Angina

Reasons for the manifestation of verbal aggression. Speech aggression and ways to overcome it

Each of us has encountered such a phenomenon as verbal aggression more than once. we were scolded by our parents and their reproaches were not always deserved, then the baton passed to school teachers, and in adulthood this danger awaits everyone who shops in a store, works or just walks down the street. What is verbal aggression and how can you fight it?

Any aggression is an emotional act that is aimed at causing physical or emotional harm to others. Linguistic aggression is causing harm using sounds. Moreover, these are not necessarily words - ordinary or profanity, but also shouting, the use of neutral words with aggressive intonation, timbre or even tempo of speech. Likewise, not every use of swear words is verbal aggression. For some, this may be a completely acceptable figure of speech or a speech norm.

Understanding the nature of verbal aggression and why it occurs, it is much easier to learn to cope with both negative statements addressed to you and hidden types of aggression.

Speech aggression is a verbal or auditory expression negative emotions, feelings and intentions.

Why does it occur

Linguistic aggression occurs:

When faced with the need to express negative emotions in response to external stimuli - a classic example: something heavy falls on your leg, up to 90% of adults will express their attitude towards what happened extremely negatively.
For expression negative emotions: anger, resentment, irritation, dissatisfaction and contempt require their expression: in the form of verbal “squabbles”, curses or words that are neutral in meaning, but extremely aggressive in context. Such aggression can be directed at people who have caused negative emotions or at those who in one way or another influence the aggressor: pushed in a crowd, stepped on, slammed a door loudly, and so on.

The main reason for linguistic aggression is an attempt to achieve a specific goal with the help of special speech strategies that should frighten the interlocutor, make him feel guilty or discredit him in the eyes of others.

Speech aggression is always a desire to harm someone. Even expressing your own negative emotions, as a rule, represents aggression towards someone. It is quite difficult to define or classify, since there are no clear criteria to distinguish aggression from neutral statements. The use of profanity or words with a negative connotation cannot be a sufficiently clear criterion, since their use does not always carry a semantic load and does not demonstrate a true attitude to the situation. And neutral words, pronounced with the right intonation or a certain tone, can be extremely aggressive for a person.

Species

Speech or verbal aggression is classified in different ways.

Main types:

Active line - aimed at a certain person, a group of people and so on. This is the expression of threats, negative wishes, abuse and calls to commit violence and aggressive actions.
Active indirect - spreading slander, gossip about someone, undermining authority, imposing on others a negative opinion about someone or something.
Passive direct - refusal to communicate with someone, silence or avoidance of an answer or conversation.
Passive indirect - refusal to give any explanation.

Most often we encounter the first two types of aggression.

Active direct in modern life found both in everyday life and public speaking, and media reactions.

This type of aggression includes loud conversations in the family, quarrels between colleagues, squabbles between neighbors and hundreds of other situations that everyone faces every day.

In the same way, active aggression is threats and destructive wishes addressed to someone by the media.

Active direct aggression is divided into open (explicit) and covert (implicit). Open linguistic aggression is expressed in the form of direct attacks, threats or insults. With hidden, the true goals are masked: neutral words and expressions are selected in such a way as to evoke negative emotions in listeners towards something or someone.

Active indirect is the deliberate, deliberate dissemination of negative false information or “shuffling” known facts about someone or something. This is done with the aim of causing negative emotions towards something.

Passive direct is a refusal to communicate with someone. It can be either demonstrative or in the form of evasive answers.

Passive indirect is the unwillingness to defend someone from aggressive attacks, refusal to give comments or explanations in someone's favor.

What to do if you encounter verbal aggression

Everyone should know how to deal with verbal aggression. Since anyone can encounter it, regardless of their age, social status, gender and lifestyle.

If you become the target of a verbal aggressor you need to:

Ignore him - if the situation allows, simply walk away from a quarrel or swearing, if this is impossible - do not respond to attacks.
Switch attention to something neutral - in response to negative statements, you can ask clarifying questions and be interested in the details of what is happening.
Agreeing with your opponent is a method that is effective in combating aggression in the family. Any aggression needs “feeding” from the other side. It is simply impossible to argue and swear with a person who agrees with everything in advance.
React with a joke or make fun of the situation.

The most important thing when dealing with any type of verbal aggression is to remain calm and not allow the person to provoke a retaliatory attack on your part. To do this, you need to clearly understand the reasons that prompted your offender to “attack” you and the goals that he is pursuing. Thinking about this helps to cope well with habitual aggressors, with whom it is impossible to avoid communication: family members, relatives, colleagues, and so on.

If you yourself are the source of aggression, then you need to learn to cope with negative emotions without splashing them out on others. Without this, you will not be able to get rid of the habit of “throwing everything out” on someone.

If you are unable to cope with verbal aggression both towards yourself and your own, you can use the following methods:

Taking medications - if you have a hard time experiencing verbal aggression directed at you in any form, you can strengthen your nervous system and get rid of fear, anxiety, and sleep problems with the help of herbal sedatives: extract of valerian, motherwort, peony or mild antidepressants: Afobazol, Aminalon and others - they are used only as directed and under the supervision of a doctor.
Special methods to reduce the load on nervous system will help breathing exercises, methods of switching consciousness: for example, reading poetry or multiplication tables to yourself, doing yoga or meditation.
Psychotherapy – You can truly stop reacting to verbal aggression with the help of psychotherapy. A psychotherapist helps a person understand why he reacts so strongly to certain statements and teaches methods not to succumb to provocations.

The problem of speech aggression in modern Russian studies (theoretical review)

The Russian language is characterized today, as many researchers note, by a decline in the level of speech culture, invectiveization and vulgarization of speech, and propaganda of violence in the media. All this is the result of increased aggressiveness public consciousness.

Society neglects the fact that verbal aggression is no less dangerous than physical aggression: it has a destructive effect on the consciousness of participants in communication, complicates the full exchange of information, and reduces the possibility of mutual understanding between communicants. In this regard, every person, in our opinion, today needs to have an idea of what verbal aggression is in order to be able to fight it.

