UN DISCOURSE AND ITS FEATURES
Abstract
At the current stage of the development of linguistics, the focus of attention of scientists working in various fields is language identity in all its styles and forms. The need for communicative practice to focus on its optimization and identification of the factors that represent the success of communication has predetermined the growing interest in discourse and its components. This article focuses on identifying the distinctive features of the official UN discourse. The theoretical framework of discourse analysis includes various fields of social sciences such as sociology, psychology, linguistics, media and political science. Each of these fields uses discourse analysis based on its own perspective and scientific methods and creates its rules for discourse analysis. The need for communicative practice to focus on its optimization and identification of the factors that represent the success of communication has predetermined the growing interest in discourse and its components.. This article, respectively, focuses on identifying the distinctive features of the official UN discourse.
Full text article
References
Burton F., Carlen P. Official discourse. London, 1979, 48 p.
Cohen, R. Language and Negotiations: A Middle East Lexicon. In: Jovan Kurbalija, Hannah Slavik (eds.). Language and Diplomacy. Malta: Diploprojects, 2001, pp. 67–91.
Cohen, R. Language and Conflict Resolution: The Limits of English. International Studies Review, 3(1), 200, 67 p.
Fedorovskaya O. A., Tsivilling M. O zhanrovoi klassifikatsii nauchno-tekhnicheskikh dokumentov i ikh nauch (On the genre classification of scientific and technical documents and their scientific content). Moscow, 1989, pp. 37–48.
Jørgensen M., Louise P. Discourse Analysis as Theory and Method. London: SAGE Publications Ltd., 2002, pp. 1–5.
Larsson B. Ett D. R. Agonistisk feminism och folklig mobilisering – examplelet kvinnofolkhögskolan. Halmstad: Tryck Bulls Graphics, 2010, pp. 38–34.
McAlevy T. The Arab-Israeli Conflict. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998, pp. 39–47.
Nick S. Use of language in diplomacy. In: Jovan Kurbalija, Hannah Slavik (eds.). Language and Diplomacy. Malta: Diploprojects.
Thompson N. Power and Empowerment. Oxford: Russell House Publishing Ltd., 2007, 5 p.
Van D. T. Prejudice in Discourse. Amsterdam: JBPC, 1984, 105 p.
Van D. T. Racism and the Press. London, 1991, 209 p.
Van D. T. Principles of Critical Discourse Analysis. Discourse and Society, 4, 1993, pp. 249–283.
Van D. T. Discourse and Cognition in Society. In: Communication Theory Today. Stanford: Stanford Univ., 1994, 177 p.
Van D. T. Multidisciplinary CDA: A Plea for Diversity. In: Wodak R., Meyer M. Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Sage Publications, 2001, 108 p.
Williams C. Tradition and Change in Legal English: A Linguistic Analysis of Diplomatic Discourse. Bern: Peter Lang, 2005, 11 p.
Authors
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Licensed under the Creative
Commons Attribution International License
(CC BY 4.0).
Copyright © by author(s).