COMMUNICATIVE SITUATIONS OF TYPIFIED BEHAVIOR

SITUAÇÕES COMUNICATIVAS DE COMPORTAMENTO TIPIFICADO

SITUACIONES COMUNICATIVAS DE COMPORTAMIENTO TIPIFICADO

Natalya A. DEPUTATOVA

Liya Faridovna SHANGARAEVA

Alfiya A. YARKHAMOVA

Liliya R. ISLAMOVA

Luiza R. ZAKIROVA

ABSTRACT: The study focuses on exploring utterances of people in various everyday

situations of communication in Russia. The representatives of psychology, sociology and

linguistics come to a common opinion that the impact of the situation consists, first of all, of

the formation of a person’s expectations regarding the near future and of stimulating actions.

Typical conditions contribute, as a rule, to the appearance of typical actions. In this paper, the

characteristic parameters of the speech behavior in a typified situation are identified. The

present study investigates the influence of typified physical conditions on speech behavior of

communicants on the example of situations of speech interaction.

KEYWORDS: Typified situation. Speech interaction. Verbal behavior. Speech act.

Communication.

RESUMO: O estudo se concentra em explorar expressões de pessoas em várias situações

cotidianas de comunicação na Rússia. Os representantes da psicologia, da sociologia e da

linguística chegam a uma opinião comum que o impacto da situação consiste, antes de mais

nada, na formação das expectativas de uma pessoa em relação ao futuro próximo e no estímulo

às ações. As condições típicas contribuem, via de regra, para o surgimento de ações típicas.

Neste artigo, são identificados os parâmetros característicos do comportamento de fala em

uma situação tipificada. O presente estudo investiga a influência de condições físicas

tipificadas no comportamento de fala de comunicantes a partir do exemplo de situações de

interação de fala.

PALAVRAS-CHAVE: Situação tipificada. Interação de fala. Comportamento verbal. Ato da

fala. Comunicação.

Kazan Federal University, Kazan - Russia. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8978-3942. E-mail:

natalizachka@mail.ru

Kazan Federal University, Kazan - Russia. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1777-5852. E-mail: sh-

liya@yandex.ru

Kazan Agrarian University, Kazan - Russia. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7743-9551. E-mail:

alfiashamsieva@mail.ru

Kazan Agrarian University, Kazan - Russia. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5981-9518. E-mail:

liliyarustamovna@mail.ru

Kazan Federal University, Kazan - Russia. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7014-0119. E-mail:

clivia29@yandex.ru

RESUMEN: El estudio se centra en explorar las expresiones de las personas en diversas

situaciones cotidianas de comunicación en Rusia. Los representantes de la psicología, la

sociología y la lingüística llegan a la opinión común de que el impacto de la situación consiste,

en primer lugar, en la formación de las expectativas de la persona con respecto al futuro

próximo y en estimular las acciones. Las condiciones típicas contribuyen, por regla general, a

la aparición de acciones típicas. En este trabajo se identifican los parámetros característicos

del comportamiento del habla en una situación tipificada. El presente estudio investiga la

influencia de las condiciones físicas tipificadas en el comportamiento del habla de los

comunicantes en el ejemplo de situaciones de interacción del habla.

PALABRAS CLAVE: Situación tipificada. Interacción del habla. Comportamiento verbal.

Acto de habla. Comunicación.

Introduction

At the present stage of development, the variability of speech is of great interest to

linguists (DEPUTATOVA, 2019). By a typified situation, we mean a combination of typified

social, physical, and cultural elements. By their nature, they have a typified impact on an

individual, define a typified psychological and mental attitude of speech interaction, and thus

determine its typified speech behavior.

The logical and causal condition of the speech interaction of communicants by the

typified external conditions of the speech situation is as follows:

1) The scenario of the development of verbal interaction and verbal behavior of the

interlocutors forms the corresponding expectations of the communicants under the influence of

the external parameters of the typified situation;

2) Situational roles between speakers are distributed unconditionally (with the

obligatory allocation of “sovereign manager”); the exchange of roles between participants in

the situation is impossible;

3) Following the designated situational role consists in committing speech actions

socially assigned to this role;

4) The choice of a specific SA and language means, due to typical speech responses,

arises in response to typified situational incentives.

In the formation of typical behavior, social processes are involved, such as 1)

habitualization and 2) institutionalization (fixing the usual in the form of social conventions)

(BERGER; LUCKMAN, 1995). The social processes of the formation of typified speech

behavior have a physiological basis. The fulfillment of a typified speech act, as a principle of

response, is a manifestation of a conditioned classical reflex and is fixed in the form of the

electrophysiological activity of individual cells. The dominant (temporarily dominant brain

installation) located in the brain stem and hypothalamus is responsible for reflex preparedness.

Establishing communication with the dominant requires the connection of a cortical center

(MATYUSHKIN, 2008).

We adhere to the definition of behavior that K. Levin (2001) puts forward. By behavior,

he understands the function of man and the environment. In typified situations, the variable

“external environment” becomes dominant. We believe that this is due to the fact that a whole

set of pragmatic signs necessary for the formation of typified speech behavior is accumulated

in the situational frame. The typified situation system includes the following components:

1) The stable situational frame;

2) The rigid distribution of situational roles;

3) The order of submission in relations between the participants in the situation;

4) The presence of unconditional social conventions regarding speech behavior within

a specific speech situation.

The nature of the speech behavior of the participants in the situation is determined by

the system organization of the typified situation. The behavior of the participants in the situation

is distinguished by such features as: 1) typification; 2) reproduction; 3) hard algorithmicity.

Typicality of speech behavior is manifested, firstly, in the high degree of correspondence of the

actions performed by the speaker to the actions of other people and their actions in similar

situations in the past, and secondly, in the instability of behavior in relation to different types

of situations. The reproductive nature of speech activity is the reproduction of cliched colloquial

formulas (KARASIK, 2000). Algorithm consists in following the scenario of speech interaction

socially approved and fixed in the knowledge of the participants in the situation. Following

certain algorithms is characteristic of any type of activity manifests itself in different situations.

A characteristic feature of a typified situation is the functioning of mechanical (or deterministic)

algorithms that contain strict norms regarding the scenario of speech interaction. For this

reason, in typified situations, the speech actions of the participants in the situation follow each

other, forming an unambiguous sequence of speech interaction, and always lead to the desired

result (SUKHODOLSKY, 1998, p. 24). The emotional state of communicants influences

communicative intentions of the speaker and the listener, the same as structural and semantic

content of the sentences implementing these intentions in the process of linguistic

communication (ABDULLINA, 2015).

We can consider typified situations as situations in which fragments of social life are

often repeated: visiting a doctor, serving in a cafe and a store, interaction between the boss and

subordinate, the prosecutor and the person under investigation, the guard and the prisoner,

teachers and students, and others. Some typified situations require a considerable margin of

time for the implementation of verbal interaction, and some situations happens in conditions of

minimal time length, for example, a request to convey something:

- Mozhno mne poprosit' kusochek hleba?

- Pozhalujsta.

- May I ask for a piece of bread

-You are welcome.

- Elena Efimovna, u menya k vam ogromnaya i delikatnaya pros'ba. Vpervye

sobirayus' na yug. S biletami, sami znaete, tragediya, esli ne bol'she. A ya slyshal, u vas

rodstvennica v aeroportu funkcioniruet. Ne pomozhet li ona mne?

- Chto v moih silah sdelayu…

- Elena Efimovna, I have a huge and delicate request for you. For the first time going to

the South. With tickets, you know, a tragedy, if not more. And I heard that your relative is

working at the airport. Would she help me?

- I will do my best...

Let us examine in more detail the influence of pragmatic situational signs (a stable

situational framework; the order of submission in relations between the participants in the

situation; a rigid distribution of situational roles and the presence of unconditional social

conventions regarding speech behavior within a specific speech situation) on the formation of

typified speech behavior of participants.

We tend to agree with M. Argyle (2001) that the environment affects human behavior

through the perception of conditions or their meanings. In our opinion, the peculiarity of the

situational framework of typified situations is the availability of special equipment that shows

what kind of activity is usually revealed in these conditions. As a rule, a specialized setting is

characteristic of a social institution or education, i.e., that place which can be considered as

surrounded by strictly established barriers of perception, in which any kind of activity is

actually carried out.

This place manages the impressions made, organizes them according to a socially

approved criterion and assigns them a specific category (for example, a hospital - a medical

institution for inpatient treatment (OZHEGOV; SHVEDOVA, 2002); hospital – a large

building where sick or injured people are looked after and receive medical treatment (Longman

Dictionary of Contemporary English, 2014); cafe - a small restaurant serving coffee

(OZHEGOV; SHVEDOVA, 2002); cafe - a small restaurant where you can buy drinks and

simple meals (Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English, 2014); a store is an institution

that produces retail trade, as well as premises in which the trade is performed (OZHEGOV;

SHVEDOVA, 2002); shop - a building or a part of building where things are sold to the public

(Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English, 2014).

Based on the foregoing, we conclude that a public place with its own set of equipment

contributes to a typified perception of the situation, which leads to the reconstruction of a

nervous model of the situation, the function of which is to impose restrictions on the choice of

a specific action (ANOKHIN, 1966). This makes it possible to perform typified speech acts in

repeated conditions.

For the perception of the situation as typified, an important factor is social agreement in

the interpretation of fragments of the external world. This requires a common physical,

biological, social, and cultural base of the participants of the situation.

Individuals belonging to a group that grew up under the same conditions, or

living and functioning in an environment that is somewhat homogeneous in

essential physical, biological, social and cultural aspects, to a certain extent

they will share common ideas and have the same general options for

perceiving the situation (MAGNUSSON, 2001, p. 207).

We are inclined to highlight several factors that determine the high degree of

structuredness of the communication space:

1) the sphere of constant interaction of representatives of various sectors of society;

2) the habitualized nature of the activity;

3) the unconditional distribution of the levels of subordination in the relations of the

participants in the interaction;

4) the behavior requiring compulsory compliance with social conventions.

Most often, all typified situations happen in places of mass communication, in various

kinds of public institutions (hospitals, shops, cafes, etc.), where the physical space of interaction

is socially structured and is considered, according to social interpretation, as consisting of

strictly determined positions of interlocutors (for example, a store involves a “seller-buyer”

interaction). Naturally, in such conditions, speech interaction is maximally conventionalized,

since it occurs under conditions of maintaining a large psychological distance (PD) between the

participants in the situation. A socially established set of characteristics corresponds to each of

the provided situational positions. This set defines the features of speech interaction. Such

characteristics are most fully consistent with the situation in the service sector and non-

production sector (hospital, store, cafe), as well as situations characterized by a high degree of

conventionality (host - guest).

To determine a typified situation, we first need to identify the external parameters of

speech interaction (a set of physical conditions). Each situation has its own characteristic set of

physical conditions (outer frame) and its spatial boundaries. The saturation of a given space is

usually consistent with the purpose of the latter. A kind of reference point for the participants

in the situation is such objects. Each supporting subject has a special social function and has its

own semiotic status (EMELYANOV, 2001, p. 147).

The speech repertoire of the participants in the situation is realized, first of all,

depending on the external situational framework, which imposes its own characteristics on the

performance of situational roles. So, for example, the request in the repertoire of a guest and an

employee will be somewhat different, although all these participants in the situation occupy a

dependent position in society. Their roles relate to thematically different situations and have a

different external framework (visiting someone else’s home, fulfilling their duties in the office).

In accordance with these differences in the physical conditions of situations, the Prescriptor

will implement different models of behavior.

1) Stimulating Speech Acts of Motivating Semantics (SSAMS) Speech Act (SA) request

in the guest's repertoire:

- Asya, mozhno dat' Bore blinchiki?

- A on stanet ih est'?

- Asya, can I give Borya pancakes?

- And will he eat them?

2) SSAMS SA request in the repertoire of a subordinate:

- Boris Palych. Razreshite zaderzhat'sya. Syn Vovik podvel. Vidno vchera

morozhennogo pereel i pribolel. Vracha zhdu.

- Boris Palych. Will you allow to be late? Son Vovik failed. I suppose yesterday he was

overeaten the ice cream and became ill. Waiting for a doctor.

As we see from the examples, the external situational frame performs a distinguishing

function in the analysis of typified situations. For example, to the thematic group of typified

situations - “Service sector” we can attribute situations of communication in a cafe and in a

store. However, the presence in both cases of its characteristic physical features (desk and

tables, counter and display case) causes a certain difference in the interpretation of the

communication situation, which necessarily affects the speech behavior of the participants in

the situation.

The typified situations of verbal interaction in a cafe and in a store are most indicative

of the dependence of the Prescriptor's speech behavior on the physical conditions of the

implementation of the SA.

Methodology

Participants and materials

This study was designed using a descriptive-qualitative research method; it is an

exploratory paradigm that leaves out statistical computation (MOLEONG, 1994, p. 2). The data

extraction method used in this study was based on video recording and content analysis

techniques. When analyzing the data, the method of extra-lingual equivalence was used. This

study was conducted in five large stores, seven cafes and fast-food cafes, three hospitals, Russia.

One hundred six random men and women who visited these establishments were selected as

objects of the study. Sellers, waiters, doctors were chosen at random to bring the

communication situation closer to everyday life. The needs for observing participants in

communication are mainly fulfilled to study how these people react and what roles they play in

each communication situation, and consider the relationship between utterances under

pragmatic forces, in accordance with the roles assigned to the communicants. The data were

collected using an observation technique that was developed in accordance with the model of

the relevant situation. The observation technique involved several different situations in the

form of discourse (in a cafe, in a store, in a hospital and at a party), during which video recording

and further information processing were conducted. The collected data is examined and

classified according to the criteria described above in relation to the typified speech situation,

the roles played by the speakers and the specific language repertoire appropriate to the given

communication situation. One hundred six adults participated in this production study were

native talkers of Russian (mean age 44, range 31 to 57). The gender of the participants in the

psycholinguistic experiment was not considered; all people took part in pragmatically

equivalent situations with a comparable social context. All participants provided informed

consent and were random people we met in cafes, shops, and in the hospital. In a situation of

communication at a party, friends, acquaintances, and acquaintances of colleagues were

involved.

Results and discussion

Influence of typified physical conditions on speech behavior of communicants on the

example of situations of speech interaction in a cafe and in a store

Let`s consider the situation of speech interaction between the client and the bartender in

a cafe. The client in this situation is the Prescriptor, and the bartender acts as the Agens.

Naturally, the Prescriptor occupies a dominant position, since in the presuppositional field of

the speaker there is information that the functions of the bartender are to optimally serve the

visitor. We can conclude that in this typified situation, the client implements the strategy of the

“manager” of the situation. In this regard, the conversation between the visitor and the bartender

will be included in the framework of the dialogic unity (DU) - order, SSAMS will come from

the client (Prescriptor), reacting remarks or direct action from the bartender (Agens). Our study

showed that the cafe’s visitor repertoire consists mainly of the SSAMS of the prescriptive SA

order. SA order is implemented in such pragmatic conditions as:

1) the dominant position of the Prescriptor (client), due to the structure of the situation;

2) the obligatory nature of the execution of the causable action for the Agent (bartender),

because it is part of his official duties (BELYAEVA, 1992, p. 15-18).

A characteristic feature of the SA order is the motivation for performing the SA, the

desire of the Prescriptor to receive the services offered.

SSAMS SA order in Russian is executed using elliptic substantive constructions (93%

of examples). These constructions may include a formula of politeness, pozhalujsta (please),

or bud'te dobry (be kind) in Russian (60% of examples). If the politeness formula is absent, the

statement is not perceived because of this as impolite, because such a speech act still

corresponds to the situational role of the client and, therefore, remains situationally appropriate,

socially approved. The reaction of Agens, unconditionally fulfilling the stated direct intention,

is a confirmation of this:

- Dva pirozhka i chaj, pozhalujsta.