Definition of verbal aggression

There are several definitions of the term “speech (verbal, verbal) aggression.”

In the stylistic encyclopedic dictionary of the Russian language, edited by M.N. Kozhina defines speech aggression as “the use linguistic means to express hostility, hostility; a manner of speech that offends someone’s pride or dignity.”

E.N. Basovskaya, in her article “Creators of Black and White Reality: About Verbal Aggression in the Media,” writes about the ambiguous interpretation of this term. Thus, with its narrow understanding, as aggressive,” she believes, “a speech act that replaces an aggressive physical action is considered.” With a broad interpretation, this is “all types of offensive, dominant speech behavior.” [Basovskaya 2004: 257]

Another interpretation of this term is given by L. Enina in her article “Speech aggression and speech tolerance in the media.” Here she writes that verbal aggression is a sphere of speech behavior motivated by the aggressive state of the speaker. [Enina 2003: 2]

E. Morozova understands verbal aggression as “violation of established speech communication etiquette norms... (use of inappropriate expressions, which constitutes an invasion of the personal sphere of the addressee, misuse or failure to use expected speech formulas).”

The authors of the article “Features of speech aggression” are V.V. Glebov. and O.M. Rodionov is determined this term as “conflict speech behavior, which is based on an attitude towards negative impact to the addressee." [Glebov, Rodionova 2006: 252]

And finally, in an article published on the website www.school.promiranet.ru, verbal aggression is defined as “rude, offensive, hurtful communication; verbal expression of negative emotions, feelings or intentions in a form unacceptable in a given speech situation.”

In defining the concept we are studying, we adhere to the opinion of E. Basovskaya (see above).

Causes of verbal aggression

Speaking about the causes of verbal aggression, Yu.V. Shcherbinina in her book “Verbal Aggression” writes that one of the reasons is “lack of awareness... of one’s own verbal behavior in general and in particular the aggressive components in it.” [Shcherbinina 2006: 42]

Aggression can be caused by “linguistic incompetence (ignorance of a word and its meaning),” writes V. Tretyakova.

Another reason that V. Tretyakova notes in her article is “inadequate defensive actions taken due to misinterpretation of words.” [Tretyakova 2000: 135]

L. Enina, discussing this problem, writes that we all experience a feeling of aggression if we consciously or unconsciously feel a threat to ourselves, our loved ones, our comfort, “and the feeling of threat causes rejection, repulsion and an aggressive state.” [Enina 2003: 4]

We read about the reasons for aggression on the pages of newspapers in the article by L. Ratsiburgskaya: “In order to survive and remain competitive in the information arena, the media turn to the interests of the crowd and build their model in accordance with them... In lately The determining factor in the choice of linguistic means turned out to be the general tone of modern media - very often ironic, skeptical, mocking, and sometimes mocking... As a result, - sums up L. Ratsiburgskaya, - newspaper and magazine language has acquired the character of verbal aggression.” [Ratsiburgskaya 2006: 56]

It is also necessary to highlight the “purely professional, or rather personal-professional reason...” of verbal aggression in the media, which I Dzyaloshinsky writes about. And he clarifies what has been said: this is, firstly, low intelligence and, accordingly, low speech culture when a journalist does not know how to express his thoughts and replaces the accuracy of his statements with emotional speech; secondly, “...a journalist, infatuated with an idea,...seeks to use all possible speech resources so that the idea with which he is sick becomes a universal disease.” [Dzyaloshinsky 2008: 2]

Mechanisms of speech aggression. Speech aggression as a strategy to discredit

An adequate understanding of the mechanisms of speech aggression is impossible without recognizing the fact that speech aggression is one of the types of speech strategies.

Speech strategies are studied in detail by Oksana Sergeevna Issers in her book “Communicative Strategies and Tactics of Russian Speech.”

“For a person accustomed to reflecting on his own speech,” she writes, “strategic and tactical planning of speech actions is a completely conscious task.” [Issers 2006: 51]

A conversation or conversation, as the author of the book rightly notes, is not a chaotic, but an orderly phenomenon, when a person sets a certain goal and tries to achieve it with the help of his own speech actions.

A speech strategy, therefore, is “a set of speech actions aimed at achieving a communicative goal” (ibid., p. 54). Speech actions that contribute to the implementation of a particular strategy are called speech tactics. That is, speech strategy and tactics are correlated as genus and species.

There are different types strategies: control over the topic, attracting attention, building an image, etc. But we are interested in this type of speech strategies as the strategy of discrediting, i.e. speech aggression strategy. The purpose of this strategy is to humiliate, insult, and laugh at the interlocutor. And the tactics will be insult, threat, ridicule, accusation, hostile remark, reproach, slander, etc.

How the speaker chooses certain speech actions depending on his communicative goals is explained in the article “Conflict through the eyes of a linguist” by V. Tretyakov.

The author of the article notes that speech is an individual phenomenon, depending on the author-performer, “it is a creative and unique process of using the resources of language.” [Tretyakova 2000: 127] Tretyakova further writes that right choice a means of language that meets the expectations of the communication partner and harmonizes communication. But both in language and in speech, there are features that create various obstacles and misunderstandings that lead the subjects of communication to conflict. But the linguistic sign itself is “virtual,” as the researcher writes; it actualizes its real meaning (including conflict-provoking properties) only in relation to the act of speech. “But a linguistic sign that has such properties does not always reveal them in an utterance,” notes V. Tretyakova. The actualization or non-actualization of the properties of a linguistic sign, which create the ground for a communicative conflict, depends, according to the author of the article, on the participants in communication. It is their communicative experience, language competence, individual language habits, etc. allow you to eliminate communication obstacles or aggravate them and bring the situation to a conflict.

