CONFRONTATIONAL COMMUNICATIVE STRATEGIES IN DRAMATURGY: CLASSICS VS MODERNINY
Valeriia KOROLOVA,
Doctor of Philology, Prof., Oles Honchar Dniprovsk National University, 72 Gagarin Ave., Dnipro 49010, Ukraine;
E-mail: koroliova@i.ua
ORCID: 0000-0002-7482-0517
Conflict is the main genre of play and the driving force behind drama. Internal communication of contemporary dramaturgical discourse is to some extent tense and uncomfortable which is motivated by the generic specifi city of play and expressed in non-combining of communicative intentions of characters. Conflict strategies are verbalized by conflict, including strategies of manipulation and speech aggression. The strategy of language aggression involves usage of tactics of insult, irony, criticism, mockery, provocation and more. A confrontational manipulation strategy can be expressed in tactics of threat, indignation, rejection, pressure, demands, etc. These tactics are aimed at seizing the communicative space to impose one’s interests on a partner.
During a conflict confrontational strategies in contemporary plays are characterized by usage of tactics with a high degree of negativity that, at the conflict peak, transform insult into the goal of communication in itself.
The strategy of language aggression involves usage of tactics of insult, irony, criticism, mockery, provocation and more. The purpose of speech aggression tactics is to express a negative assessment of the addressee and to reduce his or her self-esteem. In I. Kotlyarevsky’s plays characters using the tactics of insult or reproach make sure to comment explaining to the addressee the reasons for their language aggression. At the same time in modern dramaturgy the image or criticism is largely autonomous.
Confrontation is one-sided in the process of language communication. When intensified confrontational stimuli can be both stimulus and response responses. At the same time plays of I. Kotlyarevsky lack open confrontation, which exacerbates conflict of a communication situation.
Modern plays show a broader and more aggressive range of confrontational tactics as well as more active usage of them. I. Kotlyarevsky’s characters often show desire to alleviate the conflict, as soon as possible to get out of the conflict situation, using weakened tactics of confrontation.
Keywords: confrontational communicative strategy, manipulating, verbal aggressiveness, speech conflict, communicative situation.
REFERENS
- Derpak, O. V. (2005). Confrontational speech genres: communicative-pragmatic and linguistic aspects. Kyiv (in Ukr.).
- Іssers, O. S. (2002). Communicative strategies and tactics of Russian speech. Moskva (in Rus.).
- Kotlyarevsky, I. (2000). Aneida. Natalka Poltavka. Kyiv (in Ukr.).
- Kotlyarevsky, I. (2009). Moskal-charivnyk. Ukrainian Classical Literature: The Best Comedies (p. 4 – 36). Donetsk (in Ukr.).
- Pevneva, Y. V. (2008). Communicative strategies and tactics in confl ict situations of everyday communication and professional pedagogical discourses of Russian and American linguistic cultures. Kemerovo (in Rus.).
- Shchuchenko, S. (2004). Let’s play. URL: http://www.kurbas.org.ua/ dramlab/schuchenko/Schuchenko-play1 (in Ukr.).
- Shchuchenko, S. (2006). Enchanted monsters. Contemporary Ukrainian dramaturg (p. 226 – 271). Kyiv (in Ukr.).
- Shchuchenko, S. (2008). Felichita. URL: http://www.kurbas.org.ua/ dramlab/schuchenko/Schuchenko-play5 (in Ukr.).
- Goff man, E. (1972). On Face Work. Interaction Ritual: Essays on Face-to-Face Behaviour (p. 5 – 45), London.
- Leech, G. N. (1983). Principles of Pragmatics. London, NY.