- S vas 125 rublej.

- Dva “Eskimo”.

- Two pies and tea, please.”

- 125 rubles.

- Two Eskimos.

In our difficult period, there is always not enough time, we are always in a hurry. The

use of elliptic constructions in dialogical speech is connected with the speaker’s desire to

simplify, reduce the utterance as much as possible, and ultimately create a single formula

containing as much information as possible while minimizing the structure of the utterance

itself. Therefore, the surface structure of the utterance contains only those components that

make up its rational minimum, i.e., are necessary and sufficient for the perception of its meaning

(GORDIEVSKAYA, 1996).

Very often, the cafe’s client’s repertoire contains verbal incentive sentences. Verbosity

is a characteristic feature of the incentive sentences under consideration, being their syntactic

norm. The absence of the verb does not lead to the destruction of the sentence, does not make

it inferior, and does not complicate the expression in it of an incentive meaning. The specificity

of this structural type of sentence consists precisely in the absence, in the uselessness of the

verb.

Motivating sentences of this type combine the “idea of the subject with the idea of the

predicate”. The subject and predicate find their joint expression in incentive sentences in the

main and only member of these sentences and in the incentive intonation that forms them

(BUZAROV, 1998). In a specific typified situation, such sentences are very easy to transform

into verb ones by expanding their composition, the result of such restoration will be, as a rule,

only one correct option that the speaker intended.

In SA, a mutual understanding arises between the client and the bartender. This

understanding is due to a typified situation in which both sides of communication are included.

Verbalization of only one component of the semantic structure of the utterance, the object to

which the action is directed, predominates in the statement of the Prescriptor. Reliability of

communication is ensured by the situation itself, a high degree of typification, and a rigid

structure which contributes to the concretization of the meaning of the statement. The

knowledge of each native speaker of the reference structure of a given statement helps to restore

the elliptical component of the statement.

- Dva kofe, pozhalujsta.

- Chernyj ili s molokom?

- Chernyj.

- Two coffee, please.

- Black or white?

- The black.

After a client’s SSAMS, a verbal response from the bartender usually does not follow,

but an immediate action follows.

Rarely enough in colloquial speech, the client, when contacting the bartender, uses

conventional speech means to express motivation. It is known that some interrogative sentences

“have already become ... the conventional means of expressing indirect requests” (SEARL,

1986, p. 175):

- Mozhno vypit' stakan koka-koly?

- Bol'shoj ili obychnyj?

- Obychnyj.

- Can I have a glass of Coca-Cola?

- Large or small?

- Small.

Conventional speech means are not able to satisfy the requirement of clarity and

conciseness of expression of direct intention. As our study has shown, the use of these means

in Russian is minimal, therefore the client’s SA (Prescriptor) consists mainly of language means

of motivation execution.

Consider the situation of speech interaction of the buyer and seller in the store.

According to the scenario of speech interaction in the store, the buyer occupies a dominant

position (the role of the Prescriptor), his speech repertoire consists of only interrogative and

direct statements. The choice of type of direct SA is limited. The vast majority of cases on the

part of the buyer are committed by the SSAMS SA request (99%). The SSAMS SA request is

made through conventional speech means (82%). The most used interrogative constructions

(65%). The prevailing use of this particular form is not accidental

The use of interrogative constructions by the buyer in a situation of requesting

information about the cost and characteristics of the goods predisposes them to be included in

speech and in a situation of expressing motivation.

This is also facilitated by the commonality of the semantic-pragmatic features of the

interrogative intent of the interrogative construct with the motivating intent. The first is

informative and incentive and the second is non-informative and incentive (BOGDANOV,

1990, p. 54). The perlocutionary effect is achieved by the fact that the performance of a speech

or physical action by the Addressee is implied in advance. In this regard, interrogative

statements become carriers of the illocutionary force of motivation. They begin to convey an

incentive intention when they are placed in a different communicative environment, in that in

which the verbal reaction of the interlocutor as a participant in communication is optional.

Thereby, the conditions for the successful implementation of the interrogative form in its

primary function are blocked, as a result of which the intention of “interrogation” is neutralized,

and the utterance acquires an illocutionary force corresponding to the situation of use, in our

case, the illocutionary force of motivation (MIKHAILOV, 1994; BELYAEVA, 1992, p. 37).

Making a direct intention in the form of a question minimizes its categoricality. In our

opinion, the interrogative form is one of the politest means of transmitting motivation. The

semantic structure of the question allows the omission of such an important element of the

direct complex as “the action predicated by the speaker”. Instead of this complex, the

component “material object” necessary for the fulfillment of the desired action is included in

the semantic structure. The categorical nature of the direct statement is reduced. It becomes

optimal for expressing motivation on the part of a person who occupies a slightly lower

situational role concerning the interlocutor in connection with the fact that the fulfillment of his

desire depends on the Addressee. Since the predicted action is part of the seller’s duties, the

perlocutionary effect of the buyer’s SA is always mandatory.

SSAMS SA request is often formulated with interrogative constructions. In the Russian

language, the most commonly used modal predicate mozhno (can) is one that transmits a

resolution request (28% of the total number of examples) or a general question starting with the

words A u vas yest'… (Do you have...) (37% of the total number of examples).

- Mozhno posmotret' von tot siniy bloknot?

- Eto posledniy.

- A u vas yest' takoy zhe dzhemper, tol'ko posvetley?

- K sozhaleniyu, net.

- Can I see that blue notebook?

- This is the last.

- Do you have the same sweater, just a little brighter?

- Unfortunately, no

From the above examples, we see that the SSAMS of the Addressee is carried out by

requesting information about the availability of the required subject at the Addressee, i.e.,

Buyer`s request is always a request for an item. This is due to the conditions of the speech

situation itself and the speaker’s desire to minimize the intensity of the direct intention. The

buyer needs an item and his speech behavior is aimed at the acquisition of this item. The goal

of the seller is to sell this item.

In the Russian language very often verbal incentive sentences are used in the buyer's

repertoire (20% of the total number of examples). This is in no way perceived as an ignorant

way of addressing, on the contrary, verbal motivational sentences are situationally appropriate

and socially approved:

- Kilogramm molochnykh sosisok.

- Yeshche chto?

- Paket moloka i pachku smetany.

- 344 rublya v kassu.

- A kilo of milk sausages.

- What else?

- A packet of milk and a pack of sour cream.

- 344 rubles to the cashier.

Naturally, such means of a speech utterance are possible in a certain typified situation.

The direct intention of this SA is expressed more specifically since its semantic structure

contains all the main components of the motivation situation, namely: the addressee-performer

of the action, the action itself, the beneficiary. At the same time, the requirement of minimizing

the speaker’s efforts concerning the performance of the predicted action was met.

In Russian, our study showed the frequent use of the imperative in the buyer’s SA and

this brings the SSAMS of the SA closer to the request from the SSAMS of the SA demand, the

speaker is convinced that he has the right to insist that the addressee do what he, the speaker,

wants from him.

- Pokazhite vazu za 120 rubley.

- Dayte posmotret' von tot sviter.

- Show the vase for 120 rubles.

- Let me see that sweater over there.

So, based on the foregoing, we concluded that the client/buyer`s verbal interaction with

the service personnel is carried out in similar conditions, the presence of some differences in

the situation (due to the different functional purpose of these establishments) is reflected in the

client / buyer’s speech repertoire.

In the Russian speech use, the speech repertoire of the client / buyer is as follows:

1) In a typified situation in a cafe, a mostly prescriptive SSAMS SA order is used.

2) SSAMS SA order is formed directly, using the language means.

3) The leading language means is elliptic substantive constructions (93%).

4) In the situation of communication in the store, in the speaker’s speech, we observe

only the SSAMS SA request and demand.

5) In 82% of cases, DSAs are formed through conventional speech means.

