Lexical pragmatic indicators of conflictogenicity in the light of the manifestation of national communication style (based on Mexican and US mass media)

Davtyants Irina Igorevna ORCID: 0000-0003-3877-1612 Senior Lecturer; Department of Ibero-American Studies in the Field of Language, Translation and Intercultural Communication; Southern Federal University 344037, Russia, Rostov region, Rostov-On-Don, Bolshaya Sadovaya str., 105/42, office 310 4283953@gmail.com Other publications by this author

          Among the social phenomena of modern society that attract the close attention of researchers from different fields of science, its conflictogenicity occupies an important place. Unequal living conditions, disproportionate distribution of material benefits, dissatisfaction with basic human needs, interpersonal conflicts caused by various psychological factors, and many other reasons that can serve as a reason for the emergence and development of conflict, have determined the presence of diverse approaches not only to the study of the conflictogenicity of society as a socio-economic phenomenon (P.E. Perov, M.B. Perova ^[14], Yu.G. Gryaznova ^[3], D. Smith ^[28], M. Vivierka ^[30], J.H. Narvaes ^[26]), but also the conflict of an individual, for whom the very process of conflict development and the outburst of negative emotions are important (M.S. Mirimanova ^[12], N.I. Leonov ^[10], V.I. Mishchenko^[13]), as well as conflictogenicity as a potential property of verbal communication (O.V. Kramkova ^[9], V.S. Tretyakova ^[17], N.A. Belous ^[2]).

         Linguistic means used by communicants play an important role in the process of conflictogenic communication, i.e. communication that can lead to conflict or occurs against the background of an existing conflict. This issue is especially relevant now and is of interest to domestic and foreign scientists, since we live in an information society where a carelessly or intentionally spoken word can cause a large-scale conflict. It is noteworthy that a number of scientific studies in this direction are devoted to the analysis of multi-level language tools used in creating the image of a "Stranger" in the media and their impact on the audience (W. Lippman ^[11], T.A. van Dijk ^[21], S. Hall ^[24], Al-Hafizh ^[20]). Thus, linguist K.M. Lerka notes that in the Spanish press, when describing immigrants, words with negative connotations are used instead of neutral vocabulary, thereby laying their connection with social problems ^{[25, p. 360]}. 

Among the key concepts of conflictogenic communication, one can single out the conflictogenicity of text / discourse, which are quite often used synonymously, however, in the case of using the second, the emphasis is on extralinguistic factors of communication, such as context and communicative situation. According to I.V. Tubalova and Yu.A. Emer, a conflict text is a verbal expression of conflict ^{[18, p. 30]}. N.A. Belous and N.V. Oskolkova note that as a result of such intentional verbal and paraverbal effects on each other, communication participants experience negative emotions ^[2]. And V.S. Tretyakova emphasizes that "... the material expression of the conflict relations of the subjects of speech in the act of communication in the form of specific linguistic and speech structures is a reflection of their precommunicative state (interests, positions, views, values, attitudes, goals, etc.)" ^{[17, p. 145]}.

One of the varieties of conflictogenic text is the so-called hate speech, which is most often considered in the context of online communication and is associated with hostility and aggressive offensive statements towards various social groups and their representatives. L.R. Komalova notes the proximity of this concept with terms such as cyberbullying and cyber-trolling ^{[7, pp. 94-95]}.

A.P. Kostyaev, in turn, suggests the term aggressive verbal discourse as an expression synonymous in meaning with conflictogenic discourse. This type of discourse, according to the author, is characterized by aggressive discursive practices ^[8].

Emphasizing the linguistic expression of conflict, modern researchers often use the term linguistic conflict of the text, which serves as a designation for those difficulties in the process of information exchange caused by the lack of an interaction strategy and characterized by the manifestation of verbal aggression ^{[15, p. 67]}. In turn, verbal means used to provoke or develop conflict are called linguoconflictogens. These include negativisms, invective vocabulary, metaphor, irony, pejorative suffixes, imperatives, violation of the norms of speech etiquette, etc. It is important to note that the choice of linguistic means in this case is due to the desire to achieve complete discredit of the opponent by insulting him, ridiculing, etc. By many researchers (V.S. Tretyakova ^[17], Z.V. Rejuk, O.V. Shiryaeva-Shiring ^[16]) it is noted that lexical means are the most common and widely used, as they allow you to convey those shades of meaning that cannot be conveyed using only morphological, syntactic and, in the case of online communication, graphical means.

