A
Discursive-Semiotic Approach to Translating Cultural Aspects in Persuasive
Advertisements |
THE ACT OF COMMUNICATION Advertisements are marketing tools used in a communication process to send a message to receivers (consumers), who will react or respond in a certain way. Communication is derived from the Latin word communis, which means common. Communication is the process of commonness of thought between a sender and a receiver of a message:
Meaning can thus only be achieved when the sender and receiver share a thought or idea. In persuasive advertisements it is assumed that both parties share this thought. In order to understand the communication of advertisements, three basic concepts have to be taken into account: field of experience, meaning and signs and symbols (Dunn et al 1990: 51-52). These aspects will be elaborated upon in the section on semiotic analysis. The field of experience refers to the receivers total life experiences. Contextual and textual elements are used by the advertiser to refer to a specific group of receivers experiences. This is closely linked to culture and cultural identity where certain elements such as customs or idiomatic language are used to send a message to the receiver. Meaning is created by signs that evoke certain meanings. Again cultural orientation plays a role here. Stubbs (1983: 8) states that "the general vision is of culture as comprising interlocking systems of meaning". These signs can either be textual or contextual elements such as a poem or music. One can distinguish between connotative, contextual and denotative meaning. Denotative meaning refers to the literal association with objects or words. Connotative meaning refers to the derived connotations of the individual towards a concept or word. Contextual meaning refers to the surroundings in which the advertisements message takes place (Dunn et al 1990: 54). In order to place the above-mentioned in a frame of reference, one should look at the communication model and the functions of the different elements. |
Model of communication One of the classical models of the communication process is that of Roman Jakobson. According to Jakobson (1960) in every concrete speech act the addresser sends a message to the addressee; the message uses a code (usually a language that is known to both the addresser and addressee); the message has a context (or referent) and is transmitted through a contact (a medium such as live speech or writing). Each one of these aspects has a linguistic function in the communication process. If the emphasis is on the sender's role in the process, an emotive function would be apparent (which would for example emphasise the role of the narrator); if the emphasis is on the receiver, a conative function would be involved; if the context is of importance, the referential function would be at work; emphasising the used code involves a meta-lingual function, while emphasising the contact gives preference to the phatic function (Seldon & Widdowson 1993: 4). If the orientation is towards the message, the poetic or aesthetic function will be at work. This function will be the focus of discussion in this section. Diagrammatically the communication process looks like this: |
CONTEXT |
||||
SENDER |
MESSAGE |
RECEIVER |
||
CONTACT
/ |
||||
CODE |
The function of the message of a persuasive
advertisement is the reason for its existence. The message is as successful as the desired
response elicited from the receiver; the symbiosis is inevitable and necessary. The
communication situation in which discourse is produced and processed can be broken down
into the various factors which can influence the possible aims of the discourse. According
to Halliday and Hasan (1989:12) the "act sequence" is of great importance as is
the relation between form and content of a message, the place where the communication
takes place, the social role of the participants and the norms attached to it. It follows thus that culture plays an inevitable role in the communication situation. Culture is "what everyone knows, and part of this knowledge is conversational competence" (Stubbs 1983: 8). It can be said that language (together with its different functions) is embedded in the culture due to the shared knowledge. |
|
||
[Index]
|