2313-8912Research Result. Theoretical and Applied Linguistics2313-891210.18413/2313-8912-2022-8-1-0-72713COMPARATIVE LINGUISTICS<strong>Coronavirus pandemic reality in mass media discourse: a comparative analysis of English-Russian onomastic metaphors</strong><strong>Coronavirus pandemic reality in mass media discourse: a comparative analysis of English-Russian onomastic metaphors</strong>VoyakinaElena Y.VoyakinaElena Y.voyackina.elena@yandex.ruTambov State Technical University, Russia20228100

The paper is devoted to the study of onomastic metaphors used in Russian and English mass media discourse to reflect the coronavirus pandemic situation. The status of onomastic metaphors in the language according to cognitive-discursive approach is determined as a mental operation when an integral conceptual structure surrounded by context and activated in minds of native speakers is subject to metaphorical transformation. Research interest in onomastic metaphors is explained by the fact that proper names enter the personal space of each individual, act as cultural, historical and linguistic markers and participate in the process of conceptualization and reconceptualization of reality. The object of the study was 215 Russian and English mass media texts, the analysis of which showed that anthroponymic, toponymic and mythonymic types of onomastic metaphors are most frequently used in mass media discourse to conceptualize the period of the coronavirus pandemic. The analysis of different types of onyms used to represent the pandemic events allowed to reveal the quantitative ratio of onomastic metaphors in Russian and English media texts, where anthroponymic metaphors occupy 43%, toponymic metaphors 31% and mythonymic metaphors 26% of the total volume of metaphors found in the analyzed discourse. It has been established that the most common source areas in both Russian and English media discourse are famous names of real time, historical figures, literature characters, real and unreal places, mythological and religious personages. These names are the most significant for a person regardless of national and cultural affiliation, however, some national priorities in the choice of proper names used to describe the pandemic period can also be observed. It has also been found that fictional source spheres are more common both in Russian and English media discourse, which is a consequence of the creative nature of human thought. The powerful pragmatic potential of onomastic metaphors influencing the recipient&rsquo;s value attitudes and contributing to stereotyping and assessment of the current situation in the public mind is emphasized.

The paper is devoted to the study of onomastic metaphors used in Russian and English mass media discourse to reflect the coronavirus pandemic situation. The status of onomastic metaphors in the language according to cognitive-discursive approach is determined as a mental operation when an integral conceptual structure surrounded by context and activated in minds of native speakers is subject to metaphorical transformation. Research interest in onomastic metaphors is explained by the fact that proper names enter the personal space of each individual, act as cultural, historical and linguistic markers and participate in the process of conceptualization and reconceptualization of reality. The object of the study was 215 Russian and English mass media texts, the analysis of which showed that anthroponymic, toponymic and mythonymic types of onomastic metaphors are most frequently used in mass media discourse to conceptualize the period of the coronavirus pandemic. The analysis of different types of onyms used to represent the pandemic events allowed to reveal the quantitative ratio of onomastic metaphors in Russian and English media texts, where anthroponymic metaphors occupy 43%, toponymic metaphors 31% and mythonymic metaphors 26% of the total volume of metaphors found in the analyzed discourse. It has been established that the most common source areas in both Russian and English media discourse are famous names of real time, historical figures, literature characters, real and unreal places, mythological and religious personages. These names are the most significant for a person regardless of national and cultural affiliation, however, some national priorities in the choice of proper names used to describe the pandemic period can also be observed. It has also been found that fictional source spheres are more common both in Russian and English media discourse, which is a consequence of the creative nature of human thought. The powerful pragmatic potential of onomastic metaphors influencing the recipient&rsquo;s value attitudes and contributing to stereotyping and assessment of the current situation in the public mind is emphasized.

