<<
>>

communicative behaviour of the blackmailer

It is necessary to understand set of norms of dialogue of the persons united on the basis of an accessory to social, age, gender, ethnic, professional, konfessionalnoj and so forth group as communicative behaviour.

Thus communicative features can be not only group, but also personal. In this case it is necessary to speak about communicative behaviour of the person [Sternin, 2000].

Initially researchers showed interest directly to a phenomenon of the language person. The special contribution to theory development lingvopersonologii was brought by such scientists, as G.I.Bogin, JU.N.sentr, V.I.Karasik, K.F.Sedov, Of this year Vorkachev, etc.

For the first time appeared in V.V. Vinogradova's work [Vinogradov, 1980] as «the image of the author», subsequently concept of the language person receives development at first thanking lingvodidakticheskomu G.I.Bogina's to approach [Bogin, 1984], then is actively developed in J.N.Karaulova's works. «The language person"is understood"as the term set of abilities and the characteristics of the person causing creation and perception by it of speech products which differ with degree of structurally-language complexity, by depth and accuracy of reflexion of the validity,
Certain target orientation »[Sentries, 1987]. The further researches have led to expansion of the given concept and allocation of one of versions of the language person - persons communicative. Allocation of the given type of the person became possible on the basis of existing tipology to the language person in which communications as sphere of functioning and actualisation of the language person are necessarily considered.

At present to consideration of the communicative person works Of this year Vorkacheva [Vorkachev, 2001] and V.I.Karasika [Karasik, 2000 are considered as the approaches most popular, in our opinion; 2002]. So, Of this year Vorkachev specifies, that under the language person it is accepted to consider the person, first of all, as capable to make and perceive speech activity, and the person communicative means already studying of features of verbal behaviour of the person realised directly within the limits of dialogue [Vorkachev, 2001].

In a paradigm of researches of the communicative person the conclusions made V.I.Karasikom, about three-componental model of the communicative person are important. It is a question of valuable, informative and behavioural aspects which are necessary for considering at the description of the communicative person. The valuable aspect includes the ethical utilitarian norms of behaviour making a cultural context, clear to the average native speaker. Informative (kognitivnyj) the aspect reflects a picture of the world of the given communicative person. The behavioural aspect is characterised by a specific set of paralinguistic means of dialogue [Karasik, 2002]. As a whole V.I.Karasika's definition does not contradict the conclusions Of this year Vorkacheva, the communicative person, according to the author, is treated as the person existing in language space - in dialogue, in the stereotypes of behaviour fixed in language, in values of language units and senses of texts [Karasik, 2002,
With. 26].

It is necessary to mention the tendency of differentiation observed recently communicative and diskursivnoj persons. So, S.N.Plotnikova suggests to differentiate persons language, communicative and diskursivnuju [Plotnikova, 2005].

According to the author, the language person is understood as the person possessing language ability, that is knowing that or other language. The communicative person appears as the language person who is the participant of communications in a role of the addressee or the sender. The person diskursivnaja represents such language person who, generating any message, bears responsibility for its maintenance, she is the language person who generates «a certain discourse in the form of continuously renewed or finished, fragmentary or integral, oral or written message» [Plotnikova, 2005, with. 7]. «Diskursivnaja the person is characterised, first of all, on the purposes, values, the communicative status, the played social and psychological role, the selected strategy of dialogue. Plurality diskursivnyh persons at one person» [In the same place] from here follows.

Not denying plural variability diskursivnyh persons at the concrete individual, we, nevertheless, do not consider relevant differentiation of concepts communicative and diskursivnoj the person and in the present research we prefer to use the term «the communicative person».

Communicative persons are classified on the various bases. As problems of the present research do not include generalisation and the description of existing classifications, will short characterise what are of interest for the description of the communicative person of the blackmailer.

On ability to cooperation in communicative behaviour, on character of harmonisation / disgarmonizatsii K.F.Sedovym's communicative interaction three types of speech behaviour are allocated: aligned, co-operative and disputed [Sedov, 1998].

