Provocative false slogans and reality

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Provocative false slogans and reality

Tkachenko Nataliia Dmitrivna Candidate of filology

Abstract

The complex studies of communication respond to the urgent need of developing people's consciousness for the sake of progress and peace. The object of the article was the provocative false slogans of the Russian military junta. The aim of the article was to reveal the false pragmatic and psychological semantics of the slogans as communication samples. The complex methods of the false slogans study combined linguistic and textual comparative, descriptive, interpretative, explanatory, classification methods and some experimental methods of analysis. Suggested here is the author's analysis of the mental dynamic ant static semantics.

The analysis revealed the cognitive pragmatical and psychological semantics of the false slogans contrasting the true verbal and nonverbal information about the war and falsifying the eternal moral values. The explicit and implicit enemy's communicative strategies and tactics demonstrate numerous illogical, contradictory unrealistic arguments, false reasons and references to history to approve their aggression. The false cognitive semantics was the strategy of presenting Ukraine as aggressor and whitewashing the occupants. The psycholinguistic analysis describes the moral portrait of the slogans as contradicting the socio-cultural norms. The psychological semantics of the slogans was directed at evoking reaction of the broad masses of population to prevent the international military and economic aid to Ukraine. The moral catch words and expressions used by the aggressors to justify the war contrasts verbal and nonverbal context of his immoral actions and reference to history reveals the complete degradation of cosciousness.

Keywords: false slogans, psycholinguistic semantics, complex analysis, wrong strategy, cognitive and psychological tactics.

Анотація

Провокаційні брехливі гасла та реальність

Ткаченко Наталія Дмирівна кандидат філологічних наук

Комплексні лінгвістичні дослідження комунікації відповідають потребам сучасної науки і вимагають глибокого вивчення когнітивних та емоційних чинників формування соціальної свідомості та його практичного застосування у розробці методів виховання людей заради миру й безпеки. За об'єкт статті обрані сучасні провокаційні гасла воєнної хунти Росії як зразки політичної комунікації задля недопущення військової допомоги Україні. Метою статті є розкриття прагматичної брехливої семантики гасел та їх когнітивного та емоційного упливу на світову громадськість. Застосовані методи дослідження семантики брехливих гасел поєднують лінгвістичні методи та текстові в операціях дефініції, опису, інтерпретації, порівняння, та класифікації когнітивних, психолінгвістичних, соціокультурних, прагматичних, смислів та конотацій; а також деякі експериментальні методи у протиставленні прагматичної та психологічної брехливої інформації про війну реальному стану речей на прикладах оригінальних документів та немовних аргументів. У статті пропонується авторський аналіз суспільної ментальної динамічної та статичної семантики.

Аналіз виявив контрастування когнітивної прагматичної та та психологічної семантики брехливих гасел правдивій вербальній та невербальній інформації про війну та фальсифікацію моральних норм. Експліцитна та імпліцитна комуніуативні сьратегії й тактики демонструють численні ілогізми, протиріччя, нереалістичні аргументиб брехливі обоснування та посилання на історію для виправдання своєї агресії. Тактика брехливих гасел слугувала стратегії представити Україну як агресора та обілити окупантів. Психолінгвістичний аналіз визначає протиріччя гасел моральни нормам. Когнітивна семантика гасел була спрямована на реакцію широких мас населення з метою запобігти міжнародній військовій та та економічній допомозі Україні. Уживання агресорами стандартних висловлювань із високоморальним змістом для виправдання війни утворює контраст з вербальним та невербальним контекстом його аморальних дій а референція до історії завоювань виявляє повну деградацію свідомості.

Ключові слова: брехливі гасла, соціолінгвістична семантика, комплексний аналіз, хибна стратегія , психологічні тактики.

Formulation of the problem

On February 24, 2022 Russia attacked Ukraine on land and in the air on all length of the common frontier. Communication belongs to the primary sphere of the human social activity and plays the crucial role in forming people's conscience and outlook, the political tasks of the state [6], it reveals the sociological aspects of language [9]. The Russian provocative false slogans, justifying the war against Ukraine were so cunningly propagated in Europe and Ukraine and many other countries of the world believed in them and were hesitating to help the Ukrainian people to defend their country.

