Lexico-semantic Aspects of Word "Sanction" in the Russian Political Sphere

Guan' Tsi ORCID: 0000-0002-3759-8881 Postgraduate student, Department of Russian Language and Methods of its Teaching, Peoples' Friendship University of Russia 117198, Russia, g. Moscow, ul. Miklukho-Maklaya, 6 gguanqi@163.com Other publications by this author

Ferdinand de Saussure suggested that language is a system, which is why words in a language do not exist in isolation, but are connected to each other in various ways. The analysis of the lexico-semantic field (hereinafter LSP) shows that the vocabulary of any language is not isolated, but interconnected, and forms an integral lexical system of the language.Studies of the term “field” in linguistics have a long history.

For the first time this term was introduced into linguistic usage in 1924 by the German scientist Henrik Ibsen, who defined "field" as "a set of vocabulary with a common semantics" ^[18]. The term “semantic field” (hereinafter SP) was introduced in 1931 by Joost Trier and defined it as a set of words having semantic connections, the meaning of each element of which can be determined through the relationship and difference between it and other elements ^2[20]. The application of the field approach in linguistics research attracts the attention of both Russian and foreign scientists. Among the most well-known field studies, it is necessary to highlight works on the study of the motivational field (Y. N. Karaulov), the grammatical-lexical field (E. V. Gulyga, E. I. Shendels, A.V. Bondarko, M. M. Gukhman), the functional-semantic field (A.V. Bondarko), the phraseo-semantic field (A. K. Birikh, N. A. Saburova), variational field (M. M. Makovsky), etc.It is worth noting that the interpretation of the term “field” differs in different fields of science.

For this study, the definition of G. S. Shchur is of fundamental importance, who believes that in linguistics, a field is "a way of existence and grouping of linguistic elements belonging to different levels of language, having common (invariant) properties, along with signs that distinguish these linguistic units from each other" ^{[17, 135]}.The use of the field method allows us to identify the systemic nature of the vocabulary.

The most important manifestation of systematic vocabulary lies in its syntagmatic relations, i.e. in the rules of word compatibility and their connection with reality, as well as in paradigmatic relations, i.e. the relations between the elements of the language, united in the consciousness or memory of the speaker by certain associations. The phenomenon of systematicity in the lexico-semantic sphere was emphasized by M. M. Pokrovsky ^{[10, p. 82]} back in 1959. In addition, as L. A. Novikov argued, the systematic nature of the dictionary consists in "... the fundamental possibility of a consistent description of the dictionary by distributing words-concepts, more precisely, lexico-semantic variants, according to semantic (conceptual) fields" ^{[9, p. 24]}.Most researchers agree that the semantic field is a set of linguistic units that have a common meaning and reflect certain conceptual spheres of reality, is characterized by hierarchy and consistency, and also has its own "core-periphery" model.

The theory of the lexico-semantic field also has many controversial definitions.

A number of scientists (Zh. Zh. Warbot, A. F. Zhuravlev ^[2], etc.) believe that LSP and SP are the same concept, denoting "a set of lexemes denoting a certain concept in the broad sense of the word," while L. M. Vasiliev ^[3], E. I. Zinoviev ^[4], V. B. Tyurin ^[14] and others suggest that LSP is a type of SP.In this study, following L. M. Vasiliev, we believe that the theory of LSP studies the relationship between lexical units in the semantic field.

Thus, the concept of LSP is narrower than the concept of SP. The object of LSP research is lexical problems, and considerable attention is paid to the paradigmatic and syntagmatic relations of lexical units included in the field and their relations with the nuclear component. LSP is a hierarchical system consisting of lexical units with common meanings from different parts of speech, which gradually move from the core of the field to the periphery in accordance with the degree of generality of meaning. This article examines the semantic connections of the lexical units that make up the LSP "sanction", the features of the structure of this field and the metaphorical models of the LSP "sanction" in political discourse. Sanctions have been used more often as an important tool of foreign policy since the end of the cold war.

