INTEGRATIVE METHODOLOGY FOR THE ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH-LANGUAGE OFFICIAL AND BUSINESS DOCUMENTS IN WARTIME DISCOURSE (2022–2025)
Keywords:
intergovernmental agreements; conceptual metaphor; frame semantics; legal linguistics; modality; perlocutionary effect
Abstract
The article proposes an integrative methodology for analyzing the linguo-cognitive characteristics of English-language official documents in the wartime discourse of 2022–2025. It shows how the combination of cognitive semantics (conceptual metaphor theory, frame semantics), critical discourse analysis, and legal-genre studies makes it possible to formalize and quantitatively assess the perlocutionary effect of official texts. The perlocutionary effect is operationalized through five metrics: MSI (weighted sentence-level intensity of the modalities must/shall/will/may), TCH (temporal commitment horizon: fixed or multi-year terms vs open-ended formulae), CRL (presence of rapid-coordination triggers such as “within 24 hours”), EDI (density of enumerative clauses), and FCAF (frequency of frame-bearing lemmas support/commitment/security/deterrence/reform/recovery per 1,000 words). The analytical pipeline includes text normalization, segmentation, lemmatization, pattern matching by regular expressions, and reliability checks of annotation; reproducibility is ensured through CSV exports and versioning of processing scripts. The corpus comprises 10 authentic documents, covering key intergovernmental security arrangements (1–4), financial instruments (5–7), and sectoral memoranda of understanding (MoUs) (8–10), all drawn from official machinereadable sources (HTML/PDF/DOCX). The analysis reveals a hybridization of legal precision and cognitive modelling (metaphorization, framing) and highlights the role of the modalities shall/will/must/may and temporal markers (“10 years”, “100 years”, “for as long as it takes”) in constructing commitments and constraining possible interpretations. The findings demonstrate distinct genre-specific profiles (security agreements with higher MSI and TCH and CRL≈1; financial instruments with the highest EDI and a dominance of support/recovery/reform frames; MoUs with lower MSI and intermediate EDI), outline practical implications for drafters and translators, and indicate avenues for further corpusbased comparison (pre-war vs wartime texts; English- vs Ukrainian-language versions; sensitivity analyses).
References
1. Agreement on Security Cooperation between the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and Ukraine. 12.01.2024. Офіс Президента України. URL: https://www.president.gov.ua/en/news/ugoda-prospivrobitnictvo-u-sferi-bezpeki-mizh-ukrayinoyu-ta-88277
2. Bilateral Security Agreement between Ukraine and the United States of America. Офіс Президента України. 13.06.2024. URL: https://www.president.gov.ua/en/news/dvostoronnya-bezpekova-ugoda-mizh-ukrayinoyu-taspoluchenimi-91501
3. Agreement on Security Cooperation between Ukraine and Canada. Офіс Президента України. 20.02.2024. URL: https://www.president.gov.ua/en/news/ugoda-prospivrobitnictvo-u-sferi-bezpeki-mizh-ukrayinoyu-ta-89233
4. Accord on Support for Ukraine and Cooperation between Ukraine and the Government of Japan. Офіс Президента України. 13.06.2024. URL: https://www.president.gov.ua/en/news/ugoda-pro-pidtrimku-ukrayini-ta-spivrobitnictvomizh-ukrayin-91481
5. Regulation (EU) 2024/792 of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the Ukraine Facility. 29.02.2024. European Union. URL: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/792/oj/eng
6. Memorandum of Understanding on the exceptional macro-financial assistance of up to €5 billion to Ukraine. 04.10.2022. Європейська Комісія. URL: https://economy-finance.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2022-11/Memorandum%20of%20Understanding%20-%20EUR%205%20billion%20exceptional%20MFA%20to%20Ukraine.pdf
7. Agreement on the Establishment of a United States–Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund (Memorandum of Intent). 18.04.2024. Кабінет Міністрів України. URL: https://www.kmu.gov.ua/storage/app/uploads/public/681/33c/e8f/68133ce8f2e82842702204.pdf
