Modus and Modality in Russian Political Media Discourse: A Linguistic Aspect

Sun' Wenxin independent researcher Miklukho-Maklaya str., 9, Moscow, 117198, Russia 1042235259@rudn.ru

Introduction

In the modern media space, characterized by a high degree of digitalization, polarization of public consciousness and increased ideological confrontation, the study of linguistic means by which political meanings are constructed, transmitted and legitimized is of particular importance. One of the key tools for influencing the addressee in the context of political communication are the categories of mode and modality, which make it possible to fix the speaker's attitude to the message, set the framework for interpreting the text, and also covertly or openly influence the audience's assessment ^[1]. Modality and mode, being universal means of expressing the author's subjective assessment and epistemic position, play an important role in creating speech strategies aimed at persuading, mobilizing, polarizing and delegitimizing hostile points of view. This is especially true for political media discourse operating in a post-truth environment where the boundaries between facts, opinions, and manipulation are blurred.

The relevance of this research is due to the need for a comprehensive understanding of the ways of linguistic realization of modality and mode in Russian political media discourse as a special type of speech practice, where powerful narratives are formed and symbolic management of public consciousness is carried out.

Over the past decades, the categories of mode and modality have remained in the focus of attention of linguists studying the problems of subjectivity, pragmatics and semantics in language. A number of works emphasize their key role in the representation of evaluativeness, epistemic attitude and communicative intention of the speaker. In particular, V.V. Vinogradov was one of the first in Russian linguistics to substantiate the need to distinguish objective and subjective modality as components of the syntactic structure of an utterance, which served as the basis for later discursive studies of modality in media text ^[2]. In modern science, mode is increasingly viewed not just as a kind of modality, but as a separate category reflecting the speaker's position in relation to the dictum (being communicated), including parameters such as emotivity, expression of will, distancing, personalization, and others. For example, P.P. Glazko focuses on the functional and semantic boundary between modality and mode, showing their interaction in the media discourse of the USA and Belarus through the prism of evaluative and expressive utterance ^[3]. At the level of pragmatic analysis, R.R. Khazieva made a significant contribution to the study of modal structures. She studied evidential statements in English-language political discourse and showed how markers of modality are used for manipulative influence and construction of conflict media space ^[4]. I.S. Lisyutkina in her work examines the tactics of factualization in Russian political media discourse, linking the increase in categoricality with the use of markers epistemic modality, such as "unconditionally", "undoubtedly", etc., emphasizing their role in creating the effect of reliability ^[5]. Finally, F.S. Kudryasheva, analyzing the intentions of the political media text based on the material of presidential rhetoric, points out the importance of modus components in the formation of persuasion and legitimization strategies, which is especially relevant in the context of crisis or mobilization discourse ^[6].

Despite the availability of significant theoretical and empirical material, it can be argued that the interaction of the categories of mode and modality in the Russian political media discourse has not yet received systematic coverage. Most of the works are either limited to considering one of the categories, or they focus on foreign or comparative cases. Thus, the question remains unresolved: how exactly modal and modal mechanisms function in modern Russian media policy practice as a means of influencing mass consciousness. The present study aims to fill this gap and offer a comprehensive linguistic analysis of these categories based on Russian media discourse.

The object of research in this paper is Russian political media discourse as a communicative and pragmatic system that includes a variety of text formats, from television appearances and interviews to online comments and publications on social networks.

The purpose of the study is to identify and describe the linguistic mechanisms of expression of modality and mode in the Russian political media discourse, as well as to determine their role in organizing the communicative impact on the mass addressee.

To achieve this goal, the following tasks are set in the work: to analyze theoretical approaches to understanding the categories of modality and mode; to identify typical linguistic means of their implementation; to identify the pragmatic and evaluative functions of these means in the structure of the media text; to consider the features of the interaction of modality and mode in a conflict and consensual political narrative.

The scientific novelty of this study lies in the fact that for the first time a comprehensive analysis of the categories of mode and modality is carried out based on the material of modern Russian political media speech based on functional-discursive and pragmatic approaches. The paper attempts not only to distinguish between these concepts, but also to show their functional interaction due to a specific communicative situation, the speaker's intention and the structure of the media text.

