MEDIA DISCOURSE AS SEMIOSIS: THE POTENTIAL OF SEMIOTICS FOR DEFINING MEDIA DISCOURSE
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17721/2520-6397.2024.2.07Keywords:
semiosis, institutional discourse, media linguistics, media discourse, media text, interaction, semiosic approachesAbstract
Background. Discourse theory is interdisciplinary. The methodological apparatus of linguistics and various related fields such as sociology, culturology, psychology, and linguosemiotics, is applied to study, comprehend, interpret, and formulate the methodological principles of discourse analysis (including media discourse as a subtype of institutional discourse) and its components (text, utterance, communicative event, communicative act). Methods and approaches to studying media discourse mostly complement each other, thus being participatory. At the current stage of language science development, media discourse is the object of numerous research investigations by Ukrainian and foreign linguists. The article aims to propose a definition of media discourse by identifying its key features as a category of communication generated by mass media. To achieve this purpose:
- a) we consider media discourse as a complex sign and analyze its action of sign (semiosis);
- b) with a focus on the sociosemiosic approach to discourse analysis, we identify characteristic features of this discourse and define it as a subtype of institutional discourse;
- c) we provide an interpretation of the main metalanguage units used to describe the proposed approach.
Methods. The research has been conducted based on the methodological principles developed in modern communicative linguistics using a semiosic approach to discourse analysis. To achieve the research aim, the following general scientific methods are applied: descriptive, inductive, comparative, generalization, and a special method of linguistic semiotic discourse interpretation.
Results. Media discourse (MD) is characterized by the following features:
- Generated by various agents (including media producers — institutions and individuals — and recipients).
- Comprises a variety of speech genres embodied in texts, which are complex signs, the signification of which is characterized by code, information and cultural dimensions.
- Directed towards interaction.
The core finding of our investigation is considered to be the reasoned presentation of the effectiveness of applying a semiotic approach to the analysis of media discourse.
Conclusion. Media discourse is a complex sign, the signification of which occurs in the informational space and is characterized by code, informational, and cultural dimensions
References
Andreichuk, N. I. (2011). Semiotics of the linguistic and cultural space of England at the end of the 15th – beginning of the 17th century: a monograph. Lviv Polytechnic Publishing House. [in Ukrainian].
Andreichuk, N. I. (2021). Vymiry semiozysu: monohrafiia. [Semiosis dimensions]. Lviv: PAIS. [in Ukrainian].
Batsevych, F. S. (2004). Fundamentals of communicative linguistics. Academy. [in Ukrainian].
Batsevych, F. S. (2010). Essays on Linguistic Pragmatics: Monograph. PAIS. [in Ukrainian].
Diachenko, M. D. (2019). Linguistic-historical aspect of discourse definition. Academic notes of TNU named after V.I. Vernadskyi. Series: Philology. Social communications. 30(69) c. 2. https://doi.org/10.32838/2663-6069/2019.2-2/01 https://philol.vernadskyjournals.in.ua/journals/2019/2_2019/part_2/3.pdf [in Ukrainian].
Dijk, T.A. van. (2008). Discourse and Context: A Sociocognitive Approach. Cambridge University Press.
Dzhoholos, O. V. & Bohuslavskyi, O. V. (2016). Fundamentals of implementation of public broadcasting: the European experience. ed. by Balaklytskyi, M. A. Moral and ethical discourse of modern mass media in the coordinates of contemporary challenges: Materials of the International Scientific and Practical Conference. pp. 13–17. Millennium. [in Ukrainian].
Encyclopædia Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/search?query=deepfake
Finkler, Yu. E. (2020) Mass media in the power framework: institutionalization revisited. с.300-313 https://doi.org/10.37222/2524-0331-2020-10(28)-22 [in Ukrainian].
Finkler, Yu. E. (2020). Ukrainian Reforms and Media Reflections. pp. 137–145. https://doi.org/10.37222/2524-0331-2020-10(28)-22 Zb2020FinklerYuri [in Ukrainian].
Foucault, M. (1972). The Archaeology of Knowledge: And the Discourse on Language. р. 49. Pantheon Books.
Foucault, M. (1982). [1981]. The Order of Discourse. Untying the Text: A Post-Structuralist Reader. ed. R. J. C. Young. Routledge & Kegan Paul P.
Habermas, J. & Luhmann, N. (1971). Preliminary Remarks on a Theory of Communicative Competence. In: Habermas and Luhmann. [in German]
Halliday, M. A. K. (1993) [1975]. Language as Social Semiotic. Language and Literacy in Social Practice / ed. by Maybin, J. Multilingual Matters,
Halliday, M. A. K. (2007). Language and Society: 10. Collected Works of M. A. K. Halliday, ed. by Jonathan J. Webster. and New Continuum.
Halliday, M. A. K., Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. Longman. p. 374. https://www.academia.edu/23141930/Cohesion_in_English_Halliday_and_Hasan
Halliday, M. A. K. & Berry, M. (1996). Meaning and Form: Systemic Functional Interpretations. Bloomsbury.
Harari, Yu.N. (2023). 21 Lessons for the 21st Century. Translated by Demyanchuk O. Bukshef. [in Ukrainian].
