Verbal markers of threat in public statements of the English-speaking segment of the social network Twitter
Deeney Irina Anatolyevna, Reshetnyak Daria Alexandrovna, Drozdova Ekaterina Alexandrovna
Moscow University named after A. S. Griboedov; Belgorod State National Research University
Moscow University named after A. S. Griboedov
RUDN University: Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia
Submitted: 16.04.2023
Abstract. The aim of the study is to establish a correlation between the intensity of a threat and the specific linguistic means expressing it in the social network Twitter (lexemes, distribution of lexemes, grammatical constructions). Threat as a regular phenomenon of Internet public pages is realised in the appropriate contextual conditions, it is endowed with a particular style and is actualised through recurrent grammatical constructions. Such conditions of threat actualisation make it possible to associate it with the speech strategy relevant in Internet discourse. The scientific novelty of the study is accounted for by considering the functions of markers of threat in the gradation of its intensity in the English-speaking segment of the social network Twitter. As a result of the study, it has been determined that the textual space of social networks has a high degree of implicitness, expressiveness and evaluativeness, verbal markers of threat occupy a special place in the textual space of social networks as key elements of comments and messages. The intensity of a threat can be determined through the linguistic means of its actualisation in a social context. The statements containing a threat themselves have the appropriate style and expression, are built according to the most typical grammatical constructions. The analysis of the latter allows us to talk about the credibility of the action predicted by the threat and the possibility of transition from the plane of Internet communication to the real world.
Key words and phrases: угроза, интернет-дискурс, маркеры, маркеры, стратегия, англоязычный сегмент, threat, Internet discourse, markers, strategy, English-speaking segment
Open the whole article in PDF format. Free PDF-files viewer can be downloaded .
References:
Beatty M. J., McCroskey J. C. It’s in Our Nature: Verbal Aggressiveness As Temperamental Expression // Communication: Quarterly. 1997. Vol. 45 (4). https://doi.org/10.1080/01463379709370076
Brynielsson J., Horndahl A., Johansson F., Kaati L., Mårtenson Ch., Svenson P. Analysis of Weak Signals for Detecting Lone Wolf Terrorists // Proceedings of EISIC. Los Alamitos – Washington – Tokyo, 2012. https://doi.org/10.1109/eisic.2012.20
Cohen K., Johansson F., Kaati L., Mork J. C. Detecting Linguistic Markers for Radical Violence in Social Media // Terrorism and Political Violence. 2014. Vol. 26 (1). https://doi.org/10.1080/09546553.2014.849948
Dahlin J., Johansson F., Kaati L., Mårtenson Ch., Svenson P. Combining Entity Matching Techniques for Detecting Extremist Behavior on Discussion Boards // 2012 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining. Washington, 2012. https://doi.org/10.1109/asonam.2012.154
Davison K. P., Pennebaker J. W., Dickerson S. S. Who Talks? The Social Psychology of Illness Support Groups // The American Psychologist. 2000. Vol. 55 (2). https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.2.205
Gingiss P. Indirect Threats // Word. 1986. Vol. 37 (3).
Harris S. The Form and Function of Threats in Court // Language & Communication. 1984. Vol. 4 (4). https://doi.org/10.1016/0271-5309(84)90010-7
Limberg H. Impoliteness and Threat Responses // Journal of Pragmatics. 2009. Vol. 41 (7). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2009.02.003
Matheson D. The Performance of Publicness in Social Media: Tracing Patterns in Tweets After a Disaster // Media, Culture & Society. 2018. Vol. 40 (4). https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443717741356
Meloy J. R., Hoffmann J., Guldimann A., James D. The Role of Warning Behaviors in Threat Assessment: An Exploration and Suggested Typology // Behavioral Sciences and the Law. 2012. Vol. 30 (3). https://doi.org/10.1002/bsl.999
Milburn T. W., Watman K. H. On the Nature of Threat: A Social Psychological Analysis. N. Y.: Praeger Publishers, 1981.
Rancer A. S., Avtgis, T. A. Argumentative and Aggressive Communication: Theory, Research, and Application. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications, 2006.
Rezaeinia S. M., Rahmani R., Ghodsi A., Veisi H. Sentiment Analysis Based on Improved Pre-Trained Word Embeddings // Expert Systems with Applications. 2019. Vol. 117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2018.08.044
Searle J. R. What Is a Speech Act? // Black M. Philosophy in America. L.: Routledge, 2014. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315830636-18
Small G. S., Medsker L. Review of Information Extraction Technologies and Applications // Neural Computing and Applications. 2014. Vol. 25 (3-4). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-013-1516-6
Tausczik Y. R., Pennebaker J. W. The Psychological Meaning of Words: LIWC and Computerized Text Analysis Methods // Journal of Language and Social Psychology. 2010. Vol. 29 (1). https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X09351676
Van Hee C., Jacobs G., Emmery C., Desmet B., Lefever E., Verhoeven B., De Pauw G., Daelemans W., Hoste V. Automatic Detection of Cyberbullying in Social Media Text // PLoS ONE. 2018. Vol. 13 (10). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0203794
Русский