Analysis of the recent research and publications

The mass conscience revealed in the political text was analysed by Shelestiuk, Shelomovska, Tatenko, Fitsula, Newsome, Baunov, Karvat, etc. Communication was the object of investigation by F. Batsevich, T. van Dijk, G. Greice, M. Halliday, etc. It is noticed that mental processes are conditioned not only by the language but also by images (Pavio). Images belong to the sphere of thinking and emotions, cognitive processes issuing from perceptions and are followed by emotional expressions. Creating the mixed image of the Soviet and fashist puppets the Russian aggressors launched the campaign against the Ukraine's independence concealing their real reasons of of losing the spheres of influence and roads to Europe.

The cognitive psychology regards the psychic processes as determined by the cognitive factors [10]. Cognitive semantics study is represented by mostly American scientists J. Lakoff, R. Landgaker, P. Jackendoff, Ch. Fillmore, L. Talmi, J. Tailor, Zh. Fauconier, B. Rudska-Ostin, A. Chenki, etc. Cognitive linguistics provides the text analysis with the laws and processes of cognizing the objective reality - nature, human and society - by methods and operations of obtaining, keeping and using people's knowledge (J. Lakoff, X. Thompson). Psycholinguistics lends to the text analysis “the study of psychological aspects of language, perceptual strategies, and speech perceptions based on linguistic models” [10].

The purpose of the article is to reveal the false pragmatic and psychological linguistic semantics of the slogans as the psychological tactic and descried and interprite the destructive communicative tactics of the aggressors.

Presentation of the main material

Applied to the false slogans study comprise the linguistic analysis of the structural, social, cognitive and psychological semantics. Lexical investigation includes the structural analysis of the words slogan, false, provocation: conceptual, differential, contextual, associative (connotative), intra- and extra-interpretation. Cognitive semantics is studied by the hermeneutic operation of interpretation. The cognitive analysis is connected with the structural, social and cultural relations (Dijk) by evaluation of the pragmatic communication factors:

The discourse analysis takes into account the social and psychological influence (illocution) of communication, aesthetic, social, moral content of the text (Grice), pragmatic standards of politeness, stylistic means, etc. [after Leech, 4]. The descriptive and interpretation methods include the conversational analysis (H. Sacks, Е. Schegloff, G. Jefferson, J. Heritage, H. Garfinkel) - an empirical method of studying the oral dialogue colloquial interaction [3] aimed at describing the interlocutors' social strategies and tactics (Dijk, Pickering, Potter), [1]. Suggested here is the author's analysis of the dynamic ant static thinking in studying the social opinion.

The experimental methods applied to studying false slogans include the method of semantic differential, gradual scaling (of aggression), the introspective analysis. The method of gradual scaling “measures the growing meaning of one word semantic component from the smallest to the biggest with lessening its positive value” [4]. The communicative strategy “We-They (Dijk, Pickering, Potter), [Kaptiurova, 2013] determines the image of the enemy according to the social and national origin. The psycholinguistic analysis frames the psycholinguistic and social portraits of interlocutors, the situation conditions (standards), characterizes social groups of the speakers in the broad social context [1]. The sociolinguistic vector of analysis “fixes “the social relationships among the participants and the significant elements of the situation, studying, in particular, the influence of education, occupation, race, peer-group identification”, etc.” [10]. Pragmatic semantics is determined by subjects, object (topic), place, time and conditions of the event, people's intentions (motives, interests, evaluations, relations between the communicants), revealing the status, national, group relations, interlocutor's thoughts and then turning intention to the world of people [2]. This semantics was analyzed by comparing the social and psychological communication norms and decline from them. So, the methods of linguistics and marginal sciences are targeted at revealing the explicit and implicit false slogans senses.

