International scientific journal
“Interpretation and researches”
Volume 2 issue 2 (24) | ISSN: 2181-4163 | Impact Factor: 8.2
38
THE DEFINITION OF POLITICAL TEXT AND A CLASSIFICATION OF
POLITICAL DISCOURSE
Xurramova Mehriniso Akbarovna
TerSPI, master student
Annotation
. This article provides information about the concept of political text
and the concept of political discourse, their specific characteristics, internal
classifications, and features.
Key words
. Text, political text, discourse, political discourse, concept.
Аннотация
. В данной статье представлена информация о понятии
политического текста и понятии политического дискурса, их специфических
характеристиках, внутренней классификации и особенностях.
Ключевые слова
. Текст, политический текст, дискурс, политический
дискурс, концепция.
Annotatsiya
. Ushbu maqolada siyosiy matn tushunchasi va siyosiy nutq
tushunchasi, ularning o'ziga xos xususiyatlari, ichki tasnifi va klassifikatsiyasi haqida
ma'lumot beriladi.
Kalit so'zlar
. Matn, siyosiy matn, nutq, siyosiy nutq, tushuncha.
Introduction
.
Text
is a large collection of information through which a person
receiving information receives information in a particular field. We have already
mentioned in our plans above the history of the text and its concept and the
importance of the study. As you know, a text is a set of information that delivers
information of any content and is studied as a whole in linguistics as a whole. A lot of
researches have been done on the subject as well.
Different scholars have different views on the classification of text. Beaugrande
and Dressler
depict that: text types are a set for producing and processing text
occurrences and hence acts as a prominent determine of efficiency, effectiveness and
appropriateness. Moreover, text types are classes of text which share certain
structural and functional elements and have developed conventionalized patterns with
a high level of usage. These text types are used to tell us about human experiences, in
an imaginative way. According to Mark and Kathy Anderson
groups:
-
Literary
-
Factual.
3
Beaugrande, R. de and Dressler, W. Introduction to Text Linguistics. Longman, 1981. – 181 p.
4
Anderson, Mark and Kathy Anderson. Text Types in English II. Sydney, Australia: MacMillan. 1998. – 27 p.
International scientific journal
“Interpretation and researches”
Volume 2 issue 2 (24) | ISSN: 2181-4163 | Impact Factor: 8.2
39
Marina Santini studied on Gradations of text types in Web pages used by corpus
of the system capable automatically deriving gradations of text types into 4 types:
-
Descriptive
-
Narrative
-
Explicatory
-
Informational.
We can divide the text into the following groups according to the content of the
information:
-
Narrative
-
Non- fiction
-
Poetry
Although there are many definitions and classifications about text types by
linguists, dividing into types of texts are still stand in front of scholars for discussion.
Main div
. Coming to
the political texts
, the texts are regarded as explanatory,
non- chronologic, non-fiction and informative texts. In political science, there are
three main approaches to categorizing an individual documents: lexicon - based
pattern matching, unsupervised topic models, supervised – learning classifiers. In
general, the research on classifying political texts can be divided into either
dictionary-based methods or machine learning-based methods.
Many typical situations of this interaction are embodied in speech genres of
political discourse. In there are three hyper genres in contemporary political
discourse:
-
political documents,
-
election campaigning
-
political debate
.
Differential features for distinguishing hyper genres are:
a.
Signs associated with the act of communication (oral or written
situations).
b.
Features associated with personal characteristics communicants and
external conditions of communication.
c.
Signs associated with the message.
d.
the following tables provide meaningful characteristics hyper genres
based on the components of the act of communication.
Genre-communicative organization of modern political discourse is built on the
following types of relationships:
1.
The relationship of juxtaposition. This relationship exists between three
hypergenres: political documents, election campaigning, political debate. Of these
5
Grimmer J. and Stewart B. M. Text as Data: The Promise and Pitfalls of Automatic Content Analysis Methods for
Political Texts. Cambridge University Press, 2017.
International scientific journal
“Interpretation and researches”
Volume 2 issue 2 (24) | ISSN: 2181-4163 | Impact Factor: 8.2
40
three hypergenres, the most voluminous is a hypergenre of pre-election campaigning
(
written and oral channel communications
), followed by political documents and
political debate using either a written or oral channel communications;
2.
Genus-species relation. This relationship takes place within the
hypergenre. Program documents (
program, manifesto, charter
) and hypergenre
election campaigning (
genres election platform, interviews, personal appeal, political
advertising
);
3.
Inclusion relation (whole-part). This relation is set between genre and
genre block, between genre and subgenres. In the hypergenre, program documents
are the most important genre blocks are the genres of
declarations, resolutions
and
statements
, in the hyper-genre pre-election campaign there are genre blocks
commitment, petition, autobiography.
4.
Intersection relation. This attitude is embodied in genreoids.
Personalized election
platform
and
personalized political advertising
.
According to V. Dijk, without collapsing political discourse analysis into critical
discourse analysis, we would like to retain both aspects of the ambiguous
designation: PDA is both about political discourse, and it is also a critical enterprise.
In the spirit of contemporary approaches in CDA this would mean that critical-
political discourse analysis deals especially with the reproduction of political power,
power abuse or domination through political discourse, including the various forms
of resistance or counter-power against such forms of discursive dominance. In
particular such an analyze deals with the discursive conditions and consequences of
social and political inequality that results from such domination.
In that case, we can understand that Political discourse analysis should be able to
answer genuine and relevant political questions and deal with issues that are
discussed in political science. That the examination of political discourse is pertinent
for the modern cross – discipline of discourse considers barely needs any advance
contention.
Conclusion
. To display the contention that most marvels in legislative issues are
shapes of text and conversation may be self-evident, particularly to a discourse
investigator, but it is as such not a good reason for political researchers to alter their
current approach to a more discourse explanatory one: Few researchers are arranged
to 'reduce' their field, or their methods, to those of another field. Consequently, we
must appear that issues in political science can in principly be examined more totally
and some of the time more adequately when it is realized that the issues have an
critical discursive dimension.
Used literature:
International scientific journal
“Interpretation and researches”
Volume 2 issue 2 (24) | ISSN: 2181-4163 | Impact Factor: 8.2
41
1.
Зильберман Л.И. Структурно - семантический анализ текста. -М .,
1982.
2.
Anderson, Mark and Kathy Anderson. Text Types in English II. Sydney,
Australia: MacMillan. 1998. – 27 p.
3.
Beaugrande, R. de and Dressler, W. Introduction to Text Linguistics.
Longman, 1981. – 181 p.
4.
Dijk, T. A. Principies of Critical Discourse Analysis. Discourse and
Society 4(2) 1993. - 249-83 p.
5.
Grimmer J. and Stewart B. M. Text as Data: The Promise and Pitfalls of
Automatic Content Analysis Methods for Political Texts. Cambridge University
Press, 2017.
6.
Turniyozov N. Matn lingvistikasi. — Samarqand: Sam DCHTI 2- nashri,
2003. – 86.
7.
Yoldoshev I.A. O‘zbek tilshunosligida matn va uni o‘rganish
muammolari (erishilgan yutuqlar va vazifalar) // Samarqand, 1998. - 59 – 61 b.