Because of the incident in Crimea, Russia was subjected to multilateral sanctions by the West, led by the United States and Europe. Gradually, the political term "sanction" is becoming more and more a part of everyday everyday discourse.In the Large Explanatory Dictionary of the Russian language edited by S. A. Kuznetsov, the dictionary entry "sanction" has the following meanings:

"1. Jurid. Approval of something by the highest authority, permission. 2. The measure applied by the State to the offender. 3. A measure taken against a party that has violated an agreement, a contract" ^{[7, p. 1148]}.

In the legal sphere, the word "sanction" has two main meanings: 1. Obtaining a permit; 2. Punishing the party who violated the law. Sanction is often used as a legal term used to regulate relations between the government and citizens/organizations. However, in the political sphere, the term "sanction" usually means measures applied against a party that has violated state or international rights, but it does not mean "permission of something, approval of something". In recent years (after 2010), the frequency of using this term in the political sphere has increased significantly, for example in political news, interviews with leaders, etc., as clearly evidenced by the statistics of the National Corpus of the Russian Language (hereinafter referred to as the NCRR).The materials of this study are selected from the following sources: website Kremlin.ru ^[19] and NKRYA ^[8].

The material selection procedure consisted of two stages. First, on the website Kremlin.ru the term "sanction" was found, search parameters were set and the period from 2010 to 2020 was selected. Thus, 595 results were obtained, from which 150 fragments were selected, including the term "sanction", and the total number of words was 6375 units. Secondly, examples were found of the use of the term "sanction" in the NKRJ newspaper corps (specifically in the RIA Novosti edition) for a similar period of time. Thus, 56 documents were studied, the total number of words of the studied texts reached 27257. 155 lexical units that make up the LSP "sanction" were selected from the studied language materials.^{SP "is characterized by the conceptual homogeneity of its units" [1, p. 61], polysystems are distributed in different fields, and therefore, at the first stage of the analysis of field units, it is necessary to take into account their relationship with the main value.}

In our case, this is the meaning of sanctions in the Russian political sphere, so it is necessary to consider more complex meanings in specific contexts. Based on the analysis of the studied lexical units, it is possible to create a field structure as a system of dependencies of these units corresponding to the "core-periphery" model. This will allow us to present the disclosure of the functional organization of the joint venture, which is a complex and unsolved problem for field theory ^{[6, pp. 172-173]}.^{1. Lexical and semantic field "sanction"}

The study of the field structure makes it possible to detect semantic connections between the lexical units that make up this field. Y. N. Karaulov ^[5] analyzed 9 methods of word classification.

The most effective of them is the natural parcelling of the field, which guarantees the integral generality of the field and pays more attention to its characteristics. In addition, during the study, it was found that this method reduces personal subjective influence in the construction of LSP, thereby allowing more objectively to establish the structure of the field. By analyzing language materials, lexical units related to nuclear components are identified. According to the method of natural field parcelling, the structure of the LSP "sanction" can be represented as follows:^{Micropole 1: – form of manifestation of sanctions:}

 restriction, fine, tightening, ban, freeze, threaten, frighten, accusation, revenge, competition, punishment, recover, destroy, hinder, tool, obstacle, obstacle, confrontation, disqualification.Lexical units in this microfield denote the forms of manifestation of sanctions.

This is mainly interference, manifested in various ways, such as prohibition/restriction, fine/punishment, destruction, threats, etc. Micropole 2 – causes or sources of sanctions:

 interference, offense, destroy, non-fulfillment, deterrence, irresponsible, exhaust, dialogue, arming, weapons, prohibited, unwillingness, depend, prohibition, enemy, security, refusal, struggle, violate, norm, rules, violence, untimely, interest, purpose, weakness, protect, illegal.Lexical units in this microfield denote the causes or sources of sanctions, which are mainly divided into two types, "fair" sanction, i.e. one side violates the legitimate interests of the other side and is therefore subject to sanctions; and "unfair" sanction, when one side imposes sanctions on the other side for various reasons to achieve its goal.

Micropole 3 – localization of sanctions:

 politician, official, parliamentarian, businessman, company, export, sport, technology, oil and gas, official, management, entrepreneur, firm, organization, enterprise, citizen, asset, visa, athlete, country, economy, trade, weapons, industry, government, procurement, financial, grouping, regime, defense worker, commodity, product, agriculture, offender, unauthorized.Lexical units in this microfield express objects subject to sanctions.

