Интенции политического дискурса. Теория и практика. Часть 1. Учебное пособие

That Agreement has been widely acknowledged as a landmark achievement, including by the President of the United States … and we can take pride in the fact that it was a Conservative-led Government which secured it.

The Agreement sets out a way to make progress on some of the most difficult issues facing Northern Ireland today … many of which have eluded previous attempts at negotiation.

It provides a clear path to putting the finances of the Stormont Executive on a sustainable footing for the future.

It offers a way forward on flags and parades.

It would establish broadly based institutions to help address the legacy of the past … offering better outcomes for victims and survivors … institutions which are to be rooted in principles of fairness, balance and impartiality.

And it contains measures to make devolution work better … including an official opposition at Stormont for which we Conservatives have long argued.

All of this was underpinned by a generous funding package that would give the

Executive £2 billion in extra spending power.

But as that great peace process veteran, George Mitchell, reminded me earlier this year … getting an agreement is about 20% of the job ….

… the other eighty per cent is getting it implemented.

For our part the Government is determined to do exactly that.

We’ve passed legislation to enable the devolution of corporation tax powers.

That’s a change that could have a genuinely transformative impact on jobs and prosperity in Northern Ireland because of the land border it shares with a low tax jurisdiction.

To take forward much needed public sector reform, we’ve released funding for the voluntary redundancy scheme contained in the Agreement.

And we will soon be introducing a Bill at Westminster to deliver the new institutions envisaged on the past.

Today I want to give you these assurances in relation to that legislation.

As our Northern Ireland manifesto made very clear …

121

… as we look back at the history of the Troubles, we in this party will never accept any form of equivalence between the police officers and soldiers who put their lives on the line to protect people from harm and defend the rule of law… and the terrorists who waged a thirty year campaign of violence to inflict harm and subvert the rule of law.

We will never accept any attempt to re-write history or legitimise the actions of those who pursued their aims by the bullet or the bomb.

And we will not countenance any form of amnesty for those suspected of criminal behaviour.

Under this Conservative Government the law will always take its course without fear or favour … and the Bill we introduce will be wholly consistent with that fundamental principle.

And I have to say that many will view with grave concern the fact that, as recently as August, the leader the Labour Party have just elected was asked five times in an interview to condemn IRA terrorism and five times failed to do so.

And while the Shadow Chancellor might have issued a carefully worded apology for the hurt caused by his comments on the IRA … I say it’s time he retracted in full his call to honour IRA terrorists and admit that he was entirely wrong ever to have made that statement in the first place.

The Conservative manifesto commits us to working with all parties to ensure everyone fulfils their obligations under the Stormont House Agreement.

But progress in the Northern Ireland Executive stalled in March when the two nationalist parties withdrew their support for crucial provisions on finance and welfare reform.

We are clear … the Government will not fund a more generous welfare system in

Northern Ireland than it does in the rest of the UK.

There is no more money.

Without welfare reform and efficiency measures to deal with in-year pressures, the Executive’s budget simply does not add up.

122

Pouring millions of pounds every week into an unreformed, high cost, welfare system in Northern Ireland means less and less money available for front line public services.

As a direct result … NHS waiting times are already getting longer and the pressure will only increase in the weeks to come.

The Government cannot stand by and let this situation drag on indefinitely, with Stormont increasingly unable to deliver key public services.

That’s why I have confirmed that we’re prepared to legislate at Westminster for welfare reform in Northern Ireland, if that becomes necessary.

It would be a last resort…. it’s an outcome we’re striving to avoid.

And that is one of the main reasons why we acted swiftly to reconvene the intensive cross party talks now underway once again to try to break the deadlock.

It’s too early to say whether they’ll succeed … though I sense a genuine willingness on all sides to make progress.

But time is short.

Unlike last year, we simply don’t have the luxury of endless long hours of discussions stretching on and on until Christmas.