The communicative person belonging to aligned type, is characterised by installation on ignoring of the partner in communications and concentration on itself. Versions of a discourse of such type are is active-aligned and is passive-aligned.

The co-operative type of communicative interaction differs installation dominating in dialogue on the interlocutor. Within the limits of this type are allocated kooperativno-konformnyj and kooperativno-aktualizatorsky subtypes [Sedov, 2000].

For us interest represents disputed type of the person which, according to K.F.Sedovu, shows installation on itself and simultaneously against the partner in communications, aspires to ego-trip at the expense of the interlocutor and provokes the interlocutor to collision [Sedov, 1998]. The disputed type of the person is subdivided into two subtypes: konfliktnoyoagressivnyj and konfliktno-manipuljatorsky.

Kommunikant, practising konfliktno-aggressive style of speech behaviour, shows aggression in relation to the partner in dialogue, trying to deliver to it the moral discomfort and to achieve sensation of own social full value. Aggression can be shown in different forms depending on specific features of participants of communications.

At konfliktno-manipuljatorskoj versions of speech behaviour the addressee acts only as object of manipulation. In process interaktsii the given type of the person proves in different speech genres - in lectures, councils, dictatorship, etc. [Sedov, 1998, 2000].

Undoubtedly, that in the course of communicative interaktsii speaking,
Is guided by certain motive for realisation communicative intentsii. According to K.F.Sedovu, the motive is the first instance in generation of speech and last instance in the course of perception and understanding of the statement, «for we understand not speech, and at all a plan, and for the sake of what our interlocutor expresses this or that thought, that is motive» [Sedov, 1999, with. 14].

As the basic intentsija blackmail - to force the addressee (to the detriment of its interests and desires) to obey to will speaking (in its advantage) the communicative behaviour of the blackmailer as we already could be convinced, can be qualified as destructive (see chapter 1 of the present research).

Does not cause doubts, that the communicative person can be differentiated on the basis of a discourse, it sotsiolingvisticheskih characteristics, on the one hand, and also from the point of view of purposes and intentions, with another. Last parametre allows scientists to allocate the destructive communicative person as the person practising destructive type of dialogue [Volkova, Panchenko, 2016]. Thus we will notice, that the destructive communicative person has something in common with the disputed type of the person allocated with K.F.Sedovym.

The destructive communicative person can be described on the model offered by V.I.Karasikom. In this case obvious there are following judgements: in the valuable plan of the destructive communicative person is admissible to allocate the external valuable plan (a negative estimation from associates) and the internal valuable plan (infringement ethical and moral values of a society). Kognitivnyj the aspect assumes knowledge kognitivnyh the schemes, corresponding with existing stereotypes of behaviour in situations of destructive dialogue in certain society, and also emotional kontseptov destructive dialogue, including representations about nonverbal kontseptualizatsii
Corresponding emotional conditions. Within the limits of behavioural aspect finds reflexion directly concrete display of the communicative person in situations of destructive dialogue of various types, including the purposes, strategy and tactics of realisation of destructive intentions [In the same place].

The offered J.A.Volkovoj and N.N.Panchenko is of interest for the present research typology of the destructive communicative persons, allowing to allocate potentially destructive and actually destructive communicative persons [Volkova, Panchenko, 2016]. The potential destructive communicative person, according to authors, has no directly destructive intention, however its communicative behaviour can be regarded the addressee or the detached onlooker as destructive. Actually destructive communicative person, on the contrary, represents the communicative person who osoznanno and purposefully chooses destructive models of behaviour.

Actually destructive communicative person depending on realised tactics can appear in three kinds:

The communicative person practising mainly manipuljativnye tactics of destructive dialogue;

The communicative person practising mainly invektivnye tactics (direct or indirect) destructive dialogue;

The communicative person practising combined invektivno-manipuljativnye tactics and combining lines of two types.

