Pragma-communicative organization of intolerant discourse: creating images of out-group and in-group

Abstract

In recent years, hate speech has rightfully received worldwide attention from researchers in numerous spheres, including those of sociology, psychology, jurisprudence, political science, etc. Meanwhile, the very essence of the phenomenon as well as the component speech in the term itself necessitate the studies of hate speech from the perspective of language science, and namely – due to the character of the phenomenon – pragmalinguistics. In this light, my article is aimed at identifying core communicative strategies and tactics used by the speaker in the framework of intolerant discourse. The research is based on Belarusian online users’ comments on news covering gender issues. Since hate speech is based on the fundamental friend-or-foe opposition, I focus not only on the tactics of creating a negative image of the out-group but also on the ways the speaker elevates the image of the in-group. The study reveals that the speaker's hostile attitude towards the addressee is chiefly manifested in the use of the communicative strategy of discrediting, the tactics of which can be conditionally divided into four groups: tactics aimed at belittling a social group (insult, humiliation, mocking, and understatement or denial); tactics aimed at defaming a social group (accusation, attributing hostile intentions, forecasting, and polarization); tactics aimed at justifying intolerance (forced intolerance, legitimation of intolerance, precedent, and appeal to authority); and tactics aimed at encouraging intolerance (appeal, inducing intolerance, and threat). The creation of a favorable image of the in-group is mostly achieved with the help of the communicative strategy of positive self-presentation that is implemented in intolerant discourse through shielding (quasi-concession, quasi-denial, quasi-apology, and shifting) and flaunting (exemplification and conforming) tactics. Although the research is confined to the Belarusian gender-based case study only, the fact that hate speech is always a reflection of the we-versus-they dichotomy innate to the participants of intolerant discourse regardless of the language of communication allows me to nevertheless presume that the findings may be extended to other discourse communities and applied to the analysis of other types of intolerant discourse.