Introduction. The present study examines the pragmastilistic potential of migration discourse based on the speeches of modern British politicians. The relevance of the chosen topic lies in the acute social specifics of migration discourse and its manipulative component. In today’s world, migration processes have become global and their impact on the development of the host culture is becoming increasingly evident. There is still no established strategy for the integration of migrants into the new society, which creates a conflict environment and determines the hostility of the indigenous population towards migrants. Migration discourse as one of the directions of policy discourse becomes an effective tool for managing public opinion. Various persuasive tactics are incorporated in the speech of politicians using linguistic means, the use of which in the British migration discourse is considered in this article.Methodology and sources. The key tasks of the study are to identify specific discursive tactics, by means of which the persuasive strategy is implemented in the British migration discourse, and to analyze the stylistic techniques used to design the discovered tactics. During the study, pragmastilistic analysis was used, the application of which involves referring to the following methods of linguistic research: the method of continuous sampling, quantitative, descriptive and comparative methods, the method of stylistic analysis, discursive analysis. The material of the study was the speeches of modern British politicians from 2004 to 2021. Results and discussion. The analysis of migration discourse based on the texts of speeches by modern British politicians allows to talk about the stylistic saturation of the material and the main means of expressiveness used in the framework of the discourse under consideration. The main tactic of opponents of free migration is the comparison of “good/bad” migrants, which is actualized using antithesis. As for the lexical stylistic means, the use of the epithet should be specified, which is also a way of actualizing opposition tactics. Thus, this tactic is implemented both at the lexical and syntactic level. Similar tactics are also relevant in the framework of pro-migration rhetoric, namely, when comparing the local elite and the visiting population, which performs all the work necessary for the functioning of society. In most cases the main stylistic technique for tactics actualization is antithesis (or the convergence of antithesis and epithet). Proponents of pro-migration policies also use metaphor (tactics for describing the political process) and syntactic parallelism (tactics for describing the benefits of migration). Finally, the most common tactic inherent in both poles of migration discourse is the tactic of generalization. It consists in equating the speaker with his audience, their “fusion”, and is most often actualized using hyperbola.Conclusion. Migration discourse is characterized by an ideological orientation, which is actualized using certain speech techniques, tactics and strategies. Migration discourse, as a multifaceted entity, can also serve to harmonize social life by facilitating the integration of migrants into the host culture. Migration discourse is a powerful ideological weapon that can be used both to contribute to integration and to incite ethnic hatred. Stylistic tools play a key role in the implementation of a persuasive strategy, which is actively used both in migration and in political discourse in general. The main tactics of the migration discourse of modern British politicians are opposition and generalization, used both in pro- and anti-migration rhetoric.
Is the Political Animal Politically Ignorant? Applying Evolutionary Psychology to the Study of Political Attitudes