The type of communication (conflict - non-conflict) is judged by its result, says V. Tretyakova. O. Issers also writes about this in his book. And the result of communication is usually associated with the purpose of communication, we read further from V. Tretyakova, with the achievement/non-achievement of the speaker’s speech intention. But the goal can be achieved in different ways. “For example, the goal of inducing the interlocutor to some action desired by the speaker can be achieved through the speech act of a polite request or order, expressed using an imperative, invective vocabulary, insulting and humiliating the personality of the interlocutor.”

Setting up for conflict, i.e. The speaker’s choice of a strategy of verbal aggression is characterized, according to the author of the article:

choice of behavior with active influence to a communication partner;

using negative vocabulary;

with dominance of the speaker's role,

with violation of communicative norms of behavior,

with labeling,

using direct and indirect insults, etc.

Spheres of existence of verbal aggression

As V. Glebov and O. Rodionova write in their article, “verbal aggression can manifest itself within any type of communication (interpersonal, group, mass) and any discourse, regardless of its time and national factors.”

The most “favorable” areas for the manifestation of verbal aggression are the following areas of life:

·family;

· school and other educational institutions;

·army;

· sector of the economy in which low-skilled workers are employed and predominantly physical labor is used;

· contacts of sellers and buyers;

· parliamentary struggle;

·Media.

In particular, an article published on the website www.school.promiranet.ru - “Speech aggression at school and ways to overcome it” - is devoted to the problem of verbal aggression at school.

The author of the article notes the particular relevance of this problem for children's speech environment and pedagogical communication. “Children can verbally humiliate, ... insult, intimidate, ridicule each other,” the author writes, “... but at the same time they do not evaluate their speech as aggressive, they are not capable of an objective assessment of their own speech behavior, and therefore of analyzing and changing it.”

Further in his article, the author draws our attention to the fact that aggression is often characteristic of teachers’ speech, and it manifests itself in raising the tone, sharp exclamations, rude remarks, caustic ridicule, etc. (“Shut your mouth!”, “Get out of the classroom! I’m counting to three…”). The author talks about dangerous consequences aggression in the speech of teachers, since “schoolchildren learn an aggressive model of speech behavior and transfer it to communication with each other (ibid.).

Many articles are devoted to the problem of verbal aggression in the media, among them: “Creators of black and white reality: about verbal aggression in the media” by E. Basovskaya; “Speech aggression and speech tolerance with the media” by L. Enina; “Speech aggression in the media and crime” by E. Lopukhova; “The use of foreign words as a manifestation of verbal aggression. Statement of the problem" T.G. Kotova; “On verbal aggression in modern media” by L. Ratsiburgskaya.

Regarding this problem, L. Ratsiburgskaya writes that with liberalization public relations There was also a liberalization in the language, which was reflected in media texts. “...Media texts began to be distinguished by brightness, creative imagination and spontaneity of live speech, stiffness, constriction, and standardness disappeared...” On the other hand, this led to a clear “overkill” of expression, a manifestation of poor taste of writing journalists. [Ratsiburgskaya 2006: 56]

If earlier journalists were one way or another guided by the written language fiction, then now their texts are closer to the style of everyday speech, notes L. Ratsiburgskaya. “This cannot pass without a trace for the language spoken by society - after all, in their everyday speech, people, as a rule, are guided not by examples of fiction, but by television and newspaper language...” (ibid.).

We read almost the same thing in E. Basovskaya’s article, where she writes that emotional state modern man largely depends on the media: not only on the topics of newspapers, magazines, etc., but also on their style. Journalists, in order to make their publications as attractive, interesting and persuasive as possible, “often choose an aggressive speech strategy.” [Basovskaya 2004: 257]

E. Basovskaya argues that a person who is characterized by aggressive verbal behavior does not always act consciously. “In this sense, the texts of printed media mass media not quite typical,” she writes (ibid.). Comparing verbal aggression in direct oral communication with verbal aggression in journalists’ remarks, the author of the article comes to the conclusion that the latter’s verbal aggression manifests itself “in accordance with a well-thought-out strategy” and not under the influence of an emotional impulse. For journalists, verbal aggression is “not a means of struggle, but a fashionable... rhetorical device” (ibid., 257-263). While verbal aggression in oral communication “serves as a crude voluntary means”, acts as an instrument of self-defense, and performs “compensatory functions, replacing physical aggression” (ibid., p. 263).

L. Enina in the article “Speech aggression and speech tolerance in the media” talks about two options for the manifestation of cases of speech aggression in texts:

Based on linguistic analysis texts, L. Enina identifies several images of the enemy in the modern press:

the enemy in the form of power, those in power. Included in the opposition “People - Power”;

an enemy among ethnic strangers;

external enemy. Opposition "Russia - West";

The author of the following article on verbal aggression in the media (E. Lopukhova “Speech aggression in the media and crime”) writes that “amplifiers of the aggressive flow of information” are often used in texts and messages, such as:

the use of words like: victim, murder, maniac, etc.;

a vivid description of aggression: brutal murder, torn body;

the use of words that insult certain representatives of various structures: policeman - “cop”, “garbage”; seller - “huckster”, “huckster”.

On overcoming verbal aggression

According to scientists, aggressive speech demonstrates an authoritarian communication style, lack of professionalism and leads to alienation, hostility, and misunderstanding. Therefore, aggression is ethically unacceptable and ineffective from a communicative point of view. In this regard, it is necessary to learn to control, restrain, and overcome verbal aggression. There is scientific literature with practical recommendations on overcoming verbal aggression. Thus, L. Enina in her article calls on journalists to reduce verbal aggression by abandoning direct evaluative oppositions, from rude evaluative expressions of images of “strangers”, “due to analytical approach to this problem." [Enina 2003: 5]

An article on our topic, published on the website www.school.promiranet.ru, provides a list of private techniques for controlling verbal aggression in specific speech situations, which, as the author writes, must be used by every civilized person:

1.Ignoring verbal aggression (silence in response to an aggressive statement; refusal to continue communication, etc.).

2.Switching attention (you need to try to change the hostile mood of the interlocutor, transfer the conversation to another topic).

