentation theories and contributory knowledge from gender studies and elsewhere. It shows how crucial it is to take into account the prediscourses of folklinguistics, including ethical ones, to understand actor-speakers’ metalinguistic activity and the role it plays in the constitution of the event. By bringing to light a fear of denaturation which affects both sex and language, this thesis also provides gender studies with a new way of interpreting essentialist discourses about the differences between the sexes.; À partir de 2011, une polémique apparemment inédite s’installe dans la sphère publique française. Elle porte sur le concept de genre, plus particulièrement sur son utilisation dans des programmes scolaires et dans le domaine législatif. Cette polémique est ici envisagée comme un événement dont il s’agit de saisir la constitution – terme préféré à celui de construction – entre 2011 et 2014. L’objectif est plus précisément de comprendre comment l’activité métalinguistique sur les mots liés au genre, activité effectuée par des actrices-locutrices ordinaires, participe de la constitution d’un tel événement. Un corpus d’énoncés francophones natifs du web (sites, blogs, réseaux sociaux) a été rassemblé, ainsi qu’un corpus de référence plus hétérogène (livres, tweets, emails, compte rendus de séances parlementaires...), afin d’étudier la mise en conflit des mots du genre du point de vue de la nomination et de la définition.L’étude propose ainsi une analyse du discours polémique à entrée lexicale nourrie par les théories de l’argumentation et par des savoirs contributeurs, venus des études de genre et d’ailleurs. Elle montre qu’il est crucial de prendre en compte les pré-discours de la linguistique folk, y compris dans leur dimension éthique, pour comprendre l’activité métalinguistique des actrices-locutrices et le rôle qu’elle joue dans la constitution de l’événement. En mettant au jour une peur de la dénaturation qui affecte à la fois le sexe et le langage, la thèse apporte également aux études de genre une façon nouvelle d’appréhender les discours essentialistes sur « la différence des sexes ».

L’article porte sur les usages de l’hypertextualité dans des interactions polémiques médiées par les réseaux sociaux-numériques (RSN). Le projet croise intimement deux perspectives d’étude : l’analyse des discours sociaux et celle des nouveaux objets discursifs induits par le numérique. L’analyse démontre l’impact du débat polémique autour de la gestation pour autrui (GPA), saisi le jour d’une manifestation nationale d’opposition à cette pratique, sur le contenu des tweets postés au sujet d’un film consacré à cette même problématique. Le corpus d’étude témoigne d’une présence massive des « technomots », caractérisée par un emploi interchangeable et souvent combiné des URL, des mentions et des hashtags (HT) pour référer au document audio-visuel en question., This article focuses on the usages of hypertextuality in polemical interactions mediated by social network sites. The project closely crosses two study perspectives: the analysis of social discourse and that of new discursive objects resulting from digital technology. The analysis demonstrates the impact of the polemical debate around surrogate motherhood, collected on the day of a national protest against this practice, on the content of tweets posted on the subject of a film dedicated to this same issue. The study corpus testifies to the massive presence of “technowords”, characterized by an interchangeable usage often combined with URLs, quotes and hashtags to refer to the audio-visual document in question.

RESUMO O artigo analisa a violência verbal em posts publicados em um site de notícias, após campanha eleitoral brasileira de 2014. Para tanto, são introduzidos os conceitos de flaming (Kayani 1998) e discurso polêmico (Amossy 2011). O corpus é analisado com as categorias de Bousfield (2008) para a impolidez na linguagem. Foram identificadas, no corpus, ameaças à face positiva e negativa dos interlocutores, que se textualizam na forma de linguagem radical e polarizada, no âmbito do discurso polêmico. Os achados sugerem que categorias interacionais caracterizam o flaming de forma mais eficiente do que o uso exclusivo de categorias lexicais. ABSTRACT The article focuses on hostile language used in electronic comments, published in a news site, after the Brazilian electoral campaign of 2014. To this end, the concepts of flaming (Kayany 1998) and polemical discourse (Amossy 2011) are introduced. For corpus analysis, Bousfield´s (2008) categories for the study of impoliteness in language are adopted. Negative and positive face threats were identified in the corpus, within the scope of polemical discourse. The research findings suggest that interactional categories stand a better chance towards the characterization of the phenomenon of flaming than the exclusive use of lexical categories.

This study approach the phenomenon of discursive inter-incomprehension. Our goal is to observe the interaction that occurs between discourses polemics in the discursive field of deafness, which constituted a discursive space delimited by two distinct positions on deafness: Audism Based Discourse and Deaf Based Discourse. Analyses indicate that the first one will be by means of anticipation - and denial - of what could be his simulacrum to the second one. The DFS will be defined precisely from what it is not, in order to build an "I" from the denial of a "non-self."KEYWORDS: Discourse. Deaf. Simulacrum. Polemical discourse., Este estudo aborda o fenômeno da interincompreensão discursiva e objetiva analisar a interação que se estabelece entre discursos polêmicos no campo discursivo da surdez, onde delimitamos um espaço discursivo constituído por dois posicionamentos distintos sobre a surdez: o Discurso de Fundamentação Surda e o Discurso de Fundamentação Ouvintista. As análises indicam que o primeiro discurso constitui-se por meio da antecipação – e da negação – do que poderia ser o seu simulacro, aos olhos do discurso segundo, e que se define justamente a partir do que ele não é, de forma a construir um “eu” a partir da negação de um “não-eu”.PALAVRAS-CHAVE: Discurso. Surdos. Simulacro. Polêmica discursiva. ABSTRACTThis study approach the phenomenon of discursive inter-incomprehension. Our goal is to observe the interaction that occurs between discourses polemics in the discursive field of deafness, which constituted a discursive space delimited by two distinct positions on deafness: Audism Based Discourse and Deaf Based Discourse. Analyses indicate that the first one will be by means of anticipation - and denial - of what could be his simulacrum to the second one. The DFS will be defined precisely from what it is not, in order to build an "I" from the denial of a "non-self."KEYWORDS: Discourse. Deaf. Simulacrum. Polemical discourse. &nbsp