6) SSAMS SA requests are made by interrogative constructions (65% in Russian); in

Russian, the most commonly used modal predicate mozhno (can) transmits a resolution request

(28% of the total number of examples), a question starting with the words A u vas yest'… (Do

you have ...) (37% of the total number of examples); elliptical constructions in the Russian

language make up 20% of the total number of examples; imperative in Russian 15% of the total

number of examples.

The analysis of situations of speech interaction in a cafe and a store confirms that the

factor of the external situational framework is important in the formation of the speech behavior

of the participants in typified situations in Russian.

Rigid allocation of situational roles

Special patterns of speech behavior, which involve certain interrelated roles, exist for

each individual typified situation (ARGYLE, 2001). These situational roles correspond to

external physical conditions. Knowledge of situational roles is a component of the cultural

heritage of native speakers, it is fixed in intersubjective consciousness, for example, the seller

is an employee of a store or shop selling goods to customers (OZHEGOV; SHVEDOVA, 2002);

a bartender is a waiter in a bar (OZHEGOV; SHVEDOVA, 2002); the waiter - in a restaurant,

cafe, at receptions: a worker serving dishes (OZHEGOV; SHVEDOVA, 2002). Performing

situational roles provides the participant situations an effective result of interaction with the

interlocutor (EMELYANOV, 2001, p. 145).

Each typified situation has a characteristic set of situational roles that is characteristic

only for it. For example, the structure of the situation of speech communication in the store

contains situational positions of the seller and the buyer:

- Ikh (sapogi) mozhno nosit' zimoy?

- Tol'ko ne v syruyu pogodu.

- Can they be worn (boots) in winter?

- Not in wet weather.

The roles of the bartender and the client are assumed by the situation of communication

in the cafe:

- Dayte dva chaya, pozhaluysta.

- Vot voz'mite.

- Give me some tea, please.

- Here, take it.

The roles of the guest and the owner of the house are assumed by the situation of

communication at a party:

- Poprobuyte etot salat, on iz krabov.

- Oy, da, ya lyublyu s krabami.

- Try this salad, it's from crabs.

- Oh yes, I love with crabs.

When choosing an adequate model of speech behavior, the speaker focuses on his

interlocutor. In some typified situations, one position assumes an indefinite number of potential

interlocutor roles.

This point of view is confirmed, for example, by the situation of communication in the

hospital, where three potential positions can be distinguished. To the first position, we attribute

SA between the doctor and the patient. To the second - SA between the doctor and the relative

of the patient. In the third position, we consider SA between a doctor and colleagues or

assistants. Our study showed that in all three cases, the doctor retains an equally dominant

position, which is explained by his professional training and the obligatory activity for the role

of the doctor. However, naturally, his speech repertoire varies from situation to situation, this

is caused by the interlocutors performing different types of roles.

Speech act doctor - patient

The dominant pragmatic types of direct speech acts in the doctor’s repertoire are

occupied by prescriptive SA (43% of the total number of examples) and suggestive SA (57%

of the total number of examples).

Prescriptive SA in the doctor's repertoire

The most common SSAMS in the doctor’s speech repertoire in Russian are the SA order

and the SA command. In Russian, these SAs are always framed using the imperative (100%

prescriptive SA).

- Otkin'te odeyalo, – skazal vrach, prilazhivaya k usham fonendoskop.

- Razden'tes' do poyasa, – skazal vrach.

- Throw back the blanket, the doctor said, adjusting the phonendoscope to his ears.

- Strip to the waist, the doctor said.

In this communicative situation, the doctor (speaker) takes a dominant position, plays

the role of the “possessor”, which informs the addressee of the status of the object of influence

and the subject of the action being caused, thus, the morphological imperative implements the

illocutionary force of the order (ALISOVA; BUNTMAN, 1988). The next significant pragmatic

sign of the situation is that the communicants have information that the execution of the

predicted action by the addressee is necessary. Their general idea is that the addressee must do

this (that he cannot help but do this) (GLOVINSKAYA, 2018). If the addressee does not act,

he may be punished, which, in particular, may result in the doctor’s refusal to provide his

services. The notion of the utility (benefit, beneficial effect) of a causable action comes to the

fore. The doctor predicts the commission of such actions that would facilitate his working

conditions with the patient, therefore, he is the beneficiary of the action being caused. But the

patient is also a subject of benefit, since all the actions of a doctor are performed, first of all, in

his interests.

When a doctor refers to various population groups, he usually does not use the form of

politeness in Russia.

- Vy budete delat' vtiraniye. Vam dadut shest' paketikov mazi. Budete vtirat' po

odnomu paketiku v den'… vot tak…

- Poloshchi gorlo dva raza v den'.

- You will do embrocation. You will be given six sachets of ointment. You will

embrocate one sachet a day ... like this ....

- Gargle twice a day.

The doctor’s speech behavior can be accompanied by commenting on his actions, often

with the inclusion of the form of the future tense verb of the 1st person plural:

- My seychas posmotrim kakaya u tebya temperaturka.

- Seychas ya postavlyu tebe ukol.

- We’ll see what your temperature is.

- Now I will give you an injection.

Suggestive SA in the doctor’s repertoire

The most common SSAMS in the doctor’s repertoire is the SA recommendation in

Russian (90% of the total number of examples). We found that in the Russian language the

situation of recommendation is different from the situation of advice. Here the speaker has

professional competence (FILATOVA, 1997).

The essence of the SA recommendation is that the Speaker performs an obligatory action

following his professional knowledge. This action is appropriate and useful for the Addressee.

The speaker's assessment of the degree of usefulness of the predicted action for the Addressee

is based on an objective basis - special knowledge. They guarantee the effectiveness of the

recommendation/advice and provide the Speaker with a priority speech-social position

(SHELOVSKIKH, 1996). In this situation, the Addressee is always interested in receiving

recommendations.

Our study showed that the doctor’s recommendation is always reactive SA, carried out

in connection with the request of the Addressee.

The pragmatic relevant features for the SA recommendation we consider as follows:

1) the priority position of the Prescriptor;

2) the effectiveness of the predicted action for the Addressee;

3) the obligatory performance;

4) the addressee's interest in the recommendation;

5) the external impulse of causation.

The addressee is either the addressee or his relatives. In this situation, the motivation

can only be directed to the Addressee.

- Nuzhno budet gorlo razrezat' ponizhe i serebryanuyu trubku vstavit', dat'

devochke vozmozhnost' dyshat', togda, mozhet byt', spasem yeye, – ob"yasnil vrach.

- Staraytes' ne podnimat' tyazhestey, pokoy i naznachennoye lecheniye,

priderzhivaytes' diyety. Solenoye, ostroye ni v koyem sluchaye ne yest'!

- It will be necessary to cut the throat lower and insert the silver tube, give the girl the

opportunity to breathe, then maybe we will save her, the doctor explained.

- Try not to lift weights, rest and prescribed treatment, adhere to a diet. In no case to eat

salty, spicy!

Statements that are constructed using the imperative mood, modal predicate nado,

nuzhno (necessary, should) in the Russian language acquire the illocutionary power of

utterance. All these forms in the doctor’s repertoire constitute an additional reference to the

objective necessity of performing an action, and also increase the impact on the interlocutor.

Sometimes, the doctor’s recommendations are implemented in a situation of prohibition

(do not lift weights), when the action, presented as reality or potency, is necessarily nominated

and the expression of the will on the part of the speaker is directed at the listener, as a real or

potential producer of the action.

SSAMS SA warning appears in the doctor’s speech in certain situations of danger, when

failure to comply with certain conventions, the result of treatment takes a dangerous turn for

the patient’s life. In such cases, the doctor uses modal predicates in Russian in combination

with the infinitive.

- Vam neobkhodimo budet delat' vtiraniye. Segodnya – v ruku, zavtra – v nogu,

potom opyat' v ruku – druguyu. Kogda sdelayete shest' vtiraniy, vymoyetes' i pridete ko

mne. Obyazatel'no. Slyshite? Obyazatel'no! Da! Krome togo, nuzhno vnimatel'no sledit'

za zubami i voobshche za rtom, poka budete lechit'sya. YA vam dam poloskaniye. Posle

yedy obyazatel'no poloshchite …

- You will need to do embrocation. Today - in the hand, tomorrow - in the foot, then

again in the hand - another. When you do six embrocations, wash yourself and come to me.

