Compositional-syntagmatic relations are formed in a linear perspective of the deployment of textual information. The importance of syntagmatic relations in terms of interpretation is due to the following factors. First of all, the sequence of presentation of compositional blocks is important from the point of view of text perception and thus fulfills here by performs the pragmatic function of controlling comprehension. In addition, as is known from linguistics of the text, in the so-called strong positions of the beginning and the end of the text the information has the greatest influence power, and consequently, due to the use of strong.
Positions it is possible compositional strengthening or weakening of those components of information, which seem to the sender to be the most significant. This implies that pragmatically pragmatically determined “distribution” of communicative load in the linear sequence of text reflects this or that arrangement of accents on various “fragments” of the picture of events, setting a certain direction for the interpretation of this picture by the reader.
As is known, in the news discourse in the strong textual position are put forward those components events that convey exactly what is new, i.e. the action itself (process, change of situation), occurred in objective reality and signifying for the recipient the modification of this or that this or that fragment of the actual picture of the world. Then in the syntagmatic sequence of the text “expected” details, background, context, etc., associated with the news event. This linear sequence is known in journalistic theory and practice as the principle of of the inverted pyramid –
“All the most valuable and important information is communicated at the beginning of the text, As the text unfolds, the information load weakens.”
Consequently, the co position-syntagmatic relations of the inverted pyramid type can be considered an interpretatively unmarked variant – the standard of an objectively neutral news message. Conversely, the placement in the strong position of other thanthe main fact, semantic components leads to the strengthening of the interpretative “component of the message, which makes such a sequence interpretatively marked.
The most common technique of such a transformation is to put information in the lead, or (in its absence) at the beginning of the text. The most common technique of such transformation is to put information that is not, strictly speaking, the main news fact. Thus, different types of commentary can be placed in a strong position at the beginning of the text. Commentary, for example, in the form of a generalizing judgment:
“” Took the bank “.
[Attacks on money collectors happen every week. They just caught the ‘werewolf’ Mr. Nobody, who wrested $250 million from his colleagues,] as in Nebraska, 2.5 million “in Nebraska, the prey of the armed bandits was $2.5 million. The accentuation of the frequency of the reported type of event in the first sentence, which constitutes with the the first part of the following sentence as a “backstory” compositional unit, creates an explicit evaluative background to the main event, the report of which occupies only a third of the entire text. Variants of interpretation may be very different, but the direction, the semantic.
The context is quite obvious: rampant crime, its intensity (attacks… every Every week; just caught …, how …), the large size of the damage (250 million dollars., 2.5 million dollars.), criminalization of law enforcement (“werewolf”). From the same category of “non-core fact” is the filling in of the strong opening position of the text in the the following message:
“‘Iranian ayatollahs can sleep peacefully until summer. [Iran can safely continue its nuclear program until at least July, until which time Iran can continue its nuclear program in peace until at least July, before which time UN sanctions will not be imposed.] This is the conclusion U.S. analysts drew from the words of The day before, during talks with US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin said.
U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who visited Moscow on Thursday and Friday. “Sanctions Russia’s sanctions against Iran are possible, provided they do not have counterproductive consequences,” Deputy Chief of Staff Yuri Ushakov said immediately after Putin and Clinton’s conversation, which ended late Friday night.”
The first sentence is essentially a conclusion, a hypothetical (in)consequence, following from the main fact and repeating the content of the headline in expanded form.
It should be noted, however, that the conclusion is not drawn by the author of the text, but by American analysts based on the words of the Russian Prime Minister. Nevertheless, this does not reduce its interpretative load, but rather strengthens it, due to the credibility of the “source”.
The considered ways of varying the compositional-syntagmatic sequence of the text can be designated as a shift of compositional blocks.
