Speech aggression as a rhetorical strategy in English-language parliamentary discourse

Litvyak Olesya Valerievna

This scientific article characterizes speech aggression as a rhetorical strategy in parliamentary discourse. When studying the parliamentary discourse, such a rhetorical strategy as verbal aggression was revealed. Speech aggression in the form of invective, i.e., denigrating the opponent through the text addressed to him, requires careful study within the framework of institutional discourses. Speech aggression refers to the use of language to express hostility and rejection of an opponent. The study identified such means of speech aggression as negativism, metaphor, irony, and neologisms. The most common means of speech aggression is negativism. By helping to create a contemptuous tone and causing a depressed state, it is able to deprive an informational publication of impartiality and objectivity, while at the same time helping to argue the author's position. These language tools create a negative emotional background and style that corresponds to the intellectual and emotional needs of the addressee, and destroy the neutral background of the message of facts. The least common means are neologisms. When studying the use of this language tool in the English-language parliamentary discourse, it was revealed that in sentences with the use of neologisms there is a negative assessment of the word invented by the author and its adverse psychological impact on the audience.

Keywords:Parliamentary discourse, speech aggression, press, neologism, negative emotional background.