The political text has it's specifics both in structure and content. Being a monologue by the form it is a dialogue of the speaker with the silent audience, taking into consideration the special interests of the certain social circles and possible arguments. The political pragmatic speech strategies of the enemy include the discourse false tactics: proposals, arguments, ultimatums, consensuses, agreements, etc. In their context “the cognitive models of representation” [1] are determined which imply mental and emotional reactions. The pragmatic tactics influencing the population are expressed in the lexemes convincing, demanding, dictating, insising, ordering, sanctioning, manipulating [after, 5] demonstrating mental and emotional pressing.

Lexical field analysis (Bondarko) of the false slogans classifies the words slogan, false, provocative in this research in one thematic field of negative influence, in psychology this phenomenon is called “assimilation” (G. Steinthal, Y. F. Herbart; F. de Saussure in linguistics). Definition of the noun provocation includes “influence the unconscious, yet determining and paradoxical way of thinking and behaving of people [10, p. 40]. Studying the semantics of the false slogans requires describing the principal concepts of the topic, expressed by the words slogan, false and provocative. According to the dictionary definition the noun slogans is stylistically neutral: “means by which the general public may express their opinions on public issues” [11]. The adjective false is negative, defined as “not true, wrong; not correct, not accurate, not sincere, not faithful” “not genuine, wrong, mistaken” [12, 13], not true or honest, dishonest, lying, unreliable; and the falsified events as “not natural, artificial, not real” [12]. The definitions of the derivatives of the adjective provocative reveal mostly negative meaning, the adjective implies emotional and psychophysical reaction “likely to rouse mosrly negative feeling, especially anger or sexual interest”, etc. [12]. The verb provoke denotes the psychological influence of challenge, anger, irritation; the adverb provoking renders the quality of nagging [12, 13].

The text associations of the provocative false slogans reflect the chain associations [apperception after Y. F. Gerbart), [4] with the knowledge in memory and thus reflecting the process of cognizing information or just believing in it. Provocation as a political tool of Russia was used in the conflict of interests [10, p. 176] concerning the territory, spheres of influence, power, economical and political balance [after, 10, p. 176]. The false slogans are used as “confrontational and abusive methods malicious in intention and destructive in effect” [10, p. 63]. The historically formed dependence of people influences their conscience and determines their roles in society; the social dynamics suppresses other people's conscience to static, passive, unable to resist and struggle for their own ideas and needs. The psychological tactic of passivizing Ukrainians and demoralizing the Ukrainian army is expressed in the false slogan “Russia had no intentions of invading Ukraine” . “Now it's doing the opposite” [9]. The cognitive semantics of the slogans being prior to the emotional the psycholinguistic analysis starts with the cognitive linguistic analysis.

The Russian aggression was planned and the false slogans came into use to justify the invasion of Ukraine. The psycholinguistic analysis is focused on “the influence factors and methods of cheating the consumer's consciousness and criticism” [5]. The first aggressor's crime was the breach of promise. Gradual scaling of the aggressors' strategic intentions demonstrates his war actions escalation: first nonintervention, then intervention and invading more Ukrainian territory and even threatening with the invasion to the European countries.

The socio-cultural semantics of the false slogans contrasts to that of the eternal moral values: conscience, honesty, humanity, justice, peace loving, respect, etc. and proves the inadequacy of the slogans to the social norms and the lack of humanistic content in the slogans. The differential analysis of the slogans reveals the cognitive component of makebelieve fight with evil linked to the social contradictions and counted on the pro-Soviet convictions. Using provocation as a political tool the aggressor started the campaign of faking, bluffing [10, p. 176] in mass media The slogans contain false references (historical, national, political) contrasting with real intentions of aggressors and arousing associations with feudal wars. For example, the false slogan proclaims “the special operation in Ukraine to annihilate bandits - Banderas” [8]. The reference to S. Bandera associating with the events of the Great Patriotic War was out of time and the slogan concealed the strategy of mass annihilation which was unveiled first by the Russian soldiers who destroyed the villages with peaceful people. The aggressor created the regional situations of military actions and states of affairs by own actions [10, p. 65] with his “tactical advantage of misleading and forerunning” [10 p. 66] Ukrainians similar as Hitler attacked the Soviet Union

