Uzbek State University of World Languages, Tashkent, Uzbekistan

scientific journal of the modern education & research institute • The Kingdom of Belgium

sociolinGuistic features media teXts of the Pandemic Period

israil Mukaddas irgashevna, Professor, Doctor of Philosophy (israil19mukaddas@gmail.com)

uzbek State university of World languages, Uzbekistan

abstract

The article examines the modern language of the media, which is one of the most striking indicators of social change. It reflects the speech changes in all spheres of public life during the pandemic. A special role in the process of changing the language of the media is played by rapidly developing information and communication means, which is a direct reflection of the process of globalization. The article analyzes in detail the characteristic sociolinguistic markers that reflect socially significant events occurring during the pandemic.

Keywords: derivation, linguoculture, media texts, occasionalisms, speech practice, speech changes, system connections, modern literary language, sociolinguistic factors, mass media (mass media), trends in linguistics, extralinguistic factors.

In modern society, it is the media and journalism, including new media, that have become the most important force that forms the modern literary language. In the context of a decline in the quality of education, a reduction in interest in reading classical literature, it is the media that has fallen to the role of the main tool for the preservation and development of the modern literary language. The daily routine of modern people is increasingly built or organized around the mass media. Mass media work for their audience, and the ideal language of a particular media should correspond to the language of the target audience [1, p. 625].

Thus, the constant participation in the creative process of those users for whom the media itself is produced, and the co-creation of professionals and non-professionals, become important characteristics of the modern audience. Mass communication can be safely called a new linguistic reality, which is located at the center of modern language processes. This is a model of a modern national language, in which its literary basis and non-literary spheres interact [3, p. 89].

The complexity of the modern language situation lies in its multidimensionality. Common language processes involve not only «old» factors, such as the interaction of functional styles, colloquial speech opposed to book speech, vernacular, dialects that have almost lost their meaning, jargons, but also new ones, for example, the Internet, the role of which will increase. In these conditions, the language of the media plays the role of a unifying factor, a kind of testing ground on which the interaction of a wide variety of means is tested and tested. Being by nature very permeable, mass communication includes everything that has a social significance. At the same time, literacy, literature is an indispensable condition for the language of the media. Numerous manuals on practical stylistics are devoted to the education of these qualities [4, p.763]. The level and nature of media language research is largely determined by the state and evolution of world linguistics, which in recent decades has been heading towards extensive development. There is a decisive turn from the study of language as a closed system to the study of lan-

guage in its many connections and functions (language and society, language and thinking, language and culture, politics, ideology, religion). This is clearly evidenced by the formation of complex disciplines (linguoculturology, socio -, psycho -, pragmalinguistics, anthropocentric linguistics, etc.), this is also evidenced by the rapidly developing linguistics of speech [1, p.627]. By developing the literary language, the language of the media also contributes to the development of culture [5, p. 8].

The language of the media covers the entire life of the nation – everything that has a public interest. But some areas of the spiritual life of society are of paramount importance for the media, they form the core, the main thing in the activities of the media and their language. The first, leading place among these areas belongs to politics. As an area of state and public activity, politics largely determines the life of society. This is due to the relevance of the policy for the media. Affecting the interests of almost all segments of the population, politics and its lexicon become part of the dictionary of the literary language [5; p.423].

The events that began at the end of 2019 and are currently continuing, which will go down in history as the «pandemic of the COVID-19 coronavirus infection caused by the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus» 1, have already significantly affected and continue to affect all spheres of public life without exception, which naturally should have found reflection and speech communication. This was reflected not only in the fact that in almost all languages of the world, the number of uses of nominations with the meaning ‘COVID-19’ (Russian ‘coronavirus’) has increased hundreds of times, but also in many other manifestations of their active development not only by speech, but in some cases by language systems. It seems that the study of these manifestations, first of all, is of undoubted interest for linguistic, as well as sociolinguistic and linguocultural comprehension, since it is important for a researcher representing the listed scientific fields to identify and describe specific forms of «habitation» of a word in a language both in the conditions of a specific language and in a language in principle, as well as to establish patterns and trends in the development of various kinds of new formations in various communicative-speech and linguocultural systems.

