The Discourse of the Russian Elite in the ERA of “Liquid” Modernity as a Problem of Ethnic, Social and Cultural Security

The purpose of this article is an analytical study of modern Russian-speaking elite discursive identity, which is a reflection of the problems of modern social and cultural security of the country. The discursive practices of elite identity in Russian discourse of the era of "liquid” modernity are observed. Addresses Current changes in behavioral discourse of elitist personality, basic discoursebased concepts, that records changes in social reality in the chronotope, are analyzed. The tense situation in Russia exacerbates socio-cultural opposition of "friend or foe" at the level of discursive practices. Modern, multicultural elitist language personality skillfully uses several ethno-linguistic and socio-cultural codes, successfully adapting to globalization and migration processes of modernity (Karabulatova, 2013, p. 794). Language game, which is clearly represented in the discourse of the elite of the Russian personality, allows the characteristic representatives to use the funds as elevated and reduced vocabulary. In the process of language use new behavioral patterns of society and culture are forming. In it N. Farkle and R. Wodak see the power of discourse (Fairclough, 1996, p. 237-240). It is obviously that the problem of discourse does not belong only to linguistics, but this very preparadigmaticity attracts the interest of researchers. The eclecticism of human society dictates various forms of communication between participants depending on social and cultural norms. In accordance with the linguistic philosophy of structuralism the language is not just a channel of information about ordinary phenomena, and the mechanism of generating and structuring the social world. This also applies to the formation of social identity and social relations, i.e. changes in discourse are a way to change the world.


Introduction 1.
Today research area called theory of discourse is one of the most rapidly developing areas of modern social sciences, and the term "discourse" has many interpretations: linguistic, semiotic, postmodern social-communicative, socio-cultural -namely this diversity of approaches to discourse causes the dialectical context of society and culture. M. Foucault in the concept of archaeology and genealogy considers discourse as a group of statements and believes that "discourse is not perfect, timeless shape... but a fragment of history [...], which imposes its own limitations and proposes its division into parts, its transformation, specific ways of temporality" (Faucault 1972:112). The study of discourse is in the focus of attention of scientists and seems to be very relevant, because in the process of analyzing the discourses revealed changes in social reality and values, that are relevant at a given time in a given location, are fixed, i.e. the chronotope of discourse are implemented. Any society is treated as an aggregate of individuals forming the different macro-social groups, depending on their gender, age, professional or social class. From the sociolinguistic point of view, each member of macrosocial group is the carrier of this or that variant of language (social dialect), which is a sign of belonging to this group.

Materials and Methods of the Study 2.
Empirical data of the study in the article was the interview texts, materials from forums and blogs on the Internet and publicistic texts of the leading Russian writers belonging to the creative elite of modern Russia. The choice of genres is explained due to the fact that in them the individual picture of the world of studied discursive elite personalities is most fully reflected. In the article the methods of discursive and conceptual analysis aimed at identifying the dominant concepts in the discourse of the modern Russian elite are used. The challenges of modern society dictate certain cultural and verbal codes, the modification of the discursive practices is taking place, thus new basic concepts are existing, and the foemer go on the periphery. Identifying of new basic concepts of each era is a topical problem of modern linguistics. Next, we will try to identify these concepts on the example of the discursive elite personality of writer Tatyana Tolstaya.
The motive for this choice was determined by several reasons: a) T. Tolstaya is a descendant of the famous noble family, so she can be referred to "the elite of the blood"; b) T. Tolstaya is representative of the meritocratic elite, as thanks to the talent she has become one of the most iconic figures of modern Russian literature; c) T. Tolstaya is the author of works in the style of postmodernism, i.e. the flow which is characteristic of the era of liquid modernity; d) T. Tolstaya belongs to the intellectual elite of Russian up-to-date society; e) T. Tolstaya is not only a famous writer, but also a famous TV presenter and popular blogger that allows to consider her as a discursive identity in signs of interdiscursivity; f) the choice of T. Tolstaya was also because of the influence of the writer on the "minds of men", and her behavioral discourse reflects the changes in the moral and other values in the Russian discourse. The chronotope of the investigated discourse of the Russian elite: Place -Russia, Moscow. Time -the early 21st century, the era of "liquid" modernity (the term of Zygmunt Bauman) (Bauman, 2008, p. 65).
In his "live" speech, in practice, T. Tolstaya widely uses another part of the spectrum of the "great and mighty Russian language", namely taboo words, enthusiastic supporter of which she is, as well as a large number of units of a computer, or rather, a network slang. We will analyze the signs of the discourse T. Tolstaya as elitist personality on the material of the genre interview and her materials in LJ ("Live journal") and Facebook, because, according to the journalist, "Every interview is a kind of confession, the person reports on is his view of things. What are the turtles is his world. That will be these same markers (the worldview of the person).