The next false slogan “the Soviet Union reconstruction ” [8] manipulated the mind of the pro-Soviet devoters but was the an evident lie because the union of nations was created by peaceful agreement of all poor and oppressed people and raised admiration of all peace loving people abroad. Another argument against this lie is that the former Soviet republics were not the parts of the Russian Federation, did the aggressors refer to the tsarist Russia? The slogan of “the fight against the Ukrainian government” [8] as illegal was not admitted by the Ukrainian people on the reason, that the new government was elected legally after the former president retreat. Besides, the war for power and restoring the former president is no excuse for the massive annihilation of Ukrainians and Russians which defines the Russian aggressors as the international criminals. The slogan of “the weak Ukrainian army” [8] popularized the idea that the Ukrainian army was too weak to defend the country, and so the strategic blitzkrieg and victory were predicted and the promise was given to Russians to parade on Khreschatyk Street in Kyiv on the ninth of May 2022. Evaluative semantics of this false slogan showed its dynamics with the time: first it sounded humiliating, then, owing to the European and American armament, the aggressor's respect grew into his interest to the new arms. It required months to convince Russia in its unrealistic plans to conquer Ukraine: with the European and the world community aid the Ukrainian army made decisive offence and worked out diplomacy towards receiving military and diplomatic assistance.

The static thinking determines the dictator's persistence in his beliefs, strategies and tactics and in interpreting the Ukrainian policy as controversial. Static thinking is revealed in the criminal policy of destroying Ukraine, stereotyped and limited by his ambitious reactions to all appeals to his consciousness. This modality is going all through the strategic intentions of the false slogans: they render the speaker's hatred and cold blood. Far from the military battlefield, measuring time by the war events, the aggressive junta demonstrated the absence of human mentality and moral norms, lacking emotions, sympathy, making contradictory decisions and discover egotistic nature. The provoking slogan “to liberate the Russian population in Ukraine ” [8] counted on the Russians compassion and possibly was first believed in Europe, but the Ukrainians never suppressed the Russian speaking population or did any harm to it.

The slogan is grounded on the national opposition, false in the context of massive mixing of population. Further on the national fiction was changed to the interstate version retaining the territorial occupation as its social essence. The national degradation is observed in low culture of both warring countries: in the brutal language and humiliation of women portaits the image of the occupants and oppressors. When the slogan failed the aggressor proclaimed defending Russians on the already occupied territories of Donetsk and Luhansk. Then the Russian leader announced that he aimed to destroy only the infrastructure of Ukraine. Whatever the aggressor lied, both Ukrainians and Russians were killed by rockets, bombs or occupants and their homes were destroyed. So, the aggressor was developing the successive lies in changing conditions, losing his arguments with Ukraine spreading the true information about the war.

The slogan of “denationalization” [8] was another concoction of the Russian war mongers and was understood by nobody in Ukraine and abroad. Its foolishness is evident from the historical mixing of population, so the slogan was far back in time and it was pragmatically directed against the Ukrainian language in view of the former attempts to restore national languages in the national republics [7]. And the population of Ukraine pragmatically neglected the Ukrainian language speaking the Ukrainian variation of Russian. The slogan's meaning is contradictory to the slogan “to liberate the Russian population in Ukraine” in the lexical opposition Russians liberation - denationalization refered to Ukrainians or rather concerning the Ukrainian language which was detested by the lasy citizens or foreigners.

The example of the egotistic psychological opposition “We-You” (Dijk, Pickering; Potter), [3], first national, the interstate, is the provocative slogan of “Russian peace” [8] into which many people believed and stayed in their homes to wait for the Russians to come. Those left were terribly mistaken and suffered tortures and deadly needs and many lost their lives. The Russian troops burned out the whole villages and towns with rockets, missiles and bombs. Thousands of people were annihilated in their homes, people perished from the military or shooting, suffered from deportation to Russia, so it was not the population but the territory of Ukraine that was at stake.

