Abstract: The subject of the study is the logical and grammatical structure of conclusions. The object of the study is conductive arguments. The authors of the article consider the implementation of such arguments in an environmental media discourse. Unlike formal logic, natural language argumentation is more often based on examples, analogies and reasoning that do not ensure the full truth of conclusions, since they can only be true with a certain degree of probability. Probabilistic arguments can have different interpretations and lead to different conclusions. A variety of such arguments is the class of conductive arguments. These are arguments that contradict other arguments presented in support of a particular conclusion. The study of conductive arguments is relevant because their role in argumentation has been little studied. In addition, environmental topics in the media give contextual characteristics to the argumentation, which makes it possible to trace the change in logical canons in reasoning. The method of reconstruction of argumentative discourse using the analytical tool "Argumentative Step" was used in the work. The elements of argumentation were analyzed in accordance with the model of argumentative functions. A theoretical analysis of the literature has shown that conductive elements in the process of argumentation do not receive sufficient coverage in Russian argumentology. The analysis of empirical material revealed a significant number of non-deductive conclusions in the argumentation. As a result of the study, the following conclusions were drawn. 1. Conductive arguments are an immanent part of the proof structure. 2. The textual constructions corresponding to the conductive arguments reflect the semantics of the counterthesis, the balance between arguments, reservations, as well as the extension of the thesis, that is, the expansion of the scope of the thesis. In the analyzed texts in English, markers of opposition and limitations were found, such as conjunctions, particles, prepositions "but", "even", "although", "even if", "in spite of", "despite of", "unless". These markers indicate the presence of conductive arguments in the text.

Abstract: The object of the study is fragments of lay discourse about artificial intelligence and new technologies that express antipathy. The subject of the study is evaluative and emotional judgments about technologies and forms of their linguistic objectification, rooted in the discourse as a product of linguaculture.
The authors consider the issue of pessimistic perception of technological progress in Western society. A productive way to study this issue is the stereotype as a cognitive-linguistic phenomenon. It was accepted that stereotypes play a special role in representing general features of national, social and other human character traits.
The authors conclude that one of the main functions of the stereotype is its orienting function, which has influence on the components of the human being’s personality.
The authors used such scientific methods as: introspection, comparison, analysis of dictionary definitions, descriptive-interpretative method, interpretation of discourse. This methods, in combination with text markup techniques, made it possible to identify fragments of discourse that were significant for analysis.
The research was based on the English language texts from The Guardian and The New York Times news aggregators, on materials from MIT Technology Review and Neuroscience News magazines.
The authors conclude that technogenic stereotypes in English discourse have a mythological basis in the form of religious motives and specific linguacultural images. This contrasts with the rational-critical view of information technology innovation.
Intermediate findings include the conclusion about the role of media, social networks, which are the key actor of the discourse of hype about technological expansion.
The novelty of the study lies in the fact that a new area of public discussion has been allocated, which is considered in the light of data on the orienting function of the stereotype, which requires academic reflection by specialists from different fields.

Abstract: The article discusses the issues of argumentation of the environmental agenda, which occupies a significant place in the modern linguistic society and is implemented in various discursive practices. The authors proceed from the fact that the environmental problem is a universal topic that is approved by all people. Therefore, the discussion of environmental problems has a great unifying force. The reaction of the audience to the discussion of environmental plans is always predictable, this topic is approved by all segments of the population. It can be said that the media and politicians always make the most of environmental issues. The combination of political speech and ecology, covered in the media, is a synergistic effect when the sum of the components is greater than a simple addition: 1+1+1→5. The synergy of politics and ecology is the object of this work, and the subject of the study are argumentative structures that provide this synergy. The article contains a review of works showing the specifics of logic and the philosophical tradition of China, which were the basis for specific models of reasoning that make up the Eastern model of argumentation. The purpose of the work is to analyze the argumentation in the speeches of Chinese politicians on the environmental topic and to monitor the implementation of the Eastern or Western model of argumentation. The main conclusions of the article are conclusions about the universality of the Western style of argumentation, which is implemented in arguments about environmental problems. The authors also point out the undesirability of leveling argumentation styles. The novelty of the work lies in the fact that these conclusions, being projected on the field of political ecology, allow us to conclude that the linguistic and cultural characteristics of each country affect the implementation of environmental policy. The authors' contribution to the research of the topic consists in a comparative analysis of the Eastern and Western styles of argumentation and in observing the implementation of one of them in ecological topos in Chinese.