Ideologeme as a Longuocognitive Phenomenon in Political Media Discourse: a Comparative Analysis of British and Kazakh Press
Keywords:
ideologeme, political media discourse, cognitive metaphor, legitimization strategy, critical discourse analysis, national identity.Abstract
The article is devoted to the linguocognitive and discursive analysis of ideologemes within the structure of political media discourse based on materials from English- and Kazakh-language press. The relevance of the study is determined by the increasing role of media in shaping public consciousness and representing ideological attitudes under the conditions of global informational polarization. The object of analysis is the political media discourse of the United Kingdom and Kazakhstan; the subject is ideologemes as conceptual and pragmatic units reflecting the cognitive models and value orientations of society. The purpose of the research is to identify the mechanisms of cognitive, framing, metaphorical, and axiological representation of ideologemes in various national media contexts, as well as to compare strategies of their legitimization and emotional marking.
The methodological framework includes cognitive-discursive analysis, critical discourse analysis (CDA), and methods of corpus linguistics. The empirical material of the study comprises a corpus of 100 newspaper articles selected from leading British and Kazakhstani publications for the period of 2023–2024. The analysis revealed significant differences in rhetorical and cognitive strategies: English-language discourse is dominated by critical argumentation and institutional opposition, whereas Kazakh-language discourse demonstrates a prevalence of collective identity, sacralization of government initiatives, and positive mobilization. Differences were identified in conceptual schemes, thematic dominants, types of legitimization, and the emotional-evaluative background of media texts.
The scientific novelty of the study lies in the development of an integrative model for the analysis of ideologemes from an intercultural perspective, based on a combination of cognitive and critical-discursive approaches. The theoretical significance of the research consists in clarifying the role of ideologemes as tools of conceptualization and navigation of political meaning. The practical relevance is determined by the applicability of the findings to media discourse analysis, intercultural communication studies, as well as the development of critical thinking and media literacy.
References
1. Караулов Ю.Н. Русский язык и языковая личность. – 6-е изд. – М.: Наука, 2010. – 270 с.
2. Красных В.В. Этнопсихолингвистика и лингвокультурология. – М.: Гнозис, 2001. – 284 с.
3. Бабушкин А.П. Типы концептов в лексике и фразеологии. – Воронеж: Изд-во Воронежского ун-та, 1996. – 81 с.
4. Charteris-Black J. Politicians and Rhetoric: The Persuasive Power of Metaphor. – 2nd ed. – Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011. – 303 p.
5. Kövecses Z. Metaphor and Culture. – Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2020. – 240 p.
6. Musolff A. Political Metaphor Analysis: Discourse and Scenarios. – London: Bloomsbury, 2016. – 224 p.
7. Van Dijk T.A. Discourse and Knowledge: A Sociocognitive Approach. – Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2021. – 422 p.
8. Wodak R. The Politics of Fear: What Right-Wing Populist Discourses Mean. – 2nd ed. – London: SAGE Publications, 2020. – 304 p.
9. Fairclough N. Language and Power. – 3rd ed. – London: Routledge, 2015. – 272 p.
10. Goffman E. Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience. – Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1974. – 586 p.
11. Chilton P. Analysing Political Discourse: Theory and Practice. – London: Routledge, 2004. – 240 p.
12. Сыздыкова А.Ж. Лингвистические механизмы репрезентации ценностей в казахской прессе. – Нур-Султан: Изд-во ЕНУ, 2021. – 200 с.
13. Искакова С. Национальная идентичность в казахстанском медиадискурсе: когнитивный подход. – Караганда: Университет Болашак, 2022. – 180 с.
14. Мусабаева М.Ш. Идеологические маркеры в казахском политическом медиадискурсе. – Алматы: КазНУ, 2020. – 210 с.
15. Fauconnier G., Turner M. The Way We Think: Conceptual Blending and the Mind’s Hidden Complexities. – New York: Basic Books, 2002. – 464 p.
16. Fillmore C.J. Frame Semantics // In: Linguistic Society of Korea (ed.). Linguistics in the Morning Calm. – Seoul: Hanshin, 1982. – P. 111–137.
17. Lakoff G., Johnson M. Metaphors We Live By. – 2nd ed. – Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2003. – 256 p.
18. Kövecses Z. Where Metaphors Come From: Reconsidering Context in Metaphor. – Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015. – 248 p.
19. Hart C. Cognitive Linguistics in Critical Discourse Analysis: Application and Implications. – London: Bloomsbury, 2020. – 256 p.
REFERENCES
1. Karaulov Iu.N. Russki iazyk i iazykovaia lichnost [The Russian Language and Language Personality]. – 6-e izd. – M.: Nauka, 2010. – 270 s. [in Russian]
2. Krasnykh V.V. Etnopsikholingvistika i lingvokulturologia [Ethnopsycholinguistics and Linguoculturology]. – M.: Gnozis, 2001. – 284 s. [in Russian]
3. Babushkin A.P. Tipy konceptov v leksike i frazeologii [Types of Concepts in Vocabulary and Phraseology]. – Voronezh: Voronezh State University Press, 1996. – 81 s. [in Russian]
4. Charteris-Black J. Politicians and Rhetoric: The Persuasive Power of Metaphor. – 2nd ed. – Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011. – 303 p.
5. Kövecses Z. Metaphor and Culture. – Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2020. – 240 p.
6. Musolff A. Political Metaphor Analysis: Discourse and Scenarios. – London: Bloomsbury, 2016. – 224 p.
7. Van Dijk T.A. Discourse and Knowledge: A Sociocognitive Approach. – Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2021. – 422 p.
8. Wodak R. The Politics of Fear: What Right-Wing Populist Discourses Mean. – 2nd ed. – London: SAGE Publications, 2020. – 304 p.
9. Fairclough N. Language and Power. – 3rd ed. – London: Routledge, 2015. – 272 p.
10. Goffman E. Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience. – Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1974. – 586 p.
11. Chilton P. Analysing Political Discourse: Theory and Practice. – London: Routledge, 2004. – 240 p.
12. Syzdykova A.Zh. Lingvisticheskie mekhanizmy reprezentacii cennostei v kazahskoi presse [Linguistic Mechanisms for the Representation of Values in the Kazakh Press]. – Nur-Sultan: ENU Press, 2021. – 200 p. [in Russian]
13. Iskakova S. Nacionalnaia identichnost v kazakhstanskom mediadiskurse: kognitivnyi podhod [National Identity in Kazakhstani Media Discourse: A Cognitive Approach]. – Karaganda: Bolashaq University, 2022. – 180 p. [in Russian]
14. Musabaeva M.Sh. Ideologicheskie markery v kazakhskom politicheskom mediadiskurse [Ideological Markers in Kazakh Political Media Discourse]. – Almaty: KazNU, 2020. – 210 p. [in Russian]
15. Fauconnier G., Turner M. The Way We Think: Conceptual Blending and the Mind’s Hidden Complexities. – New York: Basic Books, 2002. – 464 p.
16. Fillmore C.J. Frame Semantics // In: Linguistic Society of Korea (ed.). Linguistics in the Morning Calm. – Seoul: Hanshin, 1982. – P. 111–137.
17. Lakoff G., Johnson M. Metaphors We Live By. – 2nd ed. – Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2003. – 256 p.
18. Kövecses Z. Where Metaphors Come From: Reconsidering Context in Metaphor. – Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015. – 248 p.
19. Hart C. Cognitive Linguistics in Critical Discourse Analysis: Application and Implications. – London: Bloomsbury, 2020. – 256 p.