The communicative persons practising mainly indirect invektivnye tactics, use strategy of discredit or so-called «game on fall of the person». The sender in this case resorts to distribution of the doubtful data, the concerning addressee, capable to do much harm its reputations, to humiliate, cause
The moral harm, which addressee not in a condition to ignore.

The communicative persons practising mainly direct invektivnye tactics, use in dialogue of the insult, threat, jeer, a communicative sadism, rudeness. For the given type of the communicative person installation on open offensive behaviour, defiantly negative and unichizhajushchee the relation to the opponent, emotional fieriness, propensity to conflicts and comprehension of own impunity is characteristic.

Special interest for the present research is represented by the communicative persons allocated with researchers practising mainly manipuljativnye tactics of destructive dialogue. The blackmailer also concerns typical representatives of this group of communicative destructive persons, distinctive line of which communicative behaviour is use of receptions of psychological pressure and manipuljativnogo influences on emotional sphere of the addressee by means of threats. Influence on painful points and conscious causing of psychoemotional harm to the person allows researchers to carry the blackmailer to the destructive communicative person [Volkova, Panchenko, 2016].

The offered typology of destructive communicative persons is presented in the form of the scheme [In the same place].

The scheme № 1.

Classification of destructive communicative persons

Let's look narrowly more attentively at features of communicative behaviour of the blackmailer, we will define the most typical receptions and the means used for achievement of the purpose.

Leaning against I.A.Sternina's ideas [Sternin, 2000, 2002, 2004, 2005], communicative behaviour actively dealing with by problems, we consider possible revealing of features of communicative behaviour of this or that person on the basis of the analysis of communicative situations in which «the communicative portrait» the participant of the speech interaction is staticized, typical models of speech behaviour, speech reaction, specificity of change replikovyh steps to dialogical dialogue, initiation, development, an exit from a situation of the communicative
Interactions.

The analysis of an empirical material (more than 500 examples) has allowed to reveal the features characterising communicative behaviour of the blackmailer, and also has formed the basis for allocation of two types of the blackmailer: the blackmailer-manipulator and the blackmailer-dictator.

It is remarkable, that both allocated types are found out in approximately equal quantity of cases (53 % and 47 % accordingly), them

The communicative behaviour is caused as the specificity of a situation of blackmail connected with achievement of an object in view, and individual displays of properties of the communicative person.

Let's address to the description of invariant characteristics

Communicative behaviour of the blackmailer. In the communicative behaviour the blackmailer it is frequency uses the conditional designs as which lexical markers acts konditsionalnyj the union if, expressing a condition:

(10) Well Nastja was lost because of own character, - Degtyaryov has stretched, - she has demanded from Vorotnikova immediately to marry it. Lion Nikolaevich has begun to get out, and then Nastja has decided it to blackmail. Has declared: «Keep in mind, if we will not undersign, I will go to militia and I will tell about the Face» (D.Dontsova. An ear from a gold small fish).

Version of a design with the union if is the design with the difficult union if..., that, used for a simultaneous explication of a categorical condition and threat of consequences of its default:

(11) - So, - has told to Lucho Novak, - I offer you a choice. Release my nephew and dismiss from it charges, and I in a private order will inform you everything, that you wish to know. But if you continue to address with it as with the criminal between us war will begin. A secret which you wish from all to hide, I will publish on the first page of each Roman newspaper. I will leave today to orthodox and all it
I will tell. I will punish you that you punish it! (J.Kolduel. The fifth Gospel).

So, in the resulted examples it is shown, that in a preposition the speaking has a categorical condition at which non-observance promises to the addressee negative consequences.

Along with it, regular use of the adversative union or, specifying that default of demanded action, will inevitably entail realisation of another is found out.

(12) It, likely, it became valid clearly, and it has tried to apply blackmail — has jerked on itself the handle of a door and has cried out: «Or you will swear, that never will go to Petrov without me, or I now will jump out!» (N.Voronel. Unvarnished. Memoirs. NKRJA).

