Functional Aspects of Language Games in Political Discourse

Abstract

The article analyzes various aspects of communication in political discourse. One of its major arguments says that politicians who disrespect major rules of communication violate the basic principles of interaction, namely in that they introduce their own new patterns of language games. Adequate principles of interaction are an indispensable requirement for political discourse as such in that they guarantee efficient communication and help avoid conflicts. Such principles are based on general rules of communication. The article underlines the importance of a structual logical chain of political communiction along the following lines: intention – strategy – tactic – means of realization. In general, human beings acquire languages according to basic linguistic forms and models. Тhe Austrian philosopher L. Wittgenstein introduced the term “language game”. In a similar vein, the Swiss linguist F. de Saussure established a link between language and the sphere of games in that he compared the systems of natural languages to the rules of chess. The language games of political discourse are represented by imperative intentions, emotive senses and various means of the manipulative use of linguistic units; they usually focus on factors of impact. The article discusses the intentions of language games as a point of activization of cognitive and communicative activities for the achievement of goals related to strategies and tactics of politicians. The nature of these intentions exerts impact on the realization of the linguo-pragmatic potential of the functions of perlocutionary linguistic acts (requests, orders, etc.). The perlocutionary functions of language are the basis of political manipulation which manifests itself as a systematic combination of traditional political instruments with contemporary communicative approaches to various aspects of the manipulative impact on political consciousness and behavior. Average citizens who react to political discourse automatically take part in broader intellectual and communivative activities; they also demonstrate their own participation in political processes. Therefore political discourse has an impact on the formation and development of civic society and its relations to the state. As a rule, politicians develop their communicative strategies along programs and platforms that are designed for central subjects of the political process (the government, political parties and leaders). This limited circle of addressees causes a certain lack of efficiency that should be corrected inasmuch as the ultimate goal of any communicative strategy should be a certain change of the addressee’s worldviews. Political tactic is an important component of political communicative technologies. Political communicative activities include various aspects of tactical measures and methods that start on a local level and go viral according to strategically devised lines. In this setting, specific political texts with their particular pragmatic implications appear to be units of political discourse with their own semiotic structure. Politicians create messages based on their world views and ideologies. The role of the addressee should be understood as a priority in political communicative acts that are usually characterized by polemics, a high degree of axiology and persuasiveness. The article focusses on linguistic tools that politicians use in order to manipulate the electorate. To influence the electorate, politicians use manipulative linguistic items on the lexical, idiomatic and metaphorical level. In political discourse, such linguistic items often turn into stereotypical linguistic tools of particular politicians that leave their mark on the electorate’s ideas of their values and beliefs. The article emphasizes the importance of the use of “strong” linguistic items that help create, in the best case, an image of the politician that includes humoristic associations with his or her individual professional language.