"Militancy" concept-sphere’s semiolinguistic actualization in advertising discourse

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru

“Militancy” concept-sphere's semiolinguistic actualization in advertising discourse

Daria G. Kurenova, Andrey V. Olyanich



Daria G. Kurenova Kuban State Technological University, Krasnodar, Russia. Andrey V. Olyanich Adyge State University, Maykop, Russia.

Abstract. The paper focuses on the clusters of signs that support semiosis of belligerency and contribute to actualization of the concept-sphere “Militancy” in creolized advertising texts. The objectives of this study were to summarize the global research experience on the semiolinguistic and lingua-cultural phenomenon of advertising in connection with relevant discursive practices in the form of a creolized (poly-coded) text, to describe the Militancy's use as the psychological phenomenon in the semiosis of advertising through the cognitive conglomerate “Militarity”, which is represented as the concept-sphere in the totality of such concepts as “War”, “Weapon”, “Ammunition”, “Hostilities” “Aggression”, “ Demolition”, “Homicide ” (“Termination of Life“).The substantial, figurative and valuable characteristics of the entire concept-sphere were considered in their connection with the constituent concepts. The authors pointed that militarity is a typical characteristic of modern ludic culture and it is actively exploited by advertising creative actors in formation of a semiotically saturated multi-code advertising text by means of an extensive cluster of militaronyms that denotes warfare and incorporates relevant aggressive images into the advertising discourse, thereby reinforcing and broadcasting ideas of achieving victory “in the fronts” of the advertising wars, in the “battles” of brands, or manufacturing companies. It is proved that militancy is reflected in the nominations and names of computer games and is supported in the semiosis of cyber space through using militaronyms (demolitonyms; instrumentatives; impetocaptives; locatives). Militancy in the semiolinguistic and discursive space of cinema advertising is discovered through semiosis of armabellitonyms and demolitonyms.

Key words: attraction, discourse, sign, semiolinguistics, militancy, militaronym, advertisement, semiosis.



ЛИНГВОСЕМИОТИЧЕСКАЯ АКТУАЛИЗАЦИЯ КОНЦЕПТОСФЕРЫ «МИЛИТАРНОСТЬ» В РЕКЛАМНОМ ДИСКУРСЕ. Дария Геннадиевна Куренова Кубанский государственный технологический университет, г. Краснодар, Россия. Андрей Владимирович Олянич Адыгейский государственный университет, г. Майкоп, Россия.

Аннотация. В статье рассмотрены кластеры знаков, поддерживающих семиозис воинственности и способствующих актуализации концептосферы «Милитарность» в креолизованных рекламных текстах. Обобщен мировой опыт изучения лингвосемиотического и лингвокультурного феномена рекламы в совокупности с соответствующими дискурсивными практиками, актуализируемыми в виде креолизованного поликодового текста. Охарактеризованы возможности использования психологического феномена воинственности в семиозисе рекламы посредством когнитивного конгломерата «Милитарность», репрезентированного как концептосфера в совокупности концептов «Война», «Оружие», «Аммуниция», «Военные действия», «Агрессия», «Уничтожение», «Прекращение жизни». Рассмотрены предметные, образные и ценностные характеристики концептосферы «Милитарность» и составляющих ее концептов. Установлено, что идея милитарности активно эксплуатируется создателями рекламы при формировании семиотически насыщенного поликодового рекламного текста, в котором используется обширный кластер знаков-милитаронимов, денотирующих воинственные действия и внедряющих в дискурс рекламы агрессивные образы, тем самым подкрепляя и транслируя идеи достижения победы «на фронтах» рекламной войны, в «битвах» брендов компаний-производителей. Предложена авторская типология знаков-милитаронимов, базирующаяся на их функциях в рекламном тексте (дискурсе). Показано, что милитарность является типичной характеристикой современной человеческой культуры, что рефлектируется в названиях игр и поддерживается в семиозисе киберпространства знаками-милитаронимами: демолитонимами, инструментативами, импетокаптивами, локативами, а в семиозисе рекламы кино знаками-армабеллитонимами и знаками-демолитонимами.

Ключевые слова: аттракция, дискурс, знак, лингвосемиотика, милитарность, милитароним, реклама, семиозис.



Introduction

advertising militarism cyberspace

Advertising is a very important civilizational form of human activity that has a high impact potential on the mentality of consumers of material and spiritual products designed by society. It is a communicative and sociocultural phenomenon, a type of institutional discourse that is widely used in numerous spheres of public life.

The communicative status of advertising discourse is well covered by linguistics. However, it still attracts the attention of researchers as a universal object of a number of linguistic branches, in particular, it is studied as an impact phenomenon in communication theory, in semiolinguistic theory of discourse deployment, presentation theory of discourse, cognitive theory of concept formation, in the theory of structural-and-semiotic organization of an advertising text its dependency on dynamics of social growth stratification, as well as on reinforcing differences according to gender, age and psychological preferences is described. In modern Russian linguistics the advertising discourse has been widely studied from various perspectives, including: the function of forming a media-advertising picture of the world as a structural-semiotic formation and its fulfillment [Rogozina, 2003; Ezhova, 2010]; functionality in the institutional communicative space as a semiotic tool for presentation impact [Olyanich, 2007]; an institutional type of communication in the totality of the relevant constituent features [Olyanich, 2011; Zamyshlyaeva, 2016]; linguistic and manipulative nature in terms of impact on consumer mentality [Vasilenko, 2014]; its influence on linguistic design of product / service images and the semiotization of their value [Ilinova, 2011; Pocheptsov]; communicative strategies and tactics of reinforcing commercial intensions [Lazareva, 2003]. Special attention is given to the semiotics of advertising discourse, in particular, there are some publications that cover mechanisms of advertising signs' formation which lead to creolization of the advertising text and advertising discourse deployment [Elina, 2008]. The semiotics of advertising discourse was also examined in the lingua-didactic aspect [Kobzareva, 2009]. Several principles and technologies as the basis of constructing sub-discourse of semiotics in advertising were described by V.S. Pavlova [Pavlova, 2013]. Yu.K. Pirogova and P.B. Parshin focused on semiotics and linguistics of the advertising text as a product of advertising discourse [Pirogova, Parshin, eds., 2000]. Advertising signs were partially characterized in the works of S.Yu. Tyurina [Tyurina, 2009] and M.A. Filippova [Filippova, 2016]. Semiotic functions of television advertising discourse were studied by N.A. Cherkashina [Cherkashina, 2014].

