Russian journal of linguistics: Vestnik RUDN (Dec 2018)

The Ethnocultural Potential of Voice Forms and Its Discourse Actualization

  • Lyubov A Kozlova

DOI
https://doi.org/10.22363/2312-9182-2018-22-4-874-894
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 22, no. 4
pp. 874 – 894

Abstract

Read online

The article belongs to the field of ethnogrammar, a branch of linguistics founded by Anna Wierzbicka, and the main goal of which is the reconstruction of cultural specificity on the basis of grammatical analysis. The analysis of grammar in the ethnocultural aspect enables us to reveal the ethnocultural factors which might have served as the backbone of certain grammatical categories or might explain the grammatical changes happening here and now. The aim of the article is the analysis of the category of voice in the ethnocultural aspect and elucidation of the ethnological factors which determine the choice of voice forms in various types of discourse. The choice of this category as the object of study is determined by the fact that it presents one of the most culture-sensitive categories and it reflects most fully the specificity of the nation’s mentality, its cultural values as well as the specificity of communication ethnostyle. The author shows the evolution of views on the essence of the category of voice in the context of changing paradigms of scientific knowledge, presents the essence of voice relations viewed from the functional and cognitive-discursive points of view and attempts to elucidate the ethnocultural factors which determine the choice of both categorical and noncategorial voice forms in various types of discourse. One of these factors is the ‘doing’ type of Anglo culture, and especially American culture in which a human being is presented as an active agent, a creator of his/her destiny and it finds reflection in the language consciousness and in the language units, including the choice of voice forms. Among other important factors which determine the necessity and expediency of using the passive constructions the author points out the following:a deliberate wish not to point out the agent of the action in accordance with the politeness principle;an attempt to avoid responsibility for one’s actions; 3) the intention to impart a generalizing meaning to one’s own opinion by disguising it as a general rule. All this enables the author to make a conclusion about the significance of discourse culture for the realization of voice forms as well as about the discourse variability of voice functions.

Keywords