The distinctive features of diplomatic discourse as the language of the profession
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.33910/1992-6464-2026-219-231-239Keywords:
discourse, diplomatic discourse, professional discourse, language of the profession, international communicationAbstract
Introduction. This article examines diplomatic discourse as a specialized language of professional communication within international relations. The language of diplomacy not only reflects the established system of international interaction but also functions as a tool for shaping and constructing political reality; therefore, its study and conceptualization within the framework of discourse theory are of particular importance. An analysis of diplomatic discourse makes it possible to identify specific features in diplomats’ professional communication, as well as the mechanisms through which political meanings are produced and transmitted. This study aims to identify the characteristics of diplomatic discourse as a distinct professional language.
Materials and Methods. The methodological framework is based on the principles of discourse theory and employs an interdisciplinary approach. The empirical data comprise resolutions of the United Nations Security Council and a selection of diplomatic statements. These materials were analyzed not only from a linguistic perspective but also within their respective political and historical contexts. The study employed content analysis, comparative analysis, and systems analysis to examine diplomatic discourse as a complex phenomenon.
Results. Diplomatic discourse can be regarded as a distinct type of institutional discourse, characterized by several stable features. Its key attributes include high contextual dependence, regulation, a performative nature, the continuity of diplomatic traditions, and an orientation toward achieving the foreign policy objectives of the state. It is noted that, in addition to specialized professional terminology, diplomatic language is characterized by established protocol and etiquette formulas, as well as complex syntactic structures.
Conclusions. The study refines the approaches to defining the concept of ‘diplomatic discourse’, traces its relationship with institutional and professional discourses, and identifies its distinctive features. These findings may be applied in further theoretical and practical analyses of diplomatic communication.
References
ИСТОЧНИКИ
Заявление МИД России в связи с попыткой военного переворота в Многонациональном Государстве Боливия. (2024a) Министерство иностранных дел Российской Федерации. [Электронный ресурс]. URL: https://www.mid.ru/ru/foreign_policy/news/1959801/ (дата обращения 09.01.2026).
Заявление МИД России в связи с развитием ситуации в Сирийской Арабской Республике. (2024b) Министерство иностранных дел Российской Федерации. [Электронный ресурс]. URL: https://www.mid.ru/ru/press_service/official_statement/1987700/ (дата обращения 08.01.2026).
Заявление МИД России в связи с ситуацией вокруг Венесуэлы. (2025) Министерство иностранных дел Российской Федерации. [Электронный ресурс]. URL: https://www.mid.ru/ru/foreign_policy/news/2066681/ (дата обращения 09.01.2026).
Заявление МИД России в связи с ситуацией на киргизско-таджикской границе. (2022b) Министерство иностранных дел Российской Федерации. [Электронный ресурс]. URL: https://www.mid.ru/ru/foreign_policy/news/1830048/ (дата обращения 08.01.2026).
Заявление МИД России о ситуации в процессе армяно-азербайджанской нормализации. (2023) Министерство иностранных дел Российской Федерации. [Электронный ресурс]. URL: https://www.mid.ru/ru/foreign_policy/news/1865114/ (дата обращения 09.01.2026).
Заявление МИД России по итогам совещания министров иностранных дел России и АСЕАН. (2022a) Министерство иностранных дел Российской Федерации. [Электронный ресурс]. URL: https://www.mid.ru/ru/foreign_policy/news/1825104/ (дата обращения 08.01.2026).
Концепция внешней политики Российской Федерации (утверждена Президентом Российской Федерации В. В. Путиным 31 марта 2023 г. (2023) Министерство иностранных дел Российской Федерации. [Электронный ресурс]. URL: https://www.mid.ru/ru/detail-material-page/1860586/ (дата обращения 07.01.2026).
Резолюция 1373 (2001), принятая Советом Безопасности ООН 28 сентября 2001 г. (2001) Организация Объединенных Наций. [Электронный ресурс]. URL: https://undocs.org/S/RES/1373(2001) (дата обращения 02.01.2026).
Резолюция 1973 (2011), принятая Советом Безопасности на его 6498-м заседании 17 марта 2011 года. (2011) Организация Объединенных Наций. [Электронный ресурс]. URL: https://undocs.org/S/RES/1973(2011) (дата обращения 02.01.2026).
Резолюция 2792 (2025), принятая Советом Безопасности на его 9997-м заседании 17 сентября 2025 года. (2025) Организация Объединенных Наций. [Электронный ресурс]. URL: https://docs.un.org/ru/S/RES/2792(2025) (дата обращения 07.01.2026).