In the main building of the National Corpus of the Russian Language (https://ruscorpora.ru/new; then – RNC) were only 7 uses of the word «coronavirus» indicating that the Russian language it is known already for at least two decades, and will bring some of the contexts in which this nomination is functioning: •SARS has a natural origin and is probably re-Combinator avian and bovine coronaviruses. NATO Representative Colonel J. Nevill and WHO representative R. Hyer officially stated on Russian television that the coronavirus has a natural origin and is in no way connected with the development of biological weapons or careless manipulations in scientific laboratories. [7, 5] When a word is in demand for one reason or another (in the vast majority of cases – extralinguistic), this, in addition to increasing the frequency (sometimes very significant) of its use, is evidenced by both the expansion of its derivational connections and their obvious dynamization, which we observe in relation to the nomination «coronavirus» in 2020.

From the beginning of the XXI century and up to the beginning of 2020, the word-formation nest of the nomination under consideration in the Russian language included only three components: the noun coronavirus (root word); the name the noun beta-coronavirus, formed from its base by the way of word composition, and formed by the suffix method from the same base of the adjective coronavirus. All the listed lexical units in this period were clearly part of the special (professional) vocabulary and were used in scientific or popular scientific texts mainly on medical topics. At the beginning of 2020, after the information recorded in the Chinese The Wuhan outbreak of infection has become known to the whole world and it is rapidly spread across the planet, the derivation when considering the nomination clearly intensified, resulting in one-a substantial extension in different languages, word-formation nests («with-the collection of single-root words, ordered derivatives derivational relations» [6, 503], where this category functions as a root word, this nest is the «lead» (A. N. Tikhonov).

In the Russian language, the most expressive neoplasm from the nomination «coronavirus», perhaps, should be recognized as occasionalism, the authorship of which is attributed to the President of the Republic of Belarus A. G. Lukashenko: thanks to him, the word – combination coronavirus psychosis entered the speech practice of our time, which quickly turned into (under the influence of current trends in the modern language) in corona-psychosis. Prerequisites for education by the President of the Republic of Belarus the occasional use of the word «coronavirus» can be noticed already in a number of publications in March 2020, for example, in one of the messages on the INTERFAX portal. EN from March 27, we find A. G. Lukashenko’s assessment of the coronavirus pandemic with the word «psychosis», which the journalist supplements

with the definition «coronavirus» in the title of the message: President of Belarus Alexander Lukashenko called the US decision to impose a state of emergency in connection with the coronavirus pandemic shortsighted, but praised the position of Donald Trump; he called the situation around COVID-19 « psychosis «( here and further in the text illustrations highlighted by me – – I. Z.), which, according to him, stopped the world economy. [11]

In less than a week, both the phrase «coronavirus psychosis» and the complex word « corona-psychosis» formed on the basis of this phrase, which is also perceived by almost everyone as an occasional from President A. G. Lukashenko, begin to be very actively used in various Russian-language journalistic texts-both in Belarusian and Russian; we will cite only some excerpts from April publications of last year:

• According to him [A. G. Lukashenko], many people are already thinking about it today above the main question: what will happen after the coronavirus pandemic. «Does it not seem that the powerful of this world without a war (Macron has already called it a war), through this so-called coronavirus psychosis, including infodemia, want to remake the world?» – the president noted in an interview with the Mir TV and radio company on Thursday. He is quoted by the state agency BelTA. Today, everyone is already responding: after the pandemic, the world will be different. And I agree with this. But where will our place be in this world? That’s the main question for me. Not corona-psychosis, not info– pandemic. It is there, but a month or two will pass. The question remains, where is our place, « Lukashenka noted. [10]

It is noteworthy that already on April 11, 2020, an article by Viktor Shenderovich appeared on the Internet portal of the famous Russian radio Echo of Moscow entitled «Keep your eyes open: corona-psychosis from «father « Lukashenko», which contains a kind of sociolinguistic interpretation of the education in question, cf. in particular: «Сorona-psychosis « – newspeak from President Alexander Lukashenko. From the very first days, when the disease spread beyond the borders of China and began to quickly seize new territories, the head of Belarus stubbornly refused to admit the existence of the problem. What kind of «panacea» he did not offer: to drink vodka, and to plow on a tractor in the field, to steam in the bath and eat well. [9]

However, the initially negative connotative coloring did not prevent the new formation «corona-psychosis» from actively introducing itself into modern speech practice, and not only in the Republic of Belarus and The Russian Federation, but also other post-Soviet states.