Semiotics of advertising discourse has long and fruitfully been examined by linguists from other countries. The topic of semiotics in advertising discourse has been precisely analyzed in Britain and the USA. The signs of advertising discourse are lexicographically reflected in the dictionary of media and communications terms published in Oxford by D. Chandler and R. Mandey [Chandler, Munday, 2011]. The idiomatic signs-processives, their actualization in advertising discourse and the effectiveness of their influence on customers were studied by E.A.Ch. Lim, S.H. Ang, Y.H. Lee and S.M. Leong [Lim et al., 2009]. A detailed study of the semiotics of advertising as a component of market communications was carried out by W. Arens, Ch. Arens and M. Weigold [2012]; the integration of advertising signs in modern marketing activities and market processes was studied by G.E. Belch and M.A. Belch [Belch, Belch, 2014]. The mechanisms and algorithms for the semiotic involvement of signs of advertising discourse on the Internet were analyzed by Chinese researchers Chen Yongmin and He Chuan [Chen, He, 2011].

The major attention is given to the ethnic specifics of advertising, when this discourse is described from the point of view of its semiotic and conceptual content on the basis of African advertising [Alozie, 2015]; advertising signs in the mass media discourse are studied in Egyptian media [El-daly, 2011]; the semiotics of African advertising on new technologies in building engineering is being studied by Cameroonian researchers Evangelista Seino and Franklin Agwa [Seino, Agwa, 2016]. There are semiotic studies of advertising discourse in China, in particular, a systematic study on the semiotic analysis of multimodality in Chinese advertising [Xu, 2014].

The researchers are very much interested in the text formation of advertising messages during advertising discourse deployment: for example, L. Downing, a researcher from the Autonomous University of Madrid, typifies signs immersed in advertising texts [Downing, 2000]; her Slovenian colleague M. Dzanic describes the decoding processes of visual signs in text advertising messages [Dzanic, 2013]. The role of advertising signs in formation of consumption discourse is considered and analyzed by B. Kettemann [2013]. Impact signs of advertising discourse as signs of consumer impact are analyzed in the works of A. Flergin [2014] and S.R. Fox [1997]. The semiotics of the impact of advertising messages on consumer consciousness by American newspaper media has attracted the attention of Swedish researcher S. Karlsson from Linnus University [Karlsson, 2015].The Greek semiologist E. Kourdis [Kourdis] drew attention to the inter-semiotic broadcast of `plastic visual signs' in an advertising discourse. Equally high is the interest of foreign scientists in cognitive mechanisms involved in advertising discourse formation and exploiting signs that secretly affect the subconscious; such mechanisms were studied by M. Najafian and A. Dabaghi [2017]. Finally, an attempt by the lingua-semiotic study of advertising discourse was undertaken in the bachelor's work by an Icelandic researcher M.B. Wejher from the University of Iceland [Wejher, 2015].

The above enumerated varieties of aspects and focuses on advertising discourse studies reflect social and cultural importance of advertising practice and prove the necessity of defining new priorities in investigating semiotic potential of the advertising discourse. The objectives of this paper include identification, description and semiolinguistic analysis of verbal and non-verbal signs that actualize one socially valuable phenomenon the linguistic-cognitive and lingua-cultural phenomenon of militancy in advertising communication. The militancy is understood as 1) tendency to fighting or warring; 2) having a combative character; 3) being aggressive, especially in the service of a cause (American Heritage Dictionary).

It is regrettable, but today's linguistic studies fail to consider the framework of a cognitively mastered dualistic militaristic model of human existence, that is staying in a constant struggle, opposed to a short-term peaceful (non-military, non-conflict) state. It activates the desire to possess values or their representatives through capture and conquest, which, accordingly, is reflected both in the predatory intention itself and in the intention to display it by linguistic means. This paradigm of the world is reflected in the language of a man-warrior, and, accordingly, the “civilian” conceptual sphere takes on a militaristic character and becomes dualistically oppositional, dividing being into “own / foreign”, and communicants within universal being into “friends” and “strangers”. Indeed, the statement of Marcus Aurelius “Vivere militare est” (“To live is to fight”) is still relevant!

