Conceptualization of the Global South: Diffusion of Daily Speech, Scientific Terminology and Specialized Discourses from the Perspective of Linguoculturology

The expression “(countries of) the Global South” is increasingly popular today not only in the speech practices of economics, politics, media and journalism, but also in scientific works and international legal discourse. It usually implies African and Asian states, but their list is still a subject of heated debates. This topic is of particular relevance, since the Russian Federation has been gradually expanding its cooperation with the countries of this cluster both bilaterally and multilaterally. The need to clarify the meaning of this concept in our study is due to the desire to minimize discrepancies in international documents. Accordingly, it aims to trace the cultural symbolization of the concept of the Global South primarily in the scientific and broad socio-political discourse, paying specific attention to international legal documents. The objectives of the study are to examine the specific approaches to this concept in everyday speech (primarily literature and media); international documents (primarily economic and political); to establish its core meanings within the current discourses of scientific communities; to critically analyze the historical fragmentation of the Global South in the post-colonial perspective; to assess the current state and prospects for the juristic use of the term, revealing the most promising approaches to its content in terms of concept and denotation. The study is based on historical materials, documents of the UN system and other international organizations, as well as scientific literature containing the relevant terminology. The study is comprehensive and relies on a comparative approach. Content analysis, SWOT-analysis, case study method, and the method of expert assessments were employed. As a result, various approaches to the content of the concept of the Global South have been systematized; the grounds for singling out this group of countries in scientific and political discourse have been classified; arguments for the need to clarify this, currently too broad and therefore insufficiently defined, concept have been proposed. It is established that this concept has been modified at least since the end of the 19th century, when the political foundations for the existing differentiation of states along the Global South axis were laid. Meanwhile, many authoritative scientists and practitioners still rely on economic indicators in this matter. The author defines the possibilities and limits of certain theories in attributing specific states to the category of the Global South. Despite the urgent demand for a clearer and more unambiguous definition of this concept, the paper argues that currently there are no scientific and practical opportunities necessary to develop such a definition. Based on the socio-cultural context and international documents, it is proposed to combine methods for classifying states into this cluster depending on specific political, economic and social goals both of the states themselves and of those who carry out such classification.

1. Al- E Ahmad, J. (1982) Gharbzadegi [Weststruckness]. Lexington: Mazda Publishers.

2. Bennett, M. J. (2013) Basic Concepts of Intercultural Communication: Paradigms, Principles, and Practices: Selected readings. Boston-London: Nicklas Brealey Publishing.

3. Borch, C. (2002) ‘Interview with Edward W. Soja: Thirdspace, Postmetropolis, and Social Theory’,

4. Distinktion: Journal of Social Theory, 3(1), pp. 113–120. https://doi.org/10.1080/1600910X.2002.9672816

5. Cardoso F. (1977) ‘The Consumption of Dependency Theory in the United States’, Latin American Research Review, 12(3), pp. 7–24.

6. Cardoso, F. H., Faletto, E. (1979) Dependency and Development in Latin America. Los Angeles: University of California Press.

7. Chagas-Bastos, F. H. et al. (2023) ‘Forum: Navigating the Global South Landscape: Insights and Implications for Representation and Inclusion in ISA Journals’, International Studies Perspectives, 24(4), pp. 441–466. https://doi.org/10.1093/isp/ekad010

8. Dados, N., Connell, R. (2012) ‘The Global South’, Contexts, 2012, 11(1), pp. 12–13. https://doi. org/10.1177/1536504212436479

9. Friedman, T. L. (2005) The World is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-first Century. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

10. Gramsci, A. (1966) La questione meridionale. Roma: Editori Riuniti.

11. Gray, K., and Gills, B. K. (2016) ‘South–South cooperation and the rise of the Global South’, Third World Quarterly, 37(4), pp. 557–574. https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2015.1128817

12. Haug, S. (2020) ‘A Thirdspace Approach to the ‘Global South’: Insights from the Margins of a Popular Category’, Third World Quarterly, 42(9), pp. 2018–2038. https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2020.1712999

13. Haug, S., Braveboy-Wagner, J. and Maihold, G. (2021) ‘The ‘Global South’ in the study of world politics: examining a meta category’, Third World Quarterly, 42(9), pp. 1923–1944. https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597 .2021.1948831

14. Huang, M. (2015) ‘South-South Cooperation, North-South Aid and the Prospect of International Aid Architecture’, Vestnik RUDN. International Relations, 1, pp. 24-31.

