The author of the article focuses on the cognitive aspect of the deployment of dialogically oriented legal discourse. The initial communicative intention of the author's text is recognized as discrete, and on its basis a set of private intentions is singled out that determine the choice of a cognitive model and its mechanisms. The object of the article is to establish the specifics of the argumentative legal discourse through discourse-cognitive analysis. Based on the linguistic material obtained by continuous sampling from public speeches of modern lawyers, the specifics of the organization of argumentative discourse according to the principles of circular, axiological, appellative, hypothetical, factual cognitive models, including their compilation, are studied; the methods of negation as a tool of persuasiveness in its explicit form, including direct and imaginary negation, elements of discourse and communication practices, as well as implicature are described; a classification of the cognitive mechanisms of the persuasiveness superstructure is given in terms of their functionality and the nature of manipulation with information about the referent. Particular attention is paid to the cognitive mechanisms of adding and inference in their implementation in the argumentative legal discourse.
legal discourse, speech interaction, communication process, language material, public speaking
1. Boldyrev N. N., Grigorieva V. S. Dominant principle and integrativity of the format of speech interactio in dialogic discourse. Tambov: Print Service, 2020. 328 p. (In Russ.)
2. Nesterova A. M. Competitiveness of the parties as a principle of criminal proceedings in the Russian Federation // Actual problems of the humanities and natural sciences. 2017. No. 7-2. P. 50-52. (In Russ.)
3. T. van Dijk. Discourse and power: representation of dominance in language and communication. M.: LIBROKOM, 2013. 344 p. (In Russ.)
4. Tertychny A. A. Models of argumentation in modern media texts // Bulletin of the Moscow University. Series 10. Journalism. 2016. No. 6. P. 46-69. (In Russ.)
5. Romanova I. D. Cognitive models of persuasion as the basis of the mechanism of persuasive influence in the study of institutional discourse (on the material of the English language) // Bulletin of Moscow State Linguistic University. 2020. No. 11. P. 207-216. (In Russ.)
6. Mann W. C, Thompson S. A. Rhetorical Structure Theory: a Theory of Text Organization. 1987. 82 p.
7. Kubryakova E. S. On the research of discourse in modern linguistics // Philology and culture. Tambov: TSU named after. G. R. Derzhavin, 2001. (In Russ.)
8. Kulikova O. V. Linguo-pragmatic foundations of the theory of argumentation (on the material of the English language): author. dis. … Dr. of Philology. M.: MGLU, 2011. 59 p. (In Russ.)
9. Zherebilo T.V. Dictionary of linguistic terms. Nazran: Piligrim, 2005. 376 p. (In Russ.)
10. Chernyshov A. V. Legal discourse and its main characteristics // Slovo. RU. Baltic accent. 2016. No. 2. P. 22-28. (In Russ.)
11. T. van Dyck T. Language. Cognition. Communication. Blagoveshchensk: BSU named after I. A. Baudouin de Courtenay, 2000. 308 p. (In Russ.)
