Baltic accent

2020 Vol. 11 №4

Back to the list Download the article

Verbal aggression in modern poetry: conventional and uncon­ventional functioning of discourse markers



The article examines the specifics of speech aggression in poetic communication. Special attention is paid to the unconventional functioning of discourse markers of aggression. The aim of the study is to analyse aggressive verbal behaviour in poetic communication and iden­tify distinctive characteristics of expressing aggression in everyday discourse. The research methodology includes methods of linguopragmatic, linguopoetic and discourse analyses. The author studies discourse markers of verbal aggression in poetic speech acts, where aggression can be expressed explicitly and implicitly. The study reveals specific strategies of expressing verbal aggression in poetic communication, which can include the self-referential criticism (through verbal aggression directed at the language of the poetic utterance, the actor of utter­ance, the poetic utterance as such and also the perceptual mechanism). The author studies the formation of aggressive message in poetic discourse and its subjectification.


  1. Agamben, G., 2012. Homo Sacer. Chto ostaetsya posle Osventsima: arkhiv i svidetel' [Homo Sacer. What remains after Auschwitz: archive and witness]. Moscow (in Russ.).

  2. Azarova, N. M., 2012. The criterion "addressee" in establishing the boundaries of poetic discourse. In: N. D. Arutyunova, ed. Logicheskiĭ analiz yazyka. Adresatsiya diskur­sa [Logical analysis of language. Addressing discourse]. Moscow. pp. 225—233 (in Russ.).

  3. Apresyan, V.Yu., 2003. Implicit aggression in language. In:  Computational Lin­guistics and Intellectual Technologies, Po materialam ezhegodnoi mezhdunarodnoi kon­ferentsii «Dialog» (2003) [Papers from the Annual International Conference “Dia­logue” (2003)]. Moscow. pp. 32—35 (in Russ.).

  4. Arutyunova, N. D., 1999. Yazyk i mir cheloveka [Human language and world]. Moscow (in Russ.).

  5. Baranov, A. N., Plungyan, V. A. and Rakhilina, E. V., 1993. Putevoditel' po diskur­sivnym slovam russkogo yazyka [A guide to the discursive words of the Russian lan­guage]. Moscow (in Russ.).

  6. Barthes, R., 2015. Fragmenty lyubovnoi rechi [Fragments of love speech]. Translat­ed by V. Lapitsky. Moscow (in Russ.).

  7. Bass, A., 1967. Psychology of the aggression. Voprosy Psychologii, 3, pp. 60—67 (in Russ.).

  8. Vepreva, I. T., 2005. Yazykovaya refleksiya v postsovetskuyu epokhu [Language reflec­tion in the post-Soviet era]. Moscow (in Russ.).

  9. Kibrik, A. A. and Podlesskaya, V. I., 2007. Speaker self-corrections and other types of speech failures as an object of annotation in the corpus of oral speech. Nauchno-tekhnicheskaya informatsiya. Ser. 2: Informatsionnye protsessy i sistemy [Scientific and technical information. Vol. 2: Information processes and systems], 2, pp. 2—23 (in Russ.).

  10. Krongauz, M. A., 2009. Yazyk i kommunikatsiya: novye tendentsii [Language and com­munication: new trends]. Available at: communication/ [Accessed 15 April 2020] (in Russ.).

  11. Levitov, N. D., 2002. The psychological state of aggression. Voprosy Psychologii, 6, pp. 168—173 (in Russ.).

  12. Lotman, Yu. M., 2000. Auto-communication: “I” and “The Other” as Addressees (On two models of communication in the cultural system). In: Yu. M. Lotman, ed. Semiosfera [Semiosphere].  St. Petersburg (in Russ.).

  13. Lutovinova, O. V., 2008. The Internet as a new “oral-written” communication sys­tem. Izvestiya Rossiiskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta im. A. I. Gertse­na [Izvestia: Herzen University Journal of Humanities & Sciences], 71, pp. 58—65 (in Russ.).

  14. Nikolaeva, T. M., 1990. On the principle of non-cooperation and / or categories of sociolinguistic impact. In: N. D. Arutyunova, ed. Logicheskiĭ analiz yazyka. Pro­tivo­rechivost' i anomal'nost' teksta [Logical analysis of language. Inconsistency and anoma­lous text]. Moscow (in Russ.).