A Global Strategy for the European Union’s Foreign and Security Policy. June 2016. Web-site CoE. (2016) [Online]. Available at: https://www.coe-civ.eu/kh/a-global-strategy-for-the-european-unions-foreign-and-security-policy (accessed 09.01.2026).
Resolution 242 (1967) of 22 November 1967. Mideast situation/Withdrawal of Israeli forces, termination of states of belligerency. (1967) United Nations. [Online]. Available at: https://www.un.org/unispal/document/autoinsert-184858/ (accessed 02.01.2026).
Xīn Shidai de Zhōngguo Guojiā Ānquan Baipishū | Xīn Shidai de Zhōngguo Guojiā Ānquan. Xīnhuashe [新时代 的中国国家安全白皮书｜新时代的中国国家安全. 来源：新华社]. Zhōnghua Renmin Gongheguo Guofangbu [中华人民共和国国防部]. (2025) [Online]. Available at: http://www.mod.gov.cn/gfbw/fgwx/bps/16385614.html (accessed 09.01.2026).
СЛОВАРИ
Арутюнова, Н. Д. (1990) Дискурс. В кн.: Лингвистический энциклопедический словарь. М.: Советская энциклопедия, с. 136–137.
Кузнецов, С. А. (2000) Большой толковый словарь русского языка. СПб.: Норинт, 1536 с.
СПИСОК ЛИТЕРАТУРЫ
Ван Дейк, Т. (2006) Дискурс и власть. М.: Прогресс, 312 с.
Голованова, Е. И. (2013) Профессиональный дискурс, субдискурс, жанр профессиональной коммуникации: соотношение понятий. Вестник Челябинского государственного университета, № 1 (292), с. 32–35.
Желнова, И. Л. (2011) Язык дипломатии в жанровой системе современного русского языка. В кн.: Человек в информационном пространстве: межвузовский сборник научных трудов в 2 т. Т. 1, вып. 10. Ярославль: Изд-во Ярославского государственного педагогического университета им. К. Д. Ушинского, с. 6–9.
Кожетева, А. С. (2012a) Дипломатический дискурс как особый вид институционального дискурса. Научный вестник Воронежского государственного архитектурно-строительного университета. Серия: Современные лингвистические и методико-дидактические исследования, № 17, с. 54–63.
Кожетева, А. С. (2012b) Языковая объективация адресанта и адресата в дипломатическом дискурсе. Теория и практика общественного развития, № 1, с. 255–258.
Никанорова, И. А. (2017) Изменение политического и дипломатического дискурса в XXI веке в связи с появлением новых акторов на мировой сцене. В кн.: Ф. Р. Мирзоева, А. И Назаренко (ред.). Язык как фактор культурной дипломатии. Материалы межвузовской научно-практической конференции. М.: Изд-во Дипломатической академии Министерства иностранных дел Российской Федерации, с. 152–156.
Терентий, Л. М. (2010) Дипломатический дискурс как особая форма политической коммуникации. Вопросы когнитивной лингвистики, № 1 (22), с. 47–56.
Терентий, Л. М. (2015) Дипломатический дискурс как особая форма научной коммуникации. Вопросы психолингвистики, № 24, с. 176–185.
Шейгал, Е. И. (2005) Проблемы анализа политического дискурса. В кн.: Е. А. Опарина, Е. А. Казак (ред.). Русский язык в современном обществе: (Функциональные и статусные характеристики). М.: Изд-во Института научной информации по общественным наукам РАН, с. 51–70.
Яппарова, В. Н. (2016) Дипломатический дискурс как объект междисциплинарного исследования. Вестник ТГГПУ, № 2 (44), с. 165–170.
Chilton, P. (2009) Metaphors in political discourse. In: J. L. Mey (ed.). Concise Encyclopedia of Pragmatics. Oxford: Elsevier Publ., pp. 622–624.
Cooper, V. A. (2024) The Good, the Bad and the Other: Discursive constructions of nations in Voice of America’s international news. Discourse & Society, vol. 36, no. 5, pp. 640–660. https://doi.org/10.1177/09579265241304002
Fairclough, N. (2006) Genres in political discourse. In: J. L. Mey (ed.). Encyclopedia of Pragmatics. Amsterdam: Elsevier Publ., pp. 293–298.
Foucault, M. (1971) L’Ordre du discours. Paris: Gallimard Publ., 81 р.
Hansen, L. (2006) Security as practice: Discourse analysis and the Bosnian war. London: Routledge Publ., 292 р.
Jin, Z. K. (2007) Diplomacy. Beijing: Renmin University of China Press, 21 р.
