The meaning as an event of response: Addressivity, responsibility and rhetoric

Milena Milenina*, Serhii Flugrant

milena.milenina@uets.edu.ua

Abstract

The relevance of this study is determined by the need to reconsider meaning within the context of contemporary communication, where it is often reduced either to subjective construction or to psychological states. The aim of the article was to conceptualise meaning as an event of response arising within the space of addressivity between the Self, the Other and the reality being addressed. Such a perspective makes it possible to regard meaning not as a static content or the outcome of interpretation, but as a dynamic process of encounter in which address and response constitute a shared space of understanding. To achieve this aim, hermeneutic, existential-logotherapeutic and rhetorical approaches to the analysis of meaning were employed. The study demonstrated that meaning is neither a property of the object nor a product of the subject, but rather an event that emerges through the interaction of address and response. It was shown that addressivity constitutes a fundamental condition of understanding, since every process of meaning-making presupposes a situation of address directed towards an addressee. Within the existential-logotherapeutic framework, the anthropological status of the human being was clarified as that of both addressee and respondent, for whom meaning becomes disclosed through a responsible attitude towards a concrete situation. It was established that, in limit situations, meaning cannot be derived from ready-made interpretations but is formed in the process of responding. Rhetorical analysis demonstrated that response takes shape in speech, where listening, pause, silence and the spoken word constitute a unified space of meaning-making. On this basis, an integral model of meaning was proposed, bringing together addressivity, responsibility and linguistic form as interrelated dimensions of a single event. The practical significance of the study lies in the possibility of applying the proposed model to the analysis of public communication, the development of responsible speech, and the training of specialists in the humanities and theology

Keywords

hermeneutics; logotherapy; speech; listening; meaning-making; communicative situation; experience of the Other

Suggested citation
Milenina, M., & Flugrant, S. (2026). The meaning as an event of response: Addressivity, responsibility and rhetoric. Humanities Studios: Pedagogy, Psychology, Philosophy, 14(3), 141-152. https://doi.org/10.31548/hspedagog/3.2026.141
References
  1. Ala-Kortesmaa, S. (2025). Ethical and culturally responsive listening in the media coverage of Indigenous Sámi people’s human rights. International Journal of Listening, 39(3), 167-182. doi: 10.1080/10904018.2025.2503213.
  2. Ala-Kortesmaa, S. (2026). Communication structures that hold us hostage: Conceptualizing unlistening as an organizational practice. International Journal of Business Communication. doi: 10.1177/23294884261422379.
  3. Andersen, I.V. (2023). Rhetorical citizenship and the environment. Climate Resilience and Sustainability, 2(2), article number e249. doi: 10.1002/cli2.49.
  4. Bohachov, A.L. (2006). Philosophical hermeneutics. Kyiv: Publishing House “Kurs”.
  5. Branny, A., Maurer, M., Andersson, E., McPhearson, T., Raymond, C.M., Faehnle, M., Olafsson, A.S., & Gulsrud, N.M. (2025). Introducing listening as a weak method for advancing sustainability and interdisciplinary scholarship. Sustainability Science, 20, 77-94. doi: 10.1007/s11625-024-01571-w.
  6. Brizić, K. (2025). Unsettled hearing, responsible listening: Encounters with voice after forced migration. Applied Linguistics Review, 16(2), 727-745. doi: 10.1515/applirev-2024-0088.
  7. Buber, M. (1970). I and thou. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.
  8. Couldry, N., & Hepp, A. (2021). The mediated construction of reality. Cambridge: Polity Press.
  9. Edlich, A., & Archer, A. (2025). Rejecting identities: Stigma and hermeneutical injustice. Social Epistemology, 39(4), 463-475. doi: 10.1080/02691728.2024.2407646.
  10. Esau, K. (2025). The quality of connections: Deliberative reciprocity and inclusive listening as antidote to destructive polarization online. Social Media + Society, 11(2). doi: 10.1177/20563051251332421.
  11. Frankl, V.E. (2006). Man’s search for meaning. Boston: Beacon Press.
  12. Freese, J.H. (Ed.). (2001). Rhetoric. New York: Modern Library.
  13. Gadamer, H.-G. (2013). Truth and method. London: Bloomsbury Academic.
  14. Heidegger, M. (1978). Being and time. Oxford: Wiley.
  15. Jaspers, K. (1971). Philosophy of existence. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
  16. Kearney, R., Klapes, P., & Hameed, U. (Eds.). (2025). Hosting Earth: Facing the climate emergency. London: Routledge.
  17. Levinas, E. (1969). Totality and infinity: An essay on exteriority. Pittsburgh: Duquesne University Press.
  18. Loureiro, L.M. (2025). Toward an understanding of listening as ethics. International Journal of Listening, 39(3), 218-227. doi: 10.1080/10904018.2025.2498736.
  19. Maciąg, R. (2024). The hermeneutics of artificial text. Computer Sciences & Mathematics Forum, 8(1), article number 94. doi: 10.3390/cmsf2023008094.
  20. Ong, W.J. (2002). Orality and literacy: The technologizing of the word. London: Routledge.
  21. Perelman, C., & Olbrechts-Tyteca, L. (1969). The new rhetoric: A treatise on argumentation. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.
  22. Picard, M. (1972). The world of silence. Chicago: Regnery Pub.
  23. Ricoeur, P. (1976). Interpretation theory: Discourse and the surplus of meaning. Fort Worth: Texas Christian University Press.
  24. Rikkonen, L., & Isotalus, P. (2024). The listening public in public diplomacy: How did the public respond to President Zelensky on Twitter? Social Media + Society, 10(4). doi: 10.1177/20563051241288960.
  25. Rosa, H. (2019). Resonance: A sociology of our relationship to the world. Cambridