Reactions to changes in communicative distance in English communication
https://doi.org/10.18384/2949-5075-2023-4-53-62
Abstract
Aim. To analyse communicative reactions to changes in distance in English communication.
Methodology. The selected material was studied using discourse analysis, contextual analysis, interpretive analysis, and introspection.
Results. The main components of the communicative situation in which a change in communicative distance occurs were identified. The main types of reactions to changes in communicative distance were distinguished: 1) on the emotional level, positive and negative reactions can be distinguished; 2) according to the criterion of speech use – verbal and nonverbal. Positive reactions indicate the willingness of the communicator to move the relationship to a new level, while negative reactions express the communicant’s disagreement with the attempts to change the established distance. Negative reactions to changes in communicative distance are predominant (displeasure, discomfort, concern, irritation, etc.). Nonverbal reactions are expressed through nonverbal means: movements, gestures, gaze, blushing, intonation, pauses. Verbal reactions are speech acts: demanding an explanation for one’s behaviour, threatening, attempting to interrupt the interlocutor, clarifying the source of information, evading the answer, and refusing. Lexical means of expressing reactions include interrogative words, interjections, nouns, adjectives, verbs describing speech behaviour, and idioms.
Research implications. The theoretical significance lies in clarifying the concept of “communicative distance”, expanding knowledge of communicative processes and factors influencing them. The practical significance of the study lies in the possibility of using its results in courses on discourse analysis, pragmalinguistics, sociolinguistics, and communication theory
About the Author
E. Dubrovchenko
Minsk State Linguistic University
Belarus
Belarus
Elena M. Dubrovchenko – Cand. Sci. (Philology), Assoc. Prof., Department of Theory and Practice of
English Speech
ulitsa Zakharova 21, Minsk 220034
References
1. Dubrovchenko E.M. Transformation of communicative distance in private communication // Bulletin of Chelyabinsk State University. 2021. No.9 (455). Pp. 69-75.
2. Efanova L.G. Communicative distance as a norm of speech interaction (on the example of using some Russian pronouns) // Bulletin of Tomsk State University. 2011. No. 2 (14). Pp. 5-11.
3. Kalmikova, O.I. Psychological distance as an indicator of the success of pedagogical interaction in the “teacher-adolescent” system: abstract of dissertation for the degree of Candidate of Psychological Sciences. Stavropol, 2001. 18 p.
4. Karasik V.I. Utterance, genre, discourse: semiotic modeling // Speech genres. 2020. No. 2 (26). Pp. 90-99. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18500/2311074020202269099
5. Karasik V.I. Norms of behavior in the linguistic worldview // Bulletin of Moscow State Regional University. Series: Linguistics. 2019. No. 4. Pp. 35-49. DOI: 10.18384/2310-712X-2019-4-35-49
6. Karasik V.I. Linguistic circle: personality, concepts, discourse. Volgograd: Peremena, 2002. 477 p.
7. Karasik V.I., Prokhvacheva O.G., Zubkova Ya.V., Grabarova E.V. Different mentality. M.: Gnosis, 2005. 352 p.
8. Kreidlin G.E. Gestures and speech in the New Linguo-Semiotic Dictionary. RGGU Bulletin. Series “Literary Studies. Linguistics. Cultural Studies”. 2021; (2-2): 232-254. https://doi.org/10.28995/2686-7249-2021-2-232-254
9. Makarov M.L. Fundamentals of discourse theory. M.: ITDGK “Gnosis”, 2003. 280 p.
10. Martynova E.M. Vegetative reactions as an indicator of anomalous communication // Bulletin of Kursk State University. 2014. No.3. URL: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/vegetativnye-reaktsii-kak-pokazatel-anomalnoy-kommunikatsii (accessed: 02/03/2023).
11. Pilatova V.N. Distance in dialogue // Philological Sciences. Questions of theory and practice. 2019. No.2. URL: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/distantsiya-v-dialoge (accessed: 03/17/2023).
12. Burgoon J.K., Hale J.L. Nonverbal expectancy violations: Model elaboration and application to immediacy behaviors // Communication Monographs. 1988-03-01. Vol. 55, iss. 1. Pp. 58-79.
13. Hall E.T. The Hidden Dimension. New York: Anchor, 1969. 217 p.
Supplementary files
Review
Views:
100
Email this article 