Lakoff, G. (1973) Hedges: A study in meaning criteria and the logic of fuzzy concepts. Journal of Philosophical Logic, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 458–508. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00262952
Schunz, S., Topcuoglu, E. A. (2023) A European Union ‘water diplomacy’? Frames of water in EU external action. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 1–36. https://doi.org/10.1163/1871191x-bja10179
Zhang, C., Afzaal, M., Omar, A., Altohami, W. M. A. (2023) A corpus-based analysis of the stylistic features of Chinese and American diplomatic discourse. Frontiers in Psychology, vol. 14, article 1122675. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1122675
SOURCES
A Global Strategy for the European Union’s Foreign and Security Policy. June 2016. Web-site CoE. (2016) [Online]. Available at: https://www.coe-civ.eu/kh/a-global-strategy-for-the-european-unions-foreign-and-security-policy (accessed 09.01.2026). (In English)
“China’s National Security in the New Era” White Paper | “China’s National Security in the New Era”. Xinhua News Agency [新时代的中国国家安全白皮书｜新时代的中国国家安全. 来源：新华社]. (2025) Ministry of National Defense of the People’s Republic of China [中华人民共和国国防部]. (2025) [Online]. Available at: http://www.mod.gov.cn/gfbw/fgwx/bps/16385614.html (accessed 09.01.2026). (In Chinese)
Foreign Ministry statement on the situation concerning the Armenian-Azerbaijani normalisation process. (2023)
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation. [Online]. Available at: https://www.mid.ru/ru/foreign_policy/news/1865114/ (accessed 09.01.2026). (In Russian)
Foreign Ministry statement on an attempted military coup in the Plurinational State of Bolivia. (2024) Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation. [Online]. Available at: https://www.mid.ru/ru/foreign_policy/news/1959801/ (accessed 09.01.2026). (In Russian)
Foreign Ministry statement on the results of the Russia - ASEAN Foreign Ministers’ Meeting. (2022) Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation. [Online]. Available at: https://www.mid.ru/ru/foreign_policy/news/1825104/ (accessed 08.01.2026). (In Russian)
Foreign Ministry statement on the development of the situation in the Syrian Arab Republic. (2024) Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation. [Online]. Available at: https://www.mid.ru/ru/press_service/official_statement/1987700/?lang=ru (accessed 08.01.2026). (In Russian)
Resolution 242 (1967) of 22 November 1967. Mideast situation/Withdrawal of Israeli forces, termination of states of belligerency. (1967) United Nations. [Online]. Available at: https://www.un.org/unispal/document/autoinsert-184858/ (accessed 02.01.2026). (In English)
Resolution 1373 (2001) Adopted by the Security Council at its 4385th meeting, on 28 September 2001. (2001) United Nations. [Online]. Available at: https://undocs.org/S/RES/1373(2001) (accessed 02.01.2026). (In Russian)
Resolution 1973 (2011) Adopted by the Security Council at its 6498th meeting, on 17 March 2011. (2011) United Nations. [Online]. Available at: https://undocs.org/S/RES/1973(2011) (accessed 02.01.2026). (In Russian)
Resolution 2792 (2025) Adopted by the Security Council at its 9997th meeting, on 17 September 2025. (2025) United Nations. [Online]. Available at: https://docs.un.org/en/S/RES/2792(2025) (accessed 05.01.2026). (In Russian)
Russian Foreign Ministry statement on developments around Venezuela. (2025) Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation. [Online]. Available at: https://www.mid.ru/ru/press_service/spokesman/official_statement/2070902/ (accessed 09.01.2026). (In Russian)
Statement of the Russian MFA in connection with the situation on the Kyrgyz-Tajik border. (2022b) Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation. [Online]. Available at: https://www.mid.ru/ru/foreign_policy/news/1830048/ (accessed 08.01.2026). (In Russian)
The Concept of the Foreign Policy of the Russian Federation. (2023) Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation. [Online]. Available at: https://www.mid.ru/ru/detail-material-page/1860586/ (accessed 07.01.2026). (In Russian)
DICTIONARIES
Arutyunova, N. D. (1990) Discourse. In: Linguistic Encyclopedic Dictionary. Moscow: Sovetskaya entsiklopediya Publ., pp. 136–137. (In Russian)
Kuznetsov, S. A. (2000) Great Explanatory Dictionary of the Russian Language. Saint Petersburg: Norint Publ., 1536 p. (In Russian)
REFERENCES
Chilton, P. (2009) Metaphors in political discourse. In: J. L. Mey (ed.). Concise Encyclopedia of Pragmatics. Oxford: Elsevier Publ., pp. 622–624. (In English)