Language features are mostly become apparent in orthoepic design in language of a carrier of a particular social language, no wonder the British sociolinguistics called social dialects 'accent', i.e. accents. In the Russian linguistic science there is an old tradition of the study of connection of language, language and social phenomena: I. A. Baudouin de Courtenay (1917-1929, L. V. Shcherba (1925-1926), A. A. Akhmatova (1913-1920),E. D. Polivanov(1927-1928), F. F. Fortunatov (1890-1914.
In the late 20th century under the leadership of L. P. Krisin has been carried a great work on the study of speech of the population of the largest cities of Russia (Kriysin, 2008& Kriysin, 2010 to identify modifications of language structures in the Russian language. In this context, the study of peculiarities of pronunciation and correctness of speech devoted to the works of contemporary experts (Verbitskaya, 2003;Karabulatova, Sayfulina & Ahmetova, 2013& Karabulatova & Polivara, 2013. In recent years, due to the radical social changes in Russia (democratization, globalization, social stratification of society, openness of borders) scientists-specialists in Russian Philology closely began to investigate changes in the Russian language and to identify social factors that contributed to the manifestation of these Trends (Karabulatova, Sayfulina & Ahmetova, 2013;Karabulatova, Koyshe & Gultyaev, 2013;Yusupov & Karabulatova, 2014;Zamaletdinov et al, 2014;Karabulatova, 2013& Ryazantsev et al, 2014. However, the majority of works in this area (unlike, for example, from a huge number of researchers in Britain) cover the area of "horizontal" classification of language variants, while social stratification is one of the most important aspects of discourse studies, including analysis of both the production and consumption of the text, and social practices, in which the discourse is developing. Theoretical and methodological basis of the study is the basic ideas and principles of the world and the sociology of culture, sociology, cultural and social anthropology, linguistics and genderistics.

3.
Professor M. A. Krongauz notes numerous examples of the use of vulgar vocabulary by representatives of the intellectual and artistic elite (Krongauz, 2007, p. 112). Professor I.S. Karabulatova indicates that members of the current elite like to play with ethnocultural and socio-cultural codes (Karabulatova, 2013, p. 795). The tendency to use "Russian articles" indicates the process of "simplifing", "massing" of the society that we categoryseries as the concept of "LUMPENIZATION", it is one of the signs of the Russian elite discourse. Since elite is the vector of moods and trends that exist in a particular society, the processes occurring in the discourse of this macrosocial group allow to extrapolate the situation in the society as a whole.
Verbal signs of elitist discourse of personality of T. Tolstaya. T. Tolstaya is typical elitist language personality, if to determine the elite linguistic identity as "native speaker of Russian language who are able to demonstrate higher language ability (the ability to speak well in all situations of communication (public and informal, familiar, planned and unexpected, extreme, etc.) and having a wide field of constant and varied speech activity" (Karaulov, 2010, p. 169).
Exploring the characteristics of individual linguistic identity, V.P. Neroznak splits it into its two main types: 1) standard linguistic identity, reflecting the average literary treated normal language, and 2) non-linguistic identity that combines "upper" and "lower" culture of the language. V. P. Neroznak finds substandard language -argot, slang, jargon and offensive words and terms a sign of belonging of the language identity to language marginals (Neroznak, 1996, p. 114-116). It is interesting that in the late 20th century the scientist refered writers, masters of the art of speech to the higher culture and representatives of anti-culture to the language marginals. The era of "liquid" modernity changed elitist ideas about linguistic identity, now under the elitist language personality is understanded a person who perfectly know the language means, has the skill and ability to switch language codes (Karabulatova, 2006, p. 44).
On the one hand, according to A. Genis "Tolstaya's prose serves as the best introduction to the new Russian literature, as I keep telling the Americans, who, however, already know that, because with pleasure are reading her stories in excellent translations. Having joined post-Soviet literature with the Silver age, Tolstaya extended into the present century that we loved in the past -openwork ligature of associations, disciplined poetic syllable, branched metaphor of the narrative" (Genis, http://www.echo.msk.ru/blog/echo_rating/1268532-echo), on the other hand, codeswitching of T. Tolstaya on sub-standard, colloquial language occurs not only in the narrow circle of communication (often for elitist language personality), but also in the published interviews.
