FEATURE FILM AS A SECONDARY SOURCE IN HISTORICAL LEARNING

2018 ◽  
Vol 63 (7) ◽  
pp. 82-88
Author(s):  
Nga Hoang Thi ◽  
Maria Zakharova

A true account of history depends on how reliable the source of the accounts is, and how correct facts about the event are. Primarily, historical accounts are built on what people narrate about particular incidents and events. However, people are motivated differently to give facts or fictitious accounts about a particular event. In the feature films, most story plots have been developed along the common narration in the mainstream media. Others have been altered to ensure that the films are entertaining and meet the expectations of the target audience. However, some of the incidents may or may not have occurred as shown in these movies. This topic explains the ever changing facts about the Vietnam War as shown in the films. It explains how some of the facts have been changed, some of the myths have been developed to be believed as facts and how fiction has changed history.

2018 ◽  

The article presents the results of analysis of the communicative intentions of the speakers realising negative assessment strategies in informal communication, modelled in the English feature film discourse. The research is done within the methodological framework of a cognitive-communicative approach to language where the communicative strategy of negative assessment is viewed as a cognitive-affective-volitional-conative mental structure of the speaker objectivised in verbal/co-verbal means of expression of negative assessment of a certain object, person, action or situation in an act of communication. Hyper-intention of negative assessment is realised through hyponymic communicative intentions of: 1) disapproval (the object is negatively assessed since it does not meet the subject’s expectations / the subject is motivated by the need to express himself/herself), 2) censure (the object-addressee is negatively assessed since it deviates from the ethic norms / the subject is motivated by the need to express the assessment before the addressee to urge him/her to reconcile with the expectations of the society), 3) criticism (the object-addressee is negatively assessed since it deviates from the utilitarian norms / the subject is motivated by the need to express the assessment before the object to urge him/her to reconcile with «the common sense»), and 4) depreciation (the object is negatively assessed since he/she does not fit the subject’s etalon/ the subject is motivated by the need to express he/she is not interested in the object). Negative assessment can be accompanied by such emotional attitudes of the subject toward the object as contempt, neglect, dissatisfaction, indignation, anger, irritation, hate, surprise, desperation, disappointment, etc. Intentions of negative assessment are distinguished from those of blame (the subject informs the addressee that the subject blames the object for taking/not taking some (un)ethical action), reproach (the subject informs the object/addressee that he/she failed the subjects’ expectations causing the subject emotional trauma) and insult (the subjects intends to hurt the object/addressee). Irony/sarcasm are addressed as implicit means of expressing negative assessment which, depending on the situation, can be realised as disapproval, censure, criticism or depreciation.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document