WHAT IS SOCIETY’S NOMINATIVE LANGUAGE? PHILOSOPHICAL ANALYSIS OF SOCIAL THEORY OF E. ROSENSTOK-HUESSY
The article presents an analysis of the social aspect of language based on the methodological ideas of E. Rosenstock-Huessy. The approach of the sophist to the analysis of social phenomena is based on the idea of an inextricable connection between the processes of thinking, speech, and communication, which are founded in language. Language is considered by the philosopher not only as a semantic structure, but also as a force that changes people and society. Such a speech approach to the analysis of society outlines some possible ways out of the social crisis in which modern European culture finds itself. Rosenstock-Huessyunderstands the power of language from a dialogical point of view as the power of speech, capable of establishing long-term and free relations between people. Embedded in the process of dialogical thought of the twentieth century, the philosophyof Rosenstock-Huessyseeks to overcome the language of Modern science, which reduced the human personality to an impersonal subject of knowledge. Criticizing the entire Western philosophical tradition for its monologue and striving for “pure” knowledge, Rosenstock- Huessy sees the goal of thinking in dialogic speech, transforming both the speaker and the listener. Rosenstock- Huessy introduces the original concept of the name into philosophical circulation. The name in his social theory is an intermediary between language and society, providing the processes of normal social communication. In this regard, the authors of the article consider it useful for social philosophy and sociology to introduce the concept of “nominative social practices”: this concept makes it possible to clarify the role of imperative speech in the processes of socialization. As a result of studying the social philosophy of the thinker, the authors propose the concept of “nominative language” as a system of social names and nominative practices. The relevance of addressing the nominative language of society is determined, according to the authors, by its social problems, in particular, by the dysfunction of names in modern society.