Undoubtedly, "in articles (of Tatyana Tolstaya -T. O.) dedicated to the problems of language, can be traced innovative trends in the emergence of scientific analytical text for a small amount of comic drama insets illustrating in vivid artistic forms the research observations on linguistic processes ("Hope and support. Heart sad change -1", "On the lime leg. Heart sad rumpled -2", "here and there. Heart sad change -3"); Tatyana Tolstaya, as a connoisseur of words, acts against total "corruption of language"; against "retraction of synonyms" that impoverishes and primitivise the linguistic identity; against the dominance of distortion in the Russian language for foreign expressions ("undigested clot of foreign cultures"); against "verbal bits" ("Check me out", "Cool"); against the shallowing of the dictionary, the pressure of jargons in the speech, eclectic merge of functional styles. Her "linguistic" articles, where a strictly scientific argumentation with thin, but the evil irony and witty jokes are combined, become a dangerous invectives" (Lyubeznaya, 2006, p. 183). One of highlighters of elitist worldview of the individual is attitude to the abuse, and not as to mean of strong emotional-energy impact in extreme situations, but as everyday vocabulary, the spirit, manifestation of emancipation and the lack of "hypocrisy". Russian abuse, counting more than a century, is not the object of our study. We see it only from the point of view of expanding the area of its usage, which is a sign of modification of discursive practices of modern Russian elite.
From the standpoint of synergetics "explosion" of the use of taboo language in the country occurred after a certain bifurcation point, namely, in the so-called "dashing 90". The complexity of survival somehow justified lumpenization of the population in Russia of that time. Times have changed, but the use of this abuse is not decreased, and rather increased and continues to grow, with a significant role in the promotion of the use of abuse played by the media, which, in the absence of prior censorship and in the chase of of audience, in every way applaud strong phrases from the lips of guest stars and celebrities. In its commitment to taboo vocabulary T. Tolstaya is not alone. The tendency of usage of Russian abuse by intelligency and representatives of the intellectual elite is noted by many researchers.
Female abuse women of the representatives of high society is not considered as something prediscovery, on the contrary, those who avoid the use of obscene language, "are not in trend". In post-perestroika Russia women suddenly lost those qualities which in the aggregate was defined as "Turgenev girl": educated, attractive, well-groomed women that do not produce impressions of being tortured by life, they open their mouthes and, in the words of Hans Christian Andersen, "from the mouth toads begin to fall ». It happens even in those groups where taboo language was strong. In fact, the use of taboo language in elite discourse is a sign of the disappearance of any linguistic, moral taboos, actualization of typical of the era of "liquid" contemporary concepts of cynicism and liberation from obligations. By classifying language elitist personality from the way of communication, researchers (Fischer, 1995;Kuprin, 1998;Kochetkova, 1999& Karabulatova, 2006 highlight its speech representation in the field of officially-professional communication, in which reflects skillful of codified literary language, or, in the words of P. Bourdieu,"legitimate language" (Bourdieu, 2005).
Spoken discoursive practise of elitist linguistic identity in the era of "liquid" modernity is implemented, except personal, direct communication, also through social networks. If the genre of interview proposes the disclosure of the worldview of the respondent, the informal communication in social networks represents the nature of communication, when the "carrier of elite culture not always follow regulations, and in his speech is widely presented units of substandard subsystems of language, i.e. there is a "situational variability" (A.D. Schweitzer)" (Carter, 2007, p. 5). The identification of the linguistic identity of the subject of the blog-discourse is linked to the value system of the virtual picture of the world, has characteristic signs and occurs through the implementation of special communication strategies in blog discourse. During the interaction of virtual and real linguistic identity happens a change of personal identification and is forming a new kind of linguistic identity, it is the subject of the blog discourse. The removal of all taboos is a stylistic feature of the discursive practices of social networks, where language personality in behavioral discourse develops into a discursive identity with the manifestation of these qualities, which in other discursive practices were not so obvious.
"The study of linguistic and paralinguistic characteristics of the blogosphere has shown that language of blogs is saturated with jargon and technical slang language (the language of "bastards", "olbanian"), foreign inclusions (mainly English), the use of several styles of speech. The texts of the blogs are reduced as much as possible and are accompanied by non-verbal elements. They are distinguished by features of the semantic organization of the texts of postmodernism with the aim of transferring the intonation of the spoken language, giving the expression of emotionality and expressiveness, additional meanings, bloggers combine literary language with youth slang, understated style of speech, computer jargon, obscene vocabulary, the use of the Russian language accompanied by intensive use of English borrowings" (Germasheva, 2011, p. 141) The signs of the discourse of T. Tolstoya are: a) single agonal signs, or signs of competitiveness (T.Tolstaya) does not see her equals, "and therefore does not enter into the discussion, and hangs labels, in the form of invective: "stinky", the newspaper published in an immense circulation, -"dung heap" the interpreters -"idiots, bastards...", the Patriarch is harmful fool..

