A Comparative Analysis of Languages in the Area of International Relations
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31548/philolog2021.03.107Abstract
Abstract. The current study is aimed at the international languages’ detailed examining and comparative analysis in the area of International relations and diplomacy in chronological order. It has proved that in language analysis, there are many variables that must be taken into the deep account; the most principal ones are the homogenous or heterogeneous population structure, cultural heritage of the state, and culture of language learnt, different techniques and strategies in learning situations. The study highlights the fact that international relations appeared in the X – IX centuries BC and developed quite a long time and dynamically; their rapid development reason was the need for food and slave trade. Subsequently, diplomacy became a tool for resolving conflicts peacefully. International relations began in Greece and Rome; thus, the first language for conducting negotiations was Latin, however, we must admit that a language itself was often the cause of misunderstandings and conflicts. At one point it was replaced by French due to Napoleon’s vast lands seizure and later by English after the Paris Peace Conference, at which English and French were equalized. The UN meeting has approved several international languages – English, French, Spanish, Russian, and Chinese, but they are considered to be only international ones. Undoubtedly, diplomatic language is a great art of speaking, writing, and resolving some problems at issue. Comparing the number of people and language importance, we may conclude that native speakers do not make the language international. Easiness to learn and similarity to other languages are the distinguishing features required to become international.
It’s worth noting that the language learning simplicity as well as the speakers’ mentality does not affect the language social significance directly.
There has been turned out that the global map of language influence has a hierarchical structure: the central axis of communications (hub) – English, surrounded by second-order hubs: German, French, Spanish, Russian and Portuguese. It is believed that the oldest written treaty was a treaty concluded in 1296 BC between Pharaoh Ramses II and King Hatgushil III. The current study has determined communication and international relations as common denominators and reached the conclusion that diplomatic language is characterized not only by the fact of description accuracy, an in-depth analysis of government policy and actions, but also precise and concise wording.
References
Habunia, Z., Ulimbasheva, Ye. (2005). Mizkulturna komunikatsiia yak fakt movy [Cross-cultural communication as a language fact]. Lviv, 176. [In Ukrainian].
Zakyrianov, К. (2015). Sopostavitelnoie issledovaniie raznostrukturnykh yazykov : linhvometodicheskiy aspect. [Comparative study of languages of different structures: linguistic and methodological aspect]. Rossiyskiy humanitarnyi zhurnal. [Russian Humanitarian Journal]. Vol. 4 (3). 224-233. [In Russian].
https://doi.org/10.15643/libartrus-2015.3.6
Kashchyshyn, N. (2017). Osoblyvosti dyplomatychnoi movy : istoriia i sohodennia. [Specifics of diplomatic language: history and the present]. URL: https://everest-center.com/osoblivosti-diplomatichnoyi-movi-istoriya-i-sogodennya/
Kuzmin, E. (1996). Protokol i etiket diplomaticheskoho i delovoho obshcheniia. [Protocol and etiquette of diplomatic and business communication]. Moscow: College of Law, Moscow State University, 381. [In Russian].
Sahaidak, О. (2006). Dyplomatychnyi protokol ta etyket. [Diplomatic protocol and etiquette]. Kyiv: Znannia [Knowledge], 380. [In Ukrainian].
Sardachuk, P., Кulyk, О. (2001). Dyplomatychne predstavnytstvo : orhanizatsiia i formy roboty. [Diplomatic representation: organization and forms of work]. Kyiv: Ukraina [Ukraine], 176. [In Ukrainian].
Safonov, М. (2007). Kitayskii yazyk i kitayskaia pismennost : kurs lektsyi. [Chinese language and Chinese script]. Moscow: AST, East-West, 640. [In Russian].
Burhanudeen, H. (2006). Diplomatic language: an insight from speeches used in international diplomacy. Journal of Southeast Asia Social Sciences and Humanities "Akademika". Vol. 67. No 1. P. 37-51. [In English].
Crystal, D. (2003). Front matter. In English as a Global Language. N. Y.: Cambridge University Press, 224. [In English].
Felix K, Ameka. (1987). A comparative analysis of linguistic routines in two languages: English and ewe. Journal of Pragmatics. No. 11 (3). P. 299-326. [In English].
https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(87)90135-4
Stanko Nick. (2001). Use of language in diplomacy. URL: https://www.diplomacy. edu/sites/default/files/Language_Diplomacy_Chapter2.PDF
Downloads
Issue
Section
License
Relationship between right holders and users shall be governed by the terms of the license Creative Commons Attribution – non-commercial – Distribution On Same Conditions 4.0 international (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0):https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/deed.uk
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).