Ecological Discourse as an Umbrella Term

This paper advances the conceptualization of ecological discourse as an umbrella term, serving to integrate a diverse range of research practices concerned with the representation, verbalization, and construction of human-nature relationships. The study's relevance is driven by the imperative to systematize the various interpretations of ecological discourse and its discursive varieties. The methodology encompasses a comprehensive analysis of scientific publications indexed in the Russian Science Citation Index (RSCI), Scopus, and Web of Science databases for the period 2010–2025, complemented by an empirical analysis of media content (over 1.5 million messages for 2024–2025, sourced via the Medialogia service). The scientific novelty of this work lies in its attempt to elucidate the explanatory potential of interpreting ecological discourse as an umbrella term that unifies various approaches to the study of environmental communication. The primary objective is to conceptually frame “ecological discourse” as an Umbrella Term that integrates a multitude of specialized sub-discourses. It is demonstrated that the status of an umbrella term provides a common framework for interdisciplinary dialogue across ecology, sociology, political science, linguistics, and philosophy. This framework accumulates a variety of sub-discourses, ranging from scientific, legal, and political to media and artistic. Interpreting ecological discourse as an umbrella term allows for overcoming the fragmentation of research and facilitates the identification of inter-discursive interactions within a unified analytical approach.

1. Anisimova, E. E. (2020). On the peculiarities of religious ecological discourse (on the example of Pope Franci’s encyclical “Laudato si'”). Bulletin of the Moscow State Linguistic University. Humanities, 10 (839): 39—51. (In Russ.).

2. Aznacheeva, E. N. (2006). On the problem of cognitive modeling of institutional discourse. In: Word, utterance, text in cognitive, pragmatic and cultural aspects. Chelyabinsk: Chelyabinsk State University. 83—84. (In Russ.).

3. Barkovich, A. A. (2025). Ecological discourse: the specifics of linguoinformational modeling of the conceptual sphere. Journal of the Siberian Federal University. Humanities, 18 (1): 143—157. (In Russ.).

4. Basinskaya, M. V. (2014). Research of lexico-semantic features of ecological discourse in the framework of linguistic ecology. Bulletin of the Moscow State Linguistic University. Humanities, 20 (706): 32—41. (In Russ.).

5. Basinskaya, M. V. (2023). Signs of the conceptual dominance of the modern ecological discourse of the English language. Cognitive studies of language, 5 (56): 409—412. (In Russ.).

6. Bogdanova, A. G., Zakharova, E. O., Mymrina, D. F. (2022). Functional and structural specificity of multicomponent terms of the English-language media ecological discourse. Bulletin of Tomsk State Pedagogical University, 4 (222): 41—50. DOI: 10.23951/1609-624X-2022-4-41-50. (In Russ.).

7. Chudinov, A. P. (2006). Political linguistics: textbook. the manual. Moscow: Flinta, Nauka. 254 p. ISBN 5-89349-897-6. (In Russ.).

8. Cox, R. J. (2010). Environmental Communication and the Public Sphere. California: Sage Publications Inc. P. 448. ISBN 9781412972116.

9. Dryzek, J. S. (2013). The Politics of the Earth: Environmental Discourses. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 328 p.

10. Ecological discourse in social media: the experience of thematic analysis E. V. Shchekotin, D. O. Dunaeva, P. A. Basina. (2024). Monitoring public opinion: economic and social changes, 6: 226—250. DOI: 10.14515/monitoring.2024.6.2483. (In Russ.).

11. Efremenko, D. V. (2006). Ecological and political discourses. Origin and evolution. Moscow: INION RAS. 285 p. ISBN 5-248-00290-7. (In Russ.).

12. Ermolaeva, P. O. (2011). Features of the formation of the ecological culture of Russian and American students: a cross-cultural project. Author’s abstract of PhD Diss. Kazan. 24 p. (In Russ.).

13. Fedoryuk, A. V. (2018). The communicative aspect of artistic ecological discourse. In: Linguistics and linguodidactics in the light of modern scientific paradigms. Irkutsk: Irkutsk State University. 186—193. (In Russ.).

14. Fedoryuk, A. V., Terekhova, M. A. (2019). On the problem of terminology research in scientific ecological discourse. In: Linguistics and linguodidactics in the light of modern scientific paradigms. Irkutsk: Irkutsk State University. 127—131. (In Russ.).

15. Filippova, T. A. (2018). The concept and main characteristics of ecological discourse (based on the material of English-language media). Proceedings of the Volgograd State Pedagogical University, 2 (125): 97—101. (In Russ.).