It seems that the point of view of G. Maksapetyan about the fact that the military language as a key modeling language for warriors, whose primary users they are (warrior's language), and the dual-antagonistic militaristic model, as the basic World model for warriors whose primary carriers they are (warrior model), in many respects determine various sides of social existence the primary or priority life ideology and strategy of the warrior (i.e. the corresponding type of thinking and behavior in general), and actual behavior of a warrior in other, non-military situations, up to the practical application of his own military experience in other circumstances, including the field of interpersonal relations [Maksapetyan]. In other words, the military looks at the world through the eyes of the military nominates. The world described with militaristic linguistic means, thus, extrapolating his specific military discourse to universal human discourse, introducing the spirit of struggle into life and communication, involving the concept of war, which has been studied for a long time by linguistics (see works: [Eccles, 1965; Ermus, Salum, 2017; GalOr, Giesen, 2007; Kotzsch, 1956; Kryachko, 2007; Margolis, 1980; Turney-High, 1949; Volkova, 2009]). The interest in it does not fade, as evidenced by modern semiolinguistic studies (see works: [Gisbertz, 2018; Golubenko, 2017; Razma, 2019; Teschke, 2017]).

The concept of WAR is one of the most important elements of the linguistic culture of mankind precisely because of its total operability: the conflict in life determines the conflict in communication, because a person always considers it necessary and justified to strive to fulfill his needs at the expense of his social environment, at the expense of his personal environment and, accordingly, in conflict with the environment. The biological confrontation of living beings turns into a social confrontation within the framework of the opposition “friend or foe”, which immediately affects the communicative space created by man. The existence is so paradoxical that even the demand for peace is realized through war and is accordingly reflected in a peaceful discourse, cf. metaphorical figures: the struggle for peace, labor battles, battle for the harvest, fight for life, fight for democracy, labor feats, labor victories, struggle with the elements, etc.

The concept of WAR is realized in an aesthetically structured semiolinguistic space and has a long presentation (aesthetic) history. Thus, Alexey Levinson notes that the army is “the richest in aesthetically designed signs with rigidly fixed meanings” [Levinson, 1999, p. 15]. Military heraldry, insignia, banners, orders, etc. are intended for external observers (it is believed that the enemy, but practically, of course “his” civilians); there are also a number of utilitarian, non-sign items related to military life, which, nevertheless, become signs and symbols. There used to be many military symbols in the past, and in modern times they are still silhouettes of famous ships, popular brands of military vehicles, weapon, etc. In that respect, we may mention one of the objects with a unique semiotic biography the Kalashnikov machine gun, which is presented as an element in the Coat of Arms of one of the African countries. Known for its characteristic outlines by hundreds of millions people, it is not only a marker of the “spread of Soviet influence”, but a sign of mass culture for marking belonging to communities and people of a certain warehouse.

Some of the objects are `intimate-military', because they are not considered militant signs from the outside, but they are not utter secret objects hidden from strangers. These are both technical vehicles and devices, documents, premises, etc., specially protected by military secrets, and also the details of uniforms and some military items. They are all significantly different from their “civilian” counterparts (if any), and this significance is addressed not to civilians as such, but to representatives of regular military personnel and undergoing military service.

The main feature of the WAR concept implementation in the communicative space is its virtual nature: war, with a generally negative attitude by society, is presented to civilians as a necessary means of acquiring peace, and the person himself undergoes a series of mental transformations role metamorphoses or transformations in connection with his participation in a military conflict. A peaceful peasant takes up the pitchfork and becomes a warrior, the civilian population goes underground and turns into partisans, the secretary of the regional committee turns into a commander, a representative of a peaceful ethnic group (for example, a Chechen) becomes a fighter or `warrior of Allah'.

A number of researchers [Barsky, 1997; Becton, 1999; Kara-Murza, 2005; Makarov, 2003; Pietro, 1982; Shah, 2003; Vodak, 1997; Zhukov; Zvereva; et al.] note this social implementation of the WAR concept in modern communication practice, calling its realization a military discourse. However, although the linguacultural, lingua-cognitive and semiolinguistic significance of this concept and militancy as a sociocultural phenomenon (category) have been distinguished, there are many more aspects to be investigated, in particular, the issue of penetration of this concept into other discursive spheres.



Materials and methods

advertising militarism cyberspace

This article focuses on the means of the WAR concept representation in relation to advertising communication and advertising discourse. For our research we used advertising creolized texts extracted from the Internet (mass media sites, advertising pages, blogs, advertising on the YouTube network), and scripts for television advertising texts.

To achieve the objectives of this paper, we proposed to apply a research algorithm that T.N. Astafurova and A.V. Olyanich have determined as a model `Sign Word Text / Discourse'. The authors state that this algorithm offers an accomplished description of sign and symbol actualization through their qualitative characterization when they are involved in the communication process. They also believe that it is possible to supply the analysis of sign meaning with undertaking the semantics interpretation of lexical nominations and other verbal complexes (set phrases, phraseological units, paremia) while they reflect some particular idea in the communicative environment and the conditions for updating the meaning of signs corresponding to a given need, in particular, it is proposed to investigate the actual process of specific discourse deployment [Astafurova, Olyanich, 2014, p. 21].

In the course of studying advertising content on various sites, we found that the advertising discourse mainly uses the semiolinguistic creative potential of the subject, figurative and value components of the Militancy concept-sphere and its central concept of WAR in connection with the sub-concepts WEAPON, AMMUNITION, HOSTILITY, AGGRESSION, DESTRUCTION, HOMICIDE (Termination of Life).

The subject component of the analyzed concept-sphere is represented by the definition of its name:

“Militancy: The fact of being active, determined, and often willing to use force; the quality or state of being militant or engaged in warfare or combat; being aggressively active (as in a cause)” (Militant).

