Representations of ideological and cultural values in modern Russian political discourse

ISSN 1132-0265 Philologia Hispalensis 26/1-2 (2012) 107-127 RepResen a ions o ideological and cul uRal alues in modeRn Russian poli ical discouRse Ta iana Dub o skaya & Ta iana Kha lamo a Penza Uni e si y o Ecology and Poli ical Sciences & Sa a o S a e Uni e si y, Russia Resumen: Es e a ículo o ece una isión del discu so polí ico uso ac ual y ana- liza 16 discu sos p onunciados po p esiden es usos a la Fede al Assembly (Asamblea Fede al). Se ha a ado de demos a que exis e una elación i- pa i a en e lenguaje, ideologías polí icas y alo es cul u ales. El análisis del discu so nos pe mi e señala concep os p imo diales y palab as cla es que en- ca nan alo es cul u ales e ideológicos, al y como se encuen an en los ex os. A a és de los ejemplos omados de los discu sos se ilus an supues os eó i- cos sob e las elaciones de pode y el ni el de indi idualismo/colec i ismo en la Rusia ac ual. Palab as cla e: discu so polí ico, p esiden e, ideologías, alo es cul u ales. Abs ac : The p esen pape p o ides an insigh in o mode n Russian poli i- cal discou se and o e s he analysis o 16 speeches deli e ed by Russian P esi- den s o he Fede al Assembly. An a emp has been made o demons a e ha he e exis s a ipa i e connec ion be ween language, poli ical ideologies and cul u al alues. The analysis o he discou se allows o single ou p inciple con- cep s and key wo ds which embody cul u al and ideological alues, as hey a e embedded in he ex s. Theo e ical assump ions on powe dis ance and he de- g ee o indi idualism/collec i ism in he mode n Russia a e illus a ed wi h in- s ances o discou se. Keywo ds: poli ical discou se, p esiden , ideologies, cul u al alues. 1. In Roduc Ion The p esen pape p o ides an insigh in o mode n Russian poli ical dis- cou se and o e s some sugges i e conclusions as o how cul u al and ideologi- cal alues a e embodied in language. The idea ha ideologies a e c ea ed, p ac ised and main ained by means o language is no no el. Mode n schola s o C i ical Discou se Analysis (CDA) ha e eached conside able esul s in explaining how language and ideology a e in e ela ed. Simila ly, a lo has been w i en abou he connec ion be ween 108 Ta iana Dub o skaya & Ta iana Kha lamo a ISSN 1132-0265 Philologia Hispalensis 26/1-2 (2012) 107-127 language and na ional men ali y, he la e being exp essed h ough language. In his pape , d awing on he achie emen s o CDA and cul u al s udies, we ha e made an a emp o s ep u he and econcile he c i ical iew on discou se wi h he analysis o cul u al alues. We ha e ied o demons a e ha he e is a ipa i e connec ion be ween language, poli ical ideologies and cul u al alues. While he minu iae o in e ac ion can ell us a g ea deal abou poli ical beha - iou , we shall concen a e on cul u al and ideological alues embedded in he ex s. To a ain his goal o he s udy, we ha e unde aken a mul i-disciplina y ap- p oach. The me hodological amewo k o he s udy encompasses he heo y o cul u al dimensions, as de eloped by Ho s ede (Ho s ede 2001), p incipal de- elopmen s in Russian cul u al s udies, and esul s o social esea ch conduc ed by sociologis s in he mode n Russia. Linguis ic analysis o speech da a ca ied ou in he p esen s udy is iewed as a key o unde s anding social p ocesses ha a e unde way in he coun y. The esea ch is based on he con en analysis (quali a i e and quan i a i e) which leads o de e mining key wo ds ha em- body p incipal ideological alues o he cu en momen , as well as explaining he causal e ec s o discou se on social li e. The da a o he esea ch is comp ised o 16 speeches ha Russian P esiden s B. Yel sin, V. Pu in and D. Med ede deli e ed o he Fede al Assembly o he Russian Fede a ion in 1994-2009. T ansla ions o he p esiden s’ add esses ha e been aken om he o icial websi e o P esiden o Russia (eng.k emlin. u). In o de o shed ligh on he in e ac ion be ween he au ho i ies and he public, ma e ials o he P esiden ’s blog ha e been explo ed (2009). T ansla ion o he blog en ies in o English has been done by he au ho s o he p esen a icle. The a icle consis s o 5 pa s. I begins wi h he in oduc ion. In pa 2, we discuss he concep s o ideology and cul u al alues and de ine ou own ap- p oach o hese concep s. In pa 3, we ocus a en ion on he cul u al dimen- sion “Powe dis ance” and p esen he ou look on Russian men ali y in e ms o a i ude o powe dis