The illocutive (intentional) pressure is strong in the slogans, targeted at mass support and revealed in the invented threats to Russia. The war proceeded under the Russian slogan “the Ukrainians may attack and take away the occupied territories” [9] which were proclaimed Russian. This slogan contradicts the slogan “the weak Ukrainian army” in the lexical opposition weak army - may attack. The slogan was intended to provoke the emotional reaction of society to the make-believe threat of invading Russia by Ukraine and other countries. At the same time the aggressor started to threaten Poland and other European countries. Though these threats seem unrealistic, infantile or even unsound, the aggressor pretended being afraid. The warning had the opposite effect and provoked the partisans to diversions on the territory of Russia and the resistance forces became active under the occupants. The opposition to aggressors on the territory of Ukraine proves the fact of the narrow social support of the aggressor including his close highly payed surrounding and businessmen interested in developing the space of Ukraine but not in the population of Ukraine. Under the threats of the attaks and in disagreement with the war the rich people of Russia began to quit the country. The false referendums results were announced to the purpose of annexing the occupied territories and annexation was proclaimed. As people run away from these territories both the referendum and its results are evidently not true and people are aware of the inhuman conditions and attitude.

Another slogan blaimed Ukraine and was aimed at attracting the world control over the military actions, it said that “it is Ukrainians themselves who kill people and burn out villages and towns” [8]. The facts evidence against the traitors who served in the Russian troops and corrected the Russian missiles in Ukraine for big money. The provoking promise “to stop the war” [9] was accompanied by the aggressors' demand to the Ukrainian government to surrender and agree to anexing the occupied territories and by the false compassion for the human losses. Thus, the aggressor proceeded with his ultimatums as discourse tactics which was protested by the Ukrainian government and the citizens under occupation because too many lives were perished in it and their heroic deeds must be honored. Following the military support to Ukraine and economic sanctions against Russia the Ukrainian army gained new victories in liberating their motherland.

Gradually the hypnosis of the false propaganda was leaving the minds of nations and the evident truth of Ukraine being the victim of the Russia's dictatorship was penetrating the world community, including the sober Russians blaming the war and assisting Ukraine to put it to the end. There were some advices from abroad to give in and agree to annexations, but the defending Ukrainians firmly disagree to such dishonest peace [instagram]. The Russian disinformation today dwells on the rights of people in Ukraine and the persecution of the religious communities.

Results and discussion

The aim of the article was to reveal the explicit and implicit false semantics of the false slogans. The structural analysis demonstrates the negative semantics of the stylistically neutral noun slogan in the collocations false slogan and provocative slogan. The he operation of interpreting slogans as political genre of the publicity style revealed the manipulative strategies and tactics: the cognitive tactic of fraud and libel and the emotional tactics of evoking the sympathy and compassion. The psychological semantics of the slogans reveals the decline from psychological norm: passivisation, destructive intentions, pessimistic nature, false compassion; threatening prognosis, the provoking tactics of humiliating the Ukrainian nation by typifying, comparisons, etc., as pragmatic means of realizing the psychological influence. False slogans include natzist praising their own nation and blaming another nation. The methods applied to convince the Russians in the war as necessary politics were the psychic speeches on mass media. The speech strategies of the false slogans are disclosed through the cognitive semantic representations of knowledge, beliefs, wants, attitude, evaluations, intentions and manipulating the interlocutor's mind. Speech pragmatic tactics are revealed in the discourse frames: arguments, contradictions, agreements and other communicative steps in speech. Place and time factors were the criteria of the pragmatic conditions of the events.

Anti-Ukraine provocative slogans abide in catch phrases, aimed at believing without thinking, so, devoid of cognitive semantics and with pragmatic implications, “a negative implication of their use is that they do not foster in-depth knowledge of public issues'. Their target is believing without thinking counted on indisposition of people to pondering [11]. "Most people would rather die than think” [11]. Switching off mind turns on emotions, the psychic affect, so, the slogans emotional influence is evaluated as "opiate for the conscience", relieving minds of morality [there]. The Corinthian: The Journal of Student Research at GC&SU mentions that the political slogans are characterized by "the absence of content: the less specific the idea, the larger the vocabulary a speech writer can select from in order to find a matching consonant." [there]. The state of the people's dreaming conscience confirms its statics in presence of the aggressor's dynamics which phenomenon is often observed in any social unit (with active and lasy people).