Necessarily. Do you hear? Sure! Yes! In addition, you need to carefully monitor your teeth and

generally the mouth while you are being treated. I will give you a rinse. After eating, be sure to

rinse...

Speech act doctor - relatives of the patient

In a situation of interaction between the doctor and relatives of the patient, the doctor

also occupies a dominant position. The doctor still retains situational role-based superiority.

The doctor’s SA, as well as in the situation of the doctor-patient, consists of prescriptive and

suggestive SAs. However, in this situation, our study showed that in Russian the leading

position is occupied by suggestive SAs (65% of the total number of examples), prescriptive

SAs decrease their positions (33% of the total number of examples). The most commonly used

prescriptive SAs in the situation of the doctor - relatives of the patient include SSAMS SA

recommendation (55% of the total number of examples) and SSAMS SA proposal (10% of the

total number of examples).

- U vas, a takzhe u vashikh rebyat “durnaya bol'”. Opasnaya, strashnaya bolezn'.

Vam vsem seychas zhe nuzhno nachinat' lechit'sya, i lechit'sya dolgo.

- Boleye veroyatnym diagnozom yavlyayetsya khronicheskaya pnevmoniya, –

skazal vrach zavedomo nepravdu, – no vse zhe nado lech' v kliniku dlya obsledovaniya.

- You and your guys have “bad pain”. Dangerous, terrible disease. You all immediately

need to begin to be treated, and treated for a long time.

- A more likely diagnosis is chronic pneumonia,” the doctor said, obviously not true,

“but you still need to go to the clinic for examination.

The tendency to use modal predicates is still observed, it is nado, nuzhno (necessary)

follows in the doctor's recommendations to the patient’s relative in Russian speech use.

- Po vsem priznakam my dumayem, chto u vashego ottsa v legkikh vospalitel'nyy

protsess. No chtoby ne prozevat' chto-nibud' strashnoye, nuzhno, dumayu, obyazatel'no

sdelat' probnuyu operatsiyu. V sluchaye chego udalit' odnu poverkhnostnuyu dolyu…

(rezul'taty sots. oprosa informantov).

- Mne kazhetsya, yego sledovalo by pomestit' v bol'nitsu. YA znayu, yemu ne

khochetsya propuskat' zanyatiya, no, v kontse kontsov, nichego ne podelayesh'.

- By all indications, we think your father has an inflammatory process in his lungs.” But

in order not to miss something scary, I need to, I think, be sure to do a trial operation. In which

case, remove one surface fraction...

- I think he should have been taken to the hospital. I know he doesn’t want to miss

classes, but, in the end, nothing can be done.

Sometimes there are examples with the expression of a recommendation by means of

an imperative (listing of predicable actions) or explicitly using verbs to recommend in Russian.

- Vot retsept. Kupite lekarstvo. Davayte rebenku utrom i vecherom po odnomu

poroshku. Postav'te yemu na grud' i spinu gorchichniki.

- YA rekomenduyu vse-taki polozhit' yego v bol'nitsu.

- Here is the prescription. Buy the medicine. Give the child one powder each morning

and evening. Place mustard plasters on his chest and back.

- I recommend putting him in the hospital.

Sometimes recommendations are expressed using elliptical constructions.

- Nikakoy raboty! Pokoy i otdykh!

- No work! Peace and relaxation!

In order to maintain the spirit of the patient’s relatives, in the doctor’s speech we

encounter a causation of involuntary actions.

- Nichego, nichego ne boytes', eto ne smertel'no.

- Nothing, don't be afraid, it's not deadly.

The doctor’s speech takes various forms, depending on the degree of medical education

of his clients.

- Prinimayte miksturu, chtoby sbit' temperaturu, poloshchite gorlo medom

kazhdyye dva chasa. Smazyvayte gorlo mentolovym maslom.

- Povtorit' mazok iz zeva i nosa, sdelat' immunogrammu krovi, sostavit' mochevoy

list.

- Provesti sanatsiyu khronicheskikh ochagov infektsii. Prinimat' Riboksin po

1tabletke 3 raza v den'. Obil'noye pit'ye, diyeta.

- Take the medicine to bring down the temperature, gargle with honey every two hours.

Lubricate your throat with menthol oil.

- Repeat the swab of the pharynx and nose, make an immunogram of the blood, draw

up the urine sheet.

- Reorganize chronic foci of infection. Take Riboxinum 1 tablet 3 times a day. Drink

plenty, diet.

When a doctor gives advice to a relative of a patient with a special medical education,

he uses professional language means. The features of a professional language are the use of

medical terminology (kaolin poultice; sulphonamides; immunogram; debridement, etc.) and the

use of elliptic structures with an indefinite form of the verb (apply; repeat; hold, etc.). Similar

elliptic statements belong to the category of situationally determined ones. In them, the situation

of communication is not explicated in the text of the dialogue, as in the contextual ellipse. The

situation of communication promotes mutual understanding of the communicants. This is

associated with the background knowledge of the participants in the situation, presupposition,

and other extra-linguistic factors (PARAMONOVA, 1995).

When a doctor turns to interlocutors who do not have a medical education, he focuses

on their level of competence, and therefore avoids the use of special concepts (take medicine,

tablets for headache, etc.). He tries to use words and expressions of everyday colloquial speech,

expresses motivation using the imperative (take; accept; rinse, etc.).

SSAMS SA offer is used in the doctor’s repertoire in conditions of uncertainty or a

situation that is not life-threatening for the patient, when there is an alternative to choose and

decision-making remains with the patient’s close ones.

- My mozhem polozhit' yego v bol'nitsu, chtoby provesti profilakticheskoye

lecheniye.

- Davayte togda provedem povtornyy kurs igloterapii, a potom posmotrim.

- We can put him in the hospital to conduct preventive treatment.

- Then let's have a second course of acupuncture, and then we'll see.

Speech act doctor - assistant

A speech act between a doctor and his assistants usually occurs in an emergency. In

such an extreme situation, the doctor and his assistants usually use the same type of SA, which

neutralizes the difference in the social statuses of the doctor and his assistant. The pragmatic

characteristics of SA used in extreme situations; we consider the following:

1. the mandatory execution of the predicted action, due to the characteristics of the

communication situation;

2. the benefits of the predicted action for a third person;

3. reducing the factor of priority / subordinate position of the speaker;

4. the obligatory perlocutionary effect.

- Dayte shelk ton'she! Etot ochen' tolstyy! Nikuda ne goditsya! – razdrazhenno i

neterpelivo brosayet vrach assistentu.

Assistent pokorno i ponimayushche molchit, bystro vdevaya v iglu nuzhnuyu

nitku.

- Sterilizuyte nemedlenno nozh, nozhnitsy, kryuchki, zond!

- V operatsionnuyu ikh ne puskat'! – prikazal vrach.

- Give the silk thinner! This one is very fat! It’s no good! - the doctor annoyingly and

impatiently throws the assistant.

The assistant dutifully and understandingly is silent, quickly threading the right thread

into the needle.

- Sterilize immediately the knife, scissors, hooks, probe!

- Do not let them into the operating room! - ordered the doctor.

Our study showed that the assistant’s speech contains significantly fewer SSAMS of

prescriptive SA. This reflects his subordinate position in relation to the doctor. Its main task is

auxiliary actions in a specific situation. In emergency situations, when the prescriptive intention

on the part of the doctor is expressed categorically or, even, sometimes rudely in Russian the

second person plural pronoun can be used when referring, which in no way sounds rude.

- Vy gotov'te yego dlya narkoza, ukladyvayte, a ya seychas pridu.

- You prepare him for anesthesia, lay him down, and I'll be right there.

In some cases, when the situation is under control, the doctor’s SA may take the meaning

of instruction, as if instructing fellow assistants how to act.

