Discourse analysis vs linguistic pragmatics: Is there a divide?

The paper focuses on distinguishing the existing methodology principles that govern the contextual, discourse and linguistic pragmatic analyses. Context analysis is treated in terms of its explanatory value which contributes to the accurate text interpretation accounting for extralinguistic aspects. The authors consider discourse analysis methodology in concordance with linguistic pragmatics which helps to draw the line between the two of them relying on the empirical data. The article aims at paying homage to Sergey T. Nefedov academic heritage, whose fundamental ideas seek further conceptualization and interpretation within the framework of the general research paradigm. Nefedov's works address the principal linguistic issues to come up with the solution which made them fundamental in differentiating various approaches to text analysis aimed at decoding the implications. The research relies on cinema and theatrical discourse material, namely the texts with the focus on major cultural events. Texts interpretation accounted for the context as well as the encyclopedic background essential for decoding. The context is the one to guide and dominate further discourse interpretation. Relying on Nefedov's findings while considering the empirical material corpus fostered the conclusion that pragmatics focuses primarily on the data all the communicators are familiar with. Discourse analysis, on the contrary, enjoys a more sophisticated approach which accounts for a wider range of factors that influence utterance production and its later decoding. The authors conclude that it is discourse analysis that aids in predicting the impact the message produces on the addressee which contributes to interpretation accuracy and effectiveness.