Lexicographic description of the language of politics in the late XX – early XXI centuries

Dictionary of language of politics as an important document, fixing the dictionary meanings characteristic for a certain historical epoch, has a scientific and public importance. The purpose of the article is to determine the composition, systematization and brief characteristics of lexicographic products describing the language of politics. The research material is monolingual linguistic/complex paper dictionaries published in Russia since the end of the 20th century. Insufficient knowledge of the cognitive and research potential of dictionaries of the language of politics determines the relevance of the research. During the research we selected 54 dictionaries of the language of politics, which were divided into 18 types: author’s dictionaries, terminological dictionaries, dictionaries of neologisms, dictionaries of obsolete vocabulary, dictionaries of nicknames, linguistic and cultural dictionaries, dictionaries of quotations, thematic, ideographic, historical, associative dictionaries, dictionaries of professional vocabulary, dictionaries of metaphors, phraseological dictionaries, dictionaries of labels, dictionaries of slogans, dictionaries of abbreviations, slang dictionaries. The author's and terminological dictionaries, dictionaries of neologisms and obsolete vocabulary are the most quantitatively represented. In Russian political lexicography, we can witness the differentiation (by addressee, by unit of description, etc.) and specialization (narrowing of the boundaries of the subject of dictionary fixation) of dictionaries. New types of dictionaries that reflect the trends in the development of linguistics (cognitive research, anthropocentrism, functionalism, etc.) are emerging. Attention is also drawn to an increase in volume of dictionary entries and the use of visual illustrations in them, an encyclopedic interpretation of a word, an increase in a volume of extralinguistic data, there is a politically biased position in relation to the described vocabulary. Dictionaries of the language of politics can act as auxiliary material for conceptual, semantic, and cognitive studies of political communication.

1. Blakar R. Language as a means of social power. Language and modeling of social interaction. Moscow: Progress, 1987, P. 88–125. (In Russ.)

2. Denisov P.N. The language of Russian social thought in the late 19 th–first quarter of the 20 th centuries. Moscow: MALP, 1998, 184 p. (In Russ.)

3. Filin F.P. About V.I. Lenin's language Dictionary. Voprosy iazykoznaniia. 1974, N 6, P. 3–10.(In Russ.)

4. Kozyrev V.A., Cherniak V.D. Lexicography of the Russian language: the current century and the past century. Saint-Petersburg: RGPU Press, 2015, 633 p. (In Russ.)

5. Manik S.A. English-language political lexicography: formation, development, current state. Doctor’s degree dissertation. Nizhnii Novgorod: 2019, 572 p. (In Russ.)

6. Morkovkin V.V. On the scope and content of the concept of «theoretical lexicography». Voprosy iazykoznaniia. 1987, N 6, P. 33–42. (In Russ.)

7. Pertseva V.G. Dictionaries of the language of politicians in the context of English lexicography. Vestnik KGU. 2016, N 2, P. 211–215. (In Russ.)

8. Skliarevskaia G.N. The word in a changing world: the Russian language of the beginning of the XXI century: state, problems, prospects. Issledovaniia po slavianskim iazykam. 2001, N 6, P. 177–202. (In Russ.)

9. Yudina T.V. Theory of socio-political speech. Moscow: Moscow University Press, 2001, 158 p. (In Russ.)