The substantive constituents of the conceptsphere are presented in the definitions of the concepts and sub-concepts that comprise it:

“War: A state of open, armed, often prolonged conflict carried on between nations, states, or parties; the period of such conflict; the techniques and procedures of war; military science; a condition of active antagonism or contention; a concerted effort or campaign to combat or put an end to something considered injurious” (American Heritage Dictionary);

“Weapon: An instrument of attack or defense in combat, as a gun, missile, sword or explosives, such as bomb, grenade, mines etc.; any means used to defend against or defeat another” (American Heritage Dictionary);

“Ammunition: All projectiles, such as bullets and shot, together with their fuses and primers, that can be fired from guns or otherwise propelled; nuclear, biological, chemical, or explosive materiel, such as rockets or grenades, that are used as weapons; an object used as a missile in offense or defense: Rocks were my only ammunition against the bear; a means of attacking or defending an argument, thesis, or point of view” (American Heritage Dictionary);

“Hostilities: The state of being hostile, antagonistic or enmity (mutually hatred); hostile acts of war; overt warfare” (American Heritage Dictionary);

“Aggression: The act of initiating hostilities or invasion; the practice or habit of launching attacks; hostile or destructive behavior or actions” (American Heritage Dictionary);

“Demolition: The act or process of wrecking or destroying, especially destruction by explosives” (American Heritage Dictionary);

“Homicide: The killing of one person by another; a person who kills another person” (American Heritage Dictionary).

An important addition to understanding the subject characteristics of this sub-concept is the following meaningful comment:

“Homicide, in criminal law, killing of a human being by the act, procurement, or negligence of another. Homicide is a generic term, comprehending not only the crimes of murder and manslaughter but also the taking of a human life under circumstances justifying the act or in a sense excusing its commission. Thus, the killing of an enemy on the battlefield as an act of war is considered justifiable homicide, and killing, without malice, to save one's own life or the lives of one's dependents is termed excusable homicide. The penalties for unlawful homicide vary from state to state and range from the death sentence to various terms of imprisonment” (Encarta...).

Cogitating about the philosophy and purpose of advertising, we will inevitably come to the concept of militancy as militarity, which in advertising communication comes down to its basic goals and objectives to “conquer” the market, “capture” territories of influence, “capture” as much as possible more potential consumers of advertised goods and services, “fight to the death” for each client, “destroy the enemy” (a competitor). The metaphorical repertoire of verbal militaristic character is quite suitable for the implementation of such goals and objectives, as evidenced by the above military verbal rhetoric (to conquer, capture, fight to death, destroy the enemy).

The idea of militancy has been widely tested by an advertising creative actors in the semiotics of a poly-code (creolized) advertising text as a product of advertising discourse. To actualize it today, an extensive cluster of signs-militaronyms is used to nominate military actions and provide relevant aggressive images, semiotizing the ideas of achieving victory “in the fronts” of the advertising war, in the “battles” of brands, manufacturing companies, etc.

Below we are presenting some findings on functional typology of militant signs (ammunitonyms, instrumentatives, armabellitonym, metumortonyms, etc.) and giving explanations on their actualization in some types of polycode texts used in modern advertising discourse (commercial and social advertising, gaming cyberspace and movie advertising). We assume that the sphere of advertising signs-militaronyms may be presented as a cluster of signs that coincide and differ in their functions in the advertising text (discourse).

The function of nominating unconditional confidence in the invincibility of a brand manufacturer company, in the super-popularity and guaranteed redemption of the brand itself due to its properties needed by consumers, is performed:

by using signs-ammunitonyms, that denote the explosive (sensational) nature of the advertised brand, its creators and owners, for example, the use of the ammunitonym Bomb in the name of an Internet agency (“Digital Bomb” is a close-knit team of Internet marketers, programmers and designers); in the name of the super-popular in July 2018 mobile communication tariff “Bomb” of the Ukrainian operator Lifecell (Bomb tariff: buy for only 60 hryvnias'); stating the cheapness of the popular brand of KFC (KFC Wings: price is a bomb!);

by using signs-instrumentatives in the form of signs-armabellitonyms as weapons (from Latin: Arma bellica military weapons) to denote the power, invincibility and high quality of the advertised brand, for example, NIKE PRO ULTIMATE: secret weapon of Cristiano Ronaldo (Nike clothing and accessories); A powerful weapon against pain that hits exactly the target (a medicine painkiller Solpadein); “Shustov” (a cognac brand); the armabellitonym Arms actualizes a pun based on the polysemy of the Russian word vyderzhka in the ad Vyderzhka is our main weapon, where vyderzhka} is the ability to endure pain and adversity (stamina), and vyderzhka2 achievement of the noble strength of the drink over time (aging). In the creolized advertisement of the perfume company Yardley the images of tubes of lipstick in the cartridge tape are fixed and accompanied by the text Lipstick is a female weapon with the armabellitonym weapon.

Gastronomic products are often advertised in the creolized texts with the help of signsmilitaronyms, for example, the explosiveness and unsurpassed sharpness of Tabasco pepper sauce, which the United States has been producing for more than 150 years, is denoted with the help of a visual sign-armabellitonym that indicates the World War II lighter bomb known as the Molotov cocktail with a homemade wick inserted into it. The text supports the semiotic aggressiveness of the visual sign: Explode Your Sense: Little Bottle, Big Flavor.