16. Filippova, T. A. (2018). The concept and main characteristics of ecological discourse. Proceedings of the Volgograd State Pedagogical University, 2 (125): 97—101. (In Russ.).

17. Flor, A. G. (2003). Environmental Communication. Quezon City: University of the Philippines Diliman. 325 p.

18. Galushko, T. G. (2018). On the issue of ecological pedagogical discourse. Izvestiya RSPU named after A. I. Herzen, 188: 182—189. (In Russ.).

19. Grishaeva, Yu. M., Alymova, O. V. (2021). Ecological culture in the multicultural discourse of the educational space. Bulletin of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 1: 29—34. (In Russ.).

20. Gromorushkina, A. A. (2020). Ecological discourse as a complex phenomenon. Herald of the MGLU. Humanities, 3 (832): 36—46. (In Russ.).

21. Gural, S. K., Petrova, G. I., Golovko, O. S. (2018). Linguistic aspects of the formation of professional ecological discourse and ecological consciousness in the higher education system. Bulletin of PNRPU. Problems of linguistics and pedagogy, 3: 127—138. (In Russ.).

22. Gurochkina, A. G. (1999). The concept of discourse in modern linguistics. In: Nomination and discourse. Ryazan: Ryazan State University named after S. A. Yesenin. 12—15. (In Russ.).

23. Ilyinskaya, T. N., Devenkova, V. V. (2016). Ways of expressing negative assessment in environmental media discourse. Almanac of Modern Science and Education, 4 (106): 49—52. (In Russ.).

24. Ivanova, E. V. (2007). Metaphorical conceptualization of natural disasters in environmental discourse (based on media texts). PhD Diss. Chelyabinsk. 219 p. (In Russ.).

25. Ivanova, E. V. (2009). Cognitive modeling of the image of nature in media ecological discourse. Bulletin of the Chelyabinsk State University, 7 (145): 65—72. (In Russ.).

26. Kalenova, O. G. (2015). Environmental media discourse as a means of relaying legal discourse. Language. Right. Society. 174—176. (In Russ.).

27. Kaminskaya, T. L., Pomiguev, I. A., Nazarova, N. A. (2019). Environmental activism in the digital environment as a tool for influencing government decisions. Monitoring public opinion: Economic and social changes, 5: 382—407. DOI: 10.14515/monitoring.2019.5.18. (In Russ.).

28. Karasik, V. I. (2000). On types of discourse. In: Linguistic personality: institutional and personal discourse. Volgograd: Change. 5—20. (In Russ.).

29. Karasik, V. I. (2002). Language circle: personality, concepts, discourse. Volgograd: Peremena Publ. 477 p. ISBN 5-7333-0143-0. (In Russ.).

30. Katermina, V. V. (2022). Cognitive and pragmatic aspect of English neologisms in ecological discourse. Bulletin of the Chelyabinsk State University, 9 (467): 84—90. DOI: 10.47475/1994-2796-2022-10911. (In Russ.).

31. Kazakova, O. A., Filippova, E. M. (2020). The discourse of the sphere of environmental management as an institutional discourse (based on the material of Russian and American Internet resources. Siberian Philological Journal, 2: 290—301. DOI: 10.17223/18137083/71/24. (In Russ.).

32. Khainatskaya, T. I. (2021). Ecological alarmism as a political discourse. South Russian Journal of Social Sciences, 22 (2): 53—73. (In Russ.).

33. Khainatskaya, T. I. (2023). The influence of ecological and political discourses on the formation of ecological identity. In: Political science in a changing world: new practices and theoretical search. Moscow: RUDN University. 635—636. ISBN 978-5-209- 12200-5. (In Russ.).

34. Khomutova, T. N. (2014). Typology of discourse: an integral approach. Bulletin of SUSU. Ser. Linguistics, 11 (2): 14—20. (In Russ.).

35. Kolosov, T. Yu., Filatova, O. A. (2011). The diversity of expressive means of language in environmental media discourse (based on the material of documentaries in English). Bulletin of the Chelyabinsk State University, 11 (226): 77—80. (In Russ.).

36. Leontiev, A. A. (2023). On the issue of reconfiguration of ecological discourse (on the example of the interaction of scientific and ecological discourse in the media. Global scientific potential, 5 (146): 230—232. (In Russ.).

37. Littlejohn, S. W., Foss, K. A. (2003). Encyclopedia of Communication Theory. New Mexico: Sage Reference Publishing. 1192 p. ISBN 9781412959377.