Harris, Z. S. (1952) Discourse Analysis. Language 28. Repr. in The Structure of Language: Readings in the philosophy of language ed. by Jerry A. Fodor & Jerrold J. Katz. Prentice-Hall.
Juignet, P. (2015). Michel Foucault and the Concept of Episteme. Philosophy, Science, and Society. pp. 331–332. https://philosciences.com/ [in French]
Korolyev, I. R. (2012). The Concept of Discourse in Contemporary Linguistics: Definition, Structure, Typology. Studia Linguistica. 6(2), pp. 294–296. Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv. [in Ukrainian]. http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/Stling_2012_6%282%29__48
Kuznietsova, T. V. (2016). On the Issue of Value-Semantic Dynamics of Media Text. Principles of Implementing Public Broadcasting: European Experience. Moral-Ethical Discourse of Contemporary Media in the Coordinates of Challenges of the Era: Materials of the International Scientific-Practical Conference. pp. 30–32. Millennium. [in Ukrainian].
Maas, U. (1984). When the Spirit of Community Found a Language: Language in National Socialism. An Attempt at Historical Argumentation Analysis. West German Publisher. [in German]
Mammadov, А. & Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk, В. (2022). Analysing Media Discourse: Traditional and New. еd. by Mammadov А and Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk В. Cambridge.
Martyniuk, A. P. (2011). Dictionary of the basic terms of cognitive-discursive linguistics. KhNU named after V. N. Karazin. [in Ukrainian].
Omelianchuk, Y. O. (2017). Pseudonews as a Genre of Contemporary English-Language Media Discourse: Linguocognitive, Communicative-Pragmatic Parameters. [PhD thesis, Kherson State University]. Institutional Repository of Zaporizhzhia National University. https://doi.org/10.32999/ksu2663-3426/2019-2-24, https://scholar.google.com/ [in Ukrainian].
Piankovska, I. (2022). Linguistic Means of Influence in German Media Texts. Current Issues in Humanities. 47(3), pp. 113–119.
Pierce, Ch. S. (1985) Logic as Semiotic: The theory of Signs // Semiotics. An Introductory Anthology / Ed. with Introductions by R. E. Innis.Indiana University Press.
Pocheptsov, H. H. (2022). Toxic Infospace: How to Preserve Clarity of Thought and Freedom of Action. Vivat.
Ponomarenko, L. G. (2016). Theory of Journalism and Journalistic Practice: Eternal Scissors of Discrepancies. Moral-Ethical Discourse of Contemporary Media in the Coordinates of Challenges of the Era: Materials of the International Scientific-Practical Conference. p. 48. Millennium. [in Ukrainian]. https://doi.org/10.24919/2308-4863/47-3-18 [in Ukrainian].
Rizun, V. V. (2008). Theory of Mass Communication: Textbook for Students of the Field 0303 "Journalism and Information". Prosvita. [in Ukrainian].
Rogers, Everett M. (2009). Diffusion of Innovations. Publishing Center "Kyiv-Mohyla Academy". . [in Ukrainian].
Selivanova, O. O. (2006). Modern Linguistics: Terminological Encyclopedia. Dovkillia. [in Ukrainian].
Serazhym, K. (2002). Discourse as a Sociolinguistic Phenomenon: Methodology, Architectonics, Variability. [Based on Materials of Contemporary Newspaper Publicism]. Ed. by V. Rizun. Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv. [in Ukrainian].
Seriot, P. (1985). Analysis of Soviet political discourse. Institute of Slavic Studies.
Shevchenko, L. I., & Dergach, D. V., & Syzonov, D. Y. (2014). Medialinguistics: Dictionary of Terms and Concepts. Ed. by L. I. Shevchenko. 2nd edition. "Kyiv University". . [in Ukrainian].
Shevchenko, L., & Syzonov D. (2021). Theory of Medialinguistics. Ed. by L. I. Shevchenko. "Kyiv University". [in Ukrainian].
Stubbs, M. (1983) Discourse analysis: the sociolinguistic analysis of natural language. University of Chicago Press. https://www.academia.edu/60315732/Discourse_analysis_The_sociolinguistic_analysis_of_natural_language
Syzonov, D. (2013) Mediatext and Mediadiscourse in the Contemporary Media Space. Studia Linguistica.7. с. 389–391. https://doi.org/10.17721/APULTP.2019.39.21-36 . [in Ukrainian].
Tomchakovska. Yu. O. (2021) Discoursology: trends and tasks (theoretical overview). pp. 115–121. Notes on Romance-Germanic Philology. 1(46), с. 115–121. http://dspace.onua.edu.ua/handle/11300/17888 . [in Ukrainian].
Tsaryk, H. (2023). Podcast as a genre of media discourse. Southern Archive (Philological Sciences) 95. с. 71. https://doi.org/10.32999/ksu2663-2691/2023-95-8 . [in Ukrainian].
Vaishenberg, Z. (2004). News Journalism: Educational Guide. Ukrainian Press Academy. [in Ukrainian].
Watts, R. J. (1981). The pragmalinguistic analysis of narrative texts: narrative cooperation in Charles Dickens's. Hard Times. Gunter Narr Verlag Tubingen.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Linguistic and Conceptual Worldviews
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