. (very very vurgal slangs are omitted). Tatiana Nikitichna is surrounded by "jerks, idiots, untalented persons and ignoramuses". And she usually offers all of them to hang themselves. And even though she acts like a woman from Odessa
Privoz, but she called Pushkin "resident of Pskov of not highest origin", the country's leadership (offensive) and you personally "goat" -try to argue". (Tolstaya, http://www.kp.ru/daily/26209/3094400/); b) signs of a lack of traditional morality, the presence of a high degree of cynicism (When in Primorsky region bandits indiscriminately began to kill the police, T. N. Tolstaya reacted in his own way: "When I learned that cops are bumped off, I began to tremble with joy". And then sneered: they say, what a stupid and funny man from Archangel wrote me: can't understand "how intelligent is glad that somebody got murdered". Indeed, naive person. After all, the best that usually the writer wants to make with others, is to put them "in head in the toilet" or hit with "a stick with a nail in the face". Typical of her is a dream about meeting with the leader of one of the factions of the national Parliament: "I'll throw myself at him like a wolf, and bite his throat..." http://www.kp.ru/daily/26209/3094400/); c) signs of contradictory of beliefs (on the one hand, the existence of the concept of social responsibility, and on the other the presence of transnationality). As mentioned above, namely in the genre of interview is most fully revealed the inner world of man. Many revelations have become available to the public after the famous interview that gave T. Tolstaya to the journalist Igor Sidarenko, where she argues that " the country is not such to fit it! It should be carried with oneself, sily fat .. ss,! Now, maybe the government is trying to conform, to be... the same backward and squint-eyed, as a people," and "love for Russia is sweet slaver. It is generally bad form. Taste is class thing. Don't want to offend classes that are prone to this bad taste".
On The manifestation of transnationality, the lack of patriotism (in the speech of some elitist personalities in Russia this word has acquired a negative connotation) -a fairly common phenomenon in the modern Russian discourse. Cynicism in the expression of contempt for Russia acquires a competitive nature. Alfred Koch, Russian statesman in B. N. Yeltsin, believes that "Russia has now appeared, and nobody needs it. In the world economy there is no place for it... the Russians are not able to earn anything... They are so admired, they are still admired for their ballet and classical literature T. N. Tolstaya behaves in the Network freely, without constraining herself with excessive politeness: "When 22 000 readers are following you, that automatically means that 21 000 from them are hamsters. Their reaction is predictable and planned. From time to time I write a post so that the hamsters to ran up and gnaw', the writer do not hide lower opinion of the readers of her blog. "It's all manipulations. You chopp for them: Hey, mice, come over here. They run and run! In order not to miss the baiting place, if the post is good headlined, such as "Russophobia". Be sure they will come and accuse me, in what do you think? In Russophobia. Can't be wrong". Another useful observation of Tolstoy: "The people don't remember anything. I have checked: I took the lyrics from three years ago, put them on Facebook, and people read them as new". (Tolstaya http://www.kp.ru/daily/26209/3094400/).

Further consideration of the discursive practices of behavioral discourse of T. N. Tolstaya is based on the signs of loss of traditional values as a sign of the era of "liquid" modernity and scandalousness as a behavioral pattern.
Signs of outrageous and scandal fully is reflected in numerous publications, reflecting behavioral discourse of T. N. Tolstaya. In blog (http://www.mk.ru/politics/2012/03/01/677193-u-tatyanyi-tolstoy-ukrali-tekst.html) Tatyana Tolstaya called a publication "the shi..y election little rag working for Putin" and "sh..t colorful piece of paper with a circulation of 5 million 490 thousand copies" and wrote that, in addition to theft, the chief editor Vladimir Mamontov (former chief editor of "Izvestiya") "and Ko" committed "the sin of bearing false witness".Linguistic personality of T. Tolstaya as a participant in blog discourse fully meets the above-mentioned characteristic of blogger. But here bright discursive identity of the blogger is released from the framework of the "average" user of the Network. The underlined, sometimes outrageous usage of abuse, pejoratives and taboo language is characteristic of dialogical blog-discourse of T. Tolstaya, which is a sign of strengthening the position of the concept "LUMPENIZATION".
Thus, we see the desire of the elite to the underlined outrageous value, the change of attitude towards their own elitism. The discursive practices of the modern Russian elite so reflect lumpenization that we can raise the question of the necessity of keeping the elite as valid intelligency of the nation, the need to revive the elite as a carrier of high elite social consciousness, which tends to raise the general level of education, intelligence in society. Observing modern world elitist community, we can state that these discursive practices have become a distinctive feature of elites of other states.

