Empathy As Speech Manipulation Target In Pre-election Discourse Of Great Britain

Anna Antonova

Abstract


Nowadays much attention in linguistics is paid to the study of manipulative kinds of texts which function within the political discourse. This paper deals with the linguistic means that the British political leaders use to actualize empathy and compassion. Despite the basic statements of Darwin’s theory these manipulation targets are considered to be the important mechanisms of tribal human behavior by many ethologists. The pre-election speeches of the British political leaders taken as linguistic data are regarded in the article with the help of intentional analysis and the analysis of stylistic means and vocabulary which are used by the producers. These methods let us understand how the producers of manipulative messages which consist of manipulative speech acts apply to the recipients’ empathy and compassion. The results of such analysis show that the most frequently used linguistic means of realization of this manipulative strategy are nominating lexemes, associative lexemes and some stylistic means (anaphora, simile and some others).  These results also let us conclude that using of ethological data in linguistics helps the researchers understand the mechanisms of linguistic manipulation in the British political discourse.  


Keywords


speech manipulation, mutual aid instinct, altruism, empathy, speech producer.

Full Text:

PDF

References


Austin, J. L. (1962). How to do things with words. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Darwin, C. (1859). On the origin of species by means of natural selection, or the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life. London : John Murray

Fet, A. I. (2005) Instinct and social behaviour. Moscow : Sova.

Goetz, J. L., Keltner, D., & Simon-Thomas, E. (2010). Compassion: An evolutionary analysis and empirical review. Psychological Bulletin. 136(3), 351–374.

Hawk, R. (2010) Humanity and compassion. (Online) Retrieved 18 July 2011, from http://socyberty.com/psychology/humanity-and-compassion

Izard, C. E. (1977). Human emotions. New York: Plenum Press.

Jansen, P. & Gehlen, A. (1975) Die Anthropologische Kategorienlehre. Bonn: Athenäum

Keltner, D. (2004). The compassionate instinct. (Online) Retrieved 18 July 2011, from http://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/the_compassionate_instinct

Khazriyati Salehuddin, Tan Kim Hua & Marlyna Maros, (2006). Definiteness and indefiniteness: A contrastive analysis of the use of determiners between the malay language and english. GEMA Online™ Journal of Language Studies, 6(1), 21-30.

Kropotkin, P. (1902). Mutual aid: A factor of evolution. (Online) Retrieved 18 July 2011, from http://manybooks.net/authors/k¬ropotkinpeter.html

Lee Su Kim (2003). Exploring the relationship between language, culture and identity. GEMA Online™ Journal of Language Studies, 3(2).

Norris, P. (2000). A virtuous circle: Political communications in post-industrial democracies. New York: Cambridge University Press

Penner, L. A., Dovidio, J. F., Piliavin, J. A., & Schroeder, D. A. (2005). Prosocial behaviour: Multilevel perspectives. Annual Psychological Reviews. 56(1). 365-392.

Price, V. (1991). Public opinion. London: Sage

Simonov, P. V. (1997) Neurobiology of individuality. Nature, 3(1), 81-89.

Singer, T. (2006). The neuronal oasis and ontogeny of empathy and mind reading: Review of literature and implications for future research. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews. 30(1), 855–863.

Trent, J. & Friedenberg, R. (2007). Political campaign communication: Principles and practices (Communication, media and politics). New York: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.

Vivanco, V. (2006). Implicatures and explicatures in english and spanish commercial messages: Pragmatic level versus semantic level. GEMA Online™ Journal of Language Studies, 6(2), 31-47.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


 

 

 

eISSN : 2550-2131

ISSN : 1675-8021