- Chto zh, ne udastsya, vidimo, razdel'no perevyazat' kazhdyy sosud. A bol'naya

mozhet ne vyderzhat' stol' zatyanuvsheysya operatsii. Pridetsya koren' legkogo peresekat'

mezhdu zazhimami nebol'shimi uchastkami i tshchatel'no ikh proshivat'. Inache koren'

legkogo v etikh spaykakh vam, ne razdelit'…

- Well, apparently, it will not be possible to separately bandage each vessel. And the

patient may not withstand such a protracted operation. It is necessary to cross the root of the

lung between the clamps in small sections and carefully stitch them. Otherwise, you cannot

divide the root of the lung in these adhesions…

External factors (the outcome of the operation or the result of treatment) directly affect

the way in which motivation is expressed in relation to the colleague's doctor. Very often elliptic

constructions predominate in speech - as a result of a lack of time.

- Mozgovaya gryzha… Gm… on zhivet… Sarkoma… myagkovata…

- Nuzhno budet vyrezat'…

- A brain hernia ... Um ... he lives ... The sarcoma ... is too soft ...

- It will be necessary to cut ...

- Usil'te podachu kisloroda! Adrenalin v serdtse! Krov' v dve veny!

- Defibrillyator!

- Boost your oxygen supply! Adrenaline in the heart! Blood in two veins!

- Defibrillator!

When a tense situation becomes more or less stable, an incentive is formed by means of

detailed phrases, a very common argumentation of prescription is given, expressive vocabulary

is applied, i.e., informative and expressive layers of pragmatic information become fully

involved.

- Professor, vy obratili vnimaniye – ved' obshcheye sostoyaniye devushki ne ochen'-

to plokhoye. I sostav krovi tozhe. Vot posmotrite. Rezul'taty angiokardiografii i

elektrokardiografii udovletvoritel'ny.

- Nichego, ona derzhitsya molodtsom, ob"yem dvizheniy v nogakh narastayet.

Naschet shvov mozhete byt' spokoyny – zashil na sto let!

- Professor, you noticed - because the general condition of the girl is not very bad. And

the composition of the blood, too. Look here. The results of angiocardiography and

electrocardiography are satisfactory.

- Good, she is doing great, the range of movements in her legs is growing. As for the

seams, you can be calm - sewn for a hundred years!

So, our study showed that in the conditions of a doctor’s verbal interaction with

assistants/colleagues, the choice of language means for motivating is determined by the external

conditions of the decision-making situation: lack of time, critical state of the patient, etc.

Depending on the situational roles of the interlocutors, the doctor observes one of the

following three models of speech behavior:

Doctor - patient:

1. SSAMS of prescriptive SAs make up 43% of SSAMS of suggestive SAs make up

57% of the doctor’s speech repertoire.

2. Of the prescriptive SAs, the SA order prevails (100%).

3. The omission by the doctor of politeness formulas in Russian.

4. Commenting on the doctor’s own actions and the use of the imperative of joint action.

5. The SSAMS set of suggestive SAs includes 90% of recommendations, 10% of

warnings

6. SA recommendation takes place mainly in a ban situation, is drawn up using

conventional speech means - in Russian, a modal predicate is nuzhno, nado (necessary) follows.

7. SSAMS SA caution is distinguished by compliance with certain conventions.

Doctor - relatives:

All components of the doctor’s speech repertoire are preserved. Only their proportional

ratio changes: SSAMS of prescriptive SAs - 33%, SSAMS of suggestive SAs - 65% (of which

55% of the total number of DSA - the SA recommendation, and 10% SSAMS of the SA

suggestion).

Doctor - assistant:

In the speech act between the doctor, his assistants, colleagues, and employees, the

leading positions are occupied by the SSAMS of prescriptive SAs, issued directly; as a means

of expressing prescription, a linguistic means is used - a verb in the form of an imperative mood.

So, our study of the doctor’s speech behavior with interlocutors performing different situational

roles showed that the doctor follows the following established behaviors: the doctor - the

patient, the doctor - the patient’s relatives, the doctor - an assistant.

Compulsory compliance with social conventions in behavior in typified situations

When we talk about coordinated knowledge of a situation, we mean the nature of

“psychological”. The psychological nature of the situation includes details about the most

appropriate behavior in the situation, feelings associated with “staying in the situation”, and

typical reactions and behavior of others in the situation. The prototypes of a situation are

actually prototypes of a “person-in-situation”, prototypes that provide expectations for the most

likely and socially appropriate behavior for different types of everyday situations (KANTOR,

2001). The formation of such prototypes and their observance is due to the need of people for

the stability of the image of “I-in-situation” (EMELYANOV, 2001, p. 145-146).

The unity of knowledge about desirable, permitted and unacceptable behavior is

recorded in the form of rules, the totality of which forms the role-playing patterns of behavior

in a specific situation. The interaction of participants is regulated by rules with varying degrees

of fixation depending on the type of situation. The most stable consistent knowledge of norm-

role models of behavior is typical of typified situations. The order of interaction in this type of

situation is subordinated to the action of mechanisms ensuring its self-reproduction.

When analyzing the speech repertoire of participants in a situation following various

norm-role models, the pragmatic significance of conventions is manifested.

It is the conventions that require the use of the verb in the imperative mood (in Russian,

the use of the 2nd person plural) in the speech interaction of the subordinate and the boss in

accordance with social norms.

- Napechatayte vypisku iz prikaza i prinesite mne na podpis'.

- Print an extract from the order and bring it to me for signature.

The clearest relationship between speech behavior and social conventions can be traced

in a situation of speech interaction at a party, where situational roles are clearly distributed

between the participants of communication (the host - the guest), scenarios of their behavior,

including speech, are painted to the smallest detail.

SSAMS of the owner of the house are 100% of the suggestive SA (SA invitation and

SA proposal).

Pragmatic conditions of the SA host - guest:

1. the effectiveness of the predicted action for the addressee;

2. the non-binding nature of the design of a causable action;

3. the dominant position of the owner of the house.

SSAMS, which are a part of the invitation, prevail mainly at the initial stage of the

speech interaction between the owner of the house and the guest. SSAMS SA invitation (100%

of cases) express an urge to enter the room or sit down. SSAMS SA offer function in a situation

of communication at the table.

SSAMS SA invitations sound much less often in the speech repertoire of the owner of

the house and make up 32% of the total number of examples. The linguistic means of arranging

the speech of the owner of the house is situationally adequate is the verb in the imperative mood

in close relations between the communicants in the informal register of communication.

For a neutral register and distant relations between communicants in Russian, the verb

in the imperative construction is used in the form of a second person plural. The imperative

mood is sometimes mitigated by the politeness formula, with the word please.

- Sadis', chuvstvuy sebya kak doma.

- Prokhodite, prokhodite, ne stesnyaytes'.

- Sit down, feel at home.

- Come in, come in, don't be shy.

In the last two examples, the directive intention of the invitation is expressed by means

of conventional speech means, it contains a component that emphasizes the situational role

status of the interlocutor (BOGOLYUBOVA; SHCHERBA, 1992, p. 156).

Our study showed that the SSAMS of the SA proposal (68% of the total number of

examples) are the nuclear component of the owner’s speech repertoire. The design of SSAMS

is achieved by language means using elliptical constructions (65% of the total number of

examples). In 60% of cases, this design is accompanied by interrogative intonation. Sometimes,

according to conventions, the amount of the product offered is minimized in Russian.

- Davay tol'ko nemnogo, prosto poprobovat'.

- Khorosho, tol'ko chut'-chut'.

- Perets farshirovannyy budesh'? Ovoshchi s syrom. Po retseptu tvoyey mamy.

- Nemnogo. Tol'ko chto iz-za stola.

- Come on just a little, just try.

- Good, just a little.”

- Will you have stuffed pepper? Vegetables with cheese. According to your mom’s

recipe.

- Little. Just from the table.

Sometimes, when the owner wants to treat guests with those dishes that he has prepared

himself, his SSAMS SA offer consists of a nominative construction with a noun, in which case

the intonation of the assertive type is preserved.