Let's notice, that in written speech rema, that is communicatively significant information, settles down, as a rule, in the end of the offer. In a situation of oral spontaneous dialogue speaking first of all tries to express new, representing for it the greatest importance of data. In written speech, in particular, in an art discourse can it is artificial to be modelled oral communications. Thus, there is a stylisation of prominent features of natural dialogue within the limits of art communications.

In the example resulted above the adversative union or, representing anaforichesky repetition as duplication of an initial part of speech units, settles down in the statement beginning that specifies in communicative intention speaking to focus attention on situationally important information for it, that is directive statement of a condition which is necessary for executing to the addressee.

Communicative activity of the blackmailer is shown in communications initiation, and also in control of a course of speech interaction. The given control can be expressed in
Imposing of a certain communicative tonality of dialogue, communicative suppression speaking, speech thrashing. The blackmailer builds a composition of a speech genre in which are included:

Introduction (the reference speaking on zatekstovuju the information known not only to the addressee, but also the sender);

The basic part (designation of a problem situation);

The conclusion (condition formulation) (the example 13, parts ((), () accordingly see).

At the same time all three composite components can be united within the limits of one statement (the example 14 see).

(13) - you hint at a crime made as if the brother.

() - Is not present, not on it, and on its own words. Here here two evenings in succession it came to Sofia Semenovne. I showed to you, where they sat. He has informed it a full confession. It the murderer. It has killed the old woman the official, protsentshchitsu at which and itself pawned things; has killed too its sister, torgovku, by name of Lizavetu, unintentionally entered into time of murder of sister. It has killed both of them itself(himself) which has brought with itself. It has killed them to plunder, and has plundered; took money and which-what things... He is all transferred word for word to Sofia Semenovne, which one and knows a secret, but in murder did not participate neither a word, nor business, and, on the contrary, was terrified the same as also you now. Be pokojny, it will not give out it.

- Business long, Avdotya Romanovna. Here, as though to you it to express, some kind of the theory

() - We will rescue it, we will gain. Want, I will take away it abroad? I have money; I in three days will get the ticket. And about that it has killed it still will do many kind affairs so all it will be smoothed down; calm down. The great person still can be. Well with you? How do you feel?

() - All it from you depends, from you, from you one you... One your word, and it is rescued! JA. I will rescue it. I also love you... I infinitely love you. Allow to me edge of your dress to kiss, give! Give! (F.Dostoevsky. A crime and punishment);

(14)... Also I will force big gejzihu to allow me to communicate with small, having threatened the poor lady adoring me that I will throw it, if it will forbid me to play with my lawful stepdaughter (In Nabokov. Lolita).

Borders of a communicative situation of blackmail are defined from the moment of explicit statement of conditions and a designation of consequences in case of their default, accordingly the input in a communicative situation always is made by the sender. However it is necessary to notice, that in household communications often blackmail is a jet genre on display of provocation, threat or behaviour of the opponent simply undesirable to the blackmailer.

It is necessary to address to the emotional party of a phenomenon of blackmail. It is known, that emotion is a motivational basis of consciousness when the emotionality accompanies any activity of the person including speech [Shahovsky, 2006]. Our supervision show, that in blackmail situations can be presented as the suppressed emotionality (in the form of hints, default, an innuendo), and eksplitsitno the expressed.

(15) Bembi has gloomy asked:

- So you plainly also did not know, on what go?

- Until have signed the contract. Then to all of us have explained and have let know, that it is not necessary to break treaty provisions because orphans among us were not. And if to us are expensive our native, remained here...

- Well, clearly, - has put Sol. - Everything, as at cinema. Usual blackmail.

- It at cinema as in a life, - has objected Drim. - Only not all with it in
Lives face (J.Lavrjashina. A snail in a plate).

