The study identifies aggression markers in publicistic texts, revealing functions like expressing viewpoints and forming attitudes, with statistically significant results indicating systematic use in journalistic discourse.
Authors
Karina Bortun, Department of Legal Linguistics, National Academy of Internal Affairs, Kyiv, 03035, Ukraine
Veronika Chekaliuk, Institute of Journalism, Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Kyiv, 01033, Ukraine
Odarka Kravchenko, Department of Chinese Language and Translation, Borys Grinchenko Kyiv Metropolitan University, Kyiv, 04212, Ukraine
Iryna Soroka, Associate Professor, Jindal Institute of Behavioural Sciences, O. P. Jindal Global University (JGU), Sonipat, 131001, India
Adila Asadova Yagub, Department of Azerbaijani Language and Literature, Western Caspian University, Baku, AZ1001, Azerbaijan
Summary
The aim of the research is to establish standard lexical signs of aggressiveness through the analysis of authorised publicistic texts.
Methods: The research employed the method of functional semantic analysis, study of the cognitive discursive model, and lexico-semantic analysis of aggression markers. The obtained results were processed using the methods of descriptive statistics. Pearson’s chi-square test (χ2), the Mann–Whitney U test, and Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficient were also used.
Results: The identified markers reflect a variety of functions, such as expressing the author’s point of view, forming a subjective attitude, expressing judgments, and supporting the author’s position. Statistical analysis confirmed their statistical significance and systematicity in journalistic discourse. Donald Trump uses high levels of aggressive language and radical statements, while other sources show lower levels of aggressiveness. Bloomberg and The Economist lead in the lowest use of aggression markers.
Conclusions: The article reveals various markers of aggression through the authorisation of publicistic texts. The identified markers indicate various functions, including expressing the author’s point of view and forming subjective attitudes. The study confirms the statistical significance of aggression markers, which indicates their systematicity in journalistic authorised discourse.
Prospects: Further research may focus on deepening the understanding of aggressive vocabulary markers and their influence on the perception of publicistic information.
Published in: Forum for Linguistic Studies
To read the full article, please click here.