These may be prohibited goods, legal entities (firm, organization, enterprise, etc.), individuals (politician, official, parliamentarian, etc.) or spheres (export, sports, etc.) that appear on the sanctions lists.

Micropole 4 – concomitant phenomena of sanctions: threats, negotiations, harm, damage, consensus, protest, supporter, law, consultation, pressure, obstacle, outrage, fear, conflict, influence, damage, crisis, challenge, restriction, anxiety, competition, loss, blow.Lexical units in this microfield denote the accompanying phenomena of sanctions.

As a rule, sanctions imposed by one party on the other have various negative consequences, such as causing losses, damage, harm, creating pressure, etc.Micropole 5 – means of combating sanctions:

 law, un, law, court, prohibition, assistance, measure, responsible, principle, counter-sanctions, countermeasures, war, develop, domestic, international, instrument, decision, community, vote.Lexical units in this microfield express the means of combating sanctions, including assistance from the UN international organization, as well as the reaction of the sanctioning party to the actions of the side that imposed sanctions, such as counter-sanctions, countermeasures, and even wars arising as a result of sanctions, for example, a sanctions or trade war.

Micropole 6 – the result of the fight against sanctions:

 refuse, withdraw, exclude, resume, restore, correct, cancel, lift, strike, cooperation, benefit, grow/grow, suffer/suffer, harm, contradict, undermine, spoil;Lexical units in this microfield denote the results of the fight against sanctions.

There are two opposite results: either the sanction/restriction is lifted, or the sanction is strengthened, as a result of which the situation becomes more complicated and relations between the two sides deteriorate.Micropole 7 – the nature of sanctions:

 counterproductive, bad, inevitable, smart, unfair, serious, inadequate, dangerous, complex, harsh, harsh, radical, toughening, international, foreign trade, hostile, limited, unprecedented, illegitimate, unilateral, illegal, extraterritorial, unfair, unreasonable.Lexical units in this microfield express the nature of sanctions.

According to their legality, sanctions are divided into legal and illegal, according to the intensity of application, sanctions can be serious, complex, harsh, harsh, radical, toughening, and according to the volume of implementation – international or unilateral.The analysis allows us to clearly demonstrate that the LSP "sanction" consists of 7 microfields, shown in the following diagram:

LSP scheme "sanction"

The belonging of lexical units to a specific micropole is determined by the main lexical meaning, differential features and lexico-semantic features of each micropole.It can be seen from the diagram that there are numerous intersections between the microfields of the LSP "sanctions".

For example, consider the area of intersection between microfields 2 and 3:Example 1: "China will impose sanctions on American companies that continue to supply weapons to Taiwan, despite numerous protests from Beijing" (02. 02. 2010 RIA Novosti).

Example 2: "On Tuesday, the head of the House of Representatives Committee, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, known for her anti-Russian position, said that the US administration should impose sanctions on Rosoboronexport, allegedly supplying weapons to Syria that the authorities of this country can use to kill civilians" (19. 06. 2012 RIA Novosti).

In Example 1, the lexical unit "weapon" in the LSP "sanction" is the cause of sanctions 

China is against American companies, and in Example 2, the same lexical unit “weapons” is the localization of sanctions, since the United States demands to prohibit Russia from supplying weapons to Syria, citing the danger to civilians.The area of intersection between microfields 1, 2 and 3:

Example 3: "In connection with the reunification of Russia and Crimea, the United States and the European Union imposed individual sanctions against Russia: freezing of assets and a ban on issuing visas to a number of persons" (31. 03. 2014 RIA Novosti).

Example 4: "For these consultations, a group of experts of the Security Council's sanctions committee on the DPRK prepared a report stating that Pyongyang could supply nuclear technology to Iran, Syria and Myanmar in violation of the UN Security Council ban, and also exported weapons abroad in circumvention of the international embargo" (29. 11. 2010 RIA News).Example 5: "Canada imposes additional economic sanctions and a ban on entry into the country for 11 citizens of the Russian Federation and Ukraine, one company also fell under sanctions, Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper said in a statement" (21. 06. 2014 RIA Novosti).

