Прагматическая пресуппозиция в заголовках англоязычных бизнес-медиа как элемент манипулятивной риторики

Целью исследования стало выявление и систематизация прагматических пресуппозиций в заголовках англоязычных бизнес-медиа, а также определение их влияния на восприятие информации аудиторией. С использованием метода контент-анализа были проанализированы 200 заголовков из ведущих бизнес-изданий. В работе были рассмотрены три типа прагматических пресуппозиций: фактивные (создающие иллюзию объективности фактов), оценочные (воздействующие на эмоциональное восприятие) и аксиологические (апеллирующие к социокультурным ценностям). Результаты подтвердили значимость прагматической пресуппозиции как элемента манипулятивной риторики заголовков. Авторы заявляют об отсутствии конфликта интересов.

The article is dedicated to the study of pragmatic presuppositions in the headlines of English-language business media and their role as an element of manipulative rhetoric. The aim of the research is to identify and systematize the types of pragmatic presuppositions used in these headlines, as well as to analyze their impact on audience perception. To reach this aim, the authors conducted a content analysis of 200 headlines from leading business publications. The analysis identified three types of pragmatic presuppositions: factive, evaluative, and axiological. Factive presuppositions (n=85) create an illusion of factual objectivity, evaluative presuppositions (n=73) influence emotional perception through implicit judgments, and axiological presuppositions (n=42) appeal to cultural and social values, guiding the reader toward specific moral and ethical conclusions. Factive presuppositions imply the existence of certain facts or events that are presented as indisputable, although they may actually be subject to interpretation. Evaluative presuppositions elicit emotional responses from the reader by employing lexical means with strong evaluative connotations. Axiological presuppositions appeal to sociocultural norms and values, shaping the reader’s moral and ethical judgments. One of the key aspects of the study is the emphasis on the fact that while lexical means can play a significant role in the realization of pragmatic presuppositions, they do not serve as its only source. Pragmatic presuppositions are also formed based on a broader context, which includes the common background knowledge, social norms, and expectations of the participants in communication. This means that presuppositions can be either strengthened or weakened depending on how information is presented in the headline and what cultural and social expectations it engages. The authors also emphasize that pragmatic presuppositions play an important role in shaping the cognitive frameworks through which readers perceive information. These frameworks guide the interpretation of the text, creating conditions where the information is perceived as obvious or inevitable, which in turn reduces the likelihood of critical analysis. The findings of the study demonstrate that English-language business media headlines actively use pragmatic presuppositions to manipulate audience perception. This makes them a powerful tool for influence, capable of shaping biased attitudes and supporting certain social and political narratives. The authors conclude that further study of pragmatic presuppositions in media texts, particularly in the context of their manipulative potential, is essential. The research opens up new perspectives for analyzing how media rhetoric can covertly influence public opinion and shape the perception of information, which calls for more in-depth and systematic exploration in the future. The authors declare no conflicts of interests.