The grammatical principles of the psychological weapon’s design in foreign policy discursus
In the XX century much attention was devoted to “psychological” or “informational” war (more prosaically expressed specific propagandas) issues. Psychological operations were included in military regulations. Yet, the issues of linguistic significance were lost in widely excepted methods of semeiotic manipulations and the foreign policy meaning of that rather presumptuously called “psychological weapon”.
Nevertheless, these issues are directly connected with the production of foreign policy propaganda texts, anyhow at peace time. From one hand it is obvious that the peculiarities of linguistic perception of the contingent these texts are transmitted to should be taken into account. From another hand, the inventory of the appropriate language structures, if it is managed successfully, provides a chance to unify and considerably automatize the formulation of foreign policy commentaries. It would result noticeable reduction of specific expenses for the payment of analysts and experts.
To begin with one should examine the essence of any weapon, especially such an exotic one called “psychological”. The essence of the weapon is the preparation for the instant. The use of weapon supposes a situation the part under attack delivers a blow. This last moment is called instant: undivided reality, eclipsing perception. Here it is not that important whether the weapon causes destruction or just paralyzes, temporarily disables the enemy or on which level of perception it functions: psychomotor or intellectual.
The definition of the weapon accentuates not only material accommodations but also mental structures and behavioral skills. In they turn, as the psychophysiological researches show, they are connected with the elaboration of foreign policy orientation in its fundamental principle, carrying the idea of attention focusing and sense of distance. In this sense not the weapon but its use is called psychological. There is a psychological, “imposing” weapon, as like any weapon it carries infusion. A charm mixed with curiosity and fear is inherent to it accompanied by selectivity and distancing as means of shape making. The attraction of danger in the world becomes a dangerous attraction of weapons. Valour precedes the weapon’s shine of the one overcoming fear in the war. Not the fearlessness but fear motivating the fearless onquers. It suggests the fearless the self-control distinctive to poetic owes as inner restraint in the face of objective reality’s self-sufficing image. It inspires obedience to foreign domination, otherwise rebellion is inevitable.
See the continuation in Armenian or Russian versions
Return