» Linguistic mechanisms of internal communication in the security and defence sector under hybrid threats

Linguistic mechanisms of internal communication in the security and defence sector under hybrid threats

DOI: doi.org/10.15407/ukrmova2026.03.003

UDC 81'42

Volodymyr Kuzmenko, Doctor of Philology, Professor, Professor of the Department of East European Languages
National Academy of the Security Service of Ukraine
22 Mykhaylo Maksymovych St., Kyiv 03195, Ukraine

E-mail: kuzmenko-vi@ukr.net
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2402-1493

Heading: Articles
Language: Ukrainian

Abstract: The article examines linguistic mechanisms of internal communication in Ukraine’s security and defense sector under hybrid threats. Drawing on publicly available internal institutional communication, the study focuses on language practices and linguistic means of address, directivity, categorization, explanation, and consolidation. Four mechanisms are identified: regulatory-directive, nominative-categorizing, explanatory-argumentative, and identification-consolidating. The analysis demonstrates that their realization varies according to the communicative situation, the relationship between addresser and addressee, and the pragmatic purpose of the message. Particular attention is paid to lexical markers of professionally relevant risks and values, as well as to the interaction of nomination, evaluation, explanation, and argumentation. Recurring linguistic choices provide shared reference points for interpreting professional situations and may contribute to maintaining institutionally relevant narratives.

Keywords: internal communications, security and defense sector, lexical markers, narrative, language practice, institutional discourse, informative (hybrid) threats.

REFERENCES

Bezuhla, L.R. (2009). Dialogue, dialogical text and dialogical discourse. Bulletin of V.N. Karazin Kharkiv National University, 867 (60), 7–14 (in Ukrainian).

Izak, M., Case, P., & Ybema, S. (2024). Communication in organizations: An overview and provocations. International Journal of Management Reviews, 26 (4), 628–648. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12374

Khraban, T. (2022). Discursive strategy for studying modern Ukrainian non-institutional military discourse. Social Communications: Theory and Practice, 13 (2), 157–169. https://doi.org/10.51423/2524-0471-2021-13-2-3 (in Ukrainian).

Kompantseva, L.F. (2020). Linguistic expertise of social networks in the context of hybrid challenges to Ukraine’s national security. Current Issues of Ukrainian Linguistics: Theory and Practice, 40, 119–139. https://doi.org/10.17721/APULTP.2020.40.119-139 (in Ukrainian).

Kuznietsova, H.V. (2021). Political discourse in Eastern European linguistics: the addressee aspect. Zhytomyr Ivan Franko State University Journal. Philological Sciences, 1 (94), 68–78. https://doi.org/10.35433/philology.1(94).2021.68-78 (in Ukrainian).

Marra, M., & Dawson, S. (2021). Workplace and institutional discourse. M. Haugh, D.Z. Kádár, M. Terkourafi (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of sociopragmatics (pp. 475–495). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108954105.025

Siuta, Н.M. (2025). Ukrainian language in the military environment – today’s realities. Ukrainian language, 4 (96), 69–73. Retrieved June 29, 2026 from https://surl.li/oylvkx (in Ukrainian).

Skorofatova, A.O. (2024). Deontic modality and the category of performativity in the aspect of legal text linguistics. Current Issues of Ukrainian Linguistics: Theory and Practice, 49, 46–60. https://doi.org/10.17721/APULTP.2024.49.46-60 (in Ukrainian).

Zhuikova, M.V. (2021). Evolution of the national identity of Ahatanhel Krymsky and language markers WE and OUR. The World of the Orient, 2 (111), 23–38. https://doi.org/10.15407/orientw2021.02.023 (in Ukrainian).

Received 28.07.2026 Аpproved 14.10.2026 Рublished 02.11.2026