In this context, such units that are directly related to the conflictogenicity of the text are also of interest, such as lexical pragmatic markers of conflictogenicity, which not only act as speech signals of hostility, but serve as markers of social tension in a given cultural community. A characteristic feature of such LPMC is the regular repetition of certain semes, which receive different formal expressions in the conflictogenic discourse of a particular group of people (ethnos). LPMC allows you to identify the most acute social problems and cultural characteristics of a particular society.

Thus, the choice of lexical units within the framework of the confrontation strategy, their density and the index of conflictogenicity (which is a dependence between the norm and the density of LPMC) are determined both by the personal preferences of communicants and, to a large extent, by the national model of behavior, which was called the national communicative style and represents a historically formed "set of national communicative means, representations and norms determined by culture and existing in the communicative consciousness of native speakers" ^{[6, p. 4]}. At the same time, the ideas of polite behavior and the peculiarities of the expression of verbal aggression, according to W.D. Schoelotgen and J.M. Hernandez-Campoy, are also its components ^{[27, p. 379]}.

The purpose of this study is to identify the relationship between the density of linguistic conflict in the text, the index of its conflictogenic tension and the national communicative style in the official media of Mexico and the United States. These linguistic cultures were not chosen by chance. According to E. Hall's classification, which had a significant impact on the formation of intercultural communication as a science, they belong to opposite groups in many respects, which allows us to talk about their significant cultural differences ^{[22, 23]}. This thesis is confirmed by numerous studies. So, if the Mexican national discourse is characterized by a high degree of courtesy, in which the need to behave politely becomes more important than the negative emotions experienced and the desire to show them (O.S. Chesnokova ^[19], I.V. Guseva ^[5], I.R. Abkadyrova ^[1], F. Varona, M. Perez, P. Vaterico-Mejia ^[29]), then American linguistic culture is characterized by great freedom of expression. As O.A. Gudina notes, "as a result, US representatives may be assessed by partners as too assertive, aggressive, rude, and their desire for informal communication is sometimes interpreted as familiarity" ^[4].

The migration crisis on the border of two countries with different economic development is associated with a large flow of migrants from Latin America who are trying to enter the United States through Mexico illegally. According to the newspaper The Fox News, during the time of J. Biden, as head of the US government, by February 2024, 7.3 million migrants had entered the country illegally, which exceeds the population of 36 states. And if we add to this figure those who were not officially counted because they were not caught (the so-called "gotaways"), then it will become more than the population of New York, the largest city in the United States at the moment [https://www.foxnews.com/politics/illegal-immigrants-biden-admin-amount-greater-population-36-states]. It is not surprising that it was the position on this issue that formed the basis of the election promises of the presidential candidates in the 2024 elections: J. Biden and D. Trump, who are the leaders of the Democratic and Republican parties, respectively.

The analysis of the factual material allows us to identify the concentration of linguistic conflict factors in the description of certain topics, which indicates their conflictogenicity. It is important to note that these topics differ in the Mexican and American media discourse, which confirms the thesis of the national conditionality of the LPMC.

Let's turn to the American press. The anti-immigration discourse of The Fox News news resource is of the greatest interest for this study, since due to its extreme politicization in support of the Republican Party, it is in this publication that a significant amount of LPMC is used to characterize the image of an "Alien" - an illegal migrant, which, as many researchers note, plays a crucial role in shaping the ideological basis of the attitude to him (T.A. van Dijk ^[21], S. Hall ^[24], Al-Hafizh ^[20], K.M. Lerka ^[25]). It is no coincidence that Democrats call the Republican speeches "invasion rhetorical and fearmongering" (fervent speeches about invasion and creating panic – hereafter our translation) and "hyperbolic and xenophobic rhetorical to scaremonger about a 'foreign invasion' at the border" (exaggerations and xenophobic speeches in order to create panic about intervention at the border) [https://www.foxnews.com/politics/illegal-immigrants-from-this-foreign-adversary-hit-new-high-amid-national-security-fears-extremely-alarming], thereby emphasizing that such deliberate use of linguistic means of the language of hostility leads to the incitement of interethnic conflicts. And if in newspapers supporting the Democrats, for example, in CNN, migrants are presented as unhappy people experiencing various hardships, then in pro-Republican publications these are those who pose a threat to national security, which was provoked by J. Biden, since from the first day of his reign he "systematically dismantled effective border security measures and interior immigration enforcement" [https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-failed-dems-sound-off-handling-border-crisis-fractures-own-party].