Social advertising quite often actualizes militaronyms in death warnings to underline the idea that life often follows wartime laws. The function of preventive avoidance of mortality from rash acts in social advertising is performed with the images of murders that might cause consumer's fear. A person's instinctive desire to avoid death is fueled in social advertising with the help of signs-metumortonyms (from Latin Metu mortis fear of death). For example, in the advertising of the Health Alerts app. (USA), a mobile application which warns customers of dangerous products, the observance of necessary hygiene requirements, the harmfulness of a number of habits are transferred by the image of a grenade attached to the door handle and is accompanied with the inscription: Germs can be deadly. Avoid outbreaks with Health Alerts app. It contains a visual sign-metumortonym, supported by a verbal warning of the mortal danger of ordinary microbes.

The nest example shows how the function of preventive avoidance of mortality from rash acts in social advertising is updated in the following advertising text directed against driving while drunk. The visual part of the poster (the semiotic body of the complex sign-metumortonym) is a stylized image of a pistol, the muzzle of which consists of many beer bottles, the shutter with a hammer, ejector and fuse is a beer opener, and the handle is a stylized car body abundance that had had an accident. The verbal component of this complex sign warns the consumer: It's like killing yourself. Don't drink and drive (Sotsialnaya reklama...).

The function of the preventive use of information as a weapon is provided in social advertising with the help of another set of militaronyms, with signs-protectives and signspreventives included. The online resource of Canadian Journalists for Free Expression (Canadian Journalists...) launched a special company in order to pay attention to the ability of journalism to be a weapon and that journalists themselves are in danger, when they try to convey information to people. The company's feature was a variety of photo and video equipment, laid out in the form of weapons. So, a visual sign-protective, which is a collage of a tripod for a camera and an automatic rifle, is accompanied by a verbal warning (signpreventive) Information is Ammunition; creolized texts containing collaged visual signspreventives (a reporter's pencil sprouting from the base of an artillery shell; a mouthpiece “sprouting” from a gun's barrel), is semiotically supported by the verb Words kill wars, indicating the strength of a journalistic word that can stop war and violence.

The semiotic space of social advertising is replete with protective content, supported mainly by military images, denoting at the same time both the implacable desire of mankind for selfdestruction and a public appeal to stop this process. Thus, the sign-demolitive “craving for sweets” is presented in creolized texts of social advertising as a semiotic indicator of a formidable disease (diabetes), and its visualization is provided by stylized images of a knife and a chocolate pistol (signsinstrumentatives in the form of ammunitonyms and armabellitonyms) (Behance).

Militarity as a phenomenon of modern human culture is widely represented in the products of gaming cyberspace. There are billions of modern militarized computer games, and their number is growing exponentially. The content of these games is literally riddled with military semiolinguistics supported by signs-militaronyms, which can be typified as:

- nominations that make names for games, acting as signs-demolitonyms, i.e. signs of destruction and destruction: “ Terminator ”, “Mortal Kombat”, “Deadly Weapon”, “Total War: Warhammer”, “Command & Conquer: Red Alert”, “OpenXcom (UFO: Enemy Unknown)”;

- nominations that make names for games (signs-instrumentatives) (“World of Tanks”, “World of Warships”, “ Invasion Machine”, “Falcon 4.0”, “Battlefleet Gothic: Armada ”, “Warhammer 40 000: Dawn of War 3”, “Conqueror's Blade ”, “ UBOAT”, “AirMech Strike”, “Gas Guzzlers Extreme”);

- nominations that name games acting as signsimpetocaptives (from Latin Impetu captis attack and capture), for example: “Insurgency: Sandstorm”; “Blitzkrieg 3”; Battlefield “World of Warfare Robots”; “Assault Squad-2”;

- nominations like game names act as signslocatives (“Total War: Three Kingdoms”; “Starcraft II”; “Total War: Arena”; “Navy Field 2”; “eRepublik”; “Desert Operations”').

In the linguistic-semiotic space of cinema advertising, the consumer often encounters visualization of military weapons as a degree indicator of attraction to a film. The semiosis of the movie poster is designed to arouse interest, to attract the maximum number of customers to cinema halls, thereby increasing the profit from movie screening. So, on the poster dedicated to the movie “Saving Private Ryan” (1998), visual signs-armabellitonyms (images of rifles and grenades) are related with signs-demolitonyms (explosions of infantry mines) (Not to be confused with demolition signs that actualize a person's craving for self-destruction; signs-demolitonyms actualize in the semiosis of a militarily-oriented advertising space the idea of destruction brought from without). Thus, the poster of the “American Sniper” movie (2016) is a creolized text, the semiotic body of which is nothing but a complex signmilitaronym, symbolizing the power of the American military machine, it consists of a signarmabellitonym (sniper rifle) and a sign-military transportonym (indicating a military Hummer car for transporting marines). The visual signs are accompanied by an inscription text that updates the idea of unsurpassed skill of an American warrior (“Navy SEAL sniper Chris Kyle's pinpoint accuracy saves countless lives on the battlefield and turns him into a legend'”') (American Sniper).



Conclusion

Summing up, we note the following.

The subject, figurative, and value (anti-value) parameters of the Militancy concept-sphere have been thoroughly lingua-semiotically mastered by advertising creative actors for composing a polycode (creolized) advertising text as a product of an advertising discourse that is very powerful in terms of its impact on the consumer. To actualize this type of concept-sphere, today a cluster of signs-militaronyms is used to nominate militant actions and carry relevant aggressive images that would deliver the hidden meanings of achieving victory in advertising goods and social services (`on the fronts' of the advertising war, in the `battles' of brands, manufacturing companies, etc.), while simultaneously creating the ground for the formation of value or anti-value ideas about militancy as one of the `dark' sides of human psychology.

As the findings showed, the advertising discourse actively exploits the semiolinguistic creative potential of the subject, figurative and value components of the MILITANCY concept-sphere and its central concept WAR in relation to associated sub-concepts WEAPONS, AMMUNITION, HOSTILITIES, AGGRESSION, DEMOLITION, HOMICIDE (Termination of Life).

Semiolinguistic actualization of the idea of militancy as a creative way of advertising is carried out with the help of a fairly extensive cluster of signs-militaronyms and related to it others that perform a number of functions.

In commercial and social advertising the following functions are discovered:

- nominating unconditional confidence in the invincibility in advertising some brand manufacturer company, in its super-popularity and guaranteed redemption (with ammunitonyms denoting the explosive sensational nature of the advertised brand, its creators and owners, or signinstrumentatives, as a sign-armabellitonym Weapon, denoting power, indomitability to prove high quality of the advertised brand);

- preventing avoidance of mortality from reckless acts in social advertising (performed with the help of metumortonyms denoting images of murders, causing consumer fear and exploiting a person's instinctive desire to avoid death), preventing and protecting against danger with armabellitonyms.

Militancy as a phenomenon of modern human culture is widely represented in nominations and titles of games in gaming cyberspace, typified in the form of demolitonyms (signs of destruction and destruction), signs-instrumentatives, signsimpetocaptives (signs of attack and capture), signslocatives (signs of territories and scenes of hostilities). In the semiolinguistic and discursive space of cinema advertising, the visualization of military weapons in movie posters is held by armabellitonyms (rifle and grenade images) combined with demolitonyms (infantry mine explosions), thus attracting attention of potential movie audience.



References

1. Alozie E.C., 2015. Semiotics and Advertising: A Conceptual Discourse. Capitalist Realism in Africa: Realities and Myths in Advertising. Bentham Books, pp. 25-33.

2. Arens W., Arens Ch., Weigold M., 2012. Contemporary Advertising and Integrated Marketing Communications. McGraw-Hill Education. 722 p.

3. Astafurova T.N., Olyanich A.V., 2014. Vitalnye potrebnosti: ot znaka k diskursu [Vital Needs: From Sign to Discourse]. Pastukhov A.G., ed. Zhanry i tipy teksta v nauchnom i mediynom disburse: mezhvuz. sb. nauch. tr. [Genres and Types of Text in Scientific and Media Discourse. Inter-University Collection of Scientific Papers]. Orel, Orlovskiy gosudarstvennyy institute kultury, pp. 19-33.

4. Barsky R.F.,1997. Discourse Analysis. London, Sage publications. 340 p.

5. Becton Julius Jr., 1999. The Military and Public Behavior. Public Talk: Online Journal of Discourse Leadership. URL: https://www.upenn.edu/pnc/public.html.

6. Belch G.E., Belch M.A., 2014. Advertising and Promotion: An Integrated Marketing Communications Perspective. McGraw-Hill-Irwin. 871 p.

7. Chandler D., Munday R., 2011. A Dictionary of Media and Communication. Oxford, Oxford University Press. 480 p.

8. Chen Yongmin, He Chuan, 2011. Paid Placement: Advertising and Search on the Internet. The Economic Journal, no. 06-02, pp. 309-328.

9. Cherkashina N.A., 2014. «Zvezda kak rolevaya model»: nekotorye semioticheskie osobennosti rossiyskoy televizionnoy reklamy [“Star as a Role Model”: Some Semiotic Features of Russian TV Commercials Advertising]. Sovremennyy diskursanaliz, iss. 11. URL: http://discourseanalysis.org/ada11/st78.shtml.

10. Downing L.H., 2000. Text World Creation in Advertising Discourse. Revista Alicantina de Estudios Ingleses, no. 13, pp. 68-88.

11. Dzanic M., 2013. The Semiotics of Contemporary Advertising Messages: Decoding Visuals. Jezikoslovje, no. 14 (2-3), pp. 475-485.

12. Eccles H., 1965. Military Concepts and Philosophy. New Brunswick, Rutgers Univ. Press. XVIII, 339 p.

13. El-daly H.M., 2011. Towards an Understanding of the Discourse of Advertising: Review of Research with Special Reference to the Egyptian Media. African Nebula, iss. 3, pp. 25-47.

14. Elina E.A., 2008. Semiotika reklamy [Semiotics of Advertising]. Moscow, Ay Pi Er Media Publ. 140 p.

15. Ermus A., Salum K., 2017. Changing Concepts of War: Russia's New Military Doctrine and the Concept of Hybrid Warfare. URL: https://www.ksk.edu.ee/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/changingconcepts-of-war-koolon-russia%e2%80%99snew-military-doctrine-and-the-concept-ofhybrid-warfare.pdf.

16. Ezhova E.N., 2010. Media-reklamnaya kartina mira: struktura, semiotika, kanaly translyatsii: avtoref dis. ... d-ra filol. nauk [Media and Advertising Picture of the World: Structure, Semiotics, Broadcast Channels. Dr. philol. sci. abs. diss.]. Voronezh. 46 p.

17. Filippova M.A., 2016. Yazykovaya spetsifika reklamnogo diskursa [Language Specificity of Advertising Discourse]. Molodoy uchenyy [Young Scientist], no. 28 (132), part 11, pp. 1033-1036.

18. Flergin A., 2014. Language of Persuasion: A Discourse Approach to Advertising Language. Research Journal of Recent Sciences, vol. 3, pp. 62-68.

