A PHILOSOPHICAL ANALYSIS OF THE GENESIS OF DEVIANT SPEECH ACTS IN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION

Abstract

The article presents a philosophical and communicative analysis of the phenomenon of deviant speech acts (DSA) in public administration. The relevance of the study is determined by the paradox of modern political communication: amid growing demands for transparency and dialogic nature of power, there is an increase in speech deviations, which are not just linguistic errors, but symptoms of deep transformations of the political field. Based on a synthesis of speech act theory (J. Austin, J. Searle), the concept of habitus and symbolic violence (P. Bourdieu) and the theory of communicative action (J. Habermas), the authors’ typology of DSA is developed, including performative collapse, communicative rupture, symbolic violence and contextual-tactical error. The empirical base is a corpus of 120 public statements of senior officials of Russia, the USA and the EU countries (2010-2024). A comparative analysis reveals systemic differences in the genesis of DSA: in the Russian context, they reflect the transformation of the entire field of public administration, while in the Western context they are more often associated with the crisis of specific political figures. It is concluded that DSA are markers of the crisis of communicative rationality and a tool for the production of power in the conditions of digital transformation of public space.