212] From the standpoint of ways of processing complex information in memory, cognitive

processes in thinking. Particular attention is focused on interactive strategy specific ways of speaking behavior, carried out under control "going global". The same point of view of understanding the strategy committed and A. Issers [Yssers 2002, 100], calling it the main

components of prediction and control of the implementation plan.

Communication strategies in some concepts [Klyuev 2002, 18-19] included with theoretical moves, planned in advance and implemented their speaker, and tactics - with the practical purposes of communication.

Thus, synthesizing different views of scholars on the concept strategies, define communication strategy as a set of certain speech acts to achieve communicative goals. That

Psychologists sometimes speak of a strategy speech behavior as installation of certain forms of behavior, including in conflict situations communication. Hence, it follows its own view on the definition of communicative strategy that relies on a behavior plan communicants (their

speech and action not conversational ) and for communication purposes including

certain attitudes.

The plan allows for different ways of communication and tactics of its implementation -

"Speaking skills to build a dialogue within the framework of a strategy

"[Borisova 1996, 25]. If the communication strategy provide for

development of the dialogue, the tactics demonstrate the implementation of this strategy include

Strategy at each stage of the course the situation of communication.

Communication tactics may consist of one or several utterances, the speaker can control the success / failure of a particular speech act at specific stages of the dialogue and to adjust its language of action given the perlocutionary effect. It should consider

that specific communication strategies and tactics in general par-

ma is the integrated use of language to achieve communicative purpose. On the one hand, the sequence of speech

acts may be tactically motivated, on the other - in one and the

same expression may be present different strategic meanings .Hulakova 2004].

We can say that the planning of linguistic behavior - is not only the structure of language statements,and most important phase of interaction in which the listener is always passive accept text-message the speaker, and actively interprets it speech acts, implementing their own strategic line.

As for conflict communication, in this case, the strategy not always include communicative action planning. This is especially applies to accidental or unintended conflicts in which the action recipient does not have a deliberate nature or addressee does not know about the possible

consequences of their actions.

In conflict situations communication communicative follow different

communication strategies. The choice of communication strategy is under

influence of psychological settings to achieve their own goals

and / or objectives of a partner. Psychologists understand the notion of installing [games

bus 2002] complex cognitive and motivational orientations in certain sys-

sition. Cognitive orientation - understanding of the specific communicative situations,

atsiyu, which are used to describe the concept of schema, script

frame. Motivational orientations associated with different types of social

relations because they can meet / not meet the needs of co-

munikantiv, reflecting a system of goals, motives and intentions [ibid]. A

therefore, in conflict situations have the following types of psychological facili-

wok: 1) against a partner, 2) ignoring the partner and 3) constructive

partner. Given these kinds of communication in a conflict situation

are three types of strategic lines of speech behavior:

1) confrontational;

2) neutral;

3) Cooperative.

Confrontational strategy of linguistic behavior shows

setting against a partner in communication. She focused on that

actively and independently pursue their own goals / interests, no matter

attention to the interests of the partner / partners involved in the conflict, and

reflects the desire of one of the participants to take advantage of communication, self-

moutverdytysya, to impose their vision and solution are not seeking

to joint action.

In psychology [Grishina 2002], this strategy is defined as "against dom-

ba "- the pressure on partners to weaken his position and enhance existing

ing their own behavior.

Conceived FIGHT, analyzed and J. Lakoffom M.Dzhonsonom

in the analysis of conceptual metaphor "argument - it is war." As a result, this analysis, the researchers made the following generalization: "We accept

person with whom argue, as the enemy. We raided her position and

protect their own. We grab territory. We produce and vyko-

rystovuyemo strategy. If we believe that the position can not be protection by-

tyty, it should leave and choose a new direction of attack. Much of what

we do in dispute, partly consistent with the notion of war [La

Coffey, Johnson 2004, 127-128]. Regardless of the nature of the argument (credible

rotary or discussion), note G. Lakoff and M. Johnson, dispute

progress in terms of war, as is her understanding embedded in kontseptua-

lnu system culture in which we exist.

Within these reasons scientists dispute in this case can