LINGUISTIC MEANS OF DISCURSIVE REPRESENTATION OF MASCULINITY AND FEMININITY

This article highlights the presence of the gender component in any type of discourse and its linguistic implementation. The aim of the study is to determine the gender component in the discourse of Western and Russian gender-oriented lifestyle magazines using a comparative analysis of the used English and Russian language means of lexical-grammatical (gender-marked language units) and semantic-syntactic (assessment, modality of sentences, syntax sentences) levels. The cognitive-linguistic approach allows us to prove that in the publications in question two types of discursive representation of masculinity and femininity are used: the type of “reflection” and the type of “construction”. The presence of gender neutral or gender-marked units of language in texts is associated with the intensity of the male / female dichotomy, this ratio reflects the predominance of egalitarian or traditional gender representations in society. The authors’ choice of the lexical repertoire, the general modality of statements and the syntactic organization of sentences correspond to the discursive tasks of publications, the linguistic tools used at the cognitive level translate certain models of gender behavior into the minds of the general readers. Analysis of 4000 contexts taken by continuous sampling from popular men’s and women’s magazines in the UK, USA and Russia for the period of 2012-2017 (“GQ”, “Men’s Health” (MH), “Men’s Fitness” (MF), “Esquire”, “Tatler”, “Cosmopolitan” (Cosmo), “Glamour”, “Women’s Health” (WH), “Women’s Fitness ”(WF),“ Marie Claire ”(MC)) allows us to identify common features and peculiarities of the discursive representation of masculinity and femininity in English editions and Russian-language versions of the same name, containing both translated and original (author) articles.

1. van Deik T. Iazyk. Poznanie. Kommunikatsiia [Language. Cognition. Communication]. M.: Progress, 1989. 312 p.

2. Gordon D., Lakoff Dzh. Postulaty rechevogo obshcheniia [Verbal communication postulates]. Novoe v zarubezhnoi lingvistike [New in foreign linguistics]. Vol. 16. Lingvisticheskaia pragmatika [Linguistic pragmatics]. M.: Progress, 1985, pp. 276302.

3. Dobrosklonskaya T.G. Massmediinyi diskurs kak ob”ekt nauchnogo opisaniia [Mass-mediated discourse as an object of scientific description]. Nauchnye vedomosti. Seriia «Gumanitarnye nauki» [Scientific statements. Series “Humanitarian sciences”]. 2014, no. 13 (184), vol. 22, pp. 181-187.

4. Zinov’eva E.S. Iazykovye mekhanizmy konstruirovaniia maskulinnosti i feminnosti v diskurse gliantsevykh zhurnalov (na materiale angliiskogo i russkogo iazykov). Diss. kand. filol. nauk [Linguistic mechanisms of masculinity and femininity construction in the discourse of lifestyle magazines (on the basis of English and Russian). Cand. philol. sci. diss.]. Yaroslavl’, 2018. 235 p.

5. Il’inykh S.A. Fenomen «novogo muzhchiny» ili snova o gendere [“New man” phenomenon or once again about gender]. Vestnik Buryatskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta [Journal of Buryatia State University]. 2012, no. 14, pp. 93-97.

6. Karasik V.I. Iazykovoi krug: lichnost’, kontsepty, diskurs [Linguistic circle: personality, concepts, discourse]. Volgograd: Peremena, 2002. 477 p.

7. Kibrik A.A., Parshin P.B. Diskurs [Discourse]. – Available at: http://www.krugosvet.ru/node/34030 (accessed 11 May 2019).

8. Kirilina A.V. Lingvisticheskie gendernye issledovaniia kak proiavlenie smeny epistemy v gumanitarnom znanii [Linguistic gender research as a display of the change of episteme in humanitarian sciences]. Vestnik Voennogo universiteta [Journal of Military University]. 2010, no. 4 (24), pp. 110-114.

9. Krasnykh V.V. Osnovy psikholingvistiki i teorii kommunikatsii. Kurs lektsii [Basics of psycholinguistics and communication theory. Course of lectures]. M: ITDGK «Gnozis», 2001. 270 p.

10. Kubryakova E.S. Evoliutsiia lingvisticheskikh idei vo vtoroi polovine XX veka [Evolution of linguistic ideas in the second half of the 20th century]. Iazyk i nauka kontsa XX veka [Language and science of the end of the 20th century]. M.: Iazyki russkoi kul’tury, 1995, pp. 144-238.

11. Luriya A.R. Iazyk i soznanie [Language and consciousness]. M.: Izd-vo Moskovskogo universiteta, 1998. 336 p.

12. Mendzheritskaya E.O. Diskurs VS funktsional’nyi stil’: chto est’ iazyk SMI? [Discourse VS functional style: what is the language of mass-media?]. Vestnik Cheliabinskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Ser. «Filologiia. Iskusstvovedenie» [Journal of Chelyabinsk State University. Ser. “Philology. Art history”]. 2011, no. 13 (228), vol. 54, pp. 99-102.

13. Fedoseeva E.V. Kognitivnye mekhanizmy diskursivnogo konstruirovaniia deistvitel’nosti v mediadiskurse (na materiale statei o Rossii v sovremennykh angloiazychnykh sredstvakh massovoi informatsii). Diss. kand. filol. nauk [Cognitive mechanisms of discursive construction of reality in media-discourse (on the basis of the articles about Russia in contemporary Englishlanguage mass-media). Cand. philol. sci. diss.]. Irkutsk, 2016. 190 p.

14. Fuko M. Volia k istine: po tu storonu znaniia, vlasti i seksual’nosti. Sbornik [Will for verity: behind knowledge, power and sexuality. Digest]. M.: Magisterium; Kastal’, 1996. 446 p.

15. Butler J. Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. N.Y., L.: Routledge, 1990. 172 p.

16. Goffman E. Interaktion und Geschlecht. Frankfurt am Main: Campus, 1994 (engl. 1977). 194 p.

17. Lakoff R. Language and Woman’s Place. N.Y.: Harper and Row, 1975. 328 p.

18. Scott J.W. Gender: a Useful Category of Historical Analysis // American Historical Review. 1986, № 5. V. 91. P. 1053-1075.

19. Unger R.K. Toward a redefinition of sex and gender // American Psychologist. 1979, № 34. P. 1085-1094.

20. Zimmerman D., West C. Sex roles, interruptions and silences in conversation // Language and sex: Difference and Dominance / B. Thorne, N. Henley. Powley, Massachusetts: Newbury House, 1975. P. 105-129.