The lexical unit "prohibition" in Example 3 is a form of manifestation of the sanction:

The United States and the European Union opposed the annexation of Crimea to Russia and imposed sanctions against it, including restrictions on the issuance of visas. In Example 4, the "ban" is the reason for the sanctions, since the United States believed that the DPRK had supplied banned nuclear technologies to Iran, Syria and Myanmar, they proposed to the UN Security Council sanctions committee to impose sanctions against the DPRK. In example 5, "prohibition" is a means of fighting Russia with Canada's sanctions against it. Relations between Russia and Canada deteriorated due to the events in Ukraine, and, in connection with the Canadian sanctions on Ukraine and Crimea, Russia introduced counter-sanctions.The reason for the intersection of microfields in the LSP "sanction" is that lexical units in the field do not exist independently, and sometimes it is necessary to analyze their semantic connections in combination with the context.

Based on the analysis of the above-mentioned lexical units, a preliminary structure of the LSP "sanction" can be constructed based on the "core-periphery" model.

In the paradigmatic aspect, the structure of the joint venture is understood as a system of interrelated classes, while in the syntagmatic aspect, the structure of the joint venture is a system of consistent classes, each of which reveals a certain structure from the core to the periphery in accordance with proximity to the main value ^{[1, pp. 67-68]}. According to I. A. Sternin, "the core is consolidated around the dominant component, the periphery has a zone organization; nuclear constituents are most specialized for performing field functions, are systematically used, perform field functions most unambiguously, are more frequent compared to other constituents and are mandatory for the field" ^{[13, p. 38].}The core of the field is, as a rule, an identifier word that expresses the general meaning for the words included in the field; in the central zone of the field there are lexical units that are less close to the main meaning, and in the peripheral zone there are lexical units that do not have a close relationship to the main meaning.

Thus, the core of the LSP "sanction" is the word-identifier – sanction. In the central zone there are words in which there is an integral sema of sanctions, as well as the main meaning of "not to allow to do something": restriction/restrict, ban/prohibit, punishment/punish, violation/violate, interference/interfere, destruction/destroy. Lexical units located in the peripheral zone: war, fine, threat/threaten, counter-sanction, countermeasures, offense, revenge, decision, obstacle, permission, competition, etc. are at a distance from the main meaning of the sanction, have stylistic shades, so their meanings sometimes need to be considered in context.Note that there is no clear boundary of the transition from the center to the periphery.

Since the LSP "sanction" is an open system, semantic relations between linguistic units in this field become more complicated. 2. Metaphorical models in the LSP "sanction"

As A. A. Ufimtseva notes, LSP "is a structurally organized set of words of one denotative relatedness, which allows us to consider it as a component of the linguistic picture of the world, which represents lexico-semantic groupings, structures of a particular language, taking into account its cultural and national identity" ^{[15, p. 13]}.

Therefore, we can say that LSP is a way of expressing the linguistic picture of the world reflected in this field.^{The analysis of the language materials allows us to note that the connotation, stylistic assessment and scope of the term "sanction" in the modern Russian political sphere have changed.}

In addition, the lexeme "sanction" is accompanied by a large number of metaphors that play an important role in building a political picture of the world, which may not be noticeable to the mass consumer and "allows you to influence both his consciousness and the unconscious components of his psyche" ^{[11, p. 76]}.

Most metaphors related to the political sphere are social metaphors, that is, a metaphor model with "socio-cultural activities and related concepts" as a source. A. P. Chudinov notes that social metaphors "explore concepts related to the conceptual spheres of "Crime", "War", "Theater (entertainment arts)", "Game and Sport"" ^{[16, p. 55]}. In the course of the study, it was found that the models of social metaphors accompanying the LSP "sanction" are usually military, theatrical sports and gaming metaphors. These metaphors make it possible to reveal the conflicting nature of sanctions and the dramatic nature of the political world.2.1. Military metaphor

The military metaphor is a metaphor model that accepts war and related concepts as a source sphere, and the sphere of political concepts as a target sphere, forming a systematic reflection between the conceptual spheres of war and politics.