.“Tactical doubt”, or the “incitement” method (targeted verbal “provocation”).

.Positive evaluative statements.

.Open verbal reprimand (it must be expressed in the correct form, with the obligatory use of the necessary politeness formulas).

Joke. Humor.

To prevent aggression, it is also proposed to use means speech etiquette:

·apology;

· indirect expression of motivation (“Perhaps you...?”; “Won’t you do...?”);

· polite treatment;

· euphemisms (from the Greek eu - “good” and phemi - “I say”), i.e. softer words or expressions instead of rude or abusive ones (“not true” instead of “lies”).

verbal aggression Russian studies

Tutoring

Need help studying a topic?

Our specialists will advise or provide tutoring services on topics that interest you.
Submit your application indicating the topic right now to find out about the possibility of obtaining a consultation.

Lecture 14

SPEECH AGGRESSION: AREAS AND FORMS OF MANIFESTATION

1. THE CONCEPT OF SPEECH AGGRESSION

“Non-brotherly states” of society, as expressed by the 19th century philosopher N. F. Fedorov in his work “The Question of Brotherhood, or Kinship, the Causes of the Unbrotherly, Unrelated, i.e., Non-Peaceful, State of the World and the Means for Restoring Kinship,” appear first all in the powerful phenomenon that sometimes embraces all spheres of society’s life, permeating its entire logosphere - the phenomenon of speech aggression (see: Fedorov N.F. Works - M., 1994.)

Verbal (verbal, speech) aggression in the modern world is assessed by the public consciousness as less dangerous and destructive than physical aggression. Thus, reviewing F. Keener’s book “The Word as a Weapon,” V. S. Chulkova writes: “Acts of verbal aggression... are beginning to be universally perceived as not entirely real and not posing a specific threat to society” (Language and Ideology. - M., 1987).

Obviously, this assessment does not take into account the real social danger of verbal aggression as the first step on the path to physical aggression, and also, what is especially important, as a phenomenon that creates an “aggressive approach to reality” among members of society, and thereby an aggressive social environment. The “aggressive logosphere” is not only a product of society. She herself actively shapes society, influencing it.

Most theories aimed at searching for the origins aggressive behavior human beings are based on the recognition of the immanence of aggression and consider aggressiveness to be an innate property of a person, a form of his behavior determined by his biological nature.

This is, for example, the position of Konrad Lorenz, a Nobel laureate and ethologist, whom we have already discussed in previous lectures. “It (humanity),” writes Lorenz, “is not aggressive and constantly ready to fight because it is divided into parties hostilely opposing each other, it is structured precisely in this way because it represents an irritating situation (we will return to this term later) A. M.), necessary to defuse social aggression." And further: "If some creed actually swept the whole world, it would immediately split into at least two sharply hostile interpretations (one true, the other heretical), and hostility and strife would flourish would be the same as before, because humanity, unfortunately, is what it is" (Lorenz K. Aggression. - M., 1994).

However, recognition of the immanence of aggression to man, the “biological” nature of it, does not at all force, contrary to popular belief, to also recognize man’s powerlessness to cope with aggression, to curb it in himself and in society.

Thus, Konrad Lorenz is confident: “The newly emerged living conditions of humanity today categorically require the emergence of such an inhibitory mechanism that would prohibit manifestations of aggression not only in relation to our personal friends, but also in relation to all people in general.”

The more we know about the nature of man and his behavior, in particular, speech behavior, the more we realize the prospects for the humanization of society and life.

Therefore, it is not at all strange that the ideological positions of such different, seemingly distant thinkers, such as, for example, the 19th century philosopher, coincide. N.F. Fedorov and the Austrian Konrad Lorenz, scientist, our contemporary. Compare: “There is no eternal enmity, but the elimination of temporary enmity is our task,” writes N. F. Fedorov.

"I do not at all think that the Great Designers of evolution (variation and selection - A. M.) will solve the problem of humanity in such a way as to completely eliminate its intraspecific aggression... We are able to experience true, warm feelings of love and friendship only for individual people, and our best intentions cannot change anything here. But the Great Designers can. I believe that they will do this, because I believe in the power of human reason, I believe in the power of selection - and I believe that reason will set in motion intelligent selection. I believe that our descendants - in the not too distant future - will become capable of fulfilling this greatest and most beautiful requirement of true Humanity,” argues K. Lorenz.

It is possible that the intelligentsia in the true sense of the word are precisely the people created by the “Great Designers of Evolution” (to use Lorenz’s metaphor) in order to fulfill the task of “eliminating temporary enmity,” which Nikolai Fedorov spoke about as the main task of humanity for more than a hundred years. years ago.

So, what “inhibiting mechanisms” of verbal aggression may arise? What existing ones can we hope for? What remains especially dangerous about verbal aggression?

2. SOCIETY’S ATTITUDE TO SPEECH AGGRESSION

In modern logospheres, verbal aggression is restrained not only clearly insufficiently, but generally weakly. Some traces of an earlier general trend - the desire of power groups, the ruling classes to avoid swear words and other bright and rude forms of verbal aggression -

6 Russian Socrates

these still remain. However, it is characteristic that, for example, when listening to tape recordings of the Watergate case, according to F. Keener in his work “The Word as a Weapon: Towards the Problem of the Psychology of Verbal Aggression” (Göttingen, 1983), all obscene words used by the president and his interlocutors were omitted, and there were quite a few such words.

This public assessment of verbal aggression, in particular swearing, as socially acceptable and only “fictitiously” dangerous, also leads to changes in legislation: for example, in the United States, fines for blasphemy and foul language in public places have been abolished. Previously, adherence to Puritan morality limited such actions to legal prosecution.