- Salat s krevetkami i ovoshchami.

- Vyglyadit appetitno.

- Kuritsa zapechennaya v teste.

- YA obyazatel'no poprobuyu.

- Vino sobstvennogo prigotovleniya.

- Nalivay.

- Salad with shrimp and vegetables.

- Looks appetizing.

- Chicken baked in pastry.

- I will definitely try.

- Home-made wine.

- Pour.

In accordance with the conventions of situationally appropriate guest behavior is the

indispensable tasting of dishes and the expression of a positive attitude towards them, regardless

of whether the guest liked them or not.

- Ugoshchaytes'! Tol'ko chto ispekla!

- YA na diyete, no uderzhat'sya ne mogu…, a zapakh kakoy, vy izumitel'no

pechete.

- Vy yeshche moi kompoty ne probovali! Zhivoy vitamin… .

- Help yourself! Just baked!

- I am on a diet, but I can’t resist ... but what a smell, you bake amazingly.

- You have not tried my stewed fruit! Living Vitamin ... .

In the speech act of the owner of the SSAMS SA suggestion in 30% of cases a

conventional speech means - an interrogative construction is used.

- Khotite yeshche chego-nibud'? Mozhet seledochki?

- Ne otkazhus'.

- Mozhet byt' vam nalit' kofe?

- Net, luchshe chay.

- Chay, tak chay.

- Do you want something else? Maybe herrings?

- I will not refuse.

- Maybe you should pour some coffee?

- No, better tea.

- Tea, so tea.

As our study has shown, in the host SA, as a linguistic means of arranging his SSAMS,

a verb in the imperative mood for the SA suggestion is often appropriate (53% of the total

number of examples).

- Nakladyvayte yeshche salat.

- Da net, spasibo, ya bol'she ne mogu.

- Take some more salad.

- No, thanks, I can’t eat it anymore.

The main SSAMS in the guest’s speech repertoire, as our study has shown, are SSAMS,

which are a part of the SA request. In 100% of cases of SA a request is formed by using

conventional speech means. To construct it, they use either interrogative (53% of the total

number of examples) or narrative (47% of the total number of examples) constructions. The

most common expressions of a request using interrogative constructions are a request for

permission.

- Mozhno ugostit' kisku kolbaskoy?

- Sinti? Konechno.

- A mozhno mne vklyuchit' muzyku? Tantsevat' khochetsya.

- Konechno, von ta knopka.

- Can I treat your pussy to sausage?

- Sinti? Of course.

- Can I turn on the music? I want to dance.

- Of course, that button is over there.

The owner’s reaction is typical - a traditional SA invitation, authorized in specific

conditions by the illocutionary force of the SA permission. The host’s speech, according to the

conditions of the speech situation, should contain an urge to the addressee to behave as at home

and not to be shy. Otherwise, the interlocutor may have the impression that he is an unwanted

guest. Sometimes SSAMS SA request is used for demand from the addressee of an item.

- U vas nichego net popit'?

- Tol'ko voda, yesli khochesh'.

- You have nothing to drink?

- Only water, if you want.

In Russian, in most cases the verb in the narrative structure is used in the form of

conditional mood (43% of the total number of examples).

- YA dumayu, ya by vypil chayu.

- YA by khotel pozvonit' domoy, a to uzhe pozdno.

- I think I would have some tea.

- I would like to call home, otherwise it's too late.

A narrative sentence conveys information about the speaker’s desire in a situation in

which the addressee has the opportunity to realize it, thereby the narrative construction of

motivation acquires the illocutionary power of motivation. In this case, the categorization of

the statement is mitigated using conditional mood. However, this language means is used very

often to convey a directive intention and, as a result, the conditional mood acquires the status

of a clichéd means for expressing motivation. The presence of a verb in the form of conditional

mood in the surface structure of the utterance no longer directly depends on the speaker’s real

desire to make the utterance more polite. Such constructions are difficult to consider as indirect

forms of expression of directive intention, although their primary (linguistic) meaning does not

have a motive. They are so often used in repetitive pragmatic conditions (in situations of

expression of motivation) for the sole purpose (the addressee takes the desired action by the

addresser) that their use becomes conventionalized. Therefore, the form of conditional mood

loses to some extent the importance of minimizing the categorical nature of the incentive

intention (URMSON, 1985). In order to minimize the categorical nature of the incentive

intention, the parental unit I think is used; that precedes the directive mood and reduces the

“claim to truth” (BOGOLYUBOVA, 2001, p. 6-8). So, the motivation is mitigated at the lexical

(use of the think verb) and the syntactic level (inclusion of the main sentence in the narrative

directive, as well as the statement of the motivation in the subordinate clause, significantly

softens the illocution of the utterance).

So, from the foregoing, we can conclude that social conventions involve the steady use

of certain models of speech behavior within each specific situation.

The situation of speech interaction at a party provides for the following behaviors:

1) the model of speech behavior of the owner of the house:

- SSAMS SA invitation at the initial stage of communication (32% of the total number

of examples). The main language means is a verb in the imperative mood.

- The SSAMS of the SA proposal is realized during speech interaction at the table (68%

of the total number of examples). The main language means is an elliptical construction with

interrogative intonation.

2) the guest speech behavior model:

- SSAMS SA request (100%). The main language means is either interrogative

constructions (53% of the total number of examples) or narrative (47% of the total number of

examples).

- Use of conventional speech means.

It should be noted that even if there is an insufficiently clearly defined external

situational framework (the only physical condition for communication is that the action takes

place on a strange territory), the situation may have a high degree of typification if there are

social conventions that determine the speech behavior of communicants.

Conclusion

Thus, by the results of our study, we came to the conclusion that the occurrence of

typified speech reactions is due to the following interrelated situational factors:

1. the presence of typified physical conditions of communication, a stable external

frame;

2. the presence of typified roles of interlocutors;

3. the presence of hierarchical relations between communicants;

4. the presence of conventions assigned to typical situations of communication.

It should be noted that not all of the above factors are equally important for all typified

situations. The first factor - the presence of a situational framework is important for

distinguishing at first glance the situations of the same type (cafe, shop). In the case when the

structure of a typified speech situation involves more than two role positions, the role played

by the interlocutor is very high. In a situation of uncertain physical conditions, social

conventions come to the fore. The subordination order in relations between participants in a

situation remains predominant in the structure of any typified situation.

The main conditions for the implementation of speech interaction in a typified situation,

we consider the following:

1. the obligatory achievement of a perlocutionary effect;

2. the small number of normative-role models of behavior;

3. not changing speech repertoire;

4. the use of only conventional means of expression of the incentive intention.

Each typified situation has its own configuration of these components:

1. the system of speech interaction in the store involves the position of the seller and

the buyer; the buyer's speech repertoire consists of the SSAMS of the SA request. SSAMS SAs

request are made by interrogative constructions (65% in Russian); the most commonly used

modal predicate mozhno is one that transmits a resolution request (28% of the total number of

examples). A question starting with the words Do you have ... (37% of the total number of

examples); elliptical constructions in the Russian language make up 20% of the total number

of examples; imperative is 15% of the total number of examples;

2. the system of speech interaction in a cafe assumes the position of a bartender and a

client; the client’s speech repertoire consists mainly of the SSAMS SA order; drawn up directly,

using language means; the leading language means is elliptic substantive constructions (93%).

3. the system of speech interaction in the hospital involves the position of the doctor,

patient, his relatives and assistant;

doctor - patient:

- SSAMS of prescriptive SA make up 43%, SSAMS of suggestive SA 57% of the

doctor’s speech repertoire; from prescriptive SAs, the SA order prevails (100%); SSAMS SA

orders are drawn up using a language means - imperative in Russian; 90% of recommendations,

10% of warnings are included in the SSAMS set of suggestive SAs.

Doctor - Relatives:

- All components of the doctor’s speech repertoire are preserved; the proportional ratio

changes: SSAMS of prescriptive SA - 33%, SSAMS of suggestive SA 65%.