The historical process in almost every country of the world is accompanied by wars. The deepest and first memories that war brings to people are described in the language. Therefore, the military metaphor is considered the oldest and most commonly understood model of metaphorical thinking, which fully reflects the initial experience gained in the process of interaction between man and society. Widespread confrontation in the political world is often compared to fighting, which explains the popularity of the use of metaphors of war in political discourse. This phenomenon is also relevant in the LSP "sanction".Example 1: "Today, three main weapons are hitting all of us: a systemic crisis, sanctions, unprecedented sanctions, and a liberal financial course." (06.10.20 Kremlin.ru )

This is the opinion of G. A. Zyuganov during the meeting of V. V. Putin with the leaders of the factions of the State Duma.

Here, the source sphere is a tool, the target sphere is sanctions, which are considered as something that causes great harm.Example 2: "Sanctions today are no longer even used as a tool of geopolitical struggle, but as an element of a simple competitive struggle in the world" (09. 04. 2019 RIA Novosti).

This is the content of Vladimir Putin's speech at the plenary session of the International Arctic Forum.

Here the source sphere is an element of competition, the target sphere is a sanction. Such a metaphorical reflection emphasized the universality of sanctions as a form of struggle.Example 3: "The overwhelming majority of respondents (58%) explain the reaction of the West to the events in Crimea by a hostile attitude towards Russia and the desire to take advantage of the moment to exert pressure on the country" (31. 03. 2014 RIA Novosti).

The social event here is that the West is imposing sanctions against Russia in connection with the annexation of Crimea.

In this example, the source sphere is a hostile attitude, the target sphere is the relationship between the West and Russia, at the same time it is clear that the West also perceives Russia as an enemy.Example 4: "But the counter-sanctions were perceived as such, you know, "bombing of Voronezh"" (16. 03. 2020 Kremlin.ru ).

The background of social events here is that Russia has come under sanctions because of the situation in Ukraine.

This is the opinion of a TASS journalist during an interview with Vladimir Putin, the journalist believes that counter-sanctions have dealt a blow to agriculture. Here the source sphere is bombing, the target sphere is counter-sanctions.In examples 1, 2, the sanction is considered as a war/struggle.

In example 3, the countries participating in the sanctions are treated as enemies. In example 4, measures to combat sanctions are considered as bombing. Thus, the following metaphorical hyphenations are formed: "war" ? "sanctions", "enemies" ? "participants in sanctions", "bombing" ? "measures related to sanctions". The similarity of the source sphere and the target sphere: conflict and confrontation aimed at identifying the conflicting nature of sanctions and hostility between the participants of sanctions.2.2. Theatrical metaphor

Theatrical metaphor is a thematic kind of metaphor, the key component of which belongs to the thematic group "spectacular arts".

In this model of metaphor, spectacular art is considered as a source sphere, and political concepts as a target sphere, thereby forming a systematic reflection between the two conceptual spheres. The theatrical metaphor often emphasizes the false nature of the political world.Example 1: "And if our partners, who are threatening the third round of sanctions, do not stop, then the time may come when we will have to respond, but I would not like such a scenario to take place" (07. 06. 2014 RIA Novosti).

This is the attitude of the Russian politician Valentina Matvienko to the US sanctions against Russia in connection with the annexation of Crimea to Russia. In this example, the source sphere is a scenario, the target sphere is a sanction, the similarity lies in the dramatic nature of the event, the purpose of which is to emphasize the dramatic effect of sanctions in the political sphere.Example 2: "Firstly, certain rhetoric in the States is related to the domestic political situation" (18.10. 2018 Kremlin.ru ).

This is Vladimir Putin's answer to a question from a journalist from China about how Russia reacts to doubts and accusations from other countries at a meeting of the Valdai discussion club. Vladimir Putin believes that the United States creates problems for countries (i.e. sanctions against Russia, a trade war against China) to achieve its own goals.

Here, the source sphere is rhetoric, the target sphere is the reason why the United States creates problems for China and Russia in order to emphasize the falsity of political activity.Example 3: "Instead of talking about sanctions, we must admit our mistakes and really agree on the settlement of the situation in Ukraine, because so far all these agreements are fake" (02. 05. 2014 RIA Novosti).

The social event here is that the United States is ready for new sanctions if Russia does not change its position on Ukraine.