The communicative potential of an innuendo expressed in written speech in the form of dots, is extensive. The innuendo, on the one hand, is expression means raznootsenochnyh emotions (admiration, disappointment, disgust, disappointment, a rage), and, with another - possesses polyfunctionality (functions of attraction of attention, game, protective, mitigativnaja, preventive and so forth). The innuendo or default can be both intentsionalnymi, and neintentsionalnymi [Valgina, 2004; Moskvin, 2007]. In the given example the blackmailer intentionally breaks off potential syntactic whole - a compound sentence in which verbalizuetsja only an additional part, and the basic proposition remains directly not expressed. In it the communicative power speaking which supervises not only the emotional condition, but also the form of expression of the last is shown.

Less frostily the blackmailer behaves in a following example:

(16) All the same you will understand nothing, so it is possible to tell also the truth. - listen, pravdoljubets, you will meet people? Or me them with somebody another to acquaint? - Here, Markin, in it you all: blackmail and threats. Give we will talk. Now you where? (V.Spektr. Face Control).

Means of expression of emotions in the given example are intensifying particles, exclamatory offers in the form of interrogative, konnotativy, the reference, partselljatsija, etc.

Despite characterising the blackmailer direktivnost, impozitivnost, criticality, the factor of emotional restraint / fieriness is not defining. In a household discourse is not present strict institutsionalnoj hierarchy, accordingly, there are no strict social or status restrictions on the form of expression of emotional experiences. Thus it is necessary to notice, that the blackmailer
Mainly behaves emotionally frostily as possesses the communicative (information) power in the given situation.

The examples presented above specify in one of the important communicative features of the blackmailer - it direktivnost. It is expressed in use of representative and-or directive speech certificates of the statement, ascertaining, the order, the prevention, the promise.

(17) Yes, yes, it so. And Zilber has declared, that if I refuse to help the father, he will tell to mum about all and will warn, that on a card the destiny of her daughter is put. The complete scoundrel! When it has started blackmail, I have drooped and... — Also has given in? — Is not present, no. It is accident. (The collective. A hiding place//"Spark". №№ 5-6, 8-13, 1970. NKRJA).

The blackmailer categorically realises directive model of behaviour, resolutely acts with statement of a condition to the addressee, thus the communicative behaviour of the blackmailer is characterised by imperativeness, has the form direct, indirect and hidden (deduced of semantics of the message) incentive statements. The ordering behaviour the blackmailer creates original «communicative installation» (direktivnost) which following will allow object of blackmail to avoid negative consequences for it.

The criticality expressed in negative qualification of actions of the addressee, is one more feature of communicative behaviour of the blackmailer. We will pay attention, that the negative estimated statement is one of elements of destructive speech behaviour and, according to T.A.Vorontsovoj, is characterised by two features:

1) it is a categoriality of an estimation which is reached at the expense of levelling of the subjective beginning of the estimated statement: the individual estimation is given as general;

2) it aksiomatichnost estimations: such negative estimation not
Assumes motivations, the knowledge is presented by the sender as an estimation-.

«A categoriality and aksiomatichnost estimations in the concrete speech statement, as a rule, are closely interconnected: one assumes another. The negative estimation looks objective and standard, i.e. is given as an estimation-knowledge, instead of as an estimation-opinion» [Vorontsova, 2006, with. 169].

The sender not only threatens a victim, but also tries to convince her that she is guilty in an event and blackmail is anything to others, as only a consequence of those or other actions of the subject.

In a following example before demanding to give out the certain information under the threat of physical violence, the blackmailer attacks the addressee with charges.

(18) My victim has peeped also a constrained voice prochirikala.

- I in what am not guilty.

I have pressed a finger more strongly, and it has calmed down.

- About you it is not guilty. Everything, that you were intended to do it to arrange small collision - just sufficient that Mr. Bonfort was late for ceremony. If I have not noticed, that you brake, that you have not crippled, at you it could escape punishment. Did not leave, and? I Think, that if it properly to ask, it much can porasskazat to us. The guy, you when - nibud exhausted pins under nails? After you to us will tell all - the most pleasant will come for you the party has put: after you will get to talking, we will release you wherever one wishes and anything to you we will not make - we will simply allow to return to a city. (R.Heinlein. A double star).

