DISCURSIVE PORTRAITS OF TOXIC POLITICIANS IN THE USA, GREAT BRITAIN AND UKRAINE (AUDIOVISUAL ANALYSIS)

Abstract

The article analyses culturally specific markers of toxicity in the discourse portraits of contemporary politicians in the United States, Great Britain and Ukraine. The object of the research are the political discourses of the United States, Britain and Ukraine; the subject matter of analysis are culturally specific (verbal and nonverbal) markers of toxicity as components of the discourse portraits of Donald Trump (the USA), Nigel Farage (the UK), Oleh Liashko (Ukraine). A discourse portrait of a toxic linguistic personality is understood as a discursive formation containing a set of semantic, stylistic, genre-related and communicative means that distinguish the speech style of such a linguistic personality whose behavior is characterized by a high degree of aggression aimed at causing emotional harm to or discrimination of the opponent. Verbal markers of toxicity include ideological, ethnic, gender-related evaluative statements that demean the personality of another person (not necessarily present) and cause him or her psychological harm or taint their image. Nonverbal markers of toxicity are divided into prosodic (derogatory-patronizing, hysterical, condescending tone of speech), gestural (waving hands and pointing at the interlocutor with the index finger, protective hugs, patting, touching the arms or shoulders of the interlocutor) and mimic (imperious facial expression, crooked mouth, dilated eyes, exaggerated grimaces) means of forming verbal explicates of toxicity. Culturally specific markers of toxicity in the discourse portraits of the three politicians are expressed by both the public agenda that is relevant to each country, e.g. racial and gender discrimination (the USA), Euroscepticism (the UK), anti-corruption efforts (Ukraine), and the aggressive-emotional type of the speakers whose speeches are characterized by a tendency to inflict emotional harm on the opponent through verbal manipulation and fake accusations, as well as the use of nonverbal aggression – hysterical manner of speech, impulsive movements of the arms and hands, head, body and exaggerated facial expressions.