Content: Introduction The Impact of lingua-cultural rhetorical questions on dialogues general-rhetorical questions 2 Examples of rhetorical questions 15 Benefit

2. General-rhetorical questions
Pragmatic function is realized with the help of disagreement marker No and its semantic equivalents. In some dialogues disagreement is expressed via negative answer to a positive yes/no question: “Or is it that you’re afraid we’ll steal уour secrets?” “What secrets can a beginning artist have?”. Meaning of the RQR can be expressed in the following sentence: A beginning artist cannot have any secrets. Or as in the following example: “You could stab me in the back with it.” “Why should I stab you in the back?”. Indirect statement of this positive RQR will be: There’s no reason why I should stab you in the back. It shows disagreement with the previous statement. Let’s consider the following example: “I’ll pay the difference for you.” “How could I let a lady pay for me?”. The implied statement looks like: I cannot let a lady pay for me, which opposes the initial statement and expresses speaker’s disagreement with his interlocutor. Usually reactions which are expressed through RQR lose their interrogative nature for the sake of emotionality. RQR which disagrees with the initial statement (containing grammatical negation) might contain lexical negation: “I don’t know.” “Oh, do you think you can fool me?”. In the next example RQR expresses disagreement (refusal) in a dialogue, in which the initial statement contains grammatical negation.
Pragmatic peculiarities of rhetorical questions responses in dialogues No 1 (030) 2012 г. 121“Promise mе, dear, you won’t believe I made you an excuse.” “What else can I believe?”. The indirect statement can be expressed by the sentence: There’s nothing else I can believe. Thus RQR which is does not contain negation may be used to express disagreement. “He finishes today. I thought we might take him back with us and give him a spot of lunch. He’s quite a gentleman”. “Is that a sufficient reason to ask him to lunch?” RQ being formally an interrogative sentence softens the implied animosity and provides the necessary but actually seeming politeness. She laughed and stood up scornfully. “The whole thing is too ridiculous. “And you think that I – I did it? What utter nonsense! Why on earth should I want to kill Linnet Doyle?I don’t even know her!”.In the next example the initial statements contains an offer to take a particular action. In dialogues of this type disagreement is expressed as a refusal to do something: “I’d like yon to handle the picture while I’m gone.” “What do I know about making a training film?” .All above described ambiguity can only be observed if we deal with indirect speech acts, because only in this case can we observe the directindirect meaning opposition which not only softens the meaning of the original utterance or creates additional hidden meanings. The next dialogue exemplifies how the offered services are rejected: “What about clothes? Shall I ring up Badger to bring some along?” Frankie looked doubtful. “I don't want to insult your clothes, Bobby, or throw your poverty into your teeth or anything like that. But will they carry conviction?” .The implied idea is the following – They will not carry conviction. In those dialogues which contain question(s) in the initial statement, disagreement is very often expressed by a RQR which contains grammatical negation: “Oh, Constance? You are not going to divorce him?” “How can she go on living with a man for whom she has no respect?”.The initial statement is expressed by a negative yes/no question which contains grammatical negation not. The answer expressed by RQR contains lexical grammatical negation (no) and implies a statement which can be presented as a sentence with double negation: She cannot go on living with a man for whom she has no respect. In some dialogues disagreement expressed by RQR is a refusal against a negative statement expressed in the initial sentence: “But there is no problem...” “Isn’t there?” He was looking down now at the numbers. . In this case RQR is an elliptical question with grammatical negation not and it can be presented in the form o a full sentence Isn’t there a problem? Rhetorical nature is affirmed by the sentence which follows RQR – the speaker does not agree with his interlocutor’s opinion, because he is well informed about the subject of the conversation. The implied idea can be expressed in the sentence: There is (a problem). In the framework of the present work we are not giving statistic analysis of the RQR being used to express agreement/disagreement, but it should be mentioned that RQR are mostly used to express a negative rather than