8. Memorandum of Understanding regarding collaboration on Ukrainian energy system resilience. 24.09.2023; оновлено 05.12.2024. Посольство США в Україні. URL: https://ua.usembassy.gov/memorandum-of-understandingbetween-ukraine-and-the-usa-regarding-collaboration-onukrainian-energy-system-resilience-2/
9. Memorandum of Understanding on a Strategic Partnership on Biomethane, Hydrogen and other Synthetic Gases. 02.02.2023. Європейська Комісія. URL: https://energy.ec.europa.eu/publications/memorandum-understanding-between-european-unionand-ukraine-strategic-partnership-biomethane_en (Повний текст, PDF: https://energy.ec.europa.eu/document/download/0b10e313-1084-49e5-a320-9460108d4cb7_en?filename=MoU_UA_signed.pdf)
10. Memorandum of Understanding on Cooperation in the Field of Cyber Defence. National Security Archive – Cyber Vault. URL: https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/sites/default/files/documents/rl07a5-tyd4t/Ukraine-Romania-Memorandum-Understanding-cyber-defense-September-2-2022.pdf
11. Artstein R., Poesio M. Inter-coder agreement for computational linguistics // Computational Linguistics. 2008. Vol. 34, No. 4. P. 555–596. URL: https://doi.org/10.1162/coli.07-034-R2
12. Cohen J. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales // Educational and Psychological Measurement. 1960. Vol. 20, No. 1. P. 37–46. URL: https://doi.org/10.1177/001316446002000104
13. Fillmore C. J. Frame semantics // Linguistics in the Morning Calm. Seoul: Hanshin, 1982. P. 111–137.
14. Lakoff G., Johnson M. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1980.
15. Fairclough N. Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Longman, 1995.
16. Bhatia V. K. Analysing Genre: Language Use in Professional Settings. London: Longman, 1993.
17. Holm S. A simple sequentially rejective multiple test procedure // Scandinavian Journal of Statistics. 1979. Vol. 6, No. 2. P. 65–70.
18. Kruskal W. H., Wallis W. A. Use of ranks in one criterion variance analysis // Journal of the American Statistical Association. 1952. Vol. 47, No. 260. P. 583–621. URL: https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1952.10483441
19. Spearman C. The proof and measurement of association between two things // The American Journal of Psychology. 1904. Vol. 15, No. 1. P. 72–101. URL: https://doi.org/10.2307/1412159
20. Efron B., Tibshirani R. J. An Introduction to the Bootstrap. New York: Chapman & Hall/CRC, 1993.
21. Hart C. Critical Discourse Analysis and Cognitive Science: New Perspectives on Immigration Discourse. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010.
22. Hart C. Discourse, Grammar and Ideology: Functional and Cognitive Perspectives. London: Bloomsbury, 2014.
23. Charteris-Black J. Corpus Approaches to Critical Metaphor Analysis. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004.
24. Charteris-Black J. Politicians and Rhetoric: The Persuasive Power of Metaphor. 2nd ed. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011.
25. Charteris-Black J. Analysing Political Speeches: Rhetoric, Discourse and Metaphor. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014.
26. Musolff A. Political Metaphor Analysis: Discourse and Scenarios. London: Bloomsbury, 2016.
27. Chilton P. Analysing Political Discourse: Theory and Practice. London: Routledge, 2004.
28. van Dijk T. A. Ideology: A Multidisciplinary Approach. London: SAGE, 1998.
29. van Dijk T. A. Discourse and Power. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008.
30. Steen G. J., Dorst A. G., Herrmann J. B., Kaal A., Krennmayr T., Pasma T. A Method for Linguistic Metaphor Identification: From MIP to MIPVU. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2010
31. Baker P., Gabrielatos C., Khosravinik M., Krzyżanowski M., McEnery T., Wodak R. A useful methodological synergy? Combining critical discourse analysis and corpus linguistics // Discourse & Society. 2008. Vol. 19, No. 3. P. 273–305. URL: https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926508088962
32. Biber D., Conrad S., Reppen R. Corpus Linguistics: Investigating Language Structure and Use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998.
33. Tiersma P. M. Legal Language. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999.
34. Solan L. M. The Language of Judges. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1993.
35. Alin J., Eichenberg A., Kulikov V., Simanovskyy M. Public pressure on multinational corporations in Russia post invasion of Ukraine: A comparative perspective // PONARS Eurasia Policy Memo. 2022. No. 814. December. URL: https://www.ponarseurasia.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/Pepm814_Alin-Eichenberg-Kulikov-Si - manovskyy_Dec2022.pdf
36. Kulikov V., Simanovskyy M., Eichenberg A., Braese K. A. Navigating wartime communications: Multinational corporations in the Russia–Ukraine war // Society and Economy. 2024. Vol. 46, No. 1. P. 1–23. URL: https://doi.org/10.1556/204.2023.00024
37. D’Arco M., Marino V., Resciniti R. Stop business with Russia! Exploring the representation and perceived authenticity of corporate activism in response to the Russia–Ukraine war // Italian Journal of Marketing. 2024. No. 1. P. 55–76. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s43039-023-00085-0
38. Opatska S., Johansen W., Gordon A. V. Business crisis management in wartime: Insights from Ukraine // Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management. 2024. Vol. 32, No. 1. Article e12513. URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5973.12513
39. Ukrainian Analytical Digest. No. 4: Negotiations, Security, and EU Integration. 2024. Center for Security Studies (CSS), ETH Zürich; Research Centre for East European Studies (FSO), University of Bremen; Center for Eastern European Studies (CEES), University of Zurich; German Association for East European Studies (DGO). URL: https://css.ethz.ch/en/publications/uad/uad-all-issues/details.html?id=%2Fn%2Fo%2F4%2Fn%2Fno_4_negotiations_security_and_euintegra
40. Ukrainian Analytical Digest. No. 9: Ukraine’s Energy and Climate Challenges. 2024. Center for Security Studies (CSS), ETH Zürich; Research Centre for East European Studies (FSO), University of Bremen; Center for Eastern European Studies (CEES), University of Zurich; German Association for East European Studies (DGO). URL: https://css.ethz.ch/en/publications/uad/uad-all-issues/details.html?
41. European Commission. Ukraine Facility – Structure and pillars; timeline and disbursements. 2025. URL: https://enlargement.ec.europa.eu/funding-technical-assistance/ukraine-facility_en
42. Council of the European Union. Council Implementing Decision (EU) 2024/1447 on the approval of the assessment of the Ukraine Plan. 14.05.2024. EUR-Lex. URL: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dec_impl/2024/1447/oj
43. European Union. Ukraine Facility (2024–2027): Summary. 01.10.2024. EUR-Lex. URL: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/EN/legal-content/summary/ukraine-facility-2024-2027.html
44. Chiluwa I., Ruzaitė J. Analysing the language of political conflict: A study of war rhetoric of Vladimir Putin and Volodymyr Zelensky // Critical Discourse Studies. 2024. Vol. 22, No. 5. P. 477–493. URL: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/379697697
45. Ganzhelyuk P. I., Ilyasova A. R. Genres of the institutional discourse of American digital diplomacy // Res Militaris. 2022. Vol. 12, No. 2. P. 2608–2612. URL: https://resmilitaris.net/uploads/paper/ec65dac8290750a82e6a01a1ff1ad42d.pdf
46. Rahman M. A. Helsinki Memorandum of Understanding as a sluggish policy: A critical discourse analysis with process types // Studies in English Language and Education. 2023. Vol. 10, No. 3. P. 1529–1545. URL: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/374388204
47. Abbas A. H. O. A critical discourse analysis of the ideology of power in unequal treaties of peace: Doctoral dissertation. University of Babylon, 2023. URL: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/372965749
2. Bilateral Security Agreement between Ukraine and the United States of America. Офіс Президента України. 13.06.2024. URL: https://www.president.gov.ua/en/news/dvostoronnya-bezpekova-ugoda-mizh-ukrayinoyu-taspoluchenimi-91501
3. Agreement on Security Cooperation between Ukraine and Canada. Офіс Президента України. 20.02.2024. URL: https://www.president.gov.ua/en/news/ugoda-prospivrobitnictvo-u-sferi-bezpeki-mizh-ukrayinoyu-ta-89233