The blackmailer breaks and is artificial aggravates a communicative situation of interaction with the addressee. As the blackmailer is interested in certain development of the communicative preferable to it
Situations, use of a disapproving negative estimation of actions by it and behaviour of the addressee allows to increase persuasiveness of the judgements and conclusions. Intentsionalnoe creation by the blackmailer of intensity of a communicative situation and a corresponding emotional tonality of dialogue becomes way of dramatisation of dialogue in which the victim of blackmail is involved.

Results of the analysis of communicative behaviour of the sender of blackmail, in our opinion, allow to expand typology of destructive communicative persons which was discussed above.

It is represented to us, that the blackmailer can prove in several ipostasjah depending on preferred tactics and prevalence in its behaviour of those or other communicative receptions and means:

1. The Blackmailer-manipulator preferring latent tactics of influence, masking the true intentions and frequently is false acting on the party of a victim («I operate in your interests», «you as the clever person should understand, what decision for you is better»). For the given type invectives as a whole are inadmissible polite dialogue, on the contrary, is underlined is one of the important communicative markers of the blackmailer-manipulator.

2. The Blackmailer-dictator using categorical requirements of categorical character, orders. For this type high level of an emotionality, criticality, imperativeness / direktivnost, direct threats are characteristic. In communicative behaviour of the blackmailer-dictator speech certificates of the insult are found out, invectives are possible, however, it is necessary to underline, that the given means are not frequency for this type of the destructive person.

For achievement of the communicative purpose the blackmailer-manipulator resorts to the diversified latent tactics of influence and
manipuljativnym to receptions, for example, information distortion, an identification of the addressee with negatively estimated social group, a programming nomination, the unsubstantiated statement, etc. [Kopnina, 2014].

On a following example we will track, how the blackmailer uses manipuljativnyj reception of discredit of a victim.

Along with criticality, a negative estimation of actions and behaviour of a victim, and also communicative direktivnostju, the communicative behaviour of the blackmailer is characterised impozitivnostju, that is speaking persistently imposes the outlook, attitude, the opinion and represents conclusions and logic conclusions as is unique true and possible with the help both emotional, and rational arguments.

(19) - Shout, break windows, but I will not let out you from here while you will disagree to be my wife!

It is a pity to me you: you will be lost for the obstinacy. Today you despise me, turn away from me, tomorrow, maybe, you and your friends will stand before me in a lap, but I will be firm.

- Never, never!

The humpback has shrugged shoulders.

- Well, you will not make it, but I will hold you at myself, will not come yet to me for you. Your neighbours learn. To you life will not be from their languages. All the same your groom will know, that you have stayed at me some days! And?. he, he, he!

- I will go everywhere itself, I will ask everywhere on you, that you the liar, that you siloju held me at yourselves! - breaking into tears, spoke polinka.

The humpback laughed.

I am not afraid of it! I am rich, and everyone will more soon attribute the complaint of the poor girl to desire to force me to marry you...

- I do not want it, I do not want! Whether you hear? - With heart has cried polinka. - I swear to you, I will more soon lose a life!

- I am old, I am cleverer than you, I have, money and patrons, - the humpback continued. - yes first your friend, Hope Sergeevna, yes she if I want, will name me the saviour... (N.Nekrasov. Three cardinal points).

In the episode resulted above the Humpback not simply emotionally forces a victim to marriage, but also methodically and with deep arguments denies all its attempts to resist. So, it uses the social power (I am old, I am cleverer than you, I have money and patrons), considers a context of occurring events and potential reaction of society (your Neighbours learn. To you life will not be from their languages), uses the prevention of the sad consequences, disguised under the speech certificate of sympathy (To me it is a pity you: you will be lost for the obstinacy). As a marker nazyvanija own position is served also by various degree of an emotionality of the sender and the addressee: the first behaves more frostily, and, accordingly, shows more likely rational, rather than emotional behaviour.

