Lexico-morphological means of manipulation in anti-Russian propaganda
https://doi.org/10.18384/2949-5075-2025-1-37-50
Abstract
Aim. To identify and analyze the means of speech influence in anti-Russian propaganda in the Western and Ukrainian media at the lexical and morphemic levels of the linguistic hierarchy.
Methodology. The study comprises the discourse and content analysis of the texts of media articles in English, German and Ukrainian languages. The continuous sampling method reveals linguistic means of manipulation in anti-Russian propaganda at the lexical and morphemic levels. The methods of linguistic description and structural and semantic analysis are used as techniques for studying the manipulative potential of propaganda speech means.
Results. The results of the study have revealed the most frequent and effective means of speech influence in anti-Russian propaganda.
Research implications. The study reveals the influencing potential of speech units within the framework of the presented language levels as applied to the current political situation, which can serve to develop a methodology for identifying speech means of influence and their further use as well as the development of countermeasures against anti-Russian propaganda spread by the Western countries and Ukraine in order to discredit Russia on the world stage.
About the Authors
Yu. A. Kuznetsova
Prince Alexander Nevsky Military University of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Yulia A. Kuznetsova – Senior Lecturer, Department of Foreign Languages
Moscow
E. G. Knyazeva
Prince Alexander Nevsky Military University of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Elena G. Knyazeva – Dr. Sci. (Philology), Prof., Departmental head, Department of Foreign Languages
Moscow
S. V. Shermazanova
Prince Alexander Nevsky Military University of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Svetlana V. Shermazanova – Cand Sci (Sociology), assoc Prof., Prof., Department of Foreign Languages
Moscow
References
1. Vasiljev, A. D. & Podsokhin, F. Y. (2016). Information warfare: linguistic aspect. In: Political linguistics, 2, 10–16 (in Russ.).
2. Kalinin, O. I. & Prikhodko, M. V. (2023). Information war: communicative, discourse, cognitive and cultural-ideological aspects. In: Journal of Military Philology, 1, 23–36 (in Russ.).
3. Kalinin, O. I. (2018). Fundamentals of linguopragmatic research of political image. Moscow: KnoRus (in Russ.).
4. Kulnina, E. A. (2021). Linguistic and stylistic analysis as a means of studying the peculiarities of the composition and comprehension of different types of text. In: Ivzestia of the Volgograd State Pedagogical University, 5 (158), 40–43 (in Russ.).
5. Dittrikh, A. G. (2023). The modern fields of pragmalinguistics research. In: Key Issues of Contemporary Linguistics, 4, 42–52. DOI: 10.18384/2949-5075-2023-4-42-52 (in Russ.).
6. Knyazeva, E. G. & Kurbakova, S. N. (2017). Philosophical and linguistic aspects of research into speech communication. In: Communication in the modern multicultural world: mass communication and linguistic personality. Iss. 5. Moscow: PEARSON publ., pp. 119–128 (in Russ.).
7. Issers, O. S. (2009). Speech influence. Moscow: FLINTA publ. (in Russ.).
8. Barbun, V. V. (2023). Speech influence as a subject of linguistic research. In: Govor: Almanac, 5, 55–57. DOI: 10.48612/govor/dvt5-k92a-z13n (in Russ.).
9. Korshunov, D. S. (2015). The system of language and paradigms of linguistics: problems of correspondence. In: Cherepovets State University Bulletin, 8 (69), 63–67 (in Russ.).
10. Salimova, R. M. (2018). Phonological approaches to study phoneme as a complex linguistic unit. In: Bulletin of the South Ural State University. Series: Linguistics, 15 (1), 16–23. DOI: 10.14529/ling180103 (in Russ.).
11. Degtyareva, A. R. & Osadchiy, M. A. (2012). The euphemism as a tactic of legal and ethical risk avoidance in public communications. In: Bulletin of Kemerovo State University, 2, 128–132 (in Russ.).
12. Moskvin, V. P. (2001). On the varieties of periphrase. In: Russian language in school, 1, 74–77 (in Russ.).
13. Lyskova, T. V. (2012). Substantive periphrases in modern journalistic discourse [dissertation]. Kirov (in Russ.).
14. Gavrilyeva, E. A. (2017). Implementation of the evaluative connotations in the translation of mass media texts. In: Science Journal of Volgograd State University. Young Scientists’ Research, 15, 21–25 (in Russ.).
15. Golub, I. B. (2006). Stylistics of the Russian language. Moscow: Ayris-press publ. (in Russ.).
16. Toropkina, V. A. (2018). Pragmatic aspects of modern media word creation: new formations as a means of speech influence. In: Sociocultural and linguopragmatic aspects of modern word-formation processes. Moscow: FLINTA publ., pp. 156–191 (in Russ.).
Supplementary files
Review
Views:
74
Email this article 
