COMMUNICATIVE TACTICS OF FACE-SAVING IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE DETECTIVE FILM DISCOURSE
Abstract
The article is devoted to the study of verbal reactions of witnesses and suspects during interrogations conducted by the detective in the course of criminal investigation. The research data includes video excerpts from the series «Agatha Raisin». Using the method of continuous sampling, dialogic units were selected that represent the detective’s questioning of witnesses and suspects. The object of the analysis is the communicative situations that occur during police interrogations of witnesses and suspects. The subject of the analysis is the linguistic means employed by the interrogated individuals to preserve their own «face». The study applies pragmatic and cognitive-discursive approaches and draws upon the insights of the communicative «face-saving» theory, speech act theory, and interpersonal communication studies. The relevance of the topic lies in the need to identify the communicative strategies employed by respondents during police questioning. The aim of the research is a contextual and interpretative analysis of the verbal reactions of suspects as manifestations of the face-saving strategy. The objectives include identifying the principal communicative tactics of the face-saving strategy and determining the linguistic features of these tactics as used by witnesses and suspects interrogated by a police detective. The results show that the interrogated individuals adjust their verbal behavior depending on their strategic intentions, the extralinguistic context of the situation, and the psychological-pragmatic characteristics of the interrogation. A taxonomy of communicative tactics used to implement the face-saving strategy has been put forward, along with the linguistic means that explicate the tactics in English-language detective film discourse. This research contributes to a deeper understanding of the nature of verbal tactics and expands the theoretical foundations of Communication Theory and Conversation Analysis. The presented theoretical and practical findings may be applied in further interdisciplinary studies in pragmatic and communicative linguistics.
References
2. Зливков В. Л. Психологічні механізми захисту. Психологія і суспільство. 2018. № 9. С. 7–15.
3. Мірончук Т. Виправдання в мовленні: структура, функції та принципи. Київ : Академвидав, 2016.
4. Новицька О. А. Зміна теми та уникання у конфліктній комунікації. Наукові записки КНЛУ. 2018. № 14. С. 12–18.
5. Савенкова Л. О. Негативізм як засіб збереження психологічного комфорту. Вісник Харківського національного університету імені В. Н. Каразіна. 2015. № 22. С. 22–28.
6. Філоненко М. М. Комунікативні бар’єри в межах мовленнєвої діяльності. Київ : Наукова думка, 2008.
7. Яценко Т. Психолінгвістичні механізми захисту обличчя у мовленні. Київ : Ліра-К, 2008.
8. Brown P., Levinson S. Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987.
9. Cupach W. R., Metts S. Facework. Handbook of interpersonal communication. Sage Publications, 1994. P. 81–100.
10. Gibb J. R. Defensive communication. Journal of Communication. 1961. Vol. 11, no. 3. P. 141–148.
11. Goffman E. Interaction ritual: Essays on face-toface behavior. New York: Anchor Books, 1967.
12. Goffman E. Relations in public: Microstudies of the public order. New York: Basic Books, 1972.
13. Kravchenko N. Прагматика виправдання та комунікативні стратегії збереження обличчя. Харків : Видавничий дім, 2020.
14. Robinson J. D., Bolden G. B. Accounts. In: Clark H. H. (ed.). The handbook of discourse processes. Routledge, 2010. P. 502–524.
15. Scott M. B., Lyman S. M. Accounts. American Sociological Review. 1968. Vol. 33, no. 1. P. 46–62.
ISSN 
.png)