What’s at stake is not just the credibility of devolved government in Northern

Ireland but the survival of devolved government in Northern Ireland.

One only has to look round Europe to see the problems caused when an administration cannot live within its budget and the harsh impact that can have on some of the most vulnerable in society.

Replaying that scenario in Northern Ireland would stretch political relationships within the Executive well beyond breaking point.

There’s a real risk that those taking a hard line against welfare reform will end up running the devolved institutions into collapse as collateral damage.

A return to direct rule would be a severe setback after everything that’s been achieved over recent years … and we are doing all we can to prevent it.

What Northern Ireland needs is an effective devolved power-sharing government that is capable of making the kind of difficult choices on spending priorities, welfare and

123

public sector efficiency with which more or less every other administration in the developed world has had to grapple in the years since the crash of 2008.

That’s what we’re striving to achieve.

But these talks aren’t just about implementing the Agreement … crucial though that

is.

In recent months the fallout from two brutal murders in Belfast has highlighted the continued presence of paramilitary organisations … and the involvement of some of their members in criminality and organised crime.

Let’s be clear.

Paramilitary organisations have no place in a democratic society.

They were never justified in the past.

They are not justified today.

And they should disband.

So a key aim of the talks is to find a way to bring an end to this continuing blight on Northern Ireland society.

These are very serious matters … as is the continuing terrorist threat from dissident republican groupings who maintain both lethal intent and the capacity to mount lethal attacks.

And I would like to put on record today the deeply felt gratitude of this Government, and this party, for the outstanding work done by the Police Service of Northern Ireland in defending the community from terrorist attack.

There is so much to be positive about in today’s Northern Ireland.

After being hit hard by Labour’s great recession … the economy there is growing again … expanding opportunity for hard working people.

There over 32,000 more people in work than when we came to office in 2010 … all now given the security of a pay packet to support their families.

Belfast is one of the most attractive destinations in the country for Foreign Direct Investment.

Year after year, Northern Ireland’s young people outperform England and Wales at

GCSE and A level.

124

And last month county Fermanagh was officially named as the happiest place in the United Kingdom.

So in conclusion … I consider myself to be immensely lucky to have been given the chance to serve as Secretary of State for Northern Ireland….

… and whilst there are times when the situation looks grim and the divisions seem impossible to bridge ….

…there three reasons why I approach this latest round of cross party talks with hope

…and even a glimmer of optimism.

Firstly, I have an outstanding team around me … including Ben Wallace, Andrew

Dunlop, Charles Elphicke and Rebecca Harris … who grapple with all the many challenges thrown at them with both dedication and enthusiasm.

Secondly, I report to a Prime Minister whose very real affection for Northern Ireland and its people means that he has been unstinting in his support for all the painstaking work needed to keep the political process up and running despite the bumps in the road of the last few years.

And thirdly … and most importantly of all … I believe that Northern Ireland’s leaders do want to make the political settlement work … and they do want to find a way to resolve the two crucial questions about which I have addressed this conference today.

Success or failure over the coming days lies in their hands.

They have rightly received praise around the world for all that they achieved in reaching the 1998 peace settlement which has transformed life in Northern Ireland for the better.

If we are to build a brighter, more secure future for everyone, now is the time to show that same spirit again.

I believe that they can do it … a resolution is possible … I will be working with perseverance and determination to see that happen.

Thank you.

(Theresa Villiers: Determination to build a brighter future for Northern Ireland, http://www.conservatives.com)

125

5. Найдите менасивные речевые акты в следующем тексте. Определите их структуру и количество интенциональных компонентов.

a) Our values will prevail in the fight against terrorism and extremism.

[...] I could go into a lot more detail. But instead, I am going to talk to you about the deadly terrorist threat we face. David Haines was a tireless humanitarian worker who helped Muslims….not just in Syria….but in Bosnia, South Sudan and Libya. Two weeks ago, he was murdered by terrorists, simply for being British. His murder followed the equally barbaric killings of James Foley and Steven Sotloff, American journalists who were reporting to the world the plight of the Syrian people.