The cognitive semantics of the slogans is logical, expressing convictions, beliefs, planning and emotions. The slogans' semantics is evaluated in the cognitive oppositions: logical-illogical, constructive-unconstructive, provocative- honest; pragmatic oppositions: true-false, agreement-disagreement, politeness (etiquette)-rudeness, etc; psychological oppositions: positive-negative, friendliness-hatred, optimistic-pessimistic, compassion-lack of compassion, peace loving-aggressiveness, demonstrativeness-modesty; the stylistics stimuli include exaggeration, diminishing, elevation, threat, etc.

The semantic contradiction between the social norms and the war mongers behavior demonstrates the opposition between the individual egotism and society morals and frames the aggressors psycholinguistic and social portrait. It is generally known that lying, demonstrativeness, aggressiveness, cruelty, threats, violence, derision characterizes abnormal thinking. The aggressive behavior and speech, references to the great warriors' victories and claiming the complete occupation of Ukraine evidence of fanatic, infantile and sadistic imagination, abnormal psychic escalating military aggression in answer to the demands to end the war and de-occupy the territories, reassures publicity of the impossibile mutually acceptable conflict solution and of the social influence on the aggressors. The psychological semantics determines the psychological tactics aimed at sympathy and belief in his good intentions. The pragmatic semantics of the slogans defines the aggressor's discourse tactic as ultimatums of ending the war on the conditions of annexing the part of the territory of Ukraine. The social stereotype of the aggressor being the state leader makes it impossible to apply any ethical and social influence to him.

The cognitive vector of the psycholinguistic analysis reveals the perverted semantics of the false slogans with the surface positive meaning but negative pragmatic sense, directed at victims instead of the aggressor which became the aggressor's tactics justifying his invasion. The gradual scaling criteria reveals the growing negative semantics of the slogan - from the false compassion and help offer to the overt fascism. The pragmatic intentions of the false slogans concealed the real state of things to Russians and raised their hatred against Ukrainians and Ukraine, the Ukrainian culture, traditions and language.

The semantic differential of the false slogans reveals “the connotative cognitive, emotive meaning of the word, its social links, personal sense, stereotypes, etc.” [4]. The differential analysis demonstrated the discrepancy between the cognitive semantics of the occupants' strategy and tactics and their false emotions. The connotative political meaning of the adjective false in the context of the noun slogan expresses the additional connotations of false compassion, untrue intentions, ambitions, show, etc. The slogans contradictory semantics is due to brousing the Ukrainian society for the supporters among Russians, first by the lie of saving them from Ukrainians, later from the Ukrainian language. The successive aggressors' changing tactics in the conditions worthened for them revealed the tendency to losing space and moral positions. The successive aggressors' changing tactics in the conditions worthened for them revealed the tendency to losing space and moral positions. The psycholinguistic analysis of the cognitive and emotional semantics of the false slogans revealed the psychological tactics used to influence and convince people of the false information, which forms the cognitive tactics of the slogans: false predictions false information, false accusations, false allegations, false claims, false statements [13], false arguments, assumptions of belief [14]. Manipulating the eternal truths was the psychological tactic to give a false impression of the honest leader really disturbed by the danger of the possible assault on Russia, but “it rang true/hollow/ false” [13, 14]. The false positive image of the aggressor was denied by detaining the occupied territories of Ukraine on the false pretext of their belonging to Russia historically, and another lie told that the Ukrainian people on the occupied territories (in reality under the death threats) was supporting him. The psychological influence of the false slogans on the minds also played the false national card of contrasting Ukrainians and Russians (an obvious lie in the context of mixed population), the lies of saving Russians, punishing bandits, false fears, false information, false promises. The analysis of the cognitive and emotional semantics of the slogans confirms the theory of provocation (Karvat), the false meaning of the slogans and mighty influence of language on mass conscience. The political text proves that the provoking semantics is bi-polar, directed at the opposition and also at the authors, as the slogan “the Ukrainians will attack Russia ” had the result that they did attack. So, the slogans stimulated the offensive verbal and nonverbal activity of the Ukrainian army.