ibu ion and powe dis ance. The heo e ical assump ions a e ollowed by he p ac ical analysis o speech da a which shows how powe dis ance is es ablished and main ained by means o language in poli ical dis- cou se. In pa 4, we elabo a e on he dimension “Indi idualism e sus Collec- i ism” and discuss he impo ance o he concep s in ques ion o he Russian communi y. The linguis ic analysis ha ollows is aimed a h owing ligh on how hese concep s a e p esen ed in poli ical discou se. In pa 5, he main e- sul s o he s udy a e summa ised and concluding ema ks a e made. 2. He conceP s o Ideology And cul uRAl Alues Now ha we ha e de ined he goals and me hod o he p esen s udy and p esen ed he da a unde analysis, i would be app op ia e o ocus on he con- cep s o ideology and cul u al alues as hese a e key e ms in he a icle. We Ideological and cul u al alues in mode n ussian poli ical discou se 109 ISSN 1132-0265 Philologia Hispalensis 26/1-2 (2012) 107-127 shall demons a e ha ideology and cul u al alues a e inex icably in e wined and, he e o e, should be iewed in a combina ion. The e m ideology has been exploi ed in ensi ely and ex ensi ely ac oss a numbe o disciplines, including his o y, philosophy, poli ical economy, an h o- pology. Linguis ics, especially he s udy o language as a social phenomenon, canno be excluded om his numbe . Howe e , as Scollon & Scollon poin ou , “ he wo d ‘ideology’ is a di icul one o use, because i has been used in so many di e en ways in he wo hund ed yea s o so o i s exis ence” (Scollon, Scollon 2005: 131). Wi h exac ly he same idea Blommae s a s his discussion o “ he e mino- logical muddle o ideologies” and no es (Blommae 2005: 158): Few e ms a e as badly se ed by schola ship as he e m ideology, and as soon as anyone en e s he ield o ideology s udies, he o she inds him/he sel in a mo ass o con adic o y de ini ions, widely a ying app oaches o ideology, and huge con o e sies o e e ms, phenomena, o models o analysis. In his a emp o elabo a e he e m, Blommae dis inguishes wo majo a- di ions o concep ualizing ideology. The schola connec s he i s adi ion wi h Ma xis heo y in which ideology is in e p e ed as “ ied o he in e es s o pa - icula social g oups and o p ocesses o powe and dominance” (Blommae 2006: 510). In he second adi ion o social s udies, ideology is unde s ood as collec i e psychology ha is made up o idea ional complexes which p esen he deepe laye s o cul u e and socie y and u n g oups o people in o communi ies, socie ies and cul u es (Blommae 2006: 510). This unde s anding o ideology is neu al and cha ac e is ic o an h opological, e hnog aphic s udies. While Blommae p e e s o ocus on he e hnog aphic adi ion, mos dis- cou se analys s unde ake he app oach es ing on a close connec ion be ween ideology and powe . Scollon & Scollon de ine ideology as “a sys em o hinking, social p ac ice, and communica ion, which is used ei he o b ing a pa icula g oup o social powe o o legi ima e hei posi ion o social powe …” (Scollon, Scollon 2005: 131). The in e p e a ion o ideology as inex icably linked o powe ela ions is pa icula ly salien wi hin he adi ion o C i ical Discou se Analysis. Fai - clough p o ides he ollowing de ini ion o ideology: “Ideologies a e ep esen- a ions o aspec s o he wo ld which can be shown o con ibu e o es ablishing, main aining and changing social ela ions o powe , domina ion and exploi a- ion” (Fai clough 2004: 9). The schola calls his iew o ideology ‘c i ical’ and opposes i o ‘desc ip i e’ iews ha a e gi en wi hou e e ence o powe and domina ion. In he p esen pape an app oach is unde aken which combines a na owe in e p e a ion o ideology as a complex o ideas and p ac ices aimed a main- aining a ce ain social o de and holding powe wi h a wide in e p e a ion o 110 Ta iana Dub o skaya & Ta iana Kha lamo a ISSN 1132-0265 Philologia Hispalensis 26/1-2 (2012) 107-127 ideology as a sys em o belie s and mo al alues which is cha ac e is ic o all people in a gi en speech communi y. We con end ha hese common belie s and ideas embedded in he men ali y o mos people in a gi en speech com- muni y can be deno ed by he e m cul u al alues. Ideology and cul u al alues a e no , as we see hem, isola ed phenomena. On he con a y, ideology is en- ac ed and inculca ed mos success ully in he socie y by ac ualizing and exploi - ing ce ain cul u al alues. The idea abou he in e connec ion be ween ideology and cul u al alues is no absolu ely no el. Tu ning o cul u al models, Gee pe cep i ely s a es ha cul u al models a e deeply implica ed in ‘poli ics’. By ‘poli ics’ he schola means …any hing and anyplace ( alk, ex s, media, ac ion, in e ac ion, ins i u- ions) whe e “social goods” a e a s ake, hings like powe , s a us, o alued knowledge, posi ions, o possessions. Since cul u al models embed assump- ions abou wha is “app op ia e”, “ ypical”, and/o “no mal”, hey a e poli ical h ough and h ough (Gee 1999: 70). E en hough he e m ideology is no used by Gee, i is qui e clea ha ideol- ogy is in ol ed in he dis ibu ion o social goods, i s and o emos , powe . Thus, on he one hand, we ha e deepe pe cep ions o he eali y and a num- be o belie s which a e sha ed by mos people and egula e hei social beha - iou . These a e mo e o less s able en i ies embedded in he people’s na ional men ali y, and i akes ime o in oduce any d ama ic changes in people’s minds. On he o he hand, we ha e ideologies ha a e c ea ed o poli ical pu - poses, i.e. o main aining o changing social ela ions o powe . Ideologies a e p ac ised, i s o all, h ough language. As Blommae has indica ed, …E e y ac o communica ion a icula es a me ap agma ics in which he lin- guis ic-ideological ea u es ope a e. This me ap agma ic, indexical laye o semio ic sys ems such as language is no neu al; i is e alua i e, ela ional, so- cially posi ioned, in es ed wi h in e es s, and subjec o con es a ion and dom- inance (Blommae 2006: 511). Depending on a poli ical pu pose, ideologies change, and so does he lan- guage used o ac ualize hem. The e o e, hese a e mo e lexible en i ies as com- pa ed o cul u al alues. In he analysis ha we shall unde ake u he , language and discu si e means a e iewed as exp essing bo h cul u al alues and ideologies p ac ised a a pa - icula his o ical momen . As i has been poin ed ou , language is ne e neu al, i always bea s a ce ain cul u al and ideological load. Russian schola s Ki aig- o odskaya and Rosano a, discussing poli ical communica ion in he Russia o he 90s, a gue ha ideology inds i s e bal en elope in gene alised o mulae, Ideological and cul u al alues in mode n ussian poli ical discou se 111 ISSN 1132-0265 Philologia Hispalensis 26/1-2 (2012) 107-127 slogans, and a b oad a ie y o p opaganda clichés (Ki aigo odskaya, Rosano a 1996). The e o e, he analysis o discu si e means in p esiden ial discou se will le us iden i y he ideologies p ac ised and de ec how adi ional cul u al alues a e ans o med unde he in luence o eme ging ideologies. The s udy d aws on Ho s ede’s model o cul u e, acco ding o which se e al socio-cul u al dimensions a e iden i ied: powe dis ance, indi idualism, mascu- lini y, unce ain y a oidance, long- e m/sho - e m o ien a ion, and indulgence e sus es ain . E e y cul u e can be cha ac e ised by a pa icula posi ion on he scale o each socio-cul u al dimension. We assume ha i is possible o e- eal his posi ion on he basis o linguis ic analysis. Ho s ede’s model has no been applied widely in discou se analysis, bu i has p o ed bene icial o social esea ch. One o such social s udies was pe o med by A dich ili and Kuchinke who explo ed cul u al alues among manage s and subo dina es in ou coun- ies o he o me So ie Union and de ined leade ship s yles acco dingly (A - dich ili, Kuchinke 2002). 3. PoweR dIs Ance: PolI IcAl dIscouRse RAns oRmIng cul uRAl Alues? Ho s ede dis inguishes 6 dimensions o cul u e, bu we shall expand on hose 2 o hem ha seem mos enligh ening in e ms o powe ela ions. Powe dis ance is, no doub , he mos impo an dimension in iew o he ype o he discou se explo ed. Ho s ede de ines his dimension as ollows: Powe dis ance is he ex en o which he less powe ul membe s o o gani- za ions and ins i u ions (like he amily) accep and expec ha powe is dis- ibu ed unequally. This ep esen s inequali y (mo e e sus less), bu de ined om below, no om abo e. I sugges s ha a socie y’s le el o inequali y is endo sed by he ollowe s as much as by he leade s (www.gee ho s ede.nl). When applied o ou da a, ‘ he powe ul’ s ands o he P esiden (p esiden- ial powe ), while ‘ he ollowe s’ include he coun y’s popula ion as a as and unlimi ed ca ego y. Russian his o y has demons a ed immensely complica ed ela ions be ween he powe ul and he ollowe s. Many schola s o Russian cul- u e and his o y obse e ha Russian go e nance has always been e y s ong, o ce ul and domina ing. “…Au ho i a ianism was he ule in Russian go e - nance,” — no ices an Ame ican au ho Yale Richmond who w o e his book in an a emp o ind a key o unde s anding he Russians and explain hese s ange olks o he es o he wo ld (Richmond 1992: 67). Richmond me hod- ically wen h ough di e en pe iods o Russian his o y o illus a e Russian au- ho i a ianism: he begins wi h he Tsa dom o Moscow o he 16 h and he 17 h cen u y whe e all he classes o he na ion we e bound o he se ice o he s a e, and ends wi h he So ie e a wi h Moscow’s hea y hand which was ound in he 112 Ta iana Dub o skaya & Ta iana Kha lamo a ISSN 1132-0265 Philologia Hispalensis 26/1-2 (2012) 107-127 economy, cul u e, educa ion, he media, eligion and ci izens’ p i a e li es. ‘Au- ho i a ianism’, ‘Moscow’s hea y hand’, ‘ o ce o main ain… au ho i y’ a e bu a ew desc ip o s ha we e used by Richmond o po ay Russian powe . A o eign ou look may some imes p o e a bi biased. The e o e, o each a balanced iew, i may be use ul o ake in o accoun inside s’ iewpoin s. Nu- me ous a emp s a unde s anding and e ealing he Russians ha e been made by na i e schola s. Acco ding o Voloshin, he explana ion o Russian s a ism lies in he his o y and geog aphical posi ion o he coun y: Russian li e needed s ong s a e powe which would be able o keep oge he as lands and nume - ous peoples (Волошин 1990: 29). Sike ich dis inguishes, among o he e hnic ea u es o he Russians, subo dina ion o an indi idual’s li e o he s a e in e - es (Сикевич 1996), which de ini ely p esupposes he s eng h o he s a e. The o he side o powe ela ions is he a i ude o he ollowe s o he pow- e ul, and he e we a e app oaching he issue cen al o Ho s ede’s model. How do he less powe ul membe s o he socie y ea he p esen dis ibu ion o powe ? Wha a e hei expec a ions? Answe ing hese ques ions, we shall e- u n o he Ame ican s udy e e ed o p e iously. The quo a ion om Kennan, p o ided in Richmond’s book, seems o ha e g asped he e y essence o wo- way powe ela ions: “Fo ms o go e nmen and he habi s o go e nmen s end o e he long un o e lec he unde s andings and expec a ions o hei peo- ples” (Richmond 1992: 68). Al hough we can ha dly ag ee wi h Richmond’s gene alised cha ac e is ic o he Russian popula ion as a submissi e ci izen y accus omed o di ec ions om abo e and unable o making hei own decisions, he e is de ini ely a g ain o u h in his s a emen . In he So ie e a communica ion be ween he powe ul and he ollowe s lacked a eedback mechanism. The powe ul we e hea d by he ollowe s, bu he ollowe s seldom had a chance o exp ess hei poin s o iew, including he opinion on he dis ibu ion o powe . The need o he popula ion o dialogue wi h he powe ul was appeased by demons a i e and a he andom mee ings o So ie leade s wi h common people, which in ac esembled s age shows and ga e he illusion o a sho powe dis ance. Nowadays, his gen e o communica ion be ween he au ho i ies and he pop- ula ion is gaining popula i y wi h mode n leade s. Ha ing ealised he g owing need o Russian popula ion o he dialogue wi h he poli ical eli e and seeking o new means o e ec i e communica ion wi h he elec o a e, he powe ul e- sponded o a newly o med social si ua ion by exploi ing mo e dialogic gen es and in en ing new o ms o dialogue wi h people. The e ha e appea ed new o ms and gen es o in e ac ion be ween he powe ul and he people, aimed a de eloping a close ela ionship and ge ing eedback om he audience: In- e ne si es, In e ne -con e ences, ideo blogs, audio and ideo messages o he coun y, e c. This dialogic o ien a ion is supposed o c ea e a new po ai o he powe ul: he powe ul who a e eady o discussion, open o c i icism and, Ideological and cul u al alues in mode n ussian poli ical discou se 113 ISSN 1132-0265 Philologia Hispalensis 26/1-2 (2012) 107-127 he e o e, close o people. In o he wo ds, he powe ul demons a e ha hey a e open o communica e wi h he public and unde line he e icacy o demo- c a ic p inciples, ele an o all membe s o socie y. Democ acy p esupposes a la hie a chy, a ho izon al powe s uc u e wi h sho e powe dis ance as compa ed o a e ical hie a chy. An appeal o demo- c a ic alues is an adequa e li mus es o dis inguish be ween an au ho i a ian and democ a ic s a e. Russia’s expe ience wi h democ acy and ma ke economy has unde gone a lo o changes, highs and lows and sudden s ops. The ad en o M. Go bache o powe ma ks he beginning o glasnos and pe es oika. Since he new Rus- sia began i s e o m p ocess, he e ha e been wo impo an aspec s o de elop- men , including building he ounda ions o democ acy h ough a new poli y o ob aining a ci il socie y, and ans o ming he economy. B. Yel sin ushe ed in he coun y a p ocess o u he democ a iza ion as en isioned by him. Pu in as Yel sin’s successo b ough solid economic g ow h and, as some esea che s see i , a ollback o democ a ic igh s. Ne e heless, democ acy was i mly ins illed in he Russian socie y as a guiding line o u he de elopmen o he coun y. Acco ding o he de ini ion p o ided by he Me iam-Webs e Dic iona y, he concep o democ acy implies: 1. a go e nmen by he people; especially: ule o he majo i y; b a go e nmen in which he sup eme powe is es ed in he people and exe cised by hem di- ec ly o indi ec ly h ough a sys em o ep esen a ion usually in ol ing pe i- odically held ee elec ions (The Me iam-Webs e Dic iona y 1995). In he book “The I ony o Democ acy” by Thomas R. Dye and L. Ha mon Ziegle a b oad de ini ion o democ acy includes he ollowing poin s: pa icipa ion by he mass o people in he decisions ha shape hei li es; go - e nmen by majo i y ule, wi h ecogni ion o he igh s o mino i ies; eedom o speech, p ess, and assembly; eedom o o m opposi ion poli ical pa ies and o un o o ice; commi men o indi idual digni y and o equal oppo u- ni ies o people o de elop hei ull po en ial (Dye, Ha mon 2008). The de ini ion gi en by he Dic iona y o he Russian Language ende s he ideas simila o he ones quo ed abo e (Словарь русского языка 1999). I may be in e ed om he de ini ions ha key democ a ic alues p esuppose low powe dis ance be ween he powe ul and he people. Le us u n now o he ex s o P esiden ial Add ess o he Fede al Assembly o he Russian Fede a ion. Analysis o hese ex s can gi e us a clue o he so- lu ion o he issue and show how o en Russian leade s eso o linguis ic em- bodimen o democ a ic alues in hei speeches, aimed a p opaga ing a new poli y and es ablishing a close appo wi h he audience. Wha a linguis ic and 114 Ta iana Dub o skaya & Ta iana Kha lamo a ISSN 1132-0265 Philologia Hispalensis 26/1-2 (2012) 107-127 analy ic accoun can achie e is a de ailed desc ip ion o he in e ac ion be ween he powe ul and he public wi h he ocus on cul u al and ideological alues. I can also show how e bal, poli ical and cul u al componen s a e combined. As a en a i e s ep, we migh suppose ha he shi in he Russian poli ical sys em om au ho i a ianism o democ acy is e lec ed in he choice o lexical uni s exp essing alues o he democ a ic s a e. Le us ake a close look a he use o he wo ds democ a ic/democ acy, independen /independence, equal/equali y, ee/ eedom, esponsible/ esponsibili y, anspa en / anspa ency, which indica e basic e e ence poin s o a democ a ic socie y. The i s ou wo ds a e embed- ded in he de ini ion o democ acy i sel , while esponsibili y p esupposes ha he powe ul should epo o he people ying o build up a anspa en socie y. The quan i a i e analysis o he da a gi en shows ha e e ence o democ a ic alues is essen ial o he add esses o B. Yel sin, who widely uses he wo ds de- moc acy/democ a ic, independen /independence, ee/ eedom, esponsible/ esponsi- bili y. As i is seen om he able, B. Yel sin eso s o democ a ic alues a he beginning and he e y end o his enu e mainly ocusing on democ acy, ee- dom and esponsibili y. The 90-s was he pe iod when new ideological iews we e ins illed in o he minds o people. The e bal componen is o emos in he p ocess o changing he mindse o people. Repe i ion o he e e ence poin s o a democ a ic soci- e y shapes a new a i ude owa ds he new poli y o he coun y. I is also wo h men ioning ha he equency o usage o he se o hese wo ds eached i s peak in 1994-1996, while a no iceable descen is obse ed in 1997-1998 (excep o he wo ds esponsibili y/ esponsible). Du ing he las yea o Yel sin’s eign, he e is a new wa e o exploi ing key wo ds o democ acy. The ex wo ks by sys ema ically epea ing democ acy/democ a ic, ee/ eedom, espon- sible/ esponsibili y, anspa en / anspa ency. The Add ess o 1999 is a kind o a a ewell message o he i s P esiden o Russia o he u u e gene a ion o pol- i icians whose aim should be o suppo and de elop he inculca ed democ a ic p inciples. The i s add esses by V. Pu in shi he ocus o he economic g ow h and social sphe e, s eng h and uni y o he coun y, while democ a ic alues ecede in o he backg ound: Ou s a egic ask o e he las yea was o s eng hen he s a e in he o m o i s ins i u ions and all he le