The theoretical significance of the research lies in clarifying the conceptual framework concerning the categories of modality and mode, as well as in developing a linguopragmatic approach to the study of political discourse. The practical significance is determined by the possibility of applying the results obtained in the analysis of political texts, the creation of training courses in media linguistics, as well as in the field of critical discourse analysis and speech expertise.

Thus, the presented research is aimed at filling the existing gap in the linguistic study of Russian political media texts and allows us to deepen our understanding of the speech mechanisms through which ideological meanings are formed, disseminated and institutionalized in public communication.

Research materials and methods

The research material is based on a corpus of 120 political media texts covering various types and forms of Russian political media discourse in the period from 2022 to 2025. The corpus includes public speeches by officials, presidential addresses, statements by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, transcripts of television programs ("Evening with Vladimir Solovyov"), as well as publications from Telegram channels and digital political communities. The selection of empirical material was carried out on the basis of its belonging to the Russian political media discourse and the presence in the structure of the text of linguistic means expressing modality and mode. The study took into account both official sources (speeches by the President of the Russian Federation, materials from federal TV channels, government documents) and unofficial media platforms, including online blogs and Telegram channels. This made it possible to cover institutionally and genre-diverse formats of speech practice, represented in both traditional and digital media environments.

The methodological basis of the research is a linguopragmatic and discursive-functional approach, which allows considering mode and modality as means of speech influence and structuring of political meaning. The main methods used are contextual analysis, the method of pragmatic interpretation, as well as elements of content analysis of media texts to identify typical linguistic markers of modality and mode in modern Russian political discourse.

Results and discussions

The modern linguistic understanding of the categories of modality and mode is based both on philosophical and logical traditions, as well as on functional, grammatical and pragmatic approaches formed within the framework of the development of linguistics of the XX–XXI centuries. Initially, the concept of modality came to linguistics from logic, where since antiquity (Aristotle, then Kant and the scholastic tradition) judgments of reality, possibility and necessity have been distinguished. These same modes formed the basis of the logical-semantic understanding of modality in linguistics ^[7].

In linguistics, modality is understood as a universal semantic category expressing the attitude of the subject of speech to the reported, including such aspects as epistemic assessment, deontic prescription, aletic possibility/necessity and emotive attitude ^[8]. Russian researchers V.V. Vinogradov, A.V. Bondarko, and N.Y. Shvedova point to the obligatory presence of modality in any utterance as a component of predicativity ^{[9, 10, 11]}, while foreign researchers point to pragmatic and communicative functions implemented, in particular, in persuasive and directive speech acts ^[12].

Mode as a linguistic category is introduced into scientific circulation by the works of S. Bally, who distinguished the dictum (the informative part of the utterance) and mode as an expression of the speaker's subjective attitude ^[13]. Modern research considers modus as a generalized pragmatic category encompassing emotivity, expression of will, assessment and distancing ^[14]. This is especially evident in political discourse, where the mode takes the form of a verbal act of persuasion, mobilization, or legitimization, often implemented in a performative form.

Some linguists propose to consider mode as a super-category that includes modality, or emphasize their functional intertwining. For example, D.V. Kozlovsky points to the synergetic coupling of the categories of evidentiality and modality in media discourse as an example of the interaction of modal mechanisms for expressing the author's position and the source of information ^[15].

The problem of differentiation and correlation of mode and modality remains debatable. A number of studies by G.P. Gavrilicheva, E.A. Chernoklinov, and V.A. Yezhkova interpret assessment as a modal meaning, and modality as a suprasegmental category encompassing the semantic, pragmatic, and rhetorical levels of utterance ^{[8, 12, 14]}.

The linguistic means of expressing modality and mode are extremely diverse. At the lexical level, these are modal verbs (should, maybe, should), introductory words (apparently, perhaps, undoubtedly), modal adverbs and adjectives (improbable, obviously, explicitly), as well as constructs with pragmatic labeling - performatives, evaluative epithets, emphatic constructions ^[16]. At the grammatical level, modality is realized through mood, word order, intonation, as well as syntactic constructions with predicates of perception, evaluation, or assumption. Along with this, it is important to note that in media political genres (address to the nation, election letters, presidential speeches), mode and modality are manifested through temporal and personal categories expressing both commonality with the addressee and the political dominance of the subject of speech.

Thus, the categories of mode and modality form an inseparable unity in the structures of political media discourse, realizing both the cognitive attitudes of the speaker and his intentions to influence the addressee. Their theoretical differentiation is necessary for accurate discursive analysis, while in real communication they function as complementary pragmatic mechanisms.

Political discourse is one of the most institutionalized and strategically oriented types of discourse, the purpose of which is to manage the attention, persuasion and behavior of a mass addressee. In the Russian context, it includes genres such as presidential addresses, parliamentary speeches, interviews on federal TV channels, election campaign materials, as well as publications by official representatives on social networks.

Communication strategies in these genres are often built around the implementation of directive and declarative functions, using language acts such as affirmation, prescription, and appeal (for example: "We must protect our national interests", "Russia will not allow interference in internal affairs"). These formulas demonstrate a stable deontic and aletic modality, expressed using modal verbs (must, must, must not), introductory words (certainly, obviously) and amplifying adverbs (intentionally, decisively).

Political media discourse in Russia operates in a centralized media system in which key agendas are set by institutional actors: the presidential administration, federal TV channels, official telegram channels, and departmental press services. This determines the ideological core of the discourse: patriotism, stability, sovereignty, protection of traditional values.

For example, official rhetoric actively uses appeals to the "collective West" as an external threat-bearing entity, which is realized through a mode of confidence and assessment: "The West is waging a hybrid war against us," "Russia is able to resist the sanctions dictate." Here the epistemic modality (leads, is capable) It is combined with evaluative (hybrid, dictatorial) and reinforced with grammatical categoricality, reflecting the strategy of political mobilization.

In Russian political communication, modality acts as a tool for legitimizing power, as well as as a means of verbal mobilization and marking an ideological position. According to S.T. Zolyan, political language in its performative function is not just a way of describing, but an act of social action in which "it becomes a matter of convenience" ^[17].

Modality allows you to structure the speech impact, creating the effects of credibility, decisiveness and generality. For example, presidential addresses often use constructions with epistemic and deontic markers.: "We are sure that...", "We must not allow...", "Measures should be taken...". They demonstrate a high level of modal subjectivity — the speaker takes the position of an authority that forms the "correct" interpretation of reality.

Since the beginning of the 21st century, political discourse in Russia has been increasingly moving into mediatized forms: television addresses, TV debates, talk shows ("Evening with Solovyov m", "Time will Tell"), official YouTube channels, publications on Telegram and VK. These formats are characterized by increased emotionality, genre hybridization, and personalization of content.

Modality in such media formats is most often realized in an expressive and evaluative mode, which is evident in statements such as: "This is a betrayal of national interests," "An obvious provocation aimed at destabilization," "We are witnessing an act of information aggression." Such constructions are saturated with modal verbs (we observe, we believe), evaluative lexemes (betrayal, provocation) and evidential operators (as you know, obviously, everyone understands).

In addition, political statements in the digital environment often contain means of pragmatic labeling: emoticons, capital letters, ellipses, and emphatic repetitions that enhance the modal vector of the message and are focused on the addressee's reactive behavior.

Thus, political media discourse in Russia is a dynamic system of meaning generation, in which the categories of mode and modality act as key linguistic mechanisms for shaping the ideological picture of the world. Their functioning is inextricably linked to genre features, the institutional nature of communication and the transformation of media formats in the digital age.

Mode and modality in Russian political media discourse are manifested as interrelated linguistic tools that provide cognitive structuring of political reality, its assessment and purposeful translation to a mass addressee. Empirical material — statements by officials, media texts from federal channels, as well as statements in digital political communities — confirms the high degree of pragmatic saturation of the discourse, where modal constructions are used to mark the epistemic position, directive prescriptions, emotional attitude and ideological affiliation of the speaker.

In political texts and public speeches by Russian officials, epistemic modality is often expressed through introductory constructions that emphasize the confidence or validity of statements. Markers such as "in all likelihood", "according to our data", "it seems", "we are convinced" perform not only a modal, but also a pervasive function, forming in the addressee a sense of objectivity and the inevitability of the voiced position. A striking example of the use of modal constructions in official discourse is the speech of Russian President Vladimir Putin in his address to the Federal Assembly (2023), where the phrase "We must protect our children from degradation and degeneration" combines epistemic and deontic modality, expressing both the objective necessity of action and the moral and legal imperative. This example demonstrates the strategy of combining rational justification with categorical necessity, which is characteristic of political discourse, which helps to create the effect of having no alternative to decisions^[18]. An analysis of diplomatic texts shows that such patterns are consistently reproduced in various contexts. For example, in the comments of the Foreign Ministry on negotiations with Ukraine, there are statements like "it is obvious that Istanbul has become an important milestone," and in reports on negotiations with American colleagues, there is an indirect strengthening of the position through quoting a third party: "Rubio welcomed the agreements..." ^[19]. This confirms that the use of epistemic markers in Russian political discourse serves as a strategy of persuasion and creating the effect of objective truth.