  15. Nikulina, E. G., 2012. Affective speech acts in the system of emotional-evaluative interaction. Vestnik Vyatskogo gosudarstvennogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Filologiya i iskusstvovedenie [Herald of Vyatka State University], 1, pp. 54—58 (in Russ.).

  16. Ostin, J., 1986. How to do things with words. In: B.Yu. Gorodetsky, ed. Novoe v za­rubezhnoi lingvistike. Vyp. 17: Teoriya rechevykh aktov [New in foreign linguistics. Vol. 17: Theory of speech acts]. Moscow. pp. 22—129 (in Russ.).

  17. Paducheva, E., 2010. Semanticheskie issledovaniya: semantika vremeni i vida v russ­kom yazyke. Semantika narrative [Semantic Research: Semantics of Time and View in Russian. Narrative semantics]. Moscow (in Russ.).

  18. Kibrik, A. A. and Podlesskaya, V. I., eds., 2009. Rasskazy o snovideniyakh. Korpusnoe issledovanie ustnogo russkogo diskursa [Dream stories. Corpus research of oral Russian discourse]. Moscow (in Russ.).

  19. Sokolova, O. V., 2019. Ot avangarda k neoavangardu. Yazyk, sub"ektivnost', kul'tur­nye perenosy [From avant-garde to neo-avant-garde. Language, subjectivity, cultural trans­fers]. Moscow (in Russ.).

  20. Sternin, I. A., 2004. Obshchestvennye protsessy i razvitie sovremennogo russkogo yazyka. Ocherk izmeneniĭ v russkom yazyke kontsa KhKh veka [Social processes and the development of the modern Russian language. Outline of changes in the Russian language at the end of the twentieth century]. Voronezh (in Russ.).

  21. Sharonov, I. A., 2008. Mezhdometiya v rechi, tekste i slovare [Interjection in speech, text and dictionary]. Moscow (in Russ.).

  22. Sharonov, I. A., 2016. Communicative and discoursive markers. In: Computa­tional Linguistics and Intellectual Technologies, Po materialam ezhegodnoi mezhdu­na­rod­noi konferentsii «Dialog» (2016) [Papers from the Annual International Confer­ence “Dialogue” (2016)]. Moscow. pp. 605—615 (in Russ.).

  23. Shakhovskii, V. I., 1987. Kategorizatsiya emotsii v leksiko-semanticheskoi sisteme yazyka [Categorization of emotions in the lexical-semantic system of the language]. Voronezh (in Russ.).

  24. Sherstyanykh, I. V., 2016. Discoursive markers as mean of organization of speech genres. Zhanry rechi [Genres of speech], 1, pp. 42—49 (in Russ.).

  25. Shcherbinina, Yu. V., 2006. Verbal'naya agressiya [Verbal aggression]. Moscow (in Russ.).

  26. Yakobson, R. O., 1975. Linguistics and Poetics. In: E.Ya. Basin and M.Ya. Polya­kov, eds. Strukturalizm «za» i «protiv» [Structuralism "for" and "against"]. Translated by I. A. Melchuk. Moscow. pp. 193—230 (in Russ.).

  27. Adams, F. and Steadman, А., 2004. Intentional Action in Ordinary Language: Core Concept or Pragmatic Understanding? Analysis, 64, pp. 173—181.

  28. Bandura, A., 1983. Psychological mechanisms of aggression. In: R. G. Geen and E. Donnerstein, eds. Aggression: Theoretical and empirical reviews. New York. pp. 1—40.

  29. Baron, R. A. and Richardson, D. R., 1994. Perspectives in social psychology. Human aggression. New York.

  30. Jucker, A. and Ziv, Y., 1998. Discourse markers: Introduction. In: A. H. Jucker and Y. Ziv, eds. Discourse Markers: Descriptions and Theory. Amsterdam. pp. 1—12.

  31. Schiffrin, D., 1988. Discourse Markers. Cambridge.

  32. Knobe, J., 2003. Intentional Action and Side Effects in Ordinary Language. Analy­sis, 63, pp. 190—193.

  33. Searle, J., 1975. Indirect speech acts. In: P. Cole and J. L. Morgan, eds. Syn­tax and Semantics, Vol. 3: Speech Acts. London. pp. 59—82.

  34. Fraser, B., 2009. An account of discourse markers. International Review of Pragma­tics, 1, pp. 293—320.

  35. Wittgenstein, L., 1953. Philosophical Investigations. Translated by G. E. M. Ans­combe. Oxford.