As is known, in Russian traditional culture there were mechanisms for protecting against speech aggression, different for different social groups. Thus, among the nobility, such a role was played by the category of “honor” and the duel mechanism associated with it. The duel as a ritual system of actions served precisely to resolve and end conflicts affecting the personal honor of a nobleman, and consisted of “an insult, a challenge and its acceptance, a fight and reconciliation (termination of the case). The culmination of a matter of honor is a duel - a fight between two rivals on a noble deadly weapons, taking place in the presence of seconds according to pre-established rules drawn up in accordance with a code or tradition" (Vostrikov A.V. Murder and suicide are matters of honor. - In the collection: Death as a cultural phenomenon. - Syktyvkar, 1994).

The mechanism of the duel by its very existence made verbal aggression in the sphere where the concept of “honor” operated so dangerous (i.e., directly related to the need to kill or be killed, with a mortal threat) that, in general, rude and open forms of verbal aggression were used to a limited extent . Wed. a fact described in the cited work based on the source - the story of M. S. Rashchakovsky: “Do you know this story with Emperor Alexander the Third, when he was still the heir? Under the hot hand, at the parade where he commanded, he swore at one lieutenant. He wrote him a letter: they say, because

I cannot challenge the heir to the throne to a duel, so I demand that you apologize to me in writing. If I don’t receive an apology by such and such an hour, I will commit suicide. Well, as you know, Alexander was a smart and sensible king, but a rude man. Didn't apologize. And this officer, of course, shot himself. So Alexander Nikolaevich forced his son to follow the coffin of this officer, whom the entire guard was burying, on foot through the whole of St. Petersburg!”

The use of rude, open forms of verbal aggression in this environment could only be timed to “insult” as the first speech act in the system of actions that make up the mechanism of a duel.

As we see, the traditional ritualized behavioral mechanisms of restraining verbal aggression, and the legal control of society over it, and the limited scope of its wide application lower social groups of society - all this weakens over time. What are the prospects? Let's take a look, first focusing on a brief analysis of the phenomenon of verbal aggression itself.

3. SITUATION OF SPEECH AGGRESSION

Participants in a situation of verbal aggression are generally divided into two groups: the aggressor (attacker) and the object of aggression (victim). As we see, this situation develops strictly according to the subject-object model S-O, where S is the active and O is the passive partner (in our terminology, this relationship is monological in content). At the same time, in some very important situations of verbal aggression, in which masses of people participate under the leadership of a leader (let's call them situations of mass aggression), all participants unite in an act of verbal aggression against some common “enemy” that is not represented in the situation by a specific person or persons. Such situations are also distinguished by the fact that the leader purposefully and intentionally influences a special instinct, which K. Lorenz, for example, in relation to a person calls “inspiration”: “Inspiration is a real autonomous instinct

human, like, say, the instinct of the triumphant cry of greylag geese. It has its own search behavior, its own challenging stimuli and, as everyone knows from personal experience, it gives such strong satisfaction that it is almost impossible to resist its tempting effect. Just as the cry of triumph very significantly influences the social structure of wild geese, even dominates it, so the instinct of inspired fighting impulse largely determines the social and political structure of mankind."

This instinct of an “inspiring fighting impulse” requires a special situation for its manifestation - an “irritating situation” (according to Lorenz), which is a situation of mass verbal aggression. Here is its structure: “In irritating situations, which are best inspiring and purposefully created by demagogues, there must first be a threat to highly revered values. The enemy, or his dummy, can be chosen almost arbitrarily, and like the values threatened, can be specific or abstract. "These" Jews, Boches, Huns, exploiters, tyrants are just as good as world capitalism, Bolshevism, fascism, imperialism and many other "isms". Secondly, an irritating situation of this kind also includes, if possible, an enthralling figure of a leader, which, as we know, even the most anti-fascist-minded demagogues cannot do without, because in general the same methods of the most different political movements are addressed to the instinctive nature of human beings. a reaction of inspiration that can be used to your advantage. The third, and almost the most important factor inspiration is also the largest possible number of enthusiastic people. The patterns of inspiration at this point are completely identical to the patterns of formation of anonymous flocks... The captivating effect of a flock grows, apparently, in geometric progression as the number of individuals in it increases,” writes K. Lorenz.

So, an annoying situation in the case of mass verbal aggression has the following general features:

structure: it requires the presence of three elements: the “enemy” (the object of aggression, absent, i.e. “excluded” from the speech situation, or actually presented, concrete or abstract), an active element (the attacker, here the leader) and a passive element (the masses led by the leader).

Compare these factors of “inspiration” (according to Lorenz), or these three elements of the irritating situation of mass verbal aggression, highlighted above, with the conclusions from our analysis of the rhetorical model of fascism carried out in previous lectures. It is absolutely clear that the ethologist’s conclusions are quite comparable and even structurally identical to ours. Indeed, the “image of the enemy”, the figure of the “charismatic leader”, the instinct of the group, in which the very mass of the gathering functions as a means of persuasion based on faith - these three components of the model of fascist aggressive rhetoric correspond to general structure annoying situation in an act of mass verbal aggression.

Let us now briefly consider the motives and goals of the aggressor during an act of verbal aggression, if the interaction occurs in a dyad. Aggression most often occurs during contacts between partners of different social status and serves to manifest or establish social asymmetry. In our terminology, these relationships are monological in form. If there is a difference in social status the aggressor and the victim, the first resorts to aggressive speech acts for “self-affirmation” and in order to achieve submission from the victim (expressed in the form of repentance, obedience, etc.). This means that an aggressive speech act is, first of all, an instrument for creating and maintaining a social hierarchy.

In addition to a purely social purpose, verbal aggression also has an emotional function. Often, an act of verbal aggression serves to “splash out” emotions and thus relieve emotional tension. A certain "catharsis" - "purification" - is achieved. F. Keener, in the above-mentioned work, the abstract of which was made by V. S. Chulkova, points out: “Most cases of verbal aggression arise precisely on the basis of a suppressed aggressive impulse.

"The fear of physical violence forces an individual to resort to less punishable forms of aggression, including verbal ones."

4. IMPORTANT FORMS OF SPEECH AGGRESSION

Manifestations of verbal aggression can be classified on different grounds.

1) It is clear that all aggressive speech acts can be arranged on a scale of intensity, or severity of manifestations, building a series from the so-called “erased” (weak) forms to the strongest (swearing). “Erased” forms are called, for example, hidden reproach, indirect condemnation. From our point of view, it is difficult to consider such speech acts as aggressive at all, since not all blasphemy or censure is aggression. Moreover, such acts are often not perceived as aggressive by partners and are not assessed by them as such. The opposite pole of the same scale is scolding, swearing, emotionally and expressively expressed direct reproach (“scream”). This is “open”, “strong” aggression.

2) However, in our opinion, it is more important to distinguish and classify speech acts of aggression according to the degree of their awareness by the aggressor (reflexivity) and their purposefulness. If a person, demonstrating a pronounced (“strong”) form of aggression, for example, “screaming” and (or) swearing, simultaneously shows that his speech actions should not be taken seriously, i.e. if there is an indirect message, then such a situation , and consequently, this form of aggression already deviates greatly from the typical phenomena of genuine speech aggression, despite the severity of the manifestations. Then it is more of an imitation than a real aggression, then it is an indirect rather than a direct speech act.

It’s another matter when we observe a fundamentally different situation - the active partner (aggressor) is quite serious and resorts to aggression consciously and purposefully. Then his speech intention may coincide with the achieved effect (result). If the speech action is particularly

is known to be committed as aggressive, and the speaker’s goal is for the addressee to understand this action as aggressive, then we have a special and “pure” type of verbal aggression, so to speak, “verbal aggression per se.” In everyday life, this type of verbal aggression is simply called “rudeness.”

3) It is also important, as we showed above, to distinguish between types of aggression according to the number of participants in the irritating situation and its characteristics (mass and socially closed forms).

4) It is also obvious that there are fundamental differences between verbal aggression towards a participant in a situation who is actually and specifically represented in it, and verbal aggression directed at an absent “enemy”. These two types of verbal aggression are called “transitive” and “intransitive” aggression. We have intransitive aggression, for example, in the case when a person scolds and scolds “life in general”; transitional - when the object is government policy, or, say, the president appears on the screen, and the television viewer turns his angry speech directly to him, as to a person present in the room. The manifestations of verbal aggression, the objects of which are a face (faces) or, conversely, abstract objects (ideas, views, etc.), are also largely different. It is clear that it would be more logical to distinguish types of verbal aggression on three different grounds: 1) the presence or absence of a specific object of aggression; 2) representation or non-representation of the object of aggression in a given speech situation and 3) concreteness or abstractness of the object of aggression. In any case, we talk about transitive abuse if the object is clearly defined, while with intransitive abuse the aggression is directed “around”, at everything around us, as if “dispersed”. The reason for intransitive abuse is the deterioration of the emotional state, and general dissatisfaction with life, and the feeling of a constant and serious threat emanating from society, disbelief in it. Thus, intransitive swearing expresses a general negative attitude towards society and life. However, it also poses a threat to others: although a person’s dissatisfaction with life is supposedly expressed in “dispersed” aggression,

This, however, it is, as it were, “redirected” to specific surrounding people who are in no way personally to blame for the state of the aggressor. The latter become victims of aggression, naturally shifted from an abstract and (or) vague object to a concrete and (or) directly presented in a speech situation.

5. CULTURAL SPECIFICITY OF MANIFESTATIONS OF SPEECH AGGRESSION

Speech aggression, like other forms of verbal behavior, reveals clear specifics in different cultures. What is “read” as aggression in the logosphere of one culture may not be perceived as such at all in other cultural logospheres. This cultural specificity of verbal aggression and its manifestations is revealed in the analysis of cultures of ancient times and remains relevant in the modern world.

Thus, in the book of F. Keener, for example, information about the spread of curses among the Frankish and Bavarian tribes of antiquity is compared. The author concludes that “under similar conditions of existence, the Bavarians were more prone to verbal aggression than the Franks, and those curses that were used by the Franks were often not perceived by the Bavarians as such at all. The reason for this was the religiosity of the Franks, which significantly influenced the number of curses used at that time to create swear words of blasphemy."

It is very important that the cause of verbal aggression during intercultural contacts can be (and this often occurs) a violation of understanding that arises on the basis of general differences and the specifics of speech behavior. Thus, K. Lorenz writes: “A significant part of the habits defined by good manners is a culturally ritualized exaggeration of gestures of submission, most of which probably go back to phylogenetically ritualized behavior that had the same meaning. Local concepts of good manners in various cultural subgroups require quantitatively different emphasis on these expressive

tive movements... Of course, the meaning of such courtesy gestures is determined solely by the agreement between the transmitter and the receiver in the same communication system. When communicating between cultures in which these conventions are different, misunderstandings inevitably arise. If we measure the gesture of the Japanese “lending an ear” on an East Prussian scale, then it can be regarded as a manifestation of pathetic servility; to a Japanese, the polite attention of a Prussian lady will give the impression of implacable hostility... In good American society, I probably often seemed rude simply because it was difficult for me to smile as often as American manners dictate. There is no doubt that these minor misunderstandings greatly contribute to the mutual hostility of different cultural groups. A person who misunderstands, as described above, the social gestures of representatives of another culture, feels treacherously deceived and insulted. The mere inability to understand the expressive gestures and rituals of another culture arouses such mistrust and fear that it can easily lead to open aggression."

Thus, during intercultural contacts, it is especially important to take into account the results of the work of researchers - ethologists and ethnolinguists, in order to successfully resist speech aggression.

6. AREAS OF SPEECH AGGRESSION

Based on the findings of F. Keener, we will indicate the following areas of life and activity that are most “favorable” for manifestations of verbal aggression. These are: 1) family; 2) school and other educational institutions; 3) army; 4) sector of the economy in which low-skilled workers are employed and predominantly physical labor is used; 5) contacts of sellers and buyers; 6) parliamentary struggle.