The deontic modality, reflecting norms, regulations and duties, is widely implemented in official documents and speeches, where constructions with the verbs of duty (must, must, should, must) are used. In his speech at the III International Olympiad on Financial Security (2023), Vladimir Putin emphasized: "The world is gradually getting rid of the dictatorship of the financial and economic model, the purpose of which is to drive into debt... the process of building a multipolar world order is historically necessary"^[20]. This formulation combines a deontic imperative ("necessary") with an epistemic rationale typical of institutional discourse.

Expressive modality in Russian political media discourse is realized through lexical and semantic means that convey the emotional and evaluative attitude of the speaker to the subject of the utterance. The TV program "Evening with Vladimir Solovyov" uses expressions such as "Europe wants war", "the United States seeks to shift the burden of conflict to Europe", reflecting the mode of categoricality and evaluation ^[21]. Such statements form a binary "we — they" opposition and act as linguistic markers of an ideological position, providing a pragmatic function of influencing the addressee through explicit modal coloring.

In addition to explicit evaluation, modality also performs the pragmatic function of manipulation, setting the boundaries of acceptable discursive behavior and transforming a private interpretation into a generally binding one. The appeals of officials often use the technique of collective inclusion ("you and I understand", "it is obvious to everyone that ..."), which creates the illusion of consensus and excludes other interpretations. In the context of media platforms such as Telegram channels "Readovka", "Military Observer" or the official pages of the governors, this is manifested in formulations suggesting the only acceptable perception of events: "it cannot be otherwise," "this is an axiom," which enhances the illocutionary force of the statement. In this case, the mode takes the form of directive action through the limitation of epistemic alternatives.

A characteristic feature of modern political media discourse in Russia is its division into official and unofficial segments, each of which has its own modal grammar and style. In official sources (speeches by the president, government websites, the Rossiya 1 TV channel), a rigid, normatively colored modality prevails: "we will not allow it," "a decision has been made," "we express confidence." These forms express a high level of institutional control and the rhetoric of commitment. While unofficial media resources — Telegram channels, blogs, online interviews - more often use ironic, tone—lowering statements ("of course, everything is going according to plan...", "every day is like a discovery"), expressing a mode of doubt, criticism or distancing. Thus, in informal discourse, the mode is often transformed into a form of political commentary with elements of parody or meta-discourse.

Conclusion

The analysis has shown that the categories of mode and modality in the Russian political media discourse play a key role in the formation and transmission of political meanings aimed at persuasion, mobilization and legitimization. Modal constructions — epistemic, deontic, evaluative — are systematically used in various formats of political communication: from official speeches and legislative documents to television shows and digital media platforms. Based on the speeches of statesmen, media texts and statements on social networks, it was revealed that modality and mode are realized inextricably, functioning as complementary linguistic mechanisms that determine the pragmatic structure of discourse and its rhetorical orientation.

Special attention in the study was paid to the analysis of lexical and grammatical means of expressing modality, including modal verbs, introductory words and performative constructions, as well as expressive and evidential coloring of utterances. The official rhetoric is dominated by a normative, directive and evaluative mode focused on the institutional legitimization of positions, while the unofficial media segment captures forms of distancing, irony and critical commentary. In both cases, modality acts not only as a means of expressing a subjective assessment, but also as a tool for structuring the ideological picture of the world and influencing public consciousness.

Thus, the results of this study have confirmed that the analysis of mode and modality allows for a deeper understanding of the communicative strategies used in the Russian political media space and to identify stable language models that form power discourse in the digital media ecosystem.

A promising area of further research is a comparative analysis of modal strategies in political media discourses from different countries, as well as the study of the dynamics of modal structures in the context of digitalization and neuro-linguistic text generation, including the role of artificial intelligence in shaping political rhetoric.