a positive answer. We believe it happens due to the fact that people use rhetorical questions mostly as a means of avoiding the direct answer to the question/statement because it may seem inadequate or inappropriate to them Good breeding, manners and social norms do not allow a person to express his/her feelings directly with the help of a highly emotional exclamatory sentence. It should be noted that emotional potential of rhetorical questions is not only limited to negative emotions. They very often express irony, surprise, jocularity and so on.1.3. RQR as a means of emotional expressiveness A wide range of emotional reactions can be expressed with the help of RQR: agreement, disagreement, doubt, support, hesitation. RQR has a great potential to express such emotions as anger, mistrust, surprise, interest, fear, annoyance, reproach, offence etc. For example: Irony “He finishes today. I thought we might take him back with us and give him a spot of lunch. He’s quite a gentleman”. “Is that a sufficient reason to ask him to lunch?” Surprise “And how will dear Irene like living in the country?” “Of course she’ll like it; why shouldn’t she?” Mrs. Small grew nervous. Disdain “I’ll go with uncle Swithin.” “Uncle Swithin! What does he matter? You can throw him over!” “I am not in the habit of throwing people over!” Indignation “Only watercolours; I can’t say I believe in my work”. “Don’t believe in it? Then how can you do it?Work’s no use unless you believe in it!” Annoyance “I couldn’t get home last evening,” she said. “Ah, Carrie,” he answered, “What’s the use saying that? I don’t care. You needn’t tell me that, though.” Jocularity “You foolish boy, why have you been trying to make me miserable?” His face lit up at her words and his eyes flashed. “Isabel, you don’t mean to say you’ll wait for me?” “Don’t you think you’re worth it?” The framework of this work allowed to describe only some basic structural and pragmatic characteristics of RQR. As it was mentioned above the main function of any RQ is to attract attention, to produce a strong impression, to raise the emotional level. The answer is implied and helps involve the reader (listener) into the conversation, it may also imply estimation. The aims of the speaker showing his opinion towards the situation may be diverse. RQR might acquire different roles which always vary according to the given situation, theme of the dialogue, emotional background of the members of the conversation, their knowledge, communicative intentions and aims.
As a result it is proved, that crosscultural communication is based on interpretation of crosscultural symbols as one of the most important motivate factors of communication. It should be emphasized that the lingual personality is the main component of communicative process. It is identified, that individual parameters of lingual personality form the individual lingual world view which reflects objectively the world perception by people having different cultures. The role of lingual personality parameters of emigrant at the successful crosscultural communication is identified. Methodology of linguoculturological researches is based on conceptology, hermeneutics, and general philology. The linguoculturological researches is to discover as language paradigm of culturological discourse, as basic pragmatic functions of linguoculturological units in any communicative situations. We use the linguocultural analysis as the base method of crosscultural communication researches. It is evident, that crosscultural communication is based on crosscultural interpretation. According to О.А. Leontovich there are some factors of national and cultural language specificity of crosscultural communication, such as: Representation of cultural traditions of the people: permits, prohibitions, stereotypical acts and etiquette characteristics of communicative universal facts. Representation of social situation and social functions of communication. Representation of local social situation in the peculiarities of the course of mental processes and various activities, such as the psycholinguistic base of speech activity, and the paralinguistic phenomena. 4. Determination of language specifics of community and research the symbols as cultural symbols Motivation of cultural symbol represents the correlation between the concrete and abstract elements of symbolic content. Such correlation distinguishes the symbol and the sign, because the sign illustrates the connection between the signified and the signifier. A sign becomes a symbol as the whole spectrum of secondary conventional values of interpretation. The symbol has the properties of the sign, although the symbol does not imply a direct reference to the denotation.