Manifestations of verbal aggression at school are especially important. They have fundamental and very dangerous overall social consequences. The aggressor (teacher), using aggressive speech acts, achieves his

momentary goals - obedience, submission, fear. However, in this case, children - victims of aggression - first create a negative attitude towards the aggressor himself, and then this negative attitude is transferred to the entire society, which the teacher represents, “on behalf of which” he makes his demands.

This is how it is said in V. S. Chulkova’s abstract on the work of F. Keener: “Children adopt and copy aggressive speech actions.” This means that not only negative social attitude, but also an aggressive pattern of behavior. "The habit of foul language can only be eradicated very long work to introduce positive assessments into all statements of adults."

So, the general principle of confronting the formed aggressive behavioral model and social position, the principle of “prevention” of speech aggression, is that “praise” and “blasphemy” are balanced in the teacher’s speech, and “negative” and “positive” in assessments are harmonized.

No utterance by an adult should contain only “blasphemy,” and if censure is necessary, it should be balanced with “praise” within the boundaries of the same utterance. The scales on which positive and negative assessments lie can and should be in balance. This will allow you to balance and harmonize the child’s emotional state and picture of the world, and correctly form his social position. In this case, censure cannot turn into aggression.

In addition, research shows that aggressive speech acts of a teacher are not perceived by students at all “as intended”: students believe that the reason for dissatisfaction and aggressive behavior (abuse) of the teacher is not the desire to correct their shortcomings, but, on the contrary, helplessness and incompetence teacher, his lack of self-confidence, bad mood, i.e. not the shortcomings of the students, but the shortcomings of the teacher. A teacher prone to verbal aggression quickly loses authority, and his scolding loses its effectiveness, becoming habitual.

In conclusion, one cannot help but note that the problem of verbal aggression has been little studied in domestic science and based on domestic material.

Research on this socially important issue is especially necessary based on the material of our logosphere, since the mechanisms that traditionally restrained the manifestations of speech aggression, when the domestic logosphere is disrupted due to long-term social upheavals and outright cataclysms, are almost (if not completely) lost. Any regulatory and advisory work in this area, in order to be effective, must first of all be based on an adequate scientific basis.

Lecture 14

SPEECH AGGRESSION: AREAS AND FORMS OF MANIFESTATION

1. THE CONCEPT OF SPEECH AGGRESSION

Most theories aimed at searching for the origins of aggressive human behavior are based on the recognition of the immanence of aggression and consider aggressiveness to be an innate property of a person, a form of his behavior determined by his biological nature.

The more we know about the nature of man and his behavior, in particular, speech behavior, the more we realize the prospects for the humanization of society and life.

So, what “inhibiting mechanisms” of verbal aggression may arise? What existing ones can we hope for? What remains especially dangerous about verbal aggression?

2. SOCIETY’S ATTITUDE TO SPEECH AGGRESSION

6 Russian Socrates

The use of rude, open forms of verbal aggression in this environment could only be timed to “insult” as the first speech act in the system of actions that make up the mechanism of a duel.

As we see, the traditional ritualized behavioral mechanisms of restraining verbal aggression, and the legal control over it by society, and the limited scope of its widespread use by the lower social groups of society - all this is weakening over time. What are the prospects? Let's take a look, first focusing on a brief analysis of the phenomenon of verbal aggression itself.

3. SITUATION OF SPEECH AGGRESSION

This instinct of an “inspiring fighting impulse” requires a special situation for its manifestation - an “irritating situation” (according to Lorenz), which is a situation of mass verbal aggression. Here is its structure: “In irritating situations, which are best inspiring and purposefully created by demagogues, there must first be a threat to highly revered values. The enemy, or his dummy, can be chosen almost arbitrarily, and like the values threatened, can be specific or abstract. "These" Jews, Boches, Huns, exploiters, tyrants are just as good as world capitalism, Bolshevism, fascism, imperialism and many other "isms". Secondly, an irritating situation of this kind also includes, if possible, an enthralling figure of a leader, which, as we know, even the most anti-fascist-minded demagogues cannot do without, because in general the same methods of the most different political movements are addressed to the instinctive nature of human beings. a reaction of inspiration that can be used to your advantage. The third, and almost the most important factor of inspiration is also the largest possible number of enthusiastic people. The patterns of inspiration at this point are completely identical to the patterns of formation of anonymous flocks... The captivating effect of a flock grows, apparently, in geometric progression as the number of individuals in it increases,” writes K. Lorenz.

So, an annoying situation in the case of mass verbal aggression has the following general features:

Compare these factors of “inspiration” (according to Lorenz), or these three elements of the irritating situation of mass verbal aggression, highlighted above, with the conclusions from our analysis of the rhetorical model of fascism carried out in previous lectures. It is absolutely clear that the ethologist’s conclusions are quite comparable and even structurally identical to ours. Indeed, the “image of the enemy”, the figure of the “charismatic leader”, the instinct of the group, in which the very mass of the gathering functions as a means of persuasion based on faith - these three components of the model of fascist aggressive rhetoric correspond to the general structure of the irritating situation in the act of mass verbal aggression.

Let us now briefly consider the motives and goals of the aggressor during an act of verbal aggression, if the interaction occurs in a dyad. Aggression most often occurs during contacts between partners of different social status and serves to manifest or establish social asymmetry. In our terminology, these relationships are monological in form. When there is a difference in the social status of the aggressor and the victim, the first resorts to aggressive speech acts for “self-affirmation” and in order to obtain submission from the victim (expressed in the form of repentance, obedience, etc.). This means that an aggressive speech act is, first of all, an instrument for creating and maintaining a social hierarchy.

"The fear of physical violence forces an individual to resort to less punishable forms of aggression, including verbal ones."

4. IMPORTANT FORMS OF SPEECH AGGRESSION

Manifestations of verbal aggression can be classified on different grounds.

