Determination of Interlocutors' Speech Intentions by Discourse Markers

The article continues a series of studies of the intentional space of social media and discursive markers of users’ intentions. The aim of the study was to test the possibility of determining speech intentions by their markers in the discourse. Participants — 291 individuals (77 males, 214 females; M=19.4 years). Respondents filled out a methodology prepared taking into account expert assessment, which contained 18 statements of social network users, and noted the intentions expressed in them. The first version of the methodology form, with statements without markers, was completed by 97 respondents, the second one, with one marker, by 96 respondents, and the third, with three markers, by 98 respondents. It has been founded that the intentions “to express doubt”, “to object” and “to insult” are best defined, while the intention “to criticize” is the worst identified. The addition of discourse markers generally improves the determination of intentions, which is consistent with their understanding as specific discourse regulators that clarify the contextual reference of what is said. This tendency is not found in all the categories studied, which is due to the possibility of subjective interpretation of sayings and ambiguity of the context. The variants of mixing of intentions in case of their incorrect identification are described. Some intentions are more often mixed with one category, which is due to their cognitive closeness, while others are mixed with a set of intentions, which indicates their blurring in consciousness. An analysis of the use of markers showes that only some intentions can be considered discursively identified. This encourages further search for markers of speech intentions and opens up new research perspectives.

1. Afinogenova V.A., Pavlova N.D. Intentsional'nye patterny v replikakh sobesednikov. Eksperimental'naya psikhologiya, 2015. Vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 36—44. (In Russ.).
2. Batura T.V., Korb A.V., Pechenkina A.M. Analiz illokutivnykh funktsii vyskazyvanii na primere tekstovykh soobshchenii v Tvittere. Sibirskii psikhologicheskii zhurnal, 2015. No. 58, pp. 162—174. (In Russ.).
3. Voronina L.V. Illokutivnyi profil' tekstovykh edinits s semantikoi tseli v aspekte ikh modelirovaniya i interpretatsii. Uchenye zapiski Kazanskogo universiteta. Seriya gumanitarnye nauki, 2021. Vol. 163, Ch. 1, pp. 42—52. (In Russ.).
4. Grebenshchikova T.A., Zachesova I.A. Psikhologiya povsednevnogo diskursa: intentsional'nyi aspekt. M.: Izd-vo “Institut psikhologii RAN”, 2014. 208 p. (In Russ.).
5. Deik van T.A. Yazyk. Poznanie. Kommunikatsiya. Blagoveshchensk: BGK im. I.A. Boduena de Kurtene, 2000. 308 p. (In Russ.).
6. Diskurs v sovremennom mire. Psikhologicheskie issledovaniya / Pod red. N.D. Pavlovoi, I.A. Zachesovoi. M.: Izd-vo “Institut psikhologii RAN”, 2011. 368 p. (In Russ.).
7. Ignat'eva A.S., Kalinina V.V., Songolova Zh.G. Yazykovoe modelirovanie fenomena sozhaleniya. Filologicheskie nauki. Voprosy teorii i praktiki, 2017. No. 3(69), pp. 103—105. (In Russ.).
8. Kamenskii M.V. Kognitivno-funktsional'naya model' diskursnykh markerov kak osnova eksperimental'nogo issledovaniya ikh kognitivnogo potentsiala. Izvestiya vysshikh uchebnykh zavedenii. Povolzhskii region. Gumanitarnye nauki, 2015. No. 2(34), pp. 111—120. (In Russ.).
9. Kozlova A.A. Eksplitsitnye i implitsitnye sposoby realizatsii rechevogo akta predosterezheniya. Traditsii i novatsii v gumanitarnom i sotsial'no-ekonomicheskom issledovanii: problemy, metody, praktiki: materialy Vserossiiskoi nauchnoi konferentsii studentov-stipendiatov Oksfordskogo Rossiiskogo Fonda (Ekaterinburg, 24 aprelya 2017 g.). Ekaterinburg: UrFU, 2017. Pp. 92—94. (In Russ.).
10. Kubryakova E.S. Ob ustanovkakh kognitivnoi nauki i aktual'nykh problemakh kognitivnoi lingvistiki. V poiskakh sushchnosti yazyka. Kognitivnye issledovaniya.: izd-vo “Znak”, 2012. Pp. 13—35. (In Russ.).