Ce texte eclaire la facon dont l’approche dite de l’argumentation dans le discours se fonde sur des corpus construits a partir d’un element socio-discursif soumis a l’investigation, comme le discours polemique compris comme une modalite argumentative, ou la formule « delegitimation d’Israel » envisagee dans ses usages argumentatifs. Si l’exploration est initiee par une problematique de depart, et encadree par des procedures analytiques existantes, c’est l’examen des discours au niveau de la macro et de la micro-analyse qui permet de soulever de nouvelles questions et de degager le fonctionnement et les fonctions sociales du phenomene observe. Le cas echeant, l’etude empirique permet alors de faire retour sur la theorie pour la modifier ou l’inflechir. L’article est illustre par des references a des travaux deja effectues, et par une micro-analyse d’un usage de la « delegitimation d’Israel » qui montre comment l’attention a la materialite du langage permet d’expliciter une logique argumentative particuliere.

У статті охарактеризовано унійну польськомовну прозу, створену на Волині в XVII ст. Особливу увагу звернено на діяльність Іпатія Потія, Касіяна Саковича та Мелетія Смотрицького у другий, унійний період його творчості. Серед культурних осередків волинського регіону виділено Володимир-Волинський, Острог, Луцьк і Дермань./ Union Polish prose, created in Volyn in XVII century is characterized in the article. The main attention is payed to works of Ipatii Potii, Kasiyan Sakowych and Meletii Smotryckii in the second period of his works. It’s marked the role of Kyrylo Terleckii in signing of the Brest Union. Among cultural centres Volodymyr-Volynski, Ostrog, Lutsk and Derman are marked out. Polemical Polish discourse is represented complex, taking into account thesis character and apologetic direction. The main dominant of Polish-fiction of XVII century in Volyn as well as its types are defined on the basis of the analyzed material. It is concluded that the Volyn period of polemists creativity was a significant contribution to the development of Polish polemical treatises and epistolary heritage. Сухарєва С. Унійна польськомовна проза волинських культурних осередків XVII ст. / Світлана Сухарєва // Науковий вісник Східноєвропейського національного університету. Сер. «Філологічні науки. Літературознавство». – 2014. – № 9 (286). – С. 137-141.

L’animal étant par excellence figure de l’altérité et surtout une manière de la construire et de l’interroger, l’usage qu’en font les discours polémiques est révélateur de positionnements rhétoriques mais aussi éthiques voire philosophiques. Trois de ces positionnements sont examinés ici, de l’assimilation de l’autre considéré comme dissident à une figure animale, manière de l’exclure de la communauté du sens et de réaffirmer des frontières menacées, à une position inverse où le discours choisit une voie dissidente par rapport aux évidences dogmatiques en invitant à une réouverture du regard et du questionnement sur soi-même et sur l’autre, en passant par l’évocation d’une exemplarité paradoxale interrogeant les comportements supposés normaux. Polemical discourses use animal figures to construct or question alterity, and the way they use them tells about rhetorical but also ethical or even philosophical positions. Three of these positions are examined here : when assimilation of one seen as a dissident to an animal is a way to reaffirm threatened borders, and the possibility of sharing truths, when animals are used as paradoxical exemples to challenge usual behaviours, and finally when a dissident way is chosen, refusing dogmatical opinions and suggesting to reopen eye and judgement, so as to question oneself, otherness and how to consider it.

У статті проаналізовано польськомовну парадигму похоронних проповідей XVII ст., присвячених проблематиці Брестської унії. Особливу увагу звернено на проповідницьку діяльність Фабіяна Бірковського, представника католицького напряму полемічної гомілетики, на основі якої будувалися подальші зразки баро¬кового проповідництва. Визначено структуру й художні засоби відтворення полеміки в похоронних пропо¬відях, їх смислову наповненість і риторичну спрямованість. Зазначено перехідні проповідницькі аспекти добарокового та барокового періодів.The Polish paradigm of a funeral sermons of the XVII century dedicated to the problems of the Brest Union is analyzed in the article. Special attention is paid to the preaching of Fabian Birkowskii, the representative of the catholic polemical homiletics direction, on its basis the following samples of Baroque peaching were constracted. It's also defined the structure and artistic facilities of polemic reproduction in the funeral sermons, their semantic fulness and rhetorical focus. Transferred preaching aspects before and in the Baroque periods are mentioned.

À partir de l’exemple de la presse électronique française, cet article suggère de repenser le rapport de la polémique à l’argumentation rhétorique et d’en tirer toutes les conséquences. Il tente de montrer (1) que le discours polémique fait partie intégrante de l’argumentation rhétorique, (2) qu’aux objectifs reconnus de persuasion et de consensus, la gestion polémique du conflit substitue (ou ajoute) une mission alternative, qui problématise les conceptions traditionnelles de l’argumentation : la coexistence dans le dissensus Drawing on the example of the French online press, this article suggests reexamining the relationship between polemical discourse and rhetorical argumentation in order to allow for a better understanding of their nature and scope. It endeavors to show: (1) that polemical discourse is a full and integral part of rhetorical argumentation, (2) that the polemical management of conflict substitutes for (or adds) an alternative mission, which problematizes the traditional conceptions of rhetorical argumentation: coexisting in dissensus