The terrorists who murdered David Haines like to call themselves the Islamic State. But I will tell you the truth: They are not Islamic. And they are not a state. Their actions have absolutely no basis in anything written in the Quran. What they believe has no resemblance whatsoever to the beliefs of more than a billion Muslims all over the world. And, like all the other Islamist terrorist organisations, they have caused the deaths of many thousands of innocent Muslim civilians. They occupy large parts of Syria and Iraq, and not only are they bringing death and destruction to the people of those countries, they have made absolutely clear their desire to attack Britain, America and the West.

ISIL are just one of the terrorist threats we face. There is Boko Haram in Nigeria, Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula in Yemen, like-minded groups in Libya, Al Shabaab in East Africa, terrorist planning in Pakistan and Afghanistan, and home-grown extremists, who, like the 7/7 bombers, were radicalised here in Britain. Last year, Drummer Lee Rigby was murdered by Islamist extremists in London, while Mohammed Saleem, an elderly British Muslim, was murdered by a Ukrainian far right extremist here in Birmingham. The police and Security Service are working hard every day to prevent other terrorist attacks on our streets.

Dealing with those threats requires a deep understanding of what is going on in the world and a studied, careful response. Because there are no simple answers. We can’t go around the world trying to re-make it in our own image. We can’t just remove dictators and assume that liberal democracy will follow.

126

When you look at what is going on across the Middle East, there is a battle raging for the heart and soul of Islam itself. And that battle is very complicated. There is the ancient split between Sunni and Shia Muslims. This is a battle that has already been fought for many years, and will be fought many years into the future. And it is not for Britain, or any other Western power, to try to resolve it. Only the many peoples of the world’s

Muslim countries can determine their future. Yes, we should stand up for human rights. Yes, we should support friendly states and moderate elements within other states. Yes, we should provide humanitarian support when wars are fought. But we have to disentangle our own national interest from the struggle that is going on in the Middle East and across the Muslim world.

That judgement will sometimes be difficult to make. But in the case of ISIL the danger is clear. They have already murdered British and American citizens in the most brutal and cowardly manner possible. They have attracted tens of thousands of foreign fighters, including thousands of Europeans, Americans, Australians and British nationals. One of their terrorists has already struck in Europe, when he murdered four innocent civilians outside the Jewish Museum in Brussels earlier this year. And they have made clear that they want to go on attacking Western targets. That is why it’s right that we are part of the international coalition dedicated to ISIL’s destruction.

If ISIL succeed in firmly consolidating their grip on the land they occupy in Syria and Iraq, we will see the world’s first truly terrorist state established within a few hours flying time of our country. We will see terrorists given the space to plot attacks against us, train their men and women, and devise new methods to kill indiscriminately. We will see the risk, often prophesied but thank God not yet fulfilled, that with the capability of a state behind them, the terrorists will acquire chemical, biological or even nuclear weapons to attack us. This is not somebody else’s battle. They have made clear their ambitions. And they have made us their enemies. And the lesson of history tells us that when our enemies say they want to attack us, they mean it. We must not flinch. We must not shy away from our responsibility. We must not drift towards danger and insecurity. While we still have the chance, we must act to destroy ISIL.

127

When we came to power, we protected the counter-terrorism policing budget and the budgets for the security and intelligence agencies. And we’ve given them extra resources for surveillance. But we must make sure, too, that the police and the security services have all the capabilities they need to keep us safe. And there is one capability that is diminishing at such a pace that not only are we risking letting terrorists plan their attacks undisrupted, we are allowing organised criminals to operate undisturbed. Crimes are going unpunished, children are being abused, and lives are being put at risk.