Cooper, V. A. (2024) The Good, the Bad and the Other: Discursive constructions of nations in Voice of America’s international news. Discourse & Society, vol. 36, no. 5, pp. 640–660. https://doi.org/10.1177/09579265241304002 (In English)
Fairclough, N. (2006) Genres in political discourse. In: J. L. Mey (ed.). Encyclopedia of Pragmatics. Amsterdam: Elsevier Publ., pp. 293–298. (In English)
Foucault, M. (1971) The Discourse on Language [L’Ordre du discours]. Paris: Gallimard Publ., 81 р. (In English)
Golovanova, E. I. (2013) Professional discourse, subdiscourse, and the genre of professional communication: concept relations. Bulletin of Chelyabinsk State University, no. 1 (292), pp. 32–35. (In Russian)
Hansen, L. (2006) Security as practice: Discourse analysis and the Bosnian war. London: Routledge Publ., 292 р. (In English)
Jin, Z. K. (2007) Diplomacy. Beijing: Renmin University of China Press, 21 р. (In English)
Kozheteva, A. S. (2012a) Diplomatic discourse as a special type of institutional discourse. Nauchnyj vestnik voronezhskogo gosudarstvennogo arkhitekturno-stroitel’nogo universiteta. seriya: Sovremennye lingvisticheskie i metodiko-didakticheskie issledovaniya, no. 17, pp. 54–63. (In Russian)
Kozheteva, A. S. (2012b) Language objectivation of addresser and addressee in the diplomatic discourse. Theory and Practice of Social Development, no. 1, pp. 255–258. (In Russian)
Nikanorova, I. A. (2017) The change of political and diplomatic discourse in the 21st century due to new actors on the world stage. In: F. R. Mirzoeva, A. I. Nazarenko (eds.). Language as a Factor of Cultural Diplomacy. Materials of the Interuniversity Scientific and Practical Conference. Moscow: Diplomatic Academy of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russian Federation Publ., pp. 152–156. (In Russian)
Sheigal, E. I. (2005) Problems of political discourse analysis. In: E. A. Oparina, E. A. Kazak (eds.). Russian language in modern society: (Functional and status characteristics). Moscow: Institute of Scientific Information for Social Sciences of the Russian Academy of Sciences Publ., pp. 51–70. (In Russian)
Terentiy, L. M. (2010) Diplomatic discourse as a specific form of political communication. Issues of Cognitive Linguistics, no. 1 (22), pp. 47–56. (In Russian)
Terentiy, L. M. (2015) Diplomatic discourse as a specific form of scientific communication. Journal of Psycholinguistics, no. 24, pp. 176–185. (In Russian)
Lakoff, G. (1973) Hedges: A study in meaning criteria and the logic of fuzzy concepts. Journal of Philosophical Logic, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 458–508. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00262952 (In English)
Schunz, S., Topcuoglu, E. A. (2023) A European Union “water diplomacy”? Frames of water in EU external action. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 1–36. https://doi.org/10.1163/1871191x-bja10179 (In English)
Van Dijk, T. (2006) Discourse and Power. Moscow: Progress Publ., 312 p. (In Russian)
Yapparova, V. N. (2016) Diplomatic discourse as an object of interdisciplinary research. Vestnik TGGPU, no. 2 (44), pp. 165–170. (In Russian)
Zhang, C., Afzaal, M., Omar, A., Altohami, W. M. A. (2023) A corpus-based analysis of the stylistic features of Chinese and American diplomatic discourse. Frontiers in Psychology, vol. 14, article 1122675. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1122675 (In English)
Zhelnova, I. L. (2011) The Language of Diplomacy in the Genre System of the Modern Russian Language. In: Man in the Information Space: Interuniversity Collection of Scientific Papers in 2 vols. Vol. 1. Issue 10. Yaroslavl: Yaroslavl State Pedagogical University named after K. D. Ushinsky Publ., pp. 6–9. (In Russian)
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Anastasiia S. Tarasova
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The work is provided under the terms of the Public Offer and of Creative Commons public license Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0).
This license permits an unlimited number of users to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format, and to remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, including commercial use.
This license retains copyright for the authors but allows others to freely distribute, use, and adapt the work, on the mandatory condition that appropriate credit is given. Users must provide a correct link to the original publication in our journal, cite the authors' names, and indicate if any changes were made.
Copyright remains with the authors. The CC BY 4.0 license does not transfer rights to third parties but rather grants users prior permission for use, provided the attribution condition is met. Any use of the work will be governed by the terms of this license.