Correlation between the sign and symbol has an important role in the specificity of crosscultural discourse consisting of different linguistic personalities and the conditions of communication. Lingual personality of emigrant as an object of linguistic researches generalizes culturallinguistic and communicativeactivity values, knowledge, attitudes and behaviors. The lingual personality consists of the following components: 1) value component has a system of values, and life meanings. It is the content of education. The value component allows a person to form an initial and deep view of the world, forms the linguistic world view, the hierarchy of spiritual representations that form the base of a national character and realize in the process of linguistic dialogue; 2) culturological component contributes cultural studies, such as the rules of speech and nonverbal behavior; 3) personality component characterizes individual and deepest things in each person [5, Р. 119]. Individual parameters of lingual personality form he complex combination of psychophysiological, social, nationalcultural and linguistic peoples` differences. It leads to the fact that at the level of crosscultural communication the differences between linguistic personalities reach a certain critical volume that can have both positive and negative impact on the success in the crosscultural communication. English and Russian cultures had some similar things in the past, such as mythoarchetypal beginning. English culture is the unity of many tribes’ cultures such as Brits, Scots, Celts, and AngloSaxons, then Norman culture. But Russian culture is the unity of culture of pagan Slavic, Christian Byzantine, and Western European.
Different cultural identity is the base of crosscommutation shock. The study of the crosscultural communication principles allows identifying the causes of communicative shock. Such identification is the way of overcoming the results of communicative shock. The process of crosscultural peoples interaction bases on studying the particular of communication using complex approaches, qualitative changes in the choice of research methods of lingual personality as the subject of successful crosscultural communication. Any lingual personality has an “evaluation scale”. For example, lingual personality of emigrant uses this “evaluation scale” to represent the surrounding world as the linguocultural model. This model is a structural property and powerful factor of personality selfdetermination, because a representative of any particular culture has a certain cultural fund, that is, a set of knowledge that provides a certain outlook in the field of national and world culture. The cultural fund is basic units included in any national culture. The person’s belonging to a particular culture determines his mentality as the basis of another culture perception usually by reading literature and crosscultural communication. In crosscultural communication the lingual world view is very important thing as a guide in the communicative process between the lingual personality of emigrant and the society. The lingual world view is the basis of personal selfidentification and largely depends on linguocultural specificity of society. It is the format of lingual semantics code. Individual lingual world view can be an actual or a relic thing. But, a relic specificity of lingual world view can be the base to form new mental structures. As a result of such new lingual world view forming we identified the difference between the archaic semantic system of language and the actual mental model that is valid for a lingual group. E.E. Brazgovskaya said about the differences of crosscultural discourse of society and “social creative text” . Crosscultural discourse has certain national sign, therefore V.V. Vorobiev says: “linguistic signs and expressions require an extralinguistic way of their representation and interpretation”, whereas lingual world view can have the form of a linguistic one. This thesis means that lingual world view can form linguistic competence, but it proves to be meaningfully more complicated. The issue of culturological relativity of lingual world view is very important. It is apparented in the variability of forms and categorization of the meanings system.
Differences of lingual world view formed under the influence of complex cognitive structures. Such influence is important for the forming as discursive models, as literary text models. Lingual and linguocultural world views are consistent with each other because of the dialectical connection of language and thought as a reflection of the world in people mind. Lingual and linguocultural world views have at the same time a number of differences due to their functional specificities. Researches of lingual world view in dynamics are carried out with the socialdynamic study of cultural interaction. The socialdynamic approach in the study of lingual world view suggests that the lingual world view is in the status of permanent development. The components of this system reflect the specificity of life and culture of social and national community which is the base of crosscultural communicative shock, because of ethnoconnotation. Ethnoconnotation has the deep level of the supposed multilayered model of cultural conceptssphere. It has a certain structure and specific parameters of ethnoconotants content. The ethnoconnotation appearance in the crosscultural communicative processes bases on the degree of correlation between form and meaning of cultural code. Lingual world view has pragmatic parameters and manifests itself in realities, which include concepts related to the life and worldview of the society that created them. So, it is evident, that crosscultural communication is based on crosscultural interpretation which bases on four factors of national and cultural language specificity having cultural symbols.
It is proved, that cultural symbol is one of the most important motivate factor of crosscultural communication having the lingual personality parameters of emigrant as the base. The lingual personality parameters consist of the following three components: value component, culturological component, personality component. The lingual personality parameters are the base of the lingual world view forming in crosscultural communication process. The lingual world view is very important thing as a guide in the communicative process between the lingual personality and the society.