For years the police and security services have had access to communications data – that is, the ‘who, where, when and how’ of a communication but not its content – and it’s played a significant role in every major Security Service counter-terrorism operation in the last decade. It’s been used as evidence in 95 per cent of all serious organised crime cases handled by the Crown Prosecution Service.

The extremists believe in a clash of civilisations – a fundamental incompatibility between Islamic and Western values, an inevitable divide between “them and us”. They demand a caliphate, or a new Islamic state, governed by a harsh interpretation of Shari’ah law. They utterly reject British and Western values, including democracy, the rule of law, and equality between citizens, regardless of their gender, ethnicity, religion or sexuality. They believe that it is impossible to be a good Muslim and a good British citizen. And they dismiss anybody who disagrees with them – including other Muslims – as nonbelievers.

Soon, we will make Prevent a statutory duty for all public sector organisations. I want to see new banning orders for extremist groups that fall short of the existing laws relating to terrorism. I want to see new civil powers to target extremists who stay just within the law but still spread poisonous hatred. So both policies – Banning Orders and Extremism Disruption Orders – will be in the next Conservative manifesto.

(Theresa May’s speech on terrorism and extremism, http://blogs.spectator.co.uk)

128

Библиография и рекомендуемая литература

Теоретические источники по проблеме исследования:

Амиров, В.М. Агитационный предвыборный сверхтекст: Организация содержания и стратегии реализации [Текст]: Дис. ... канд. филол. наук / В.М.

Амиров. – Екатеринбург, 2002. – 227 с.

129

Андреев, О.А., Хромов Л.Н. Техника быстрого чтения [Текст] / О.А. Андреев, Л.Н. Хромов. – Москва: Просвещение, 1991. – 160 с.

Анохин, П.К. Эмоции. [Текст] / П.К. Анохин. – БМЭ, 2-е изд., 1964. – т.35. – с.339-367.

Антология мировой философии, т.1, ч.2. – М.: Мысль, 1969. – 357 с.

Антонова, А.В. Средства выражения промиссивной интенции в английском языке [Текст] / А.В. Антонова. – Оренбург: ИПК ГОУ ОГУ, 2007. – 119 с.

Апресян, Ю.Д. Перформативы в грамматике и словаре [Текст] / Ю.Д. Апресян // Изв. АН СССР. Сер. лит. и яз., 1986. – т.45, № 3. – с.208-223.

Арутюнова, Н.Д. Истоки, проблемы, категории прагматики [Текст] / Н.Д. Арутюнова // Новое в зарубежной лингвистике. – М.: Прогресс. 1985. – Вып. 16. – с.3-43.

Арутюнова, Н.Д. Предложение и его смысл (логико-семантические проблемы). Изд. 2-е, стереотипное [Текст] / Н.Д. Арутюнова. – М.: Едиториал УРСС, 2002. – 384 с.

Арутюнова, Н.Д. Пропозиция [Текст] / Н.Д. Арутюнова // Большой энциклопедический словарь "Языкознание". – М.: Большая российская энциклопедия, 2000. – 688 с.

Афанасенко, Е.В. Семантический повтор в политическом дискурсе (на материале русского и английского языков) [Текст]: автореф. дисс. … канд. филол. наук / Е.В. Афанасенко. – Саратов, 2006. – 18 с.

Базылев, В.Н. К изучению политического дискурса в России и российского политического дискурса [Текст] / В.Н. Базылев // Политический дискурс в России – 2: Материалы раб. совещ. – М.: Диалог – МГУ, 1998. – с.6-8.

Баранов, А.Н., Казакевич, Е.Г. Парламентские дебаты: традиции и новации. Советский политический язык (от ритуала к метафоре) [Текст] / А.Н. Баранов, Е.Г. Казакевич – М.: Знание, 1991. – 42 с.

Беляева, И.В. Феномен речевой манипуляции: лингвоюридические аспекты [Текст]: автореф. дисс. … докт. филол. наук / И.В. Беляева. – Ростов-на-Дону, 2009.

– 40 с.

130