Linguocognitive Modeling of the Concepts “Fake” and “Counterfeit” in Contemporary Media Discourse

The subject of this study is the use of the lexemes “fake” and “counterfeit” in contemporary Russian media discourse. The focus is on the linguistic representation of the phenomenon of inauthenticity, which is actively shaped and reinterpreted under conditions of digital communication and intensive information exchange. The article examines the functional features of these lexemes in media texts, as well as their role in describing unreliable information and inauthentic objects. Particular attention is paid to the semantic and cognitive emphases that are activated when one or the other nomination is chosen in specific contexts. The analysis explores how these linguistic units contribute to the formation of public perceptions of inauthenticity and which aspects of reality they highlight in media discourse. Thus, the study concentrates on the linguistic and conceptual interpretation of the phenomenon of inauthenticity through the prism of media language. The research employs a linguocognitive approach combined with frame modeling, along with elements of contrastive analysis and discourse analysis, in order to identify differences in the functioning of the examined lexemes in media texts. The scientific novelty of the study lies in the fact that the lexemes “fake” and “counterfeit” are treated not as separate concepts, but as different linguistic means of representing the same phenomenon of inauthenticity in contemporary media discourse. It is demonstrated for the first time that these nominations activate different cognitive and communicative aspects of the concept depending on the context of use. The analysis shows that “fake” is primarily associated with the dissemination of unreliable information, its social perception, and its social consequences, whereas “counterfeit” is oriented toward concrete objects, the presence of an original prototype, and practices of recognition and verification. It is concluded that the distinction between these lexemes is not only semantic, but also functional and discourse-based. The results obtained allow for a more precise description of the mechanisms of conceptualizing inauthenticity in media texts and may be applied in further studies of media discourse and cognitive semantics.