As a rule, in articles of such American online publications, when creating an image of a migrant, a number of LPMC are used at once, having high imagery, expression and negative assessment: these are numerous negativisms, vivid metaphors with negative associations, and contextual LPMC acquiring negative connotations in context. At the same time, obscene and reduced vocabulary is not used in the press, which is explained by censorship norms. It is interesting to note the absence of an appeal to the Mexican administration to help solve the crisis at the border.

To illustrate the content of the lexico-semantic field "migrant" in the American media discourse, let us turn to the most frequent LPMC, which often act as language cliches:

LPMC-definitions used to characterize the migration problem: very serious problem; broken immigration system; overwhelming; chaotic border; human disaster; critical threat; our border is wide-open; terror watchlist nationalities; extremely alarming.

LPMC-definitions, characteristics and designations of migrants used: undocumented aliens; illegal immigrants; illegal aliens; criminal migrants; noncitizen offenders; migrants with links to terrorism into America; individuals who present a security risk and have no legal basis to remain here.

LPMC-actions used to describe the actions of migrants: to crush the city; to destroy the city; to ruin the city; to rush a border; take advantage of the American people.

LPMC-nouns and phrases related to the activities of migrants:

a) Number of arrivals: influx of new arrivals; record number of border crossings;

b) Additional burden on taxpayers: the additional costs to taxpayers; at the expense of the American taxpayer;

c) Threat to national security, terrorism: risk of terrorism and national security; risk to national security; serious threat to public safety; national security fears;

d) Rising crime rates: potential for espionage; increased crime rates, drugs and violence; flow of deadly fentanyl; illegal alien crime; smuggling of drugs like fentanyl; murders; rapists; violent crime; kidnapping; human trafficking.

Let's consider some metaphors that act in the role of LPMC due to their connection with the conflict-prone themes of this ethnic community:

«The contributions of the immigrant community here have been seismic» [https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/07/nyregion/adams-migrants-destroy-nyc.html]

In this statement, it is noted that the consequences of living with a large number of immigrants in New York are so serious that they are similar to the consequences of an earthquake.

In the following fragment, the influx of immigrants is presented as an invasion of the United States, and the border between Mexico and the United States as the first line of defense: "if our border is our first line of defense, we're going to lose and this is unsustainable" [https://www.foxnews.com/media/la-joya-texas-police-border-crisis-overwhelming ]. This image becomes even more expressive in the following passage, which also demonstrates the high density of LPMC:

«…president’s other mega-catastrophe: Biden has transformed Trump’s largely controlled southern frontier into an immigration superhighway… Illegal aliens are racing through gaps in the wall whose construction Biden ordered stopped on Day One of his tenure. Things have rocketed downhill since» [https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/biden-afghanistan-border-deroy-murdock].

As we can see, the authors of the publications emphasize that illegal immigrants (outsiders), without encountering any obstacle in their path, enter America at full speed through an unfinished wall on the border. At the same time, the situation is getting worse. To enhance the pragmatic impact, the catastrophic consequences of Biden's actions are contrasted with the clear and reliable border protection system that existed under Donald Trump.

It should also be noted that there are a number of neutral lexical units that turn into LPMC in an ethno-cultural context. Thus, the words of the mayor of New York that immigrants are excellent swimmers and therefore can work as lifeguards, which are very lacking in the United States, generated a real resonance in society and were considered by many to be racist and provoking an increase in social tension in society [ https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/15/nyregion/eric-adams-migrants-swimmers.html ], since one of the ways of illegal entry In the USA, it is the crossing of the Rio Grande River into the river, which is life-threatening.

In general, the American media space presents a negative image of a migrant: these are people who somehow pose a threat to the well-being of the United States. Lexical units semantically related to the topics of threats to national security, threats to the financial well-being of society and threats to the deterioration of the criminal situation are presented among the LPMC forming the LSP of this concept. There is a high density of linguistic conflict, as well as the use of various stylistic techniques, such as hyperbolization and metaphors, for greater expressiveness. The fact that the publications that served as the source of the material belong to the official press allows us to assert that a fairly high index of conflictogenic tension of the text in the context of the "friend–foe" problem not only does not go beyond the norms of the national communicative style of the United States, but is also characteristic of it.

The crisis caused by the large flow of immigrants was faced not only by the United States, but also by Mexico. However, the situation in this case is significantly different. If the majority of refugees seeking to enter the United States at any cost are less well-off than US citizens, then Americans come to Mexico and stay there, whose ability to pay is much higher than that of the Mexicans themselves. Thus, a different image of the "Alien" is being formed in the Mexican linguistic culture. It is important to note that the Mexican official press is less politicized and more homogeneous. Let's turn to the most frequent LPMC:

1. The situation at the border and the characteristics of the actions of the US government:

LPMC-definitions used to characterize the situation at the border: "falla sist?mica agravada que ignora los derechos y el bienestar de las personas refugiadas y migrantes" [https://www.excelsior.com.mx/global/muere-nina-migrante-de-guatemala-bajo-custodia-de-eu/1597232 ]; mucha tensi?n.