This is the opinion of deputy Mikhail Yemelyanov in an interview with RIA Novosti. In this statement, the adjective "prop" is used from the noun "prop", i.e. "objects imitating authentic things in a stage setting, shop windows" ^{[7, p. 105]}. The choice of lexical means in this example highlights the falsity of the introduction of sanctions by the United States and the West against Russia on the basis of de-escalation of the situation in Ukraine.2.3. Sports / Gaming metaphors

The analysis of the materials under study showed that sports and gaming metaphors also occupy a prominent place in the LSP "sanction".

These metaphors are usually considered as a single model that is widely used in political discourse, highlighting aspects such as the offensive and defense of the opposing sides. Competitiveness and competitive nature play a significant role in political activity, as well as in sports or in the game. In this regard, sanctions in the political sphere are usually considered as a competitive activity, and participants in sanctions relations are considered as competing players. This metaphorical model fully reflects the conflict, opposition and competition of political behavior – sanctions.Note 1: "The law was adopted in addition to Obama's decrees, which imposed two rounds of US sanctions against Russia" (03. 04. 2014 RIA Novosti).

In connection with the annexation of Crimea to Russia, US President Barack Obama once signed a law to support Ukraine and impose sanctions against Russia.

In this example, a round is a sports term that means "part of a boxing match during the time set by the competition rules" ^[12]. The metaphorical reflection "round ? period of US sanctions against Russia" emphasizes the intensity of US sanctions against Russia and the seriousness of the situation.Note 2: "Returning to the topic of Iran and energy companies, I cannot fail to mention that Russia has also faced sanctions.

What could be the plan to win this game against the dollar? How can Russia succeed?" (03.10. 2018 Kremlin.ru ).R. Chilcote at the international forum "Russian Energy Week" asked Vladimir Putin about the sanctions imposed against Russia.

In this example, the source sphere is a game, and the target sphere is a sanctions war between the United States and Russia. The similarity lies in the opposition both in the process of the game and in the sanctions policy.Note 3: "This year Rosneft concluded about four dozen international agreements at the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum, the geography of which covers both hemispheres.

This "triumphant account" shows that Russia remains one of the key players in the global energy market, despite the threat of economic sanctions" (24. 05. 2014 RIA Novosti).In this example, there are three metaphorical reflections: the triumphal account ? signing of international agreements; the player ? Russia; the game ? world energy trade.

Despite the sanctions imposed by the West, Russia still occupies an important place in the energy sector. Sanctions are understood here as a factor affecting the results of the international economic game, as well as the means of the enemy to achieve victory in the game.

The considered models of metaphors (military, theatrical, sports / gaming) are widely used in the LSP "sanction". Among them, the military metaphor is usually used to express the corresponding conflict or confrontation in the political sphere. The theatrical metaphor reflects the unreliability, embellishment and drama of sanctions in the political sphere. Sports/gaming metaphors express the competitiveness of sanctions in political activity. The true goals of creating political metaphors, as a rule, are ideology and assessment of political reality. Conclusions

Summing up, we can conclude that the LSP "sanction" in the political sphere consists of 7 interconnected microfields.

LSP "sanction" is a hierarchical system, the lexical units of which gradually move from the core to the periphery, depending on the proximity to the main meaning.

The boundary of the transition from the core to the periphery is unclear, because the LSP "sanction" is an open system, and its semantics is constantly being enriched and developed. The lexical units that make up the LSP "sanction" are accompanied by a large number of metaphors in the political sphere. The analysis of language materials makes it possible to discover that the term "sanction" in the political sphere has such meanings as restrict/restrict, prohibit/prohibit something.

It is worth noting that in the modern world, sanctions have become much more diverse: they can be imposed on individual citizens, organizations, as well as on entire countries. In addition, the term "sanction" has acquired a stronger negative stylistic coloring, has pronounced negative connotations, conveys the false and dramatic nature of political life. Russian Russian. Further research of this problem will allow a more systematic analysis of the changes in the political terms of the modern Russian language, to study the factors affecting their semantic content, to identify the features of the political picture of the world of the Russian ethnos.

The results obtained can serve as a basis for research in lexicology, political linguistics, linguoculturology, etc.