5. CULTURAL SPECIFICITY OF MANIFESTATIONS OF SPEECH AGGRESSION

6. AREAS OF SPEECH AGGRESSION

This is how it is said in V. S. Chulkova’s abstract on the work of F. Keener: “Children adopt and copy aggressive speech actions.” This means that not only a negative social attitude is formed, but also an aggressive pattern of behavior. “The habit of foul language can be eradicated only by very long work to introduce positive assessments into all the statements of adults.”

In conclusion, one cannot help but note that the problem of verbal aggression has been little studied in domestic science and based on domestic material.

Workshop script

"Speech aggression"

Target: increasing the psychological and pedagogical competence of teachers.

Objectives of the seminar:

provide theoretical information to teachers about the causes of verbal aggression;

develop skills in using techniques to control verbal aggression;

Target group: teachers.

Seminar progress:

Introduction 15 min

Announcement of the topic, introduction.

Greetings

Warm-up

Theoretical part 30 min

Speech aggression of the teacher

Forms of manifestation of verbal aggression

Practical part 30 min

Practicing the skill

Feedback

Total duration: 1 hour 15 minutes

Workshop “Speech aggression”.

Introduction

Announcement of the topic

Greetings

Participants are invited, sitting in a circle, to talk about their mood, associating it with the weather, book, color, etc.

Warm-up “And I’m going...”

Participants sit in a circle. There is one more chair in the circle. One of the participants sits clockwise on an empty chair and says: “And I’m going.” The next participant in the chain moves to an empty chair and says: “And I’m next.” The next one behind him sits on the vacant chair and says, “And I’m a hare.” The next one changes seats and says: “And I’m with...” (name of any participant). The named person moves next to him. Thus, the circle is broken and the whole chain begins anew. Each time the participants change clockwise faster and faster.

Theoretical part.

Concept, causes of verbal aggression

Speech aggression - this is offensive communication, the verbal expression of negative emotions, feelings or intentions in an offensive, rude, unacceptable form.

Causes of verbal aggression

General	Private
propaganda of violence	response to aggression
the attribute of a strong, confident personality is promoted in society	external stimulus
replacement of physical aggression	intention to cause damage "out of habit"
	family education
	children's team (negative experience)

Conclusions:

Speech aggression is a widespread phenomenon among children and adolescents.

Adolescents prone to verbal aggression generally do not assess their verbal behavior as aggressive.

Speech aggression of the teacher

Reasons

As an involuntary reaction of a teacher to an irritating situation that has arisen; most often acts as a kind of defensive reaction.

As a conscious, purposeful reaction.

Consequences of teacher verbal aggression

In children and adolescents, self-esteem decreases and self-doubt arises.

The teacher unwittingly develops an aggressive response in children.

First, a negative attitude is created towards the aggressor himself, and then this negative attitude is transferred to the entire society that the teacher represents.

The main forms of manifestation of verbal aggression

Insults.

Threats.

Rough requirements.

Rough refusal.

Hostile remarks.

Ridicule

Techniques for controlling verbal aggression

Ignoring verbal aggression (extinction method).

A person does not react to verbal aggression addressed to himself, as if he “does not notice” the hostility on the part of the interlocutor, and does not respond with rudeness to rudeness.

Example:

Silence in response to aggressive speech.

Refusal to continue communication (turn away and leave).

Continue communication in a calm, even tone.

Switching attention - involves an attempt to distract the interlocutor from an aggressive intention, to move the conversation to another topic.

Example:

Ask your interlocutor an unexpected question (“What do you think about...?”)

Make an interesting proposal (“Let’s go to the movies.”)

Offer an interesting and exciting task (game).

"Tactical Doubt" (the “provoking” method) - involves verbal “provocation”: to hurt pride, to challenge.

Example:

“I thought you were a good boy, I was probably mistaken...”

“Come on, who is the bravest - who will go first make peace?"

Open verbal reprimands. Involves the elimination of open, clearly expressed verbal aggression.

Example:

“I am giving you a stern reprimand!”

“Guys, stop arguing!”

Humor, joke - strong remedy diversion of aggression, because laughter often simply “relieves the anger of others.”

Requirements:

The joke shouldn't be offensive.

Should be clear.

Consider individual characteristics children and adolescents (sensitivity).

Belief - explaining to children and adolescents the rules of disciplined behavior.

Don't:

Convince the inaccessible (“you never have to quarrel again”).

Raise your tone.

Persuade casually.

Suggestion - indirect beliefs are softer, hidden, less offensive to the addressee.

Example:

Advice (“If I were you, it would be better to do this…”).

Expression of attitude towards the offense (“I would have done it not this way, but this way...”).

An indication of the negative consequences of verbal aggression.

Preventive conversation .

It is advisable to carry out this in a situation where there has been a specific case of verbal aggression on the part of the child, and not because this child In general, he is distinguished by a tendency to verbal aggression.

Practical part

Psychologist:Now we will try to practice using techniques to control speech aggression. To do this, we will unite into two teams. Each team will receive a conflict situation. Your task, through joint discussion, is to indicate the form of manifestation of aggression in a given situation, and to resolve it by using some method of controlling aggression.

9. Practicing the skill of using techniques in practice:

1. Children and teenagers are preparing for a big event. Most children take an active part in this. But one 13-year-old boy distracts the teacher and other children with his conversations, that is, he allows himself rude ridicule and insults towards the participants: “Sanya, your hands are like hooks, why do you cut so crookedly!”; “Oh, Lenka, what did you think of, color the title in red, no idea!” etc.

2. Among children and adolescents it occurs mind game"What? Where? When?". In addition to the direct participants, other children are present at the event - spectators, who offend the players with caustic statements: “Yes, Zhenya, we thought that you were smarter, but in reality it turned out wrong,” “Leshka, are you a fool or something, such a simple answer, and you don’t know!” etc.

Teachers discuss their options. After 15 minutes, a representative from each team says that they did it.

10. Feedback

What new did you learn? Was everything clear? Will you apply the proposed techniques in practice, if not, then why?

Literature

Shcherbinina Yu.V. "Russian language. Speech aggression and ways to overcome it.” Textbook/M.: Flinta: Nauka, 2004.