LINGUISTIC ASPECTS OF THE ARGUMENTATION IN THE AVIATION DISCOURSE

UDC 811:629.7

Boika Tatsiana Igorevna – Senior Lecturer, the Department of Language Training. Belarusian State Aviation Academy (77, Uborevicha str., 220096, Minsk, Republic of Belarus); external doctorate student, the Department of Linguistics and Linguodidactics. Belarusian State Pedagogical University named after Maxim Tank (18, Sovetskaya str., 220030, Minsk, Republic of Belarus). E-mail: boiko-ti@mail.ru

DOI: https://doi.org/ 10.52065/2520-6729-2024-285-14.

Key words: argumentation, argumentative discourse, types of argumentation, argumentation markers, scientific text.

For citation: Boika T. I. Linguistic aspects of the argumentation in the aviation discourse. Proceedings of BSTU, issue 4, Print- Mediatechnologies, 2024, no. 2 (285), pp. 103–108 (In Russian). DOI: 10.52065/2520-6729-2024-285-14.

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to analyze the linguistic aspects of argumentation in aviation scientific texts. Aviation discourse is implemented in scientific texts of various genres (textbooks, reports of aviation specialists, reports of Aircraft Accident Investigation Board, aircraft operating manuals). Argumentation in aviation discourse is a special type of communication associated with aviation activities and air transport. Currently argumentation markers in aviation texts have not been studied. Using the linguistic methodology of argumentation analysis, based on the material of aviation scientific texts, the author identifies and describes the main types of argumentation markers (explanation, conclusion,objection, example) and their functions (commenting, signaling, informative and organizational). Two groups of argumentation markers are identified: rational argumentation markers, affecting the addressee’s mind, and emotional argumentation markers, aimed at the addressee’s emotions. The predominance of rational argumentation over emotional argumentation in scientific aviation texts is proved. Linguistic research of aviation discourse allows us to understand the peculiarities of the language of the aviation industry and identify the functions of argumentation markers in English-language scientific aviation texts in order to more accurately formulate and interpret information messages and scientific texts, as well as realize their pragmatic potential. The results of the study will contribute to a more effective use of language in scientific aviation literature to achieve communicative and educational goals.

Download

References

  1. Mironec V. V. Concept, types and types of argumentations. Molodezh’ i nauka: actual’nyye problem fundamental’nykh i prikladnykh issledovaniy: materialy II Vserossiyskoy natsional’noy nauchnoy konferentsii studentov, aspirantov i molodykh uchenykh [Youth and science: Current problems of fundamental and applied research: materials of the II All-Russian national scientific conference of students, postgraduates and young scientists]. Komsomol’sk-na-Amure, 2019, pp. 268–271 (In Russian).
  2. Baranov A. N. Lingvisticheskaya teoriya argumentatsii (kognitivnyy podkhod). Dissertatsiya doktora filologicheskikh nauk [Linguistic theory of argumentation (cognitive approach). Dissertation DSc (Philology)]. Moscow, 1990, 372 p. (In Russian).
  3. Graff D., Birkenshtajn K. Kak pisat’ ubeditel’no: iskusstvo argumentatsii v nauchnykh i nauchnopopulyarnykh rabotakh [How to write persuasively: the art of argumentation in scientific and popular science works]. Moscow, Al’pina Pablisher Publ., 2015. 257 p. (In Russian).
  4. Ivin A. A. Osnovy teorii argumentatsii [Basics of Argumentation Theory]. Moscow, VLADOS Publ., 1997. 352 p. (In Russian).
  5. Kostyushkina G. M. Kontseptual’naya sistematika argumentatsii [Conceptual taxonomy of argumentation]. Moscow, Flinta Publ.: Nauka Publ., 2017. 584 p. (In Russian).
  6. Shymanskaya V. Ju. Communicative and pragmatic characteristics of the addresser and the addressee in the customs media discourse (comparative analysis). Vestsi BDPU [News BSPU], series 1, 2020, no. 1, pp. 76–78 (In Russian).
  7. Shymanskaya O. Pragmatic potential of news mediatexts on customs and border protection. Filologickě Vědomosti. Vědecký a praktický časopis, 2019, no. 1, pp. 7–12.
  8. Nuzhnova E. E. Argumentation strategy in scientific discourse. Vestnik PNIPU. Problemy yazykoznaniya i pedagogiki [Herald PSTU. Problems of linguistics and pedagogy], 2019, no. 2, pp. 57–64 (In Russian).
  9. Savchuk T. N. Argumentatsiya v diskurse gumanitarnykh nauk (na materiale russko-i belorusskoyazychnykh tekstov). Avtoreferat dissertatsii doctora filologicheskikh nauk [Argumentation in the discourse of the humanities (based on Russian and Belarusian-language texts). Abctract of thesis DSc (Philology)]. Minsk, 2020. 48 p. (In Russian).
  10. Prigarina N. K. Argumentatsiya sudebnoy zashchititel’noy rechi : ritoricheskaya model’. Avtoreferat dissertatsii doctora filologicheskikh nauk [Argumentation of a judicial defense speech: a rhetorical model. Abctract of thesis DSc (Philology)]. Volgograd, 2010. 34 p. (In Russian).
  11. Homenko E. V. Linguistic and pragmatic features of argumentation in English scientific and educational texts. Vestnik PGU [Herald PSU], series A, 2019, no. 10, pp. 115–120 (In Russian).
  12. Homenko, E.V. Zhanroobrazuyushhiy potentsial argumentativno-otsenochnykh sredstv (na materiale angloyazychnykh nauchnykh tekstov po energetike). Avtoreferat dissertatsii doctora filologicheskikh nauk [Genre-forming potential of argumentative and evaluative means (based on English-language scientific texts on energy). Abctract of thesis DSc (Philology)]. Minsk, 2014. 28 p. (In Russian).
  13. Sorokina S. G. Features of the argumentative structure of a scientific text. Privolzhskiy nauchnyy vestnik [Privolzhsky Scientific Journal], 2013, no. 3, pp. 82–88 (In Russian).
  14. Advanced Avionic Handbook, U.S.: Department of transportation. Federal aviation administration, 2009, 116 p.
  15. Aragiljan N. K. Aviatsionnyy angliyskiy yazyk v neshtatnykh situatsiyakh [Aviation English in non-routine situations]. Ul’yanovsk, UVAU GA(I) Publ., 2012. 154 p. (In Russian).

13.06.2024