els o powe . I was clea ha wi hou esol - ing his key issue we would no achie e success ei he in he economy o in he social sphe e. Ideological and cul u al alues in mode n ussian poli ical discou se 115 ISSN 1132-0265 Philologia Hispalensis 26/1-2 (2012) 107-127 able 1. Re e ence o democ a ic alues by Russian leade s p esiden ial add ess o he ede al coun- cil (numbe o wo ds) democ a ic/ democ acy independen / independence equali y/ equal ee/ eedom Responsible/ esponsibili y anspa en / anspa ency Yel sin, 1994 (15755) 42 14 1 38 20 7 Yel sin, 1995 (20642) 34 15 4 35 14 15 Yel sin, 1996 (12634) 33 10 3 42 18 5 Yel sin, 1997 (13611) 3 4 1 10 30 7 Yel sin, 1998 (14799) 6 8 5 10 25 9 Yel sin, 1999 (20920) 20 7 5 29 37 12 Pu in, 2000 (3876) 9 2 3 7 10 2 Pu in, 2001 (5921) 1 1 1 6 4 5 Pu in, 2002 (5686) 1 2 - 5 4 2 Pu in, 2003 (6058) 4 1 2 7 6 5 Pu in, 2004 (5208) 8 2 2 9 5 4 Pu in, 2005 (5212) 23 6 4 12 4 4 Pu in, 2006 (6533) 2 1 1 2 5 2 Pu in, 2007 (8036) 8 - 1 3 8 4 Med ede , 2008 (8492) 26 5 2 29 14 4 Med ede , 2009 (9826) 8 1 4 10 - 10 122 Ta iana Dub o skaya & Ta iana Kha lamo a ISSN 1132-0265 Philologia Hispalensis 26/1-2 (2012) 107-127 Which o he alues do he mode n leade s p each: wes e n indi idualism, Rus- sian sobo nos whe e e e y indi idual is a aluable pa o a communi y, o collec i ism wi h a g oup as a p ima y en i y? To wha ex en , i any, a e cul- u al alues as unconscious en i ies ans o med in o ideologies as conscious di ec i es? To answe hese ques ions, we shall ‘ il e ’ ou linguis ic exp essions ha se up he ecu ing discou se e e en s. Ou assump ion is ha in he indi idualis ic cul u e discou se is pene a ed by he ‘I-line’ as he p onoun I is a means o s uc u ing pe sonal iden i y: 1 pe s. sg. p onoun is used o exp ess one’s poin o iew, o desc ibe pe sonal expe i- ence and a i ude owa ds di e en issues. The collec i is cul u e p esupposes minimal use o pe sonal iden i y ma ke s and ocuses on la ge en i ies, such as socie y, people, na ion, e c. Le us p oceed on his hypo he ical assump ion. In able 4 we p esen he esul s o quan i a i e analysis o a ious lexical nomina- ions used o e e o di e en membe s and g oups o he socie y. As we can see in able 4, Russian leade s o en eso o using he p onoun I, bu he p onoun we p edomina es in he analysed discou se. The ex wo ks by s eadily epea ing he p onouns we/ou . Bo h Pu in and Med ede e e mainly o he coun y, s a e, people, ci izens, whe eas de ini e g oups (s uden s, young people, se icemen, eache s, e c.) a e ep esen ed by isola ed ins ances. Wha is no ewo hy abou Med ede ’s ex s is no only ecu ence o e e - ences o di e en agen s, bu also he ex en o which hese agen s a e o e ly speci ied. The e is a conside able inc ease in he use o he p onoun I and e e - ences o an indi idual, which can be e idence o a shi owa ds a mo e indi id- ualized app oach in add essing he public and o pu suing a mo e libe al policy: The cul o he s a e and he illuso y wisdom o he adminis a i e appa a us ha e p e ailed in Russia o e many cen u ies. Indi iduals wi h hei igh s and eedoms, pe sonal in e es s and p oblems ha e been seen as a bes a means and a wo s an obs acle o s eng hening he s a e’s migh . This iew endu ed h oughou many cen u ies. <…> This is why he adop ion in 1993 o a Cons i u ion p oclaiming he in- di idual, hei li e, igh s and p ope y as he highes alue was an unp ece- den ed e en in Russia’s his o y, and we should hank all hose who ook pa in d a ing and adop ing his documen . (Med ede , 2008); Th ough ou join e o s, no only will ou li ing s anda ds show eal im- p o emen bu we ou sel es will change oo. We need o o e come he wide- sp ead iew ha esponsibili y o so ing ou all p oblems lies wi h he s a e o wi h whoe e else, bu no wi h each o us pe sonally. Pe sonal success, en- cou agemen o ini ia i e, a be e quali y o public discussion, and ze o ole - ance o co up ion should become pa o ou na ional cul u e, an in insic pa o who we a e. (Med ede , 2009). Ideological and cul u al alues in mode n ussian poli ical discou se 123 ISSN 1132-0265 Philologia Hispalensis 26/1-2 (2012) 107-127 able 4. Linguis ic means o add essing o di e en membe s o socie y pu in, 2002 (5686) pu in, 2004 (5208) pu in, 2006 (6533) med ede , 2008 (8492) med ede , 2009 (9826) i/my 12 5 11 30 54 We/ou 104 98 142 159 219 You/you 9 1 19 9 4 coun y s a e 16 8 26 16 28 15 25 24 42 18 Russia 24 32 33 12 40 people popu- la ion na ion ci