Assistant - Doctor:

- In the speech act between the doctor, his assistants, colleagues, and employees, the

leading positions are occupied by the SSAMS of prescriptive SAs, issued directly; as a means

of expressing prescription, a linguistic means used there - a verb in the form of an imperative

mood.

Host – Guest:

- The owner’s speech repertoire includes the SSAMS SA invitation (32%), implemented

at the initial stage of communication and executed using a language means - a verb in the

imperative mood;

- SSAMS SA proposal (68%), which is implemented at the table, with the help of using

elliptical structures with interrogative intonation;

- The guest’s speech repertoire consists of the SSAMS SA request (100%) and is formed

with the help of conventional speech means: interrogative constructions (53%), narrative

constructions (47%).

Our study showed that each typified situation occurs according to a specific scenario of

speech interaction, offering characteristic speech repertoires. Different languages imply

different means of identifying identical types of directives. In translation, the ongoing processes

of integration of knowledge, interaction of different cultures and cultural traditions impose on

the translator a mission of ambassador of culture, providing for understanding between the

parties in cross-cultural communication (SABIROVA, 2019). It helps us to realize the

peculiarities of linguistic consciousness of peoples, reconstruction of the linguistic picture of

the world, and the development of intercultural competence of people (AKHMETOVA et al.,

2019).

REFERENCES

ABDULLINA, L. R. Lexical and semantic potential of emotionally expressive sentences in

the tatar and French languages. Journal of Language and Literature, v. 6, no. 2, p. 50-54,

2015.

AKHMETOVA, L. A.; SHAIMARDANOVA, M. R.; ZORINA, A. V.; NIKISHINA, S. R.;

NAZMUTDINOVA, M. A.; GATIN, R. G. The word-formation category "displacement

causation": mutational and modification semantics of German, Russian and Tatar verbs.

XLinguae, v. 12, no. 1, p. 21‒36, 2019.

ALISOVA, T. K.; BUNTMAN, N. V. The pragmatic nature of motivational statements (order

and request). In: Biryulin, L.A. (Ed.). Imperative in different structural languages:

Abstracts of the conference reports “Functional and typological direction in grammar.

Command”. Leningrad: LO IYAZ, 1988. p. 9-10.

ANOKHIN, P. K. Cybernetics and integrative brain activity. Voprosy psikhologii

[Psychology issues], v. 3, p. 10-32, 1966.

ARGYLE, M. Main characteristics of the situation. In: Grishina, N.V. (Compl.). Psychology

of social situations. St. Petersburg: Peter, 2001. p. 178-187.

BELYAEVA, E. I. Grammar and pragmatics of motivation: English. Voronezh: Voronezh

University Publishing House, 1992.

BERGER, P.; LUCKMAN, T. Social construction of reality. Moscow: Medium, 1995. p.

40-92.

BOGDANOV, V. V. Speech communication. Pragmatic and semantic aspects. Leningrad:

Izd-vo LGU, 1990. 87 p.

BOGOLYUBOVA, L. I.; SHCHERBA, G.M. The situation of communication and language.

In: Repina, T.A. (Ed.). French in the light of the theory of speech communication. St.

Petersburg: Publishing house of St. Petersburg University, 1992. 180 p.

BOGOLYUBOVA, L. I. Parentetic units in French and Russian. In: Yendol'tsev, Yu.A. (Ed.).

Actual problems of the theory and practice of translation. Mat. XXX Conf., v. 2. St.

Petersburg: Publishing house of St. Petersburg University, 2001. 65 p.

BUZAROV, V. V. The basics of the syntax of English colloquial speech. Moscow: Kron-

Press, 1998. p. 100-160.

DEPUTATOVA, N. A. Extra-linguistic features of the southern dialect of American English

in the novel of Harper Lee “Go Set a Watchman”. Journal of Educational and Social

Research, v. 9, no. 3, p. 117-124, 2019.

EMELYANOV, Yu. N. Research and design of interpersonal situations as a theoretical and

applied area of social psychology. In: Grishina, N.V. (Compl.). Psychology of social

situations. St. Petersburg: Peter, 2001. p. 138-150.

FILATOVA, E. A. Motivational utterances as speech acts in modern Russian: abstract.

diss. ... cand. philol. Sciences. Moscow State University named after M.V. Lomonosov,

Moscow, 1997. p. 22.

GLOVINSKAYA, M. Ya. Semantics of verbs of speech from the point of view of the theory

of speech acts. In: Vinokur, T.G.; Glovinskaya, M.Ya.; Golanova, E.I.; Ermakova, O.P.;

Zemskaya, E.A.; Kitaigorodskaya, M.V.; Rozanova, N.N. Russian language in its

functioning. Communicative-pragmatic aspect. Moscow: Nauka, 2018. p. 158-218.

GORDIEVSKAYA, M. L. Trends in minimizing the structure of utterance in Russian

colloquial dialogic speech. Moscow: Moscow State Pedagogical University, 1996. p. 34.

KANTOR, I. Perception of situations. In: Grishina, N.V. (Compl.). Psychology of social

situations. St. Petersburg: Peter, 2001. p. 212-215.

KARASIK, V. I. Ethnocultural types of institutional discourse. In: Troshina, N.N. (Ed.).

Ethnocultural specificity of speech activity. Moscow: Institute for Scientific Information on

Social Sciences RAS, 2000. p. 40.

LEVIN, K. Psychological field. In: Grishina, N.V. (Compl.). Psychology of social situations.

St. Petersburg: Peter, 2001. p. 37-40.

Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English. Pearson Longman, 2014. 2224 p.

MAGNUSSON, D. Situational perception - area of research. In: Grishina, N.V. (Compl.).

Psychology of social situations. St. Petersburg: Peter, 2001. p. 205-211.

MATYUSHKIN, D. P. The functional structure of behavioral dominants (theoretical

analysis). The principle of dominance and adaptive behavior. Nervous system, v. 32, p.

30-45, 2008.

MIKHAILOV, L. M. Communicative grammar of the German language. Moscow:

Vysshaya shkola, 1994. p. 125-128.

MOLEONG, L.J. Qualitative Research Methods. Bandung: PT Remaja Rosdakarya, 1994.

OZHEGOV, S. I.; SHVEDOVA, N. Yu. (Eds.). Dictionary of the Russian Language.

Moscow: Rus. yaz., 2002. 950 p.

PARAMONOVA, I. P. On the communicative and structural premises of ellipses in German

colloquial speech. In: Zinder, L.R. (Ed.). Functional-textual aspects of linguistic units. St.

Petersburg: SPbSU Language Center, 1995. p. 36-40.

SABIROVA, D. R. Comprehension of the English national character in building professional

linguistic culture. Journal of Educational and Social Research, v. 9, no. 3, p. 101‒106,

2019.

SEARL, J. R. Classification of illocutionary acts. New in foreign linguistics, v. 17, p. 170-

194, 1986.

SHELOVSKIKH, T. I. Speech act of the council: factors of pragmatic variability of

intentional content. In: Grishayeva, L.I. (Ed.). Collection of modern pragmalinguistic

studies of Romance, Germanic and Russian languages. Voronezh: Voronezh State

University, 1996. p. 167.

SUKHODOLSKY, G. V. Introduction to the mathematical-psychological theory of

activity. St. Petersburg: Publishing house of St. Petersburg University, 1998.

URMSON, J. O. Parentetic verbs. In: Paducheva, E.V. (Ed.). New in foreign linguistics, v.

16. Moscow: Progress, 1985. p. 201.

How to reference this article

DEPUTATOVA, N. A.; SHANGARAEVA, L. F.; YARKHAMOVA, A. A.; ISLAMOVA, L.

R.; ZAKIROVA, L. R. Communicative situations of typified behavior. Rev. EntreLínguas,

Araraquara, v. 7, n. esp. 4, e021100, Nov. 2021. e-ISSN: 2447-3529.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.29051/el.v7iesp.4.15657

Submitted: 09/02/2021

Required revisions: 20/05/2021

Approved: 05/09/2021

Published: 10/11/2021