Above (item 3.2 see.) we have specified, that in the case of the examples showing communicative behaviour of the blackmailer, use cases manipuljativnogo reception of threat by suicide are revealed, i.e. threat is two-forked (both on the addressee, and on the blackmailer). The given examples are interesting to that in them the blackmailer directly shows dezadaptatsiju and inversiruet communicative roles. So, formal display by the blackmailer of the communicative power is accompanied by an open recognition of weakness and impossibility of other exit from the developed situation. Hence, the blackmailer not only shows the communicative power, but also is hidden transfers to its addressee who, in turn, should react from a force position, according to the developed situation to anticipate and not to admit

Realisations of negative consequences for both participants of a situation of communicative interaction.

The blackmailer-dictator, on the contrary, chooses direct tactics of influence, does not hide true intentions, the purposes and own position.

(20) - I have once again checked up the transaction and have found out infringements infringements not in them / and at you / Applied science / the Whole department has simply disappeared for one night / I has glanced in archives and has lifted some old affairs ^pokazyvaet чертежи* learn the child / rumpling police cars in evening news / So / your department of workings out turns out spends the huge sums for it / writing off them on cellular for army / That you for it build now / a spaceship / I want 10 million dollars a year till the end of a life / (h/f the Dark knight, 2008).

The blackmailer-dictator states the facts known to it (I have once again checked up the transaction and has found out infringements) and openly shows the compromising evidence - drawings. For a designation of the requirement the sender of blackmail uses unequivocally treated volitiv (I want).

The one more sign, allowing to differentiate two ipostasi the blackmailer, categoriality degree is at promotion of requirements.

So, extreme degree of a categoriality which can be distinguished the observer / the addressee as categorical is peculiar to the blackmailer-dictator.

(21) - the new book about Harry Potter / is necessary to Girls

- Well/was good/I will go to a bookshop /

- You have fallen and were knocked by a head about asphalt? /

- Yes is not present like /

- We have all published books / it it will would be desirable to learn / that further /

- The neopublished manuscript is necessary to you? /

- At us enormous communications with publishing houses/unless it is a problem? / and you and not that can/was true? /

- The book should be here not later than three And if you do not get until then to me the book / can not come back here any more / (h/f the Devil carries Prada, 2006).

Speech certificates testify to high level of a categoriality konstativa (to Girls it is necessary) and an injunctive (the book should be here), requirements used for a formulation. Future time and eksplitsitno the expressed threat of prospect (And if you do not get until then to me the book / can not come back here any more) also underline categoricalness of the requirement.

The blackmailer-manipulator, making the demand, on the contrary, frequently creates illusion of a choice at the addressee, let and between two frankly negative variants: performance of conditions of the blackmailer and threat realisation.

(22) - it is fine, Mr. Holmes. I protest only in interests of our client. Has put such ticklish...

- Dear sir, it is heavy to me to discuss this question but if money is not paid the fourteenth, of course, the eighteenth weddings will not be.

- It is impossible, - Holmes has objected.

- My God, my God, as it is sad! - has exclaimed Milverton, taking out from a pocket a thick notebook. — here tomorrow it will be already possible to name, when this note will be in hands of the husband of this lady. And all only because she does not wish to pay for it the beggarly sum which would get in half an hour, having exchanged the brilliants on pastes (A.Dojl. Charles Ogastesa Milvertona's end).

Blackmailer-manipulator Milverton pretends to be acting on the party of a victim (only in interests of our client, My God, my God,
As it is sad!), moreover, hides own initiative (to me hard to discuss this question), thereby trying to expose the innocent hostage of circumstances. He does not demand categorically to satisfy the laid down condition, but colourfully describes consequences of its default (the eighteenth weddings will not be) and meaningly underestimates gravity of the requirement (And only because she does not wish to pay all for it the beggarly sum).

