Панич, Олексій2017-05-262017-05-262016Панич, О. О. Українська мова як мова філософії : in varietate concordia / Панич О. О. // Мова : класичне - модерне - постмодерне : збірник наукових праць. - 2016. - Вип. 2. - С. 129-134.https://ekmair.ukma.edu.ua/handle/123456789/11398The article deals with the problem of grasping Ukrainian language as a language of philosophy at the current stage of development of Ukrainian philosophical thought. A good starting point is to admit that not every European country has or should have a «national philosophy» in the sense Germany, France or Great Britain do. In most European countries, there are (sometimes outstanding) philosophers, but it does not entail automatically a phenomenon 134 of «national philosophy». To have a «national philosophy» means primarily to have a stable and continuing common discourse in a certain national language. However, for this purpose, Ukrainian philosophical milieu is all too scanty: for the entire country, we have but a dozen active «phenomenologists», about the same number of «analytical philosophers», etc. In fact, instead of having at least one national philosophical mainstream, we rather have a number of micro-discourses that form a local branches of some foreign mainstreams (Latin Scholasticism, German Kantian Studies, French Postmodernism, etc.). That is why the development of Ukrainian language as a language of philosophy crucially depends on translations or «commented retellings’ of philosophical works written in other — mostly «mainstream» — philosophical languages. However, there is a new and important complication»: as we and our colleagues effectively proved in the «European Dictionary of Philosophies», terminological systems of those mainstream philosophical languages are mutually incompatible. That is why the idea and call to create a universal order of Ukrainian philosophical terminology that would reflect and reproduce all these systems adequately and in a non-contradictory way is utopian. Moreover, this means that we are doomed to have multiple and partially incompatible terminological systems inside the Ukrainian philosophical discourse; also we’ll never reach a universal consensus about the best (or optimal, or even commonly accepted) way to translate this or that philosophical term. Our actual future task is to accept and consciously develop a sort of internal Ukrainian polyglossia, as a set of Ukrainian micro-mirrors of past and present world philosophical processes.Статтю присвячено проблемі осмислення української мови як мови філософії з урахуванням сучасного стану розвитку української філософської думки.uknational philosophyphilosophical terminologypolyglossiamicro-narrativeнаціональна філософіяфілософська термінологіяполіглосіямікронаративArticle