SPECIFIC CHARACTER OF INTENSIFICATION OF EVALUATORY STRUCTURES IN THE ENGLISH LITERARY DISCOURSE
Abstract
The paper deals with the problems of evaluatory intensification in the discourse. The intensification of evaluative structures is of particular interest in the study of pragmatic significance. The purpose of the proposed article is to analyze linguistic resources that contribute to the intensification of evaluation in the English language literary discourse. The methodology is determined by the tasks, the material, the nature of the article and is of complex character. One of the main ways to increase the evaluator y meaning of the utterance is the explicit means of expression of the speaker’s modal attitude to the reported information represented by modal words and adverbs. Effective intensifiers of evaluative structures are a variety of expressive means and stylistic devices: hyperbole, epithet, simile, rhetorical question. Evaluative words perform a specific syntactic function – they are definitions of words-classifiers. Intensification of the evaluator y meaning is also carried out by clarifying text units that modify the main predicative line of the basic sentence or its adverbial components. The intensified character of the evaluation can be traced also in the one-complex personal sentences, where the attribute functions as a semantic predicate. Thus, the intensification of the evaluator y meaning can be carried out in various ways, but all of them are conditioned by the peculiarities of linguistic behavior, the logical parameters of the design of thought, and other factors of the speech-mental process and are characterized by: a) the combination of the same marks of evaluation; b) the interplay of various evaluation marks; c) the transfer of evaluatory signs of explicit utterances to the implicit parts of the text. Lexical-syntactic intensifiers used to enhance the evaluation reveal the presence/absence of the ideal in the environment by establishing the degree of significance of the object for the subject in terms of conformity/inconsistency of the object to the needs, interests and desires of the subject.
References
2. Вольф Е.М. Функциональная семантика оценки. Москва : Едиториал УРСС, 2009. 280 с.
3. Bara B.G. Cognitive Pragmatics: The Mental Processes of Communication. Cambridge, MA : MIT Press, 2010. 304 p.
4. Bednarek M. Dimensions of evaluation: Cognitive and linguistic perspectives. Pragmatics and Cognition. 2009. Vol. 17(1). P. 146–175.
5. Breeze R., Olza I. Evaluation in media discourse. European perspectives. Berlin : Peter Lang, 2017. 286 p.
6. Leech G.N. Principles of Pragmatics. London ; New York : Longman, 1983. 250 p.
7. Lulu L. Application of Cooperative Principle and Politeness Principle in Class Question-answer Process. Theory and Practice in Language Studies. 2017. Vol. 7(7). P. 563–569.
8. Martin J.R., White P.R.R. The Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English. New York : Palgrave Macmillan, 2005. 278 p.
9. White P.R.R. Evaluative contents in verbal communication. Handbook of Verbal Communication : in 3 vol. / A. Rocci, L. de Saussure (eds.). Berlin : Mouton de Gruyter, 2016. Vol. 3. P. 77–96.