MULTIMODAL DEVICES FOR CONVEYING PROHIBITION IN ENGLISH-LANGUAGE INFOGRAPHIC TEXTS DURING THE PERIOD OF THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.24919/2522-4565.2021.47.15

Keywords:

prohibition, icon, verbal equivalent, explanation, multimodal text

Abstract

This article is devoted to the study of English-language infographic texts related to COVID-19. The focus is on the range of tools which have been devised to represent the prohibition of certain actions during the course of the pandemic. It is established that this segment of information is illustrated by icons of varying sizes and shapes. Most of the icons that have been identified are in the form of a circle; a much smaller portion of them are square in shape. In addition to this, all the circles have a distinct border, usually red, with a diagonal line superimposed on the image, which emphasizes the fact that a certain action is prohibited. In addition, the number of icons in each text varies. The texts are primarily focused on the use of a number of icons which give a visual representation of the undesirability of having contact with other individuals; of being present in public places; of touching one’s face, in particular one’s nose, mouth, and eyes; and of physical greetings whether in the form of handshakes or hugs. The fact is substantiated that the creators of these texts are also drawing the attention of recipients to the undesirability of individuals’ using public transport and engaging in office work, if they have any signs of illness. On the basis of analysis, it was found that some of the icons which were presented are difficult to understand if the verbal component is absent. In texts of this kind, it is thus expedient to use that verbal element, which actually helps in the decoding of the true semantics. Because the relevant texts are devoted to the topic of health, they give the most attention to icons with appropriate verbal explanations which are expressed in an imperative manner, and which can function as ‘prohibitionary tools’ by including an initial lexical unit that embodies that sense, such as “don’t” or “avoid”, “touch”, “have”. Single verbal sentences that do not include the visual element are apt to be totally misinterpreted. In such cases, it is only the use of the icon that makes it clear that performing certain actions is forbidden, rather than being permitted.

References

Макарук Л.Л. Паралінгвальні засоби як механізми впливу та маніпуляції в сучасному англомовному мультимодальному рекламному дискурсі. Psycholinguistics. Психолінгвістика. Психолингвистика : зб. наук праць. Серія: Філологія. Переяслав-Хмельницький : ФОП Домбровська Я.М. 2018. Вип. 23 (2). С. 148–164.

Макарук Л.Л. Проблеми дослідження семіотично ускладнених текстів. Науковий вісник Чернівецького університету : зб. наук. пр. Германська філологія. 2014. Вип. 692–693: С. 67–70. URL: http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/Nvchnugf_2014_692-693_22 (дата звернення: 12.10.2021).

Макарук Л.Л. Візуалізація як характерна ознака сучасного англомовного газетного дискурсу. Науковий вісник Волинського національного університету імені Лесі Українки. Філологічні науки. Мовознавство. 2012. № 6 (231). С. 47–52.

Kress G. Literacy in the New Media Age. London; New York : Routledge, 2003. 208 p.

Norris S. Modal Density and Modal Configurations: Multimodal Actions. The Routledge Handbook of Multimodal Analysis / ed. by C. Jewitt. London; New York : Routledge, 2009. P. 78–91.

O’Halloran K.L., Smith B.A. Multimodal Studies: Exploring Issues and Domains (Routledge Studies in Multimodality). 1st Edition. New York; London : Routledge. 2014. P. 1–41.

Van Leeuwen T. Introducing Social Semiotics. London : Routledge, 2004. 320 p.

Published

2022-01-27