<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Publishing DTD v1.3 20210610//EN" "JATS-journalpublishing1-3.dtd">
<article article-type="research-article" dtd-version="1.3" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xml:lang="ru"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">communicology</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title xml:lang="ru">Коммуникология</journal-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="en"><trans-title>Communicology</trans-title></trans-title-group></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="ppub">2311-3065</issn><issn pub-type="epub">2311-3332</issn><publisher><publisher-name>МАК</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.21453/2311-3065-2019-7-2-15-24</article-id><article-id custom-type="elpub" pub-id-type="custom">communicology-15</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Research Article</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="section-heading" xml:lang="ru"><subject>ТЕОРИЯ, МЕТОДОЛОГИЯ И ИСТОРИЯ СОЦИОЛОГИИ</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="section-heading" xml:lang="en"><subject>THEORY, METHODOLOGY, AND HISTORY OF SOCIOLOGY</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>Коммуникационная теория Р. Крэйга: дискурсивные практики и тенденции взаимодействия в управлении субъектом</article-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="en"><trans-title>Communication Theory by Robert T. Craig: discursive practices and interaction trends in subject control</trans-title></trans-title-group></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes"><name-alternatives><name name-style="eastern" xml:lang="ru"><surname>Андриянова</surname><given-names>Т. В.</given-names></name><name name-style="western" xml:lang="en"><surname>Andriyanova</surname><given-names>T. V.</given-names></name></name-alternatives><email xlink:type="simple">noemail@neicon.ru</email><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff-1"/></contrib></contrib-group><aff-alternatives id="aff-1"><aff xml:lang="ru">Курский государственный университет<country>Россия</country></aff><aff xml:lang="en">Kursk State University<country>Russian Federation</country></aff></aff-alternatives><pub-date pub-type="collection"><year>2019</year></pub-date><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>14</day><month>07</month><year>2021</year></pub-date><volume>7</volume><issue>2</issue><fpage>15</fpage><lpage>24</lpage><permissions><copyright-statement>Copyright &amp;#x00A9; Андриянова Т.В., 2021</copyright-statement><copyright-year>2021</copyright-year><copyright-holder xml:lang="ru">Андриянова Т.В.</copyright-holder><copyright-holder xml:lang="en">Andriyanova T.V.</copyright-holder><license license-type="creative-commons-attribution" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/" xlink:type="simple"><license-p>This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.</license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://www.communicology.ru/jour/article/view/15">https://www.communicology.ru/jour/article/view/15</self-uri><abstract><p>В 1999 году американский исследователь Роберт Т. Крейг написал свою концептуальную статью «Теория общения как поле» (Communication Theory as a Field), которая расширила контекст дискуссии о дисциплинарной идентичности в области коммуникации. В учебниках по теории коммуникации в то время практически не было согласия относительно того, что представляет собой ее дискуссионное поле или какие теории необходимо включать в учебные пособия. Эта статья, представляющая поле коммуникации, стала основой для четырех различных учебников по теории коммуникации. Крейг предлагает свое видение теории коммуникации, которое делает огромный шаг к объединению этого довольно разнородного поля и к решению его основных проблем. На пути к этому объединяющему видению, Крейг сосредоточился на теории коммуникации как практической дисциплине и показывал, как различные традиции теории коммуникации могут быть вовлечены в диалог о практике коммуникации и управления. В этом дискурсе различные ученые (С. Дитц, Т. Тэйлор, П. Лазарсфельд, К. Арнольд, Н. Луман) вступают в диалог о практических преломлениях теорий коммуникации. Вслед за Крейгом автор рассматривает семь различных традиций теории коммуникации в общих чертах и более подробно останавливается на социо-психологическом и социо-культурном подходах как наиболее перспективных в плане управленческого воздействия на субъект</p></abstract><trans-abstract xml:lang="en"><p>In 1999, American researcher Robert T. Craig wrote his conceptual article Communication Theory as a Field,” which expanded the context of the discussion of “ disciplinary identity in the field of communication. In textbooks on communication theory at that time there was practically no agreement on what constituted her discussion field or what theories should be included in textbooks. This article, representing the field of communication, became the basis for four different textbooks on the theory of communication. Craig offers his vision of the theory of communication, which takes a huge step towards combining this rather heterogeneous field and solving its main problems. Towards this unifying vision, Craig focused on the theory of communication as a practical discipline and showed how different traditions of the theory of communication can be involved in a dialogue about the practice of communication and management. In this discourse, various scholars (S. Dietz, T. Taylor, P. Lazarsfeld, K. Arnold, N. Luhmann) enter into a dialogue on the practical refractions of communication theories. Following Craig, the author considers seven different traditions of the theory of communication in general terms and in more detail dwells on the sociopsychological and sociocultural approaches as the most promising in terms of management impact on the subject.