izens 13 10 - 24 32 6 1 23 13 1 - 9 36 3 6 30 37 8 2 17 socie y 3 11 6 23 17 amily 1 6 16 3 5 You h/ young - 4 10 2 10 child en 2 2 8 3 10 s uden s 2 1 - - - e e yone/ e e y pe son 1 - 4 7 - - 10 15 6 5 The example gi en abo e p o ides a di ec answe o he ques ion on wha Russia is seeking o — i is sobo nos , whe e e e y pe son is an insepa able and meaning ul pa o a communi y. Ne e heless, he coun y’s in e es s a e o u mos impo ance, which also cons i u es a ypical cha ac e is ic o he gen e o P esiden ial Add ess: Second, we need o wo k ha d o p o ec he uniqueness o ou coun y’s cul- u e in all i s di e si y, o help p ese e he ich e hnic adi ions o Rus- sia’s peoples, and a he same ime de elop and imp o e Russian language 124 Ta iana Dub o skaya & Ta iana Kha lamo a ISSN 1132-0265 Philologia Hispalensis 26/1-2 (2012) 107-127 p og ammes, which se e as he basis o communica ion and uni y in ou coun y (Med ede , 2009). Gi en his e idence, i can be seen ha mode n p esiden ial discou se elies on adi ional Russian alues: appeals o communal spi i help he powe ul o emphasize he impo ance o he coun y’s in e es . Howe e , along wi h p op- aga ing collec i e pu poses, he alue o an indi idual is being s essed, which can be in e p e ed as an a emp o inculca e new ideologies in he socie y a e a long pe iod o So ie collec i ism. 5. conclusIon The analysis o poli ical discou se ca ied ou in he p esen pape has sup- po ed ou assump ion ha poli ical ideologies can be based upon adi ional cul u al alues, and oge he wi h language hese en i ies o m a ipa i e uni y. Ho s ede’s heo y o cul u al dimensions appea s o be an e icien ame- wo k o cha ac e izing cul u al and ideological space o he mode n Russia. Focusing a en ion on wo p incipal dimensions ha a e essen ial o unde - s anding powe ela ions (Powe Dis ance, Indi idualism s. Collec i ism), we ha e singled ou a numbe o p incipal ideologically meaning ul concep s in speeches o Russian p esiden s, which embody a new poli y and alues in o- duced in he socie y. The e idence seems o be s ong ha he e is a gap be ween newly inculca ed democ a ic p inciples and adi ionally high powe dis ance. In ou opinion, Ho s ede’s linea scale “Indi idualism s. Collec i ism” has ce ain limi a ions and canno accommoda e he Russian adi ional concep o ‘sobo nos ’ which uni es p opaga ing communal in e es s and, simul aneously, he alue o an indi idual. Bo h elemen s o sobo nos can be disco e ed in Russian p esiden ial discou se, which p o es once again ha he powe ul eso o adi ional cul u al alues when a emp ing a in oducing ce ain ideologies. Re eRences A dich ili, A., Kuchinke, K.P. (2002). “Leade ship s yles and cul u al alues among manage s and subo dina es: a compa a i e s udy o ou coun ies o he o me So- ie Union, Ge many, and he US”. HRdI 5: 1, 99-117. Blommae , J. (2005). discou se: A c i ical In oduc ion (Key opics in sociolinguis ics). Camb idge Uni e si y P ess. —, (2006). Language ideology. encyclopedia o language and linguis ics. Else ie . 510-522. Dye, T.R., Zeigle , H. (2008). The I ony o Democ acy: An Uncommon In oduc ion o Ame ican Poli ics. Wadswo h Publishing. Fai clough, N. (2004). Analysing discou se: ex ual Analysis o social Resea ch. Lon- don, New Yo k: Rou ledge. Ideological and cul u al alues in mode n ussian poli ical discou se 125 ISSN 1132-0265 Philologia Hispalensis 26/1-2 (2012) 107-127 Gee, J.P. (1999). An In oduc ion o discou se Analysis: Theo y and me hod. London: Rou ledge. Ho s ede, G. Dimensions o na ional cul u es. www.gee ho s ede.nl/cul u e/dimen- sions-o -na ional-cul u es.aspx —, (2001). Cul u e’s Consequences: compa ing alues, beha io s, ins i u ions, and o - ganiza ions ac oss na ions (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publica ions. Hsu, F.L.K. (1985). The sel in c oss-cul u al pe spec i e. In An hony J. Ma sella, Geo ge DeVos, and F ancis L.K. Hsu (eds), cul u e and sel : Asian and wes e n pe - spec i es, New Yo k: Ta is ock Publica ions. Ki aigo odskaya, M.V., Rozano a, N.N. (1998). Con empo a y Poli ical Commu- nica ion: T ends o De elopmen . dialoganalyse I. Re e a e de 6. A bei s agung P ag 1996. Tuebingen, Max Niemeye Ve lag. 245-251. The me iam-webs e dic iona y (1995). Me iam-Webs e . Richmond, Y. (1992). F om Nye o Da. Unde s anding he Russians. In e cul u al P ess. Scollon, R., Scollon, S.W. (2005). In e cul u al communica ion: A discou se App oach. Ox o d: Blackwell. ВЕЖБИЦКАЯ А. (1997). Язык. Культура. Познание. М.: Русские словари. ВОЛОШИН М. (1990). Россия распятая. Юность 10, 24-31. ГАЧЕВ Г.Д. (1998). Национальные образы мира. М.: Издательский центр «Академия». КАСЬЯНОВА К. (1994). О русском национальном характере. М. МЕДИНСКИЙ В.Р. (2009). О русском воровстве, особом пути и долготерпении. М.: ОЛМА Медиа Групп. МЯЛО К.Г. (1996). О русском идеале. Евразия 1(4), 77-85. СИКЕВИЧ З.В. (1996). Национальное самосознание русских. (Социологический очерк). М.: Механик. Словарь русского языка (1999): В 4-х т. / РАН, Ин-т лингвистич. исследований. — 4-е изд., стер. М.: Рус. яз.; Полиграфресурсы. da a P esiden ial Add ess o he Fede al Assembly o he Russian Fede a ion (1994). h p:// www.in el os. u/2007/02/04/poslanija_p eziden a_ ossii_bo isa_elcina_ ede al- nomu_sob aniju_ _1994_god.h ml P esiden ial Add ess o he Fede al Assembly o he Russian Fede a ion (1995). h p:// www.in el os. u/2007/02/05/poslanie_p eziden a_ osii_bo isa_elcina_ ede al- nomu_sob aniju_ _o_dejjs ennos i_gosuda s ennojj_ las i_ _ ossii_1995_god. h ml P esiden ial Add ess o he Fede al Assembly o he Russian Fede a ion (1996). h p://www.in el os. u/2007/02/05/poslanie_p eziden a_ osii_bo isa_elcina_ ede al- nomu_sob aniju_ _ ossija_za_ko o uju_my_ _o e e_1996_god.h ml P esiden ial Add ess o he Fede al Assembly o he Russian Fede a ion (1997). 126 Ta iana Dub o skaya & Ta iana Kha lamo a ISSN 1132-0265 Philologia Hispalensis 26/1-2 (2012) 107-127 h p://www.in el os. u/2007/02/05/poslanie_p eziden a_ osii_bo isa_elcina_ ede al- nomu_sob aniju_ _po jadok_ o_ las i__po jadok_ _s ane_1997_god.h ml P esiden ial Add ess o he Fede al Assembly o he Russian Fede a ion (1998). h p://www.in el os. u/2007/02/05/poslanie_p eziden a_ osii_bo isa_elcina_ ede al- nomu_sob aniju_ _obshhimi_silami__k_podemu_ ossii_1998_god.h ml P esiden ial Add ess o he Fede al Assembly o he Russian Fede a ion (1999). h p://www.in el os. u/2007/02/05/poslanie_p eziden a_ osii_bo isa_elcina_ ede al- nomu_sob aniju_ _ ossija_na_ ubezhe_jepokh_1999_god.h ml P esiden ial Add ess o he Fede al Assembly o he Russian Fede a ion (2000). h p://www.in el os. u/2007/01/17/poslanie_p eziden a_ ossii_ ladimi a_pu ina_ ed- e alnomu_sob aniju_ _2000_god.h ml P esiden ial Add ess o he Fede al Assembly o he Russian Fede a ion (2001). h p://www.in el os. u/2007/01/17/poslanie_p eziden a_ ossii_ ladimi a_pu ina_ ed- e alnomu_sob aniju_ _2001_god.h ml P esiden ial Add ess o he Fede al Assembly o he Russian Fede a ion (2002). h p://www.in el os. u/2007/02/05/poslanie_p eziden a_ ossii_ ladimi a_pu ina_ ed- e alnomu_sob aniju_ _2002_god.h ml P esiden ial Add ess o he Fede al Assembly o he Russian Fede a ion (2003). h p://www.in el os. u/2007/02/05/poslanie_p eziden a_ ossii_ ladimi a_pu ina_ ed- e alnomu_sob aniju_ _2003_god.h ml P esiden ial Add ess o he Fede al Assembly o he Russian Fede a ion (2004). h p://www.in el os. u/2007/02/05/poslanie_p eziden a_ ossii_ ladimi a_pu ina_ ed- e alnomu_sob aniju_ _2004_god.h ml P esiden ial Add ess o he Fede al Assembly o he Russian Fede a ion (2005). h p://www.in el os. u/2007/02/05/poslanie_p eziden a_ ossii_ ladimi a_pu ina_ ed- e alnomu_sob aniju_ _2005_god.h ml P esiden ial Add ess o he Fede al Assembly o he Russian Fede a ion (2006). h p://www.in el os. u/2007/02/05/poslanie_p eziden a_ ossii_ ladimi a_pu ina_ ed- e alnomu_sob aniju_ _2006_god.h ml P esiden ial Add ess o he Fede al Assembly o he Russian Fede a ion (2007). h p://www.in el os. u/2007/02/05/poslanie_p eziden a_ ossii_ ladimi a_pu ina_ ed- e alnomu_sob aniju_ _2007_god.h ml P esiden ial Add ess o he Fede al Assembly o he Russian Fede a ion (2008). h p://www.k emlin. u/ ansc ip s/1968 P esiden ial Add ess o he Fede al Assembly o he Russian Fede a ion (2009). h p://www.k emlin. u/ ansc ip s/5979 Videoblog o P esiden o Russia D. Med ede (2009). h p://blog.k emlin. u/ acKnoWledgemen s We a e indeb ed o D . Isabel Iñigo-Mo a who in i ed us o pa icipa e in he olume and p o ided necessa y suppo du ing he p ocess o p epa ing he pape . Ideological and cul u al alues in mode n ussian poli ical discou se 127 ISSN 1132-0265 Philologia Hispalensis 26/1-2 (2012) 107-127 Many hanks also go o P o . Jim Bu e ield who ook he ouble o become ou olun ee ing edi o and whose commen s on he con en s and help as o he English language use a e mos app ecia ed. We a e, o cou se, esponsible o any su i ing d awbacks.