Pays also to yourself attention that fact, that for communicative behaviour of the blackmailer-manipulator the underlined politeness (the Dear sir) while the blackmailer-dictator affords rough, sharp statements to a victim, an offensive tonality (you have fallen and were knocked by a head about asphalt) is characteristic. It is necessary to notice, that the given types not always give in to accurate differentiation.

It is obvious, that the allocated types of the blackmailer-dictator and the blackmailer - of the manipulator correlate with differentiated by K.F.Sedovym kommunikantami, practising konfliktno-aggressive or konfliktno-manipuljativnyj style of speech behaviour.

The basic distinctive signs of communicative behaviour of the allocated types we will present in the form of the table.

The table № 2.

Comparative characteristics of specificity of communicative behaviour of types of blackmailers

Features of communicative behaviour The blackmailer-dictator The blackmailer - the manipulator
Categoriality + -
Politeness - +
Tactics

Influences

Mainly direct Mainly hidden

The carried out analysis of features of communicative behaviour of the blackmailer has allowed to be convinced once again, that blackmail concerns destructive communicative interaction, and the blackmailer is actually destructive communicative person, trying to realise intention to harm the addressee.

As a whole the communicative behaviour of the blackmailer is characterised through emotionality categories, direktivnosti, criticalities, impozitivnosti and communicative activity. It is realised in the speech certificate of threat (direct or indirect), and also in speech certificates of the statement, ascertaining, the order, the prevention, the promise, by means of the conventional and adversative unions, hints, innuendoes, umolchany, konnotativov, references, exclamations and other ways of expression of emotions.

As blackmail represents reguljativnyj a communicative phenomenon, intentsionalno focused on the addressee, further we will address to consideration of a position of the second participant of interaction - to the description of communicative behaviour of a victim of blackmail.

3.4.

<< | >>
A source: Nikodimova Anna Dmitrievna. BLACKMAIL AS the PHENOMENON of DESTRUCTIVE COMMUNICATIONS. The dissertation on competition of an academic status of a Cand.Phil.Sci. Volgograd - 2018. 2018

More on topic communicative behaviour of the blackmailer:

  1. concept of communicative behaviour and the communicative person of modern linguistics
  2. communicative behaviour of the addressee
  3. communicative behaviour of the sceptic-pragmatist
  4. parametres of communicative behaviour of the sceptic
  5. characteristics of communicative behaviour of sceptics
  6. communicative behaviour of the sceptic-critic
  7. communicative behaviour of the malicious sceptic
  8. typology and the characteristic of communicative behaviour of sceptics
  9. the Chapter the second SPECIFICITY of the LANGUAGE DESCRIPTION of COMMUNICATIVE BEHAVIOUR of the PERSON In the SITUATION "FLIRTATION"
  10. 2.3.1. Concepts «communicative strategy» and «communicative tactics» in the scientific literature
  11. Knyazev Anastas Andreevna. SPECIFICITY of COMMUNICATIVE BEHAVIOUR of the PERSON In FLIRTATION SITUATIONS: GENDER ASPECT. The dissertation AUTHOR'S ABSTRACT on competition of a scientific degree of a Cand.Phil.Sci. Tver - 2018, 2018
  12. KNYAZEV ANASTAS ANDREEVNA. SPECIFICITY of COMMUNICATIVE BEHAVIOUR of the PERSON In FLIRTATION SITUATIONS: GENDER ASPECT (ON the MATERIAL of ENGLISH-SPEAKING FICTION). The dissertation on competition of a scientific degree of a Cand.Phil.Sci. Ivanovo - 2017, 2017
  13. the Technique of diagnostics of communicative installation on V.V. Bojko (definition of the general communicative tolerance)
  14. 1.2.3 Communicative and temporalnye perception factors Communicative factors of perception of the political leader
  15. § 3. The account of a parity biological and social in criminal behaviour as one of directions of increase of efficiency of punishment under criminal law Discussion about biological and social in behaviour of the person and the precondition to its renewal.
  16. 3.3.1 Communicative courses
  17. 1.2.4. Communicative style of the professional language person