</p></trans-abstract><kwd-group xml:lang="ru"><kwd>коммуникация</kwd><kwd>теория коммуникации</kwd><kwd>дисциплинарная матрица</kwd><kwd>исследовательское поле</kwd><kwd>управление</kwd><kwd>субъект коммуникации</kwd></kwd-group><kwd-group xml:lang="en"><kwd>communication</kwd><kwd>communication theory</kwd><kwd>disciplinary matrix</kwd><kwd>research field</kwd><kwd>control</kwd><kwd>communication subject</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><back><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="cit1"><label>1</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Шарков Ф.И. (2005). Социальная коммуникация: истоки и парадигмы: Лекция. Москва.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Шарков Ф.И. (2005). Социальная коммуникация: истоки и парадигмы: Лекция. Москва.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit2"><label>2</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Arnold C.C. (1989). Rhetoric. In: E. Barnouw, G. Gerbner, W. Schramm, T.L. Worth, L. Gross (Eds.), International encyclopedia of communications New York: Oxford University Press.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Arnold C.C. (1989). Rhetoric. In: E. Barnouw, G. Gerbner, W. Schramm, T.L. Worth, L. Gross (Eds.), International encyclopedia of communications New York: Oxford University Press.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit3"><label>3</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Berelson B.R., Lazarsfeld P.F., McPhee W.N. (1954). Voting: a study of opinion formation in a presidential campaign. University of Chicago Press.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Berelson B.R., Lazarsfeld P.F., McPhee W.N. (1954). Voting: a study of opinion formation in a presidential campaign. University of Chicago Press.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit4"><label>4</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Bowers J., Iwi K. (1993). The discursive construction of society. Discourse &amp; Society. No. 4, Р. 357-393.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Bowers J., Iwi K. (1993). The discursive construction of society. Discourse &amp; Society. No. 4, Р. 357-393.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit5"><label>5</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Carey J.W. (1989). Communication as culture: Essays on media and society. Winchester, MA: Unwin Hyman.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Carey J.W. (1989). Communication as culture: Essays on media and society. Winchester, MA: Unwin Hyman.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit6"><label>6</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Craig R.T. (1999). Communication Theory as a Field. Communication Theory. Vol.9. Iss. 2. Р.119-161.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Craig R.T. (1999). Communication Theory as a Field. Communication Theory. Vol.9. Iss. 2. Р.119-161.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit7"><label>7</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Cronen V.E., Pearce W.B., Changsheng X. (1989).The Meaning of «Meaning» in the CMM Analysis of Communication: A Comparison of Two Traditions. Research on Language and Social Interaction. 23 (1-4): 1-40.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Cronen V.E., Pearce W.B., Changsheng X. (1989).The Meaning of «Meaning» in the CMM Analysis of Communication: A Comparison of Two Traditions. Research on Language and Social Interaction. 23 (1-4): 1-40.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit8"><label>8</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Deetz S.A. (1994). Future of the discipline: The challenges, the research, and the social contribution. Annals of the International Communication Association. Vol.17. Iss.1 P. 565-600.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Deetz S.A. (1994). Future of the discipline: The challenges, the research, and the social contribution. Annals of the International Communication Association. Vol.17. Iss.1 P. 565-600.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit9"><label>9</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Ehninger D. (1968). On systems of rhetoric. Philosophy and Rhetoric. No. 1. Р. 131-144.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Ehninger D. (1968). On systems of rhetoric. Philosophy and Rhetoric. No. 1. Р. 131-144.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit10"><label>10</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Heritage J. (1984). Garfinkel and ethnomethodology. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Heritage J. (1984). Garfinkel and ethnomethodology. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit11"><label>11</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Luhmann N. (1992). What is communication? Communication Theory. Vol.2. Iss.3. Р. 251-259.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Luhmann N. (1992). What is communication? Communication Theory. Vol.2. Iss.3. Р. 251-259.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit12"><label>12</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Schoening G.T., Anderson J.A. (1995). Social action media studies: Foundational Arguments and Common Premises. Communication Theory. Vol.5, Iss. 2. P. 93-116.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Schoening G.T., Anderson J.A. (1995). Social action media studies: Foundational Arguments and Common Premises. Communication Theory. Vol.5, Iss. 2. P. 93-116.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit13"><label>13</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Taylor T.J. (1992). Mutual misunderstanding: Scepticism and the theorizing of language and interpretation. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Taylor T.J. (1992). Mutual misunderstanding: Scepticism and the theorizing of language and interpretation. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref></ref-list><fn-group><fn fn-type="conflict"><p>The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.</p></fn></fn-group></back></article>