ConceptualizationCoronavirusLinguistic picture of the worldMass media discourseOnomastic metaphorPandemicProper nameConceptualizationCoronavirusLinguistic picture of the worldMass media discourseOnomastic metaphorPandemicProper nameСписок литературыAl-Salman, S. and Haider, A. S. (2021). COVID-19 Trending Neologisms and Word Formation Processes in English, Russian Journal of Linguistics, 25(1), 24-42. (In English)Anderson, R. D. (2004). The Causal Power of Metaphor: Cueing Democratic Identities in Russia and Beyond, in Beer, F. A. and De Landtsheer, Ch. (eds.), Metaphorical World Politics: Rhetorics of Democracy, War and Globalization, East Lansing, NY, US, 91-110. (In English)Arnold, I. V. (2000). Stilistika Sovremennogo Anglijskogo Yazyka [Stylistics of Modern English], Prosveshchenie, Moscow, Russia. (In Russian)Arutyunova, N. D. (1990). Metaphor and discourse, in Arutyunova, N. D. and Zhurinskaya, M. A. (eds.), Teoriya metafory [Theory of metaphor], Progress, Moscow, Russia, 5-32. (In Russian)Baranov, А. N. and Karaulov, Yu. N. (1991). Russkaya Politicheskaya Metafora: materialy k slovaryu [Russian political metaphor: materials for the dictionary], Vysshaya shkola, Moscow, Russia. (In Russian)Benabid, F. (2021). Lexicovid-19, a flowering of linguistic novelties, Synergies Algerie, 29, 161-175. (In English)Blokh, M. Ya. and Semenova, T. N. (2001). Imena Lichnye v Paradigmatike, Sintagmatike i Pragmatike [Personal names in paradigmatics, syntagmatics and pragmatics], Gotika, Moscow, Russia. (In Russian)Chaiuk, T. and Dunaievska, O. (2020). Producing the Fear Culture in Media: An Examination on Coronavirus Discourse, Journal of History, Culture and Art Research, 9(2), 184-194. (In English)Chudinov, A. P. (2003). Metaforicheskaya Mozaika v Sovremennoj Politicheskoj Kommunikatsii: monografiya [Metaphorical mosaic in modern political communication: monograph], Yekaterinburg, Russia. (In Russian)Golovanova, E. I. and Madzhaeva, S. I. (2020). About the Coronavirus Pandemic Vocabulary, Vestnik Chelyabinskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta, 7(441), 121, 48-57. (In Russian)Gromenko, E. S. (ed.) (2020). Slovar&#39; Russkogo Yazyka Koronavirusnoj Epokhi [Dictionary of the Russian Language of the Coronavirus Era], Institut lingvisticheskih issledovanij RAN, St-Petersburg, Russia. (In Russian)Gudkov, D. B. (1999). Precedentnoe Imya i Problemy Precedentnosti [Precedent name and problems of precedentness], Publishing house of MGU, Moscow, Russia. (In Russian)Karasik, V. I. (2020). The Epidemic in the Mirror of Media Discourse: Facts, Assessments, Positions, Politicheskaya lingvistika, 2(80), 25-34. (In Russian)Karaulov, Yu. N. (2003). Russkij Jazyk i Jazykovaja Lichnost&rsquo; [Russian language and linguistic personality], Editorial URSS, Moscow, Russia. (In Russian)Katermina, V. V. and Lipiridi, S. H. (2020). Features of reflecting the coronavirus pandemic in the vocabulary of medical discourse (based on English neologisms), Izvestiya Volgogradskogo gos. ped. un-ta, 4(147), 170-175. (In Russian)K&ouml;vecses, Z. (2010). A New Look at Metaphorical Creativity in Cognitive Linguistics, Cognitive Linguistics, 21(4), 663-697. (In English)Lakoff, G. (1980). Metaphors We Live By, Univ. of Chicago Press, Chicago, USA. (In English)Lee, Suk-eui (2021). A News Corpus-Based Analysis of &lsquo;COVID-19&rsquo; Vocabulary, Korean Linguistics, 93, 273-305. (In English)Li, L. (2021). Words, Dictionaries and Sociology: The Impact of Coroneologisms, Lexicograpy, 8(1), 80-104. (In English)Littlemore, J. (2019). Metaphors in the Mind: Sources of Variation in Embodied Metaphor, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, UK. (In English)Massey, G. and Ehrensberger-Dow, M. (2017). Translating Conceptual Metaphor: The Processes of Managing Interlingual Asymmetry, Research in Language, 15(2), 173-189. (In English)Musolff,&nbsp;A. (2004). Metaphor and Political Discourse. Analogical Reasoning in Debates about Europe, Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke, UK. (In English)Nakhimova, Е. А. (2007). Precedentnye Imena v Massovoj Kommunikacii: monografiya [Precedent Names in Mass Communication: monograph], Yekaterinburg, Russia. (In Russian)Otin, E. S. Connotative onyms and their derivatives in the historical and etymological dictionary of the Russian language, Voprosy yazykoznaniya, Nauka, Moscow, Russia, 2, 55-72. (In Russian)Voyakina, E. Yu. (2010). Onomastic metaphor in the economic discourse, Vestnik Leningradskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta imeni A.S. Pushkina, Linguistics, 1(1), 290-299. (In Russian)Zinken,&nbsp;J. (2004). Metaphors, Stereotypes, and the Linguistic Picture of the World: Impulses from the Ethnolinguistic School of Lublin, Metaphorik.de, 7, 115-136. (In English)Zolotarev, M. V. and Privalova, I. V. (2020). Development of the cognitive potential of a precedent anthroponym, Science Journal of Volgograd State University. Linguistics, 19(2), 159-170. (In Russian)Zueva, E. V. (2016). The phenomenon of precedence in language, Nizhny Novgorod Linguistics University Bulletin, 35, 32-40. (In Russian)