The specialists told about the channels of soaking Russian disinformation into the USA policy [15] which influenced some congressmen. The Washington Post discovered thousands of the fabricated news articles and posts in the social nets and commentaries propagating the American isolationsm, terrorising by the fears of the attacks on USA and trying to increase the economic and race strain in the USA (Roman Osadchuk). They also cast the anti-Ukrainian and anti-European slogans into the protests of the Polish farmers blocking the frontiers against the Ukrainian import.

Mikle Makkol, the head of the USA Chamber of Representatives in the foreign affairs admitted penetrating of the Russiann propaganda into the USA and into his party. Olha Beloholova believes that this propaganda is oriented to the complete loss of any belief. Yakub Kalensky said that Russian politicians try to reduce the international aid to Ukraine, to undermine the belief in the Ukrainian institutions and polarize the society. The fight with disinformation should include discovering the Russians activity, increasing the resistance of the audience to manipulations and preventing using the weak places in the social nets and communities by the aggressor by the aggressor [14].

The fight against the slogans immorality required switching on cognition by truthful information, realizing the evil intentions of the aggressors. Revealing the lie of pro-Russian slogans served the mighty cognitive and psychological stimulus to the Ukrainian liberating war and propaganda in word and in deed historically won by many countries for freedom and independence by hard value. The contradictory pro-Russian slogans and nonverbal proofs (photographs, videos and visits) convinced the world in the honest and vigorous patriotic defense of Ukraine. Honest publicity and diplomacy are the communication tactics evoking people consciousness. Blessed are the words of truth, enflaming the human mind with the desires and efforts to stop the bloody war.

semantics false slogan moral

Conclusions

The complex psycholinguistic analysis revealed the false cognitive semantics of the aggressors' slogans, contradicted by extra-linguistic reality. The analysis revealed the cognitive and psychological semantics of the false slogans contrasting the true verbal and nonverbal information about the war and falsifying the eternal moral values. The explicit and implicit enemy's communicative strategies and tactics demonstrate numerous illogical, unrealistic arguments, false reasons and references to history to approve their aggression. The false cognitive semantics was the strategy of provoking massive negative emotions all over the world, presenting victim as aggressor and whitewashing the occupants.

The psycholinguistic analysis describes the moral portrait of the slogans as contradicting the socio-cultural norms - the eternal moral values: The psychological semantics of the slogans is directed at evoking reaction of the broad masses of population revealing the pragmatic strategies to prevent the international military and economic aid to Ukraine. The moral catch words and expressions used by the aggressors to justify the war and the psychological tactics implied in the false slogans to influence and convince people reveal the complete degradation of consciousness. Revealing the false of the slogans was the urgent task on the Ukraine's ideological front and in diplomacy to win the moral war over the aggressors.

References

1. Andreychuk N.I. (2010). Zhitteviy svit ludini v angliyskimu institutsiinomy diskursi epokhi Tudoriv (The human outlook in the English institutional discourse of Tudor period) Mova i kultura; naukove vidannia. Kyiv: Vidavnichy dim Dmitra Burago. 13 (II, 138). P. 75-82.

2. Kalischuk D.M. (2007). Analis intentsiy movtsya yak peredumova adekvatnoi interpretatsii polituchnikh tekstiv [Analysis of the speaker's intentions preceding the adequate interpretation of the political texts]. Philologicni studii: naukovii chasopis. Lutsk: Volinskiy Academichniy Dim. 1/2 (39-40). P. 247-252.

3. Kapturova V.V. (2013). Komunikativni strategii koristuvachiv sotsialnikh merezh ta mikroblogiv [The communicative strategies of the social networks and mikroblogs jusers]. Lingvistika ХХІ stolittia: novi doslidzhennia I perspectivy. P. 104-111.

