“Multilingualism” in Digital Diplomacy: Linguistic Characteristics and Socio-Political Implications
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.46991/hc.2025.22.2.170Keywords:
Digital diplomacy, multilingualism, language choice, soft power,, linguistic inequality, global communication, legitimacy, power, discourseAbstract
The rapid digitalization of diplomatic practice has transformed how states communicate, negotiate, and project influence in the global arena. This article examines the role of multilingualism as a strategic, political, and sociocultural component of digital diplomacy. While much scholarship has focused on technological innovation and communication efficiency, linguistic choices often subtle yet deeply consequential remain underexplored.
Drawing on theoretical perspectives from sociolinguistics, communication studies, and international relations, the study analyzes how language selection shapes visibility, accessibility, legitimacy, and soft-power projection in digital environments. It further discusses the challenges posed by global language hierarchies, machine-translation reliance, and linguistic inequalities that can marginalize certain communities in international discourse.
The paper argues that multilingualism is not merely a technical feature of digital communication but a political act embedded in power relations, cultural identity formation, and global governance. Ultimately, the article positions multilingualism as a core element of contemporary digital diplomacy and a prerequisite for equitable global communication in the digital age.
Downloads
References
References
1. C. Bjola & M. Holmes (eds.), Digital Diplomacy: Theory and Practice (London: Routledge, 2015); I. Manor, The Digitalization of Public Diplomacy (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2019).
2. J. Pamment, New Public Diplomacy in the 21st Century (London: Routledge, 2014).
3. P. Bourdieu, Language and Symbolic Power (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1991); J. S. Nye, Soft Power (New York: PublicAffairs, 2004).
4. R. Phillipson, Linguistic Imperialism (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992); M. Warschauer, Technology and Social Inclusion (Cambridge: MIT Press, 2003).
5. N. Fairclough, Critical Discourse Analysis (London: Longman, 1995); R. Wodak, The Politics of Fear (London: SAGE, 2015).
6. J. Melissen (ed.), The New Public Diplomacy (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005).
7. P. Seib, Real-Time Diplomacy (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012).
8. J. Habermas, The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1989).
9. M. Castells, Communication Power (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009).
10. C. Bjola & J. Pamment, “Digital Diplomacy and International Organisations,” The Hague Journal of Diplomacy 14, no. 1–2 (2019): 1–22.
11. J. Kurbalija, An Introduction to Internet Governance (Geneva: DiploFoundation, 2016).
12. R. Adler-Nissen, Stigma Management in International Relations (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014).
13. M. Gillespie & A. Webb, “Diasporas and Diplomacy,” Global Media and Communication 8, no. 3 (2012): 253–272.
14. Cull, “The Long Road to Public Diplomacy 2.0,” International Studies Review 15, no. 1 (2013): 123–139.
15. Nye, J. S. (2004). Soft power: The means to success in world politics. PublicAffairs.
16. Pamment, J. (2014). New public diplomacy in the 21st century: A comparative study of policy and practice. Routledge.
17. Phillipson, R. (1992). Linguistic imperialism. Oxford University Press.
18. Seib, P. (2012). Real-time diplomacy: Politics and power in the social media era. Palgrave Macmillan
19. N. Snow & P. M. Taylor (eds.), Routledge Handbook of Public Diplomacy (London: Routledge, 2009).
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Աննա Տարոյան
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