38. Lopashenkova, T. V., Bondareva, L. M. (2025). Features of linguistic implementation of callto-action tactics in English-language environmental discourse. Bulletin of the Baltic Federal University named after I. Kant. Series: Philology, pedagogy, psychology, 2: 27—40. DOI: 10.5922/vestnikpsy-2025-2-3. (In Russ.).

39. Mamonova, E. Y., Kron, A. S. (2018). The specifics of modern English-language ecological discourse. Philological sciences. Questions of theory and practice, 4 (82) / 2: 371—374. (In Russ.).

40. Mironova, N. N. (1997). Evaluative discourse: problems of semantic analysis. Izvestia of the Academy of Sciences. A series of literature and language, 56 (4): 52—59. (In Russ.).

41. Moiseenko, A. V. (2016). Intersection of discourses in environmental texts. Nauchnyy dialog, 4 (52): 52—60. (In Russ.).

42. Naess, A. (1995). The Deep Ecology «Eight Points» Revisited. In: Deep Ecology for St the 21 Century: Readings on the Philosophy and Practice of the New Environmentalism. Boston, MA: Shambala. 213—221.

43. Nikolaeva, E. N., Zotov, V. V., Popel, A. E. (2019). Humanitarian ecology as a response to the global crisis of culture and civilization. Culture and Civilization, 9 (5A): 111— 117. DOI: 10.34670/AR.2019.45.5.015. (In Russ.).

44. Oreshkina, T. A., Konyashkin, V. A. (2018). Ecological consciousness and ecological discourses of civilization. Oikumena. Regional studies, 4: 133—144. DOI: 10.24866/1998-6785/2018-4/133-144. (In Russ.).

45. Parakhina, I. S., Babich, O. A. (2018). Conceptual metaphor as a means of influencing readers in environmental media discourse. Baltic Humanitarian Journal, 2 (23): 92—95. (In Russ.).

46. Pavlova, E. B. (2021). Linguopragmatics of ecological Internet discourse. Moscow: RUDN University. 104 p. ISBN 978-5-209-11177-1. (In Russ.).

47. Romanova, E. V., Kazantseva, I. V. (2024). Linguopragmatic features of the German ecological media discourse. Bulletin of the Mari State University, 18 (3): 404—410. DOI: 10.30914/2072-6783-2024-18-3-404-410. (In Russ.).

48. Semenenko, I. S., Khainatskaya, T. I. (2022). Discourses on well-being in the reality of “unstable development”: between the past and the future. Social Sciences and modernity, 5: 76—99. DOI: 10.31857/S0869049922050045. (In Russ.).

49. Sergeev, D. V. (2014). Cultural semantics of ecological discourses. In: Actual issues of modern science. Moscow: Sputnik+ Publishing House. 123—125. (In Russ.).

50. Skripnikova, A. I. (2013). Ecolinguistics. Environmental media discourse (on the example of the Kazakh bilingual newspaper “Ecological Courier”). In: Philology and Linguistics: problems and prospects. Chelyabinsk: Two Komsomol Members. 64—67. (In Russ.).

51. Smirnova, O. V., Yakovleva, T. V., Ilchenko, D. S. (2025). Ecological discourse in modern Russian socio-political publications: research results. Questions of the theory and practice of journalism, 14 (2): 267—284. DOI: 10.17150/2308-6203.2025.14 (2).267-284. (In Russ.).

52. Sozinov, A. V. (2011). Ecological discourse: global, national and regional levels: historical and cultural analysis. Author’s abstract of PhD Diss. Krasnodar. 22 p. (In Russ.).

53. Stibbe, A. (2015). Ecolinguistics: Language, Ecology and the Stories We Live By. London, New York: Routledge. 210 p.

54. Teryukhova, T. V. (2025). Verbal health saving strategy as an intersection point of ecological and gastronomic discourses. In: Issues of foreign language philology in the context of modern research. Cheboksary: I. Ya. Yakovlev Chuvash State Pedagogical University. 318—326. (In Russ.).

55. Vavilova, E. N., Dang, T. X. (2016). Ecological discourse in social networks. International education and intercultural communication. 218—222. (In Russ.).

56. Zaitseva, A. V. (2013). On the problem of typology of texts of ecological discourse of Germany. Philological sciences. Questions of theory and practice, 7 (25): 92—96. (In Russ.).

57. Zaitseva, A. V. (2014). Typology of texts of ecological discourse of Germany. PhD Diss. Smolensk. 253 p. (In Russ.).

58. Zhou, W., Huang, G. (2017). Chinese ecological discourse: a Confucian-Daoist inquiry. Journal of Multicultural Discourses, 12 (3): 272—289.