HISTORY OF POLITICAL THOUGHT THROUGH THE LENS OF INERDISCIPLINARY LINGUISTICPOLITICAL STUDIES

Abstract

This article discusses the possibilities of interdisciplinary studies of political thought, in particular in Ukrainian context, through the methodological lens that combines political linguistics and discourse analysis in the realms of “linguopolitology”, studies of linguistic styles of people – linguistic “personology” of politicians, studies of political metaphors, comparative studies of political communications, and also methods of critical discourse analysis. Since studies in political linguistics are very broad, one school is selected for analysis: the Ural school of political linguistics. Its main research areas are outlined, briefly presented and discussed, with examples of other similar studies into the complicated relations between language and politics. Based on that, the future, potential ways of applying linguistic research tools to analysis of how the political thinking in Ukraine evolved are briefly outlined. In addition, main strains of critical discourse analysis are also presented with a particular focus on their methodological foundations. All this together shows that the history of political ideas can be studied by means of analysing political languages of philosophers and ideologists, since this knowledge can contribute a lot to a better understanding of their polemics and arguments. A study in political metaphor seems very promising in understanding the genres and styles of political communication and in getting a holistic picture of political and social contexts in which certain political ideas evolved. The studies of creolisation processes can be enhanced by applying the methodology of postcolonial studies to them since it can greatly contribute to the studies of Ukrainian political thought and to postcolonial manifestations in it. Studies of semiotic reflections of social conflicts within political discourses enable a deeper analysis of political ideologies as systems of icons and symbols. They can be studied within the socio-cognitive approach of T. van Dijk or discursive-historical approach of R. Wodak that combines the textual and contextual levels of analysis. However it also implies de- and re-contextualisation of texts and discourses that, in turn, poses the risk of presentism in the studies of history of political thought.