Pronoun as the parameter of English economic discourse pragmalinguistic cohesion
https://doi.org/10.18384/2949-5075-2023-4-33-41
Abstract
Aim. To identify the functions of pronouns in discourse organization and the parameters defining the choice of pronouns that are responsible for inner and outer economic discourse cohesion.
Methodology. Methods of discriptive, discourse and contextual analysis are applied in the research. The study is based on the scripts of International Monetary Fund representatives’ speeches, reports, blogs, news and publications in Finance and Development Magazine in 2022 chosen by the method of continuous sampling.
Results. The conducted analysis revealed that pronouns take an active part in the processes of discourse creation and organization: making text formation possible they gain their semantics and pragmatics. The choice of pronoun results from communicative situation parameters, the speaker’s communicative strategy, accepted or stereotypical speech behaviour.
Research Implications. The significance of the research lies in the possibility of applying the results to teaching efficient business communication.
About the Author
А. Gabets
Moscow State Institute of International Relations (University) of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Anna A. Gabets – Cand. Sci. (Philology), Assoc. Prof., Department of English Language No. 4
prospekt Vernadskogo 76, Moscow 119454
References
1. Antipina Ye. S. [Functions of the personal pronouns ‘I’ and ‘We’ in the Ivan Bunin's works (“Waters Aplenty” and “Cursed Days”)]. In: Izvestiya vysshikh uchebnykh zavedeniy. Seriya: «Gumanitarnyye nauki» [News of Higher Schools. Series “Humanities”], 2012, vol. 3, iss. 3, pp. 196–200.
2. Beljayev A. S., Lazovskaya N. V. [The role of personal pronouns I, you, we and they in English political discourse]. In: Yazyk nauki i professional'noy kommunikatsii [Language of science and professional communication], 2021, no. 3 (4), pp. 5–10.
3. Golik N. A. [On the influence of personal deictic units on coherent text formation]. In: Filologicheskiye nauki. Voprosy teorii i praktiki [Philology. Theory & Practice], 2017, no. 12-1 (78), pp. 79–82.
4. Egorshina N. V. [Study of discourse as the culture symbol for the further methodic work of the instructors]. In: Nauchno-metodicheskiy byulleten' Voyennogo universiteta MO RF [Scientific and methodological bulletin of the Military University of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation], 2020, no. 1 (13), pp. 146–152.
5. Kalashnikova Ye. A., Kremer I. Yu. [Representation of the category of local connectivity within the framework of political commentary]. In: Sovremennyye kontseptsii romano-germanskoy filologii, lingvodidaktiki i mezhkul'turnoy kommunikatsii: materialy Vserossiyskoy nauchno-prakticheskoy konferentsii [Modern concepts of Romano-Germanic philology, linguodidactics and intercultural communication: materials of the All-Russian Scientific and Practical Conference]. Ryazan, Ryazan Higher Airborne Command School named after General of the Army V. F. Margelov Publ., 2022, pp. 102–106.
6. Kozhina N. M. [Discourse analysis and functional stylistics from speech studies positions]. In: Tekst – Diskurs – Stil' [Text – Discourse – Style]. St. Petersburg, St. Petersburg State University of Economics Publ., 2004, pp. 9–33.
7. Milevskaya T. V. Svyaznost' kak kategoriya diskursa i teksta (kognitivno-funktsional'nyy i kommunikativno-pragmaticheskiy aspekty): avtoref. diss. … kand. filol. nauk [Connectivity as a category of discourse and text (cognitive-functional and communicative-pragmatic aspects): abstract of PhD thesis in Philological Sciences]. Rostov-na-Donu, 2003. 43 p.
8. Mukovskii O. L. Deiksis i anafora v russkom, angliiskom i ispanskom yazykakh: diss. ... kand. filol. nauk [Deixis and anaphora in Russian, English and Spanish: PhD thesis in Philological Sciences]. St. Petersburg, 2015. 185 p.
9. Norman B. Yu. Lingvisticheskaya pragmatika (na materiale russkogo i drugikh slavyanskikh yazykov): kurs lektsiy [Linguistic pragmatics (based on Russian and other Slavic languages): a course of lectures]. Minsk, Belarusian State University Publ., 2009. 183 p.
10. Sternin I. A. [Effective speech impact]. In: Teoreticheskiye i prikladnyye problemy yazykoznaniya. Izbrannyye raboty [Theoretical and applied problems of linguistics. Selected works]. Voronezh, Istoki Publ., 2008, pp. 253–293.
11. Tayupova O. I., Farrakhova F. U. [Representation of coherence in the texts of various discourses]. In: Rossiyskiy gumanitarnyy zhurnal [The Liberal Arts in Russia], 2021, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 54–64. DOI: 10.15643/libartrus-2021.1.5.
12. Hyland K. Bringing in the Reader: Addressee Features in Academic Articles. In: Written Communication, 2001, vol. 18, iss 4, pp. 549–574.
13. Gardelle L., Sorlin S., eds. The Pragmatics of Personal Pronouns. Amsterdam, Philadelphia, John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2015. 337 p. (Studies in Language Companion Series, 171).
Supplementary files
Review
Views:
100
Email this article 
