Modus of negative truth value in English political discourse

The relevance of the present study is determined by its inclusion in the scholarly inquiry into the interpretive function of language through modus categories as formats of knowledge representation. The article establishes the modus status of the category of negative truth value as a means of secondary interpretation of knowledge in the language. It reveals the conceptual basis of the modus category under study as the interaction of the features “discrepancy between the content of a judgment and reality” and “negative communicative reaction of refutation.” The paper describes the structure, content, and interpretive potential of the modus of negative truth value. The means of expressing modal meanings of denying the truth of the content of a politician's primary discourse are systematized. The variability of the syntactic position of the modus of negative truth value is analyzed. The study highlights the interaction of truth assessment and ethical evaluation in the content of the modus of negative truth value. It also examines the pragmatic potential of the modus of negative truth value in the discursive implementation of political power

1. Arendt H. (2022). Lying in politics: Reflections on the Pentagon Papers. Political Conceptology. (2): 183-203. (In Russ.).

2. Arutyunova N. D. (1988). Types of linguistic meanings: Evaluation, event, fact. Moscow: Science, 1988. 341 p. (In Russ.).

3. Arutyunova N. D. (1999). Language and the human world. 2nd ed. Moscow: Languages of Russian Culture, 1999. 896 p. (In Russ.).

4. Bakhtin M. M. (1997). Collected works. Vol. 5. Works of the 1940s - early 1960s. Moscow: Russian Dictionaries, 1997. 731 p. (In Russ.).

5. Baykova A. V., Bukharov V. M. (2024). Linguistic characteristics of false statements (based on the material of American political discourse). Philological Sciences. Issues of Theory and Practice. 17(7): 2279-2285. (In Russ.).

6. Boldyrev N. N. (2019). Language and the system of knowledge. Cognitive theory of language. 2nd ed. Moscow: YaSK Publishing House, 2019. 480 p. (In Russ.).

7. Bouvot K. (2019). The role of lying in politics. Ethics, Politics & Society. (2): 177-203.

8. Chabannaya A. G. (2024). “New sincerity” as an instrument of speech manipulation in Joe Biden's political speeches. Political Linguistics. 1(103): 106-114. (In Russ.).

9. Fairclough N. (2015). Language and power. London; New York: Routledge, 2015. 264 p.

10. Gosteva Zh. E. (2010). Truth and politics in the light of political philology: Toward formulating the problem. Bulletin of Pomor University. Series: Humanities and Social Sciences. (4): 66-69. (In Russ.).

11. Issers O. S. (2020). Facets of the “new sincerity” in contemporary political communication. Bulletin of Novosibirsk State University. Series: History and Philology. 19(6): 216-227. DOI 10.25205/1818-7919-2020-19-6-216-227 (In Russ.).

12. KSKT - Brief dictionary of cognitive terms / E. S. Kubryakova, V. Z. Demyankov, Yu. G. Pankrats, L. G. Luzina; E. S. Kubryakova (ed.). Moscow: Moscow State University Press, 1996. 245 p. (In Russ.).

13. Lyons J. (1995). Linguistic semantics: An introduction. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1995. 376 p.

14. Paducheva E. V. (1996). Semantic studies. Moscow: Languages of Russian Culture, 1996. 464 p. (In Russ.).

15. Plakhotnaya Yu. I. (2023). Pragmatics of lies in political discourse. Political Linguistics. 5(101): 123-130. (In Russ.).

16. Razlogova E. E. (2004). Logical-cognitive and stylistic aspects of the semantics of modal words. Moscow: Moscow State University Press, 2004. 199 p. (In Russ.).

17. Rogozina I. V. (2021). Representation of the “new sincerity” in American political Twitter discourse. In: Modern humanitarian scientific knowledge: Multidisciplinary approach: Proceedings of the International Scientific and Practical Conference, Barnaul, June 25, 2021. Barnaul: Polzunov Altai State Technical University, 2021. P. 10-14. (In Russ.).

18. Rogozina I. V. (2022). English-language scholarly discourse on the dual nature of political lies. Polzunov Almanac. (3): 91-94. (In Russ.).

19. Sheigal E. I. (2000). Semiotics of political discourse: Doctor of Philology dissertation. Volgograd, 2000. 431 p. (In Russ.).

20. Trunova N. V. (2025). Crooked mirror of English-language political publicistic discourse. In: Human and time in language and literature: Collected papers dedicated to the anniversary of Professor Maya G. Merkulova. Moscow: Languages of the Peoples of the World, 2025. P. 61-68. (In Russ.).

21. van Dijk T. A. (2015). Discourse and power: Representation of domination in language and communication. Moscow: URSS; LIBROKOM Book House, 2015. 352 p. (In Russ.).