19. Fox S.R., 1997. The Mirror Makers: A History of American Advertising and Its Creators. Chicago, University of Illinois Press. 416 p.

20. Gal-Or N., Giesen K.G., 2007. The Concept of War. Peace Review. A Journal of Social Justice, vol. 19, iss. 2, pp. 149-156. DOI: 10.1080/10402650701353240.

21. Gisbertz Ph., 2018. The Concepts of“Waf' and “Peace” in the Context of Transnational Terrorism. Archiv fьr Rechtsund Sozialphilosphie, vol. 104, no. 1, pp. 315 (13). DOI: https://doi.org/10.25162/arsp-2018-0001.

22. Golubenko E.A., 2017. Kontsept «voyna» v sovremennom angliyskom yazyke [The “war” Concept in Modern English]. Vestnik RUDN Seriya: Russkiy i inostrannye yazyki i metodika ikh prepodavaniya [RUDN Journal of Russian and Foreign Languages Research and Teaching], vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 447-457.

23. Illyinova E.Yu., 2011. Reklamnyy diskurs: tsennosti, obrazy, assotsiatsii [Advertising Discourse: Values, Images, Associations]. Reklamnyy diskurs i reklamnyy tekst [Advertising Discourse and Advertising Text]. Moscow, Flint Publ., Nauka Publ., pp. 38-56.

24. Kara-Murza S.G., 2005. Manipulyatsiya soznaniem [Manipulation of Consciousness]. Moscow, Eksmo Publ. 832 p.

25. Karlsson S., 2015. Advertising as Discourse: A Study of Print Advertisements Published in The New Yorker. Sweden, Linnsus University. 26 p.

26. Kettemann B., 2013. Semiotics of Advertising and the Discourse of Consumption. AAA: Arbeiten aus Anglistik und Amerikanistik, vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 53-67.

27. KobzarevaT.Yu., 2009. Semiotika reklamy [Semiotics of Advertising]. Moscow, Izd-vo Rossiyskogo gosudarstvennogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. 35 p.

28. Kotzsch L., 1956. The Concept of War in Contemporary History and International Law. Geneva, Librairie E. Droz Publ. 310 p.

29. Kourdis E., 2014. Intersemiotic Translation in Advertising Discourse: Plastic Visual Signs in Primary Function in Communication. Semiotics and Visual Communication: Concepts and Practices. Cambridge, Cambridge Publishing Company, pp.72-85. URL: https://www. researchgate.net/publication/261064092.

30. Kryachko V.B., 2007. Ponyatiynye kharakteristik ikontsepta «voyna» v angliyskoy i russkoy lingvokulturakh [Conceptual Characteristics of the Concept of “War" in the English and Russian Linguistic Cultures]. Izvestiya Volgogradskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta [Ivzestia of the Volgograd State PedagogicalUniversity], no. 2 (20), pp. 26-30.

31. Lazareva E.A., 2003. Reklamnyy diskurs: strategii i taktiki [Advertising Discourse: Strategies and Tactics]. Lingvistika: Byulleten Uralskogo lingvisticheskogo obshchestva [Linguistics: Bulletin of the Ural Linguistic Society]. Yekaterinburg, vol. 9, pp. 82-121.

32. Levinson A., 1999. Ob estetike nasiliya (armiya I obshchestvo v SSSR / Rossii za poslednie 10 let) [On the Aesthetics of Violence: The Army and Society in the USSR / Russia over the Past 10 Years]. Neprikosnovennyy zapas. Debaty o politike I kulture, no. 2 (4), pp. 34-52. URL: http:// lit.lib. ru/d/dedovshchina/levinson-01. shtml.

33. Lim E.A.Ch., Ang S.H., Lee Y.H., Leong S.M., 2009. Processing Idioms in Advertising Discourse: Effects of Familiarity, Literality, and Compositionality on Consumer Ad Response. Journal of Pragmatics, vol. 41, iss. 9, pp. 17781793. URL: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0378216608002506?via%3Dihub/.

34. Makarov M.L., 2003. Osnovy teorii diskursa [Fundamentals of the Theory of Discourse]. Moscow, Gnosis Publ. 280 p.

35. Maksapetyan A.G., 2001. Yazyk i metafizika: monografiya [Language and Metaphysics. Monograph]. URL: http: //www.philosophy.ru.

36. Margolis J., 1980. The Concepts of War and Peace. Social Theory and Practice, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 209-226. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5840/soctheorpract19806220.

37. Najafian M., Dabaghi, A., 2017. Hidden Language of Advertising: A Semiotic Approach. Proceedings of the International Conference: Doing Research in Applied Linguistics. Thonburi, Bangkok, pp. 20-26. URL: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/f977/eefe6e79d79709388868296d21db39a7c81e.pdf.

38. Olyanich A.V., 2007. Prezentatsionnaya teoriya diskursa [Presentation Theory of Discourse]. Moscow, Gnosis Publ. 407 p.

39. Olyanich A.V., 2011. Reklamnyy diskurs i ego konstitutivnye priznaki [Advertising Discourse and Its Constitutive Features]. Reklamnyy diskurs i reklamnyy tekst [Advertising Discourse and Advertising Text]. Moscow, Flint Publ., Nauka Publ., pp. 10-37.

40. Pavlova V.S., 2013. Vozmozhnosti primeneniya printsipov I tekhnologiy semiotiki v graficheskom dizayne reklamy [Possibilities of the Applying the Principles and Technologies of Semiotics in Graphic Design Advertising]. Vestnik Zabaykalskogo gosudarstvennog ouniversiteta [Transbaikal State University Journal], no. 3 (94), pp. 59-65.