15. Jørgensen, K. (2000) ‘Continental IR Theory: The Best Kept Secret’, European Journal of International Relations, 6(1), pp. 9–42. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354066100006001002

16. Kislenko, I. Ju. (2022) ‘Southern Theory: Does Sociology Exist Outside the Western Canon?’, Monitoring of Public Opinion: Economic and Social Changes, (1), pp. 226–244. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.14515/ monitoring.2022.1.1795

17. Korany, B. (1976) Social Change, Charisma and International Behavior? Leiden: Sijhoff.

18. Korany, B. (1986) How Foreign Policy Decisions Are Made in the Third World: A Comparative Analysis. New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429038228

19. Korany, B. (1994) ‘End of history, or its continuation and accentuation? The global South and the ‘new transformation’ literature’, Third World Quarterly, 15(1), pp. 7–15. https://doi. org/10.1080/01436599408420360

20. Kornprobst, M., and Senn, M. (2016) ‘Introduction: Background Ideas in International Relations’, The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 18(2), pp. 273–281. https://doi. org/10.1177/1369148115613663

21. Lopez, A. (2007). ‘Introduction: The (Post) Global South’, The Global South, 1 (1), pp. 1–11.

22. Mahler, A. G. (2018). From the Tricontinental to the Global South: Race, Radicalism, and Transnational Solidarity. Durham: Duke University Press.

23. Nossal, K. (2001) ‘Tales that Textbooks Tell: Ethnocentricity and Diversity in American Introductions to International Relations’, in International Relations – Still an American Social Science? Toward Diversity in International Thought. Albany: State University of New York Press, pp. 167–186.

24. Prebisch, R. (1981) Capitalismo periférico: crisis y transformación. México: Fondo de Cultura Económica.

25. Rastoltsev, S. (2018). ‘“Global South”: origin and evolution of the notion’, Global South in the Polycentric World (Global Development, iss. 19). Moscow: IMEMO Publ., pp. 5–10. (In Russian). https://doi. org/10.20542/978-5-9535-0547-5

26. Rekosh K. (2016). ‘Conceptualization of legal discourse towards normativity’, RSUH/RGGU bulletin. Series Economics. Management. Law, (1), pp. 20–25 (In Russian).

27. Rekosh K. Kh. (2023) ‘Raising the Question of Law in Language’, Courier of Kutafin Moscow State Law University (MSAL), (11), pp. 27–37 (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.17803/2311-5998.2023.111.11.027-037

28. Rigg, J. (2007) An Everyday Geography of the Global South. London: Routledge. https://doi. org/10.4324/9780203967577

29. Said W. E. (1978). Orientalism. New York: Pantheon Books.

30. Smirnov A. V. (2012) ‘Philosophy of translation and translation of philosophy’, Philosophy journal, 1, pp. 40–58 (In Russian).

31. Smirnov, A. V. (2001) Logika smysla: Teorija i ejo prilozhenie k analizu klassicheskoj arabskoj filosofii i kul'tury [Logic of meaning: Theory and its application to the analysis of classical Arabic philosophy and culture]. Moscow: Jazyki slavjanskoj kul'tury Publ. (In Russian).

32. Solarz, M. W. (2012) ‘‘Third World’: the 60th anniversary of a concept that changed history’, Third World

33. Quarterly, 33(9), pp. 1561–1573. https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2012.720828

34. Solarz, M. W. (2012) ‘North — South, Commemorating the First Brandt Report: searching for the contemporary spatial picture of the global rift’, Third World Quarterly, 33(3), pp. 559–569. https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2012.657493

35. Spivak, G. K. (1994) ‘Can the Subaltern Speak?’, in Colonial Discourse and Post-Colonial Theory A Reader. London: Routledge, 46 p. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315656496

36. Taylor, I. (2013). ‘Global South’, in International Organization and Global Governance. London: Routledge, 13 p. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203795972

37. Wa Ngugi, M. (2012). ‘Rethinking the Global South’, Journal of Contemporary Thought, (35), pp. 5–10.

38. Wagner, P. (2017) ‘1 Finding One’s Way in Global Social Space’, in The Moral Mappings of South and North. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, pp. 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781474423267-004 Wallerstein, I. (1974) ‘The Rise and Future Demise of the World Capitalist System: Concepts for Comparative Analysis’, Comparative Studies in Society and History, 16(4), pp. 387–415. https://doi. org/10.1017/S0010417500007520

39. Yakovenko, А. V. (2024). ‘A Sketch of the Emerging World: the Global South’, Problemy nacionalʹnoj strategii, (1), pp. 42–57 (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.52311/2079-3359_2024_1_42

40. Zarakol, A. (2019). ‘‘Rise of the Rest’: As Hype and Reality’, International Relations, 33(2), pp. 213–228. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047117819840793