LPMC-definitions characterizing the actions of the United States as a country: discriminatorio.

LPMC-actions used to evaluate the actions of the US government: ingresar armas, poner en manos de la delincuencia Mexicana, chantajear.

LPMC-nouns and phrases used to characterize the U.S. government: indolencia; arrogancia; aires de superioridad; ofensiva contra la inmigraci?n ilegal; ataque.

2. U.S. citizens living in Mexico:

LPMC-definitions used to characterize and designate migrants from the United States arriving in Mexico: nuevos turistas con poder adquisitivo mayor.

LPMC-actions used to describe the actions of migrants from the United States in Mexico: inundar.

LPMC-nouns and phrases related to the residence of migrants from the United States in Mexico: intervenci?n; colonia estadounidense, precios incre?bles, imperialism, “n?madas digitales", gentrificaci?n, avalanche.

As can be seen from the above LPMC, there are significantly fewer of them in the Mexican press than in the American one, which is explained by such features of the national style as a high degree of courtesy and respect for a partner. It is also quite problematic sometimes to single out a separate word as an LPMC, since Mexican linguoculture is characterized by allegory and descriptive speech. F. Varona notes that Mexicans tend to avoid conflicts with "superiors", to which they include, for example, US citizens [Varona 2007: 189]. Perhaps it is this desire to save the partner's face that explains the predominance of nouns characterizing the US government and US citizens over adjectives, since this technique involves indirect, rather than direct characterization (some kind of distancing).

In the Mexican press, as well as in the US media, there is a certain concentration of linguistic conflict when touching on certain topics. There, for Mexicans, this is an increase in prices caused by the arrival of a large number of foreigners who can undoubtedly afford more than the Mexicans themselves. Many Mexicans are forced to leave their homes and move to the outskirts, as their homes are now rented by US citizens. This process is called gentrification and is widely discussed in the Mexican media.

The large flow of foreigners is also compared to a natural disaster: immigrants arrive so rapidly that it resembles an avalanche or flood.

An important role in the formation of LPMC in Mexican linguistic culture is played by Mexico's colonial past and repeated U.S. interventions, one of which ended with Mexico losing almost half of its territories. The fact that visitors do not want to learn Spanish and behave like hosts causes certain fears among the local population and is the reason for the appearance of LPMC, thematically related to imperialism and colonial occupation. For the same reason, some neutral lexical units acquire negative connotations, for example, the designation of the English language: el ingl?s. Cf.:

«Y el ingl?s, bueno, est? en todas partes: suena en los supermercados, en los bares de vinos y en las clases de fitness en el parque» [https://www.latimes.com/espanol/mexico/articulo/2022-07-27/los-turistas-estadounidenses-y-los-trabajadores-a-distancia-estan-aburguesando].

It is interesting to note that in order to emphasize that Mexicans do not approve of the anti-immigration policy of the United States, the following lexical units are used to describe refugees from Latin American countries:

«El presidente de Estados Unidos Joe Biden y congresistas de su pa?s est?n considerando aprobar “nuevas y estrictas medidas migratorias que contravendr?an est?ndares internacionales” de derechos humanos y expondr?an a miles de migrantes y solicitantes de asilo a situaciones peligrosas… miles de migrantes y solicitantes de asilo vulnerables, en su mayor?a latinoamericanos» [https://www.jornada.com.mx/noticia/2024/01/19/politica/eu-considera-aprobar-estrictas-medidas-antimigratorias-alerta-hrw-8934].

Thus, the US government is deliberately endangering the lives of thousands of people who are seeking asylum.

The results of the analysis of Mexican online publications suggest that there are two images of migrants in the Mexican linguistic culture. One of them is an arrogant, well–off stranger with white skin who speaks English and requires special treatment, while the other is a Latin American brother with the same problems and values as Mexicans.

As a result, it can be noted that the index of conflictogenic tension of the Mexican press is significantly lower than that of the American press: words with pronounced negative semantics are not used, there are almost no metaphors that should give greater expression to the author's words, there is practically no hyperbalization, so characteristic of the American media discourse. In many ways, this situation is explained by the national communicative style, which has an undoubted influence on the permissibility of using linguistic conflict in the official press.