4. Accord on Support for Ukraine and Cooperation between Ukraine and the Government of Japan. Офіс Президента України. 13.06.2024. URL: https://www.president.gov.ua/en/news/ugoda-pro-pidtrimku-ukrayini-ta-spivrobitnictvomizh-ukrayin-91481
5. Regulation (EU) 2024/792 of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the Ukraine Facility. 29.02.2024. European Union. URL: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/792/oj/eng
6. Memorandum of Understanding on the exceptional macro-financial assistance of up to €5 billion to Ukraine. 04.10.2022. Європейська Комісія. URL: https://economy-finance.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2022-11/Memorandum%20of%20Understanding%20-%20EUR%205%20billion%20exceptional%20MFA%20to%20Ukraine.pdf
7. Agreement on the Establishment of a United States–Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund (Memorandum of Intent). 18.04.2024. Кабінет Міністрів України. URL: https://www.kmu.gov.ua/storage/app/uploads/public/681/33c/e8f/68133ce8f2e82842702204.pdf
8. Memorandum of Understanding regarding collaboration on Ukrainian energy system resilience. 24.09.2023; оновлено 05.12.2024. Посольство США в Україні. URL: https://ua.usembassy.gov/memorandum-of-understandingbetween-ukraine-and-the-usa-regarding-collaboration-onukrainian-energy-system-resilience-2/
9. Memorandum of Understanding on a Strategic Partnership on Biomethane, Hydrogen and other Synthetic Gases. 02.02.2023. Європейська Комісія. URL: https://energy.ec.europa.eu/publications/memorandum-understanding-between-european-unionand-ukraine-strategic-partnership-biomethane_en (Повний текст, PDF: https://energy.ec.europa.eu/document/download/0b10e313-1084-49e5-a320-9460108d4cb7_en?filename=MoU_UA_signed.pdf)
10. Memorandum of Understanding on Cooperation in the Field of Cyber Defence. National Security Archive – Cyber Vault. URL: https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/sites/default/files/documents/rl07a5-tyd4t/Ukraine-Romania-Memorandum-Understanding-cyber-defense-September-2-2022.pdf
11. Artstein R., Poesio M. Inter-coder agreement for computational linguistics // Computational Linguistics. 2008. Vol. 34, No. 4. P. 555–596. URL: https://doi.org/10.1162/coli.07-034-R2
12. Cohen J. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales // Educational and Psychological Measurement. 1960. Vol. 20, No. 1. P. 37–46. URL: https://doi.org/10.1177/001316446002000104
13. Fillmore C. J. Frame semantics // Linguistics in the Morning Calm. Seoul: Hanshin, 1982. P. 111–137.
14. Lakoff G., Johnson M. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1980.
15. Fairclough N. Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Longman, 1995.
16. Bhatia V. K. Analysing Genre: Language Use in Professional Settings. London: Longman, 1993.
17. Holm S. A simple sequentially rejective multiple test procedure // Scandinavian Journal of Statistics. 1979. Vol. 6, No. 2. P. 65–70.
18. Kruskal W. H., Wallis W. A. Use of ranks in one criterion variance analysis // Journal of the American Statistical Association. 1952. Vol. 47, No. 260. P. 583–621. URL: https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1952.10483441
19. Spearman C. The proof and measurement of association between two things // The American Journal of Psychology. 1904. Vol. 15, No. 1. P. 72–101. URL: https://doi.org/10.2307/1412159
20. Efron B., Tibshirani R. J. An Introduction to the Bootstrap. New York: Chapman & Hall/CRC, 1993.
21. Hart C. Critical Discourse Analysis and Cognitive Science: New Perspectives on Immigration Discourse. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010.
22. Hart C. Discourse, Grammar and Ideology: Functional and Cognitive Perspectives. London: Bloomsbury, 2014.
23. Charteris-Black J. Corpus Approaches to Critical Metaphor Analysis. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004.
24. Charteris-Black J. Politicians and Rhetoric: The Persuasive Power of Metaphor. 2nd ed. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011.
25. Charteris-Black J. Analysing Political Speeches: Rhetoric, Discourse and Metaphor. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014.
26. Musolff A. Political Metaphor Analysis: Discourse and Scenarios. London: Bloomsbury, 2016.
27. Chilton P. Analysing Political Discourse: Theory and Practice. London: Routledge, 2004.
28. van Dijk T. A. Ideology: A Multidisciplinary Approach. London: SAGE, 1998.
29. van Dijk T. A. Discourse and Power. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008.