41. Pietro J., 1982. Linguistics and the Professions. NewJersey, Norwood, pp. 83-97.

42. PirogovaYi.K., Parshin P.B., eds., 2000. Reklamnyy tekst: semiotika i lingvistika: monografiya [Advertising Text: Semiotics and Linguistics. Monograph]. Moscow, Izd-vo Mezhdunarodnogo institute reklamy, Izdatelskiy dom «Grebennikov». 268 p.

43. Pocheptsov G.G. Teoriya kommunikatsii [Theory of Communication]. URL: http://niv.ru/doc/ communications/pocheptsov/index.htm.

44. Razma G., 2019. A Modern Warfare Paradigm: Reconsideration of Combat Power Concept. Journal of Security and Sustainability, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 435452. URL: https://doi.org/10.9770/jssi. 2019.8.3(12).

45. Rogozina I.V., 2003. Media-kartina mira: kognitivnosemioticheskiy aspekt: dis. ... kand. filol. nauk [Media Picture of the World: Cognitive-Semiotic Aspect. Dr. philol. sci. diss.]. Barnaul. 430 p.

46. Seino E., Agwa F., 2016. Stylistics Analysis in Advertising Discourse: A Case of the Dangote Cement Advertisement in Bamenda Cameroon. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, vol. 7, no. 6, pp. 105-112.

47. Shah A., 2005. “War, Propaganda and the Media”. Global Issues. URL: https://www.globalissues.org/article/157/war-propaganda-and-the-media.

48. Teschke B., 2017. Carl Schmitt's Concepts of War: A Categorical Failure. Meierhenrich J., Simons O., eds. The Oxford Handbook of Carl Schmitt. Oxford, Oxford University Press, pp. 77-97.

49. Turney-High H., 1949. Primitive War: Its Practice and Concepts. Columbia, Univ. South Carolina Press. 277 p.

50. Tyurina S.Yu., 2009. O ponyatiyakh «reklamnyy diskurs» I «reklamnyy tekst» [About the Concepts of Advertising Discourse and Advertising Text]. Vestnik Ivanovskogo gosudarstvennogo energeticheskogo universiteta [Vestnik of Ivanovo State Power Engineering University], no. 1, pp.75-77.

51. Vasilenko A.P, 2014. Reklamnyy diskurs: ot soderzhaniya teksta k manipulyatsii potrebitelem [Advertising Discourse: From Text Content to Consumer Manipulation]. Melikyan VYu., ed. Yazyk i pravo: aktualnye problem vzaimodeystviya: materialy IVVseros. nauch.-prakt. konf [Language and Law:

52. Current Problems of Interaction. Proceedings of the 4thAll-Russian Scientific and Practical Conference]. Rostov-on-Don, Donizdat, iss. 4, pp. 146-153.

53. Vodak R., 1997. Yazyk. Diskurs. Politika [Language. Discourse. Politics].Volgograd, Peremena Publ. 137 p.

54. Volkova S.B., 2009. Kontsept «military service» i ego sostavlyayushchie v khudozhestvennom diskurse [The Concept of “Military Service” and Its Components in Art Discourse]. Yazyk. Soznanie. Kommunikatsiya: sb. st. [Language, Consciousness, Communication. Collection of Articles]. Moscow, MAKS Press, iss. 39, pp. 87-94.

55. Wejher M.B., 2015. The Central Role of Language in the Semiotics of Advertising. University of Iceland. 28 p. URL: https://pdfslide.net/ documents/the-central-role-of-language-in-thesemiotics-of-barbara-wejherpdfthe-central.html.

56. Xu D., 2014. A Social Semiotic Analysis of the Multimodality of an Advertisement. Chinese Semiotic Studies, vol. 6, iss. 1, pp. 154-165.

57. Zamyshlyaeva Yu. S., 2016. Reklamnyy diskurs kak vid institutsionalnogo diskursa [Advertising Discourse as a Type of Institutional Discourse]. Chelyabinskiy gumanitariy, no. 4 (37), pp. 27-30.

58. Zhukov I.V Voyna v diskurse sovremennoy pressy [The War in the Discourse of the Modern Press]. URL: http://www.faq.at/rusjaz.

59. Zvereva G., 2005. Chechenskaya voyna v diskursakh massovoy kultury Rossii: formy reprezentatsii vraga [The Chechen War in the Discourses of Mass Culture of Russia: Forms of Representation of the Enemy]. Gudkov L. Obrazvraga [Image of the Enemy]. URL: http:/ /library.khpg.org/files/docs/1409672n2.pdf

60. American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language. Electronic Version Dictionary. Houghton Mifflin Company, 1996.

61. American Sniper. IMDb. URL: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2179136/?ref_=adv_li_tt.

62. Behance. URL: https://www.behance.net/gaUery/438465/United-Way-AHA-Anti-Obesity-Campaign.

63. Canadian Journalists for Free Expression. URL: https://www.cjfe.org.

64. Encarta Desk Encyclopedia. 1996-1997. Microsoft Corporation.

65. Militant. Merriam-Webster. URL: https://www.merriamwebster.com/dictionary/militant.

66. Sotsialnaya reklamaprotiv pyanstva za rulem [Social Advertising Against Drunkenness at the Wheel]. URL: http://akpspb.ru/blog/reklama_i_bezopasnost/socialnaya_reklamaprotiv_pyanstva_za_rulem/18-256.

Размещено на Allbest.ru

...