LINGUISTIC MENTIOLOGY: DEVELOPMENT OF O. POTEBNYA’S HYPOTHESIS ON THE NATURE OF LANGUAGE, UNREAL TYPES OF COMMUNICATION, AND THE THEORY OF “LANGUAGE CATASTROPHE”

Abstract

Introduction. Explaining the nature of language, O.Potebnya developed a hypothesis of its divine origin, suggesting that it was initially tuned to positive and exclusively truthful communication. The modern Ukrainian linguist S.Vakulenko expanded on this hypothesis, pointing out the development of various types of unreal communication, which present an opposition between truthful and untruthful communication. These positions are projected onto the issues of linguistic mentiology.
Purpose. The aim of the scientific inquiry is to demonstrate the peculiarities of the development of O.Potebnya’s hypothesis regarding the divine origin of language and types of primary communication, as elaborated in S.Vakulenko's modern hypothesis and supplemented by the author of this article with an update of the “language catastrophe” theory grounded in the phenomenon of verbalizing falsehood or “diabolical speech”.
Results. The features of the development of O. Potebnya’s methodological positions regarding the hypothesis of the divine origin of language are demonstrated, projecting onto (1) S. Vakulenko’s hypothetical teachings concerning the differentiation of unreal types of hierarchical communication presented on a scale of evaluation and (2) the theory of “language catastrophe” associated with the modeling of falsehood, which is the basis of “diabolical speech”. This theory is based on manipulative communicative strategies for presenting untruths with corresponding semantic and pragmatic activators of ideologemes and mythologemes, influencing the distortion of linguistic consciousness and modeling pseudo-reality. In the traditional Christian worldview and perception, a system of several types of unreal communication is presented in multi-level planes with the actualization of languages of different nature (mental, spiritual, non-verbal and vocal, material, corporeal). To illustrate these theoretical positions, internet discourse is utilized, characterizing Putin’s discourse as an expressive type of manipulative deceiver, representing “destructive speech”, for the realization of which manipulations of omission or concealment of true information, its distortion, substitution of concepts, verbalization of cunning, creation of manipulative symbolism, imagery, conditional terms, etc., are used. This pertains to forms of information warfare.
Originality. The novelty of this scientific study lies in presenting the development of the theory of linguistic
mentiology, which is projected onto the clarification of the nature of contemporary fake communication, propaganda, and information warfare.
Conclusion. In contemporary Ukrainian linguistics, we observe the development of O. Potebnya’s theory regarding the nature of language and types of unreal communication (S. Vakulenko), as well as the theory of
“language catastrophe” (F. Batsevych). Unreal communication can occur in various hierarchical systems,
reflecting (1) communication between God and angels of lower and higher ranks, (2) between God and humans, (3) among higher-ranked angels, and (4) among lower-ranked angels, (5) as well as between angels of higher and lower ranks simultaneously, (6) between humans and angels of lower and higher ranks, (7) among demons themselves, (8) between demons and angels of higher and lower ranks, (9) between the devil and God, and (10) between the devil and humans. However, the real form of communication is undoubtedly between humans, although it may exhibit characteristics of devilish speech, aggressive and untruthful, or angelic speech, sacred and righteous. These definitions of communication types are considered metaphorical.
Falsehood is the cause of the “catastrophe” of each individual language. The “catastrophe” of language is manifested in the universal linguistic tendency towards an increase in the number of words, meanings, senses, connotations, associations that verbalize negative assessment, certain conditional or figurative terms, and so on.
Contemporary Ukrainian internet communication presents the image of Putin as a deceiver, who, along with his ideologues, uses a system of manipulative technologies to verbalize falsehood. Such speech is interpreted as “diabolical speech”.