30. Steen G. J., Dorst A. G., Herrmann J. B., Kaal A., Krennmayr T., Pasma T. A Method for Linguistic Metaphor Identification: From MIP to MIPVU. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2010
31. Baker P., Gabrielatos C., Khosravinik M., Krzyżanowski M., McEnery T., Wodak R. A useful methodological synergy? Combining critical discourse analysis and corpus linguistics // Discourse & Society. 2008. Vol. 19, No. 3. P. 273–305. URL: https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926508088962
32. Biber D., Conrad S., Reppen R. Corpus Linguistics: Investigating Language Structure and Use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998.
33. Tiersma P. M. Legal Language. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999.
34. Solan L. M. The Language of Judges. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1993.
35. Alin J., Eichenberg A., Kulikov V., Simanovskyy M. Public pressure on multinational corporations in Russia post invasion of Ukraine: A comparative perspective // PONARS Eurasia Policy Memo. 2022. No. 814. December. URL: https://www.ponarseurasia.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/Pepm814_Alin-Eichenberg-Kulikov-Si - manovskyy_Dec2022.pdf
36. Kulikov V., Simanovskyy M., Eichenberg A., Braese K. A. Navigating wartime communications: Multinational corporations in the Russia–Ukraine war // Society and Economy. 2024. Vol. 46, No. 1. P. 1–23. URL: https://doi.org/10.1556/204.2023.00024
37. D’Arco M., Marino V., Resciniti R. Stop business with Russia! Exploring the representation and perceived authenticity of corporate activism in response to the Russia–Ukraine war // Italian Journal of Marketing. 2024. No. 1. P. 55–76. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s43039-023-00085-0
38. Opatska S., Johansen W., Gordon A. V. Business crisis management in wartime: Insights from Ukraine // Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management. 2024. Vol. 32, No. 1. Article e12513. URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5973.12513
39. Ukrainian Analytical Digest. No. 4: Negotiations, Security, and EU Integration. 2024. Center for Security Studies (CSS), ETH Zürich; Research Centre for East European Studies (FSO), University of Bremen; Center for Eastern European Studies (CEES), University of Zurich; German Association for East European Studies (DGO). URL: https://css.ethz.ch/en/publications/uad/uad-all-issues/details.html?id=%2Fn%2Fo%2F4%2Fn%2Fno_4_negotiations_security_and_euintegra
40. Ukrainian Analytical Digest. No. 9: Ukraine’s Energy and Climate Challenges. 2024. Center for Security Studies (CSS), ETH Zürich; Research Centre for East European Studies (FSO), University of Bremen; Center for Eastern European Studies (CEES), University of Zurich; German Association for East European Studies (DGO). URL: https://css.ethz.ch/en/publications/uad/uad-all-issues/details.html?
41. European Commission. Ukraine Facility – Structure and pillars; timeline and disbursements. 2025. URL: https://enlargement.ec.europa.eu/funding-technical-assistance/ukraine-facility_en
42. Council of the European Union. Council Implementing Decision (EU) 2024/1447 on the approval of the assessment of the Ukraine Plan. 14.05.2024. EUR-Lex. URL: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dec_impl/2024/1447/oj
43. European Union. Ukraine Facility (2024–2027): Summary. 01.10.2024. EUR-Lex. URL: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/EN/legal-content/summary/ukraine-facility-2024-2027.html
44. Chiluwa I., Ruzaitė J. Analysing the language of political conflict: A study of war rhetoric of Vladimir Putin and Volodymyr Zelensky // Critical Discourse Studies. 2024. Vol. 22, No. 5. P. 477–493. URL: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/379697697
45. Ganzhelyuk P. I., Ilyasova A. R. Genres of the institutional discourse of American digital diplomacy // Res Militaris. 2022. Vol. 12, No. 2. P. 2608–2612. URL: https://resmilitaris.net/uploads/paper/ec65dac8290750a82e6a01a1ff1ad42d.pdf
46. Rahman M. A. Helsinki Memorandum of Understanding as a sluggish policy: A critical discourse analysis with process types // Studies in English Language and Education. 2023. Vol. 10, No. 3. P. 1529–1545. URL: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/374388204
47. Abbas A. H. O. A critical discourse analysis of the ideology of power in unequal treaties of peace: Doctoral dissertation. University of Babylon, 2023. URL: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/372965749
Published
2025-12-24
Pages
5-16
Issue
Section
SECTION 1 ROMANIC LANGUAGES
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