11. Mishlanov V.A., Krizhanovskaya E.M., Kuznetsova Yu.M. K interpretatsii implitsitnogo modusa: semioticheskie marker rechevykh intentsii v tekstakh setevoi kommunikatsii. Medialingvistika, Vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 366—378. (In Russ.).
12. Novoe v zarubezhnoi lingvistike. Vypusk 17. Teoriya rechevykh aktov / Otv. red. B.Yu. Gorodetskii. M.: Progress, 1986. 423 p. (In Russ.).
13. Yu. Ponimanie sokrashchennogo ili neodnoznachnogo vyskazyvaniya: sochetanie verbal'nogo i real'nogo opyta chitatelya. Voprosy psikholingvistiki, 2020. No. 3(45), pp. 85—95. (In Russ.).
14. Pavlova N.D., Afinogenova V.A., Grebenshchikova T.A. Diskurs sotsial'nykh media: intentsional'nyi podkhod. Psikhologicheskii zhurnal, Vol. 44, no. 1, pp. 81—90. (In Russ.).
15. Pavlova N.D., Afinogenova V.A., Kubrak T.A., Zachesova I.A. Rechevye intentsii i referentsial'nye ob"ekty v diskurse sotsial'nykh media (na material diskussii v usloviyakh lokdauna). Eksperimental'naya psikhologiya, Vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 139—156. (In Russ.).
16. Pavlova N.D., Grebenshchikova T.A. Intent-analiz. Osnovaniya, protsedura, opyt ispol'zovaniya. M.: Izd-vo “Institut psikhologii RAN”, 2017. 151 p. (In Russ.).
17. Pavlova N.D., Peskova E.A. Ponimanie intentsional'nogo podteksta rechi adresatom. Eksperimental'naya psikhologiya, 2012. Vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 74—82. (In Russ.).
18. Rakhilina E.V., Bychkova P.A., Zhukova S.Yu. Rechevye akty kak lingvisticheskaya kategoriya: diskursivnye formuly.Voprosy yazykoznaniya, 2021. No. 2, pp. 7—27. (In Russ.).
19. Temirgazina Z.K., Bachurka M.S. Rechevye akty pokhvaly i odobreniya v pedagogicheskom diskurse. Vestnik RUDN. Seriya: Teoriya yazyka. Semiotika. Semantika, 2017. Vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 97—105. (In Russ.).
20. Ushakova T.N., Pavlova N.D., Alekseev K.I., Latynov V.V., Tseptsov V.V. Slovo v deistvii. Intent-analiz politicheskogo SPb.: Aleteiya, 2000. 320 p. (In Russ.).
21. Fleis Dzh. Statisticheskie metody dlya izucheniya tablits dolei i proportsii / Perevod s angl. I.L. Legostaevoi, A.M. Nikiforova. M.: Finansy i statistika, 1989. Pp.74—88, 227—240. (In Russ.).
22. Chernyavskaya V.E. Metapragmatika kommunikatsii: kogda avtor prinosit svoe znachenie, a adresat svoi kontekst. Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo universiteta. Yazyki literatura, 2020. Vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 135—147. (In Russ.).
23. Shmurak R.I. Formal'nye sredstva vyrazheniya upreka v russkom yazyke: k protsedure korpusnogo poiska. Vestnik Moskovskogo Seriya “Filologiya”, 2021. No. 2, pp. 83—93. (In Russ.).
24. Camp E. Slurs as dual-act expressions / Ed. D. Sosa. Oxford: Oxford University Press,
25. Fogal D., Harris D.W., Moss M. (Eds.). New Work on Speech Acts. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018.
26. Hanks P. Types of speech acts / New Work on Speech Acts. Eds. D. Fogal, D.W. Harris, M. Moss. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018. Pp. 123—143.
27. Harris D.W. Intention and commitment in speech acts. Theoretical Linguistics, 2019. Vol. 45(1-2), pp. 53—67.
28. Murray S.E., Starr W.B. The structure of communicative acts. Linguistics and Philosophy, 2021. Vo 44, pp. 425—474.
29. New Work on Speech Acts / Eds. D. Fogal, D.W. Harris, M. Moss. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018.
30. Pilgun M., Gabdrakhmanova N. Digital spaces of network aggression: muscovites’ perception of migrants. Russian Journal of communication, 2020. Vo 12, no. 3, pp. 237—261.