The Discourse of the Russian Elite in the ERA of “Liquid” Modernity as a Problem of Ethnic, Social and Cultural Security

Abstract

The purpose of this article is an analytical study of modern Russian-speaking elite discursive identity, which is a reflection of the problems of modern social and cultural security of the country. The discursive practices of elite identity in Russian discourse of the era of "liquid” modernity are observed. Addresses Current changes in behavioral discourse of elitist personality, basic discoursebased concepts, that records changes in social reality in the chronotope, are analyzed. The tense situation in Russia exacerbates socio-cultural opposition of "friend or foe" at the level of discursive practices. Modern, multicultural elitist language personality skillfully uses several ethno-linguistic and socio-cultural codes, successfully adapting to globalization and migration processes of modernity (Karabulatova, 2013, p. 794). Language game, which is clearly represented in the discourse of the elite of the Russian personality, allows the characteristic representatives to use the funds as elevated and reduced vocabulary. In the process of language use new behavioral patterns of society and culture are forming. In it N. Farkle and R. Wodak see the power of discourse (Fairclough, 1996, p. 237-240). It is obviously that the problem of discourse does not belong only to linguistics, but this very preparadigmaticity attracts the interest of researchers. The eclecticism of human society dictates various forms of communication between participants depending on social and cultural norms. In accordance with the linguistic philosophy of structuralism the language is not just a channel of information about ordinary phenomena, and the mechanism of generating and structuring the social world. This also applies to the formation of social identity and social relations, i.e. changes in discourse are a way to change the world. DOI: 10.5901/mjss.2015.v6n3s4p147

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 11 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.