ARGUMENTATIVENESS OF UTTERANCES OF INDIGNATION

Abstract

The article deals with the study of emotional arguments used by indignant speakers. Indignation is viewed as a negative mental state that arises as a result of a person’s strong discontent, his/her anger, and disgust towards those events and actions of other people that have happened or are happening in his/her environment. A person experiences indignation when he/she evaluates events as unfair. Indignation along with other emotions, such as anger, frustration, resentment, and disappointment, is associated with censure – utterances of disapproval of one’s deeds, actions, etc. In everyday life, such terms as “criticizing”, “rebuking”, “finding fault”, “blaming”, “questioning one’s judgment or decision”, “demanding explanations”, and “disagreement” are used to denote censure. Speakers choose the following four ways of expressing censure: 1) direct rebuke; 2) demanding explanations; 3) implying moral or intellectual inferiority of someone; 4) expressing surprise or disgust.
One of the strategies used in communication is argumentation, which takes place when the grounds of a statement are provided. Argumentation can include reasonings, the context of which involves a difference of opinion, and at the same time, these reasonings have a certain structure, namely, a thesis and supporting arguments.
Trying to be persuasive, the addressant appeals to the feelings of the addressee. During emotional argumentation, the thesis represents the point of view of the addressant, who tries to convince the addressee of its soundness. During emotional argumentation, the speaker uses rhetorical questions and other expressive means.