4. Kuranova С.I. (2012). Osnovy psikholinguistiki: textbook [Fundamentals of psycholinguistics]: textbook. Kyiv: vydavnichy Tsentr “Akademiia”.

5. Tatenko V.O. (2008). Sotsialna psikhologiya vplivu [Social psychology of influence]. Monographiya. Kyiv: Milenium..

6. Fitsula М.М. (2002). Pedagogika. Navchalny posibnik dla studentiv vischikh pedagogichnih zakladiv (Pedagogics.Textbook for figher pedagogical school students). Kyiv: Vidavnichiy Tsentr “Akademiya” [in Ukrainian]

7. Shelestiuk E.V. (2012) Linguoculturnii aspect yasikovoi politiki [Cultural linguistic aspect of the linguistic politics], Vestnik Cheliabinskogo gos. Unoversiteta. Phylologiia. Iskustvovedeniie. Cheliabinsk: Cheliabinsky gosuniversitet. № 36 (290). Vol. 72. P. 72-81.

8. Baunov A. (2022). Putin's Speech on Russia-Ukraine War at Mobilization. The Washington Post

9. Britannica.

10. Karwat M. (2022). Theory of Provocation. In Light of Political Science. Monograph. Studies in politics, security and society. /Edited by Stanislaw Sulowski. University of Warsaw 376.

11. Newsome C. (2002) “The Use of Slogans in Political Rhetoric,” The Corinthian: Vol. 4, Article 3.

12. OAAD Oxford Advanced American Dictionary. (2011). Oxford University Press; 8th ed. Edition. Authors: A.S. Hornby, Jennifer Bradbery, Margaret Deuter. Editor: Diana Lea. 816.

13. OALD Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary (2015). Th Edition Oxford University Press. Margaret Deuter and Jennifer Bradbery (Author)

14. Vorozhko, T. (2024) Voice of America

Література

1. Андрейчук Н.І. Життєвий світ людини в англійському інституційному дискурсі епохи Тюдорів. Мова і культура: наукове видання. 13 (II, 138). 2010. C. 75-82. Київ: Видавничій дім Дмитра Бураго.

2. Каліщук Д.М. Аналіз інтенцій мовця як передумова адекватної інтерпретації політичних текстів. Філологічні студії: науковий часопис. Луцьк: Волинській академічний дім. 1/2 (39-40). 2007. C. 247-252.

3. Kaптюровa В.В. Комунікативні стратегії користувачів соціальних мереж та мікроблогів. Лінгвістика ХХІ століття: нові дослідження і перспективи. 2013. C. 104-111.

4. Kурановa С.I. Основи психолінгвістики: підручник. Київ: видавничій центр “Академія”. 2012.

5. Татенко В.О. Соціальна психологія впливу. Монографія. Київ. Міленіум. 2008. 216.

6. Фіцула М М. Педагогіка: навчальний посібник для студентів вищіх педагогічних заклвдів. Київ: Видав. Центр Академія. 2002. 528.

7. Шелестюк Е.В. Лингвокультурный аспект языковой политики. Вестник Челябинского гос. ун-та. Филология. Искусствоведение. Челябинск: Челябинский гос. ун-т, 2012. № 36 (290).Вып. 72.С. 72-81.

8. Baunov, A. Putin's Speech on Russia-Ukraine War at Mobilization. The Washington Post 2022.

9. Britannica.

10. Karwat M. Theory of Provocation. In Light of Political Science. Monograph. Studies in politics, security and society. /Edited by Stanislaw Sulowski. University of Warsaw. 2022. 376.

11. Newsome C. “The Use of Slogans in Political Rhetoric,” The Corinthian. 2002. Vol. 4 , Article 3.

12. OAAD Oxford Advanced American Dictionary. Oxford University Press; 8th Edition. Authors: A. S. Hornby, Jennifer Bradbery, Margaret Deuter. Editor: Diana Lea. 2011.

13. OALD Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary. Third Edition Oxford University Press. Margaret Deuter and Jennifer Bradbery (Author). 2015.

14. Vorozhko T. Voice of America 2024.

Размещено на Allbest.ru