The article explores pragmasemantic aspects of the speech act of threat (SAT) in everyday conflict discourse, using examples from Russian colloquial speech. The authors analyze the impact of direct and indirect threats on the addressee from the point of view of the theory of speech acts, biopsychology, and physiology, which makes it possible to understand the nature of SATs and identify the key communicative and semantic factors of this type of speech acts.

The image of the city as one of the most important elements of modern post-industrial reality is an essential element in the world picture of any individual. The research aims to study the peculiarities of perception and verbal representation of the image of Kaliningrad by the students of the Immanuel Kant Baltic Federal University. The objectives of the research determined the choice of a comprehensive methodology, which included the method of unfini­shed sentences, as well as the methods of interpretation and modelling. As a result of this re­search, four interrelated constituents of the image of Kaliningrad were determined — external (architectural and landscape), cultural and historical, anthropological, social and household. The verbal representation of their structural and content characteristics was illustrated using the results of a survey based on the method of unfinished sentences, which was developed and con­ducted by the author.

The article analyses the emotive aspect of the production and perception of the speech act of threat and the specificity of the perception of this act by a modern native speaker of Rus­sian. The act of threat is an instrument of influence exerted on the listener. Its effectiveness depends on the strength of the negative emotions of anxiety, fear, etc. initiated in the listener. At the same time, the production of threatening statements is often associated with the speak­er's emotional state, which in some cases can serve as a catalyst for imperative influence. The speech act of threat, being an element of conflict discourse, contradicts the traditional princi­ples of productive communication and the legal norms of any developed state. In everyday communication, a verbal threat can be regarded as a way of implementing communicative intentions that are completely justified from the socio-ethical point of view. For a modern Russian speaker, threat is not a communicative taboo and can be deliberately used in conflict situations related to the protection of human dignity, life, social values, etc.