POLITICAL DISCOURSE IN CRISIS CONDITIONS: THEORETICAL FOUNDATIONS AND ANALYTICAL PERSPECTIVES

Abstract

This article is focused on the theoretical interpretation of political discourse (PD) as a multidimensional communicative phenomenon, which is particularly evident in times of crisis and war. The current realities of the russian-Ukrainian war have highlighted the importance of PD as a tool for shaping public opinion, mobilising citizens and legitimising government decisions. In crisis situations, political speech ceases to be merely a means of communication – it becomes a mechanism for influencing collective consciousness, a channel for articulating moral positions, and a space for struggling over the interpretation of events. Despite a significant amount of research, the field of political discourse still lacks a coherent theoretical framework and a single definition, which complicates the practical analysis of political communications.
The purpose of this article is to systematise existing approaches to the study of PD and to identify its key characteristics in crisis and conflict situations. The objectives of the study include: reviewing the main theoretical approaches (critical, cognitive, communicative, pragmatic), analysing definitions of PD, revealing the role of the addressee (based on the concepts of P. Charaudeau and N. Fairclough) and the addresser (according to T. van Dijk), determining linguistic characteristics, genre hybridity, and formulating our own interdisciplinary definition.
The scientific novelty of the article lies in an attempt to integrate various theoretical approaches and propose a definition of PD as a situationally and institutionally determined discursive practice that combines text, context, addresser and addressee within the framework of political interaction. This practice is implemented through linguistic means, genre-frame structures, communication channels, and receptive models, forming a dynamic meaning and performing the function of rhetorical intervention in the public space. The proposed definition allows us to consider PD as an instrument of power, legitimisation and mobilisation, which acquires particular significance in conditions of crisis and war, as well as a real instrument for the practical analysis of contemporary political communications.