Judging by the data of Urban Dictionary, during March – August 2020, seven neoplasms included in the LSH of interest to us entered the English-language speech practice (three of them appeared in April, two in May, one each in June and August): • covidity (the ability to express emotion without use of the lower half of the face for emotional expressions behind a mask); • Covidhead (slang for the feeling of being entirely overtaken, mentally and emotionally, by stress due to the Coronavirus Pandemic; there is no Russian-language analogue; • Covidhoaxamitis (a crippling mental disability that results in a diminished capacity to understand the basic science about the viral pandemic caused by SARS-CoV-2 (Covid 19) thus espousing inaccurate and deceptive information that minimizes, disregards and embraces that the disease is simply a hoax); • Coviding (how you’re responding emotionally and physically to the worldwide Covid-19 pandemic of 2020); • Covidism (interpretation of the words in the Urban Dictionary is absent, given only the containing phrase (example: I am suffering from Covidism in 2020), which allows to determine the contextual meaning: emotional and/or physical condition of the individual, due to the influence of coronavirus pandemic of 2020); • Covidmania (an uncontrollable obsession or preoccupation with coronavirus diseases like Covid19); • Covidophobia (a morbid fear of coronavirus diseases).

The formed lexical and semantic group also contains nominations that are clearly synonymous with the word corona-psychosis, which functions in the East Slavic (Russian-and Ukrainian – speaking) speech

practice: covidophobia (covidphobia) and covidmania (covidmania). From our point of view, the categories Covidhoaxamitis, Coviding and Covidism, as well as Covidhead, which has no analogue in the Russian language, are partially synonymous with the word coronapsychosis, despite the fact that their meanings need contextual clarification to a greater extent than «covidphobia» and «covidmania» as words with obvious negative connotations.

Thus, today we can confidently say that the COVID-19 pandemic caused by the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus has already left a very noticeable mark in modern speech practice and media materials around the world, as evidenced by the current practice of various linguistic cultures. The «coronavirus» dictionary, which continues to be actively updated, is of absolute interest for understanding both from a communicative and linguistic point of view, and from the positions of system-structural and functional linguistics – and not only within the boundaries of a specific national language, but also (perhaps to the greatest extent) in a comparative way.

references

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9. 10. 11. Bushuyev A.B. Language dynamics and sociodynamics: some phenomena in modern Russian // The Russian literature in the context of modern integration processes: Materials of the second intern. scientific conf. Volgograd, Apr. 24–26. 2007: in 2 v. Volgograd: Publishing house VolGU, 2007. V. 1. 625–628 p. Zarva M.V. Word in broadcasting: about language and style of broadcasts. Pronunciation in radio– and the television speech: reference book. M.: Flint: Science, 2011. 376 p. Petrova N.E. Language of modern mass media: means of speech aggression. M.: Flint: Science, 2011. 160 p. Shakhovsky V.I. Language humiliation in the context of modern communication in Russia // Problems of speech communication. Saratov, 2007. № 7. 763 p. The mass media language and politics / under the editorship of G. Ya. Solganik. M.: Publishing house of the Moscow University; Journalism department of the Moscow State University named after M.V. Lomonosov, 2012. 952 p. Tikhonov, A.N. (1997), Slovoobrazovatel’noe gnezdo [Word-building nest]. Karaulov, Yu.N. (ed.) Russian language, Encyclopedia, Moscow, Bol’shaya Rossiiskaya entsiklopediya publ., Drofa publ., pp. 503-505. (in Russian) Tsymbalova L. M., Kiselev O. I. International Symposium on Civil-military Cooperation in the field of influenza surveillance and Control. // «Questions of virology», 2003.12.01). Volodina M. N. The language of mass media as a special type of social interaction. // The language of mass media as an object of interdisciplinary research. Ch. 2. – M., 2004. www.echo.msk.ru/blog/currenttime/2623110-echo/ www.interfax.ru/world/702191 www.interfax.ru/world/701243