4.
A characteristic feature of Russian discourse always had a special connection to the personality of the writer. "Literaturecentrism of Russian culture has led to the fact that the writing has been identified with the performance of moral duty, the writer was given a royal place in castles in the air of national spirit" -rightly writes A. Ashkerov (Ashkerov, 2002). It is a bright example of social exclusion (Osipov, 2002). The phenomenon of marginality cannot be evaluated except in the context of the wider cultural and sociological issues, such as culture and personality, cultural mechanization of behavioral regulation, socialization, norm and deviation, social stratification and social mobility, sources of sociocultural dynamics, etc. (Atoyan, 1993;Stonekvist, 1989;Raban, 1989;Karabulatova, 2011& Stepanova 2000. Changing of social practices in the era of "liquid" modernity has led to a change in the axiological attitudes in the Russian discourse -the concept of "intelligence" gives way to the concepts of "cynicism", "aggression", etc. However elitist personalities continue not only to read, but also share their opinions about what they read in the Network. Interesting is the comparison of the participant of the forum "And you, what are you reading?" manners of presentation of the two authors of memoirs: "A. Shirvindt. "Thoroughfare of biography". I started to read, and for some reason just remembered books of Zolotukhin... In Shirvindt writes about life, about the theater, about colleagues, and Zolotukhin writes about the same. But how differently. It turns out that it is without dirty wash. It is often with sad irony, but not offensive to those of whom he writes. And it is not that he wants to remain good for all. No, it's just the different attitude to the people, another character (forum "And you, what are you reading?").
The difference of T. Tolstaya discourse from the classical discourse of the Russian writer as "the expression of the thoughts and aspirations of the people" is in that " TT turned intelligence complexes into commercial literary products, which proved to be quite competitive on the market. Thus, quite naturally was completed the process of glorification, and the legalisation of market relations of "thinking layer" of our society. <...> This is the attitude now is called technology. The technology of literary success" (Ashkerov, 2002) Therefore, attitude towards others is determined not only by the time in which writers live, but also by individual qualities of elitist personality, the ability to maintain moral and axiological installations, the qualities that combine to form the concept of "intelligent person".

5.
It should be noted that Russian discourse of the era of "liquid" modernity presents several striking discursive personalities, the behavioral discourse of which is similar, and the attitude to which causes polar feelings. In Addition to T. N.Tolstaya, to such personalities are A. B. Pugacheva and K. A. Sobchak, the name of last became a common noun anthroponym. Not in vain in some publications T. Tolstaya is called Ksenia Sobchak of Russian literature. Behavioral patterns of scandal, cynicism, csandalous value in the presence of strong personality, charisma, clearly defined concept of dominance, talent, flexibility of behavior contribute to the fact that these discursive identities arise in some admiration and a desire to imitate and in others complete rejection of their behavioral discourse. Thus, we want to emphasize that in this case the attitude is influenced by all the signs of the elite discourse -verbal (vocabulary), nonverbal (manner of clothing, proprietary environment) and behavioral patterns (communicative social behavior).
Rightly is, however, to note that the features of the lumpenization of elite discourse can be traced not only in Russian but American discourse: "unfortunately, in general, you come from high assessment of American diplomacy. <...> I am still more sceptical about the general principles which form the USA elite. Except Psaki there is also Biden. The second man in the state, who also regularly says things that make people open their mouth. This indicates a general level of training of the elite," says Andrei Korobkov, Professor of political science at the University of Tennessee (USA), expert of the Russian Council on international Affairs, doctor of economic Sciences (Korobkov, 2014). Indeed, Jane Psaki, despite her high position in the establishment of the USA is hard to call an elitist discourse personality, not to mention the elitist language of personality.I n recent years her name has become a anthroponym, and behavioral discourse of personality of J. Psaki is the testimony of expanding the implementation of the concept "lumpenization" in the discourse of the elite, because on formal grounds, the assistant to the President of the United States belongs to the elite of power. All of the above given allows to conclude that along with the concepts of "Dominance", "Cynicism", "Transnationalism", "Mobility" as the signs of Russian discourse of the era of liquid modernity, the modern discourse of the elite is observed the highlighting of the concept of "LUMPENIZATION" of elite personalities. Thus, we must recognize that the phenomenon of elitist speech of language personality needs rethinking at the present stage of development of society. The obtained results of the research allow to realistically assess the changes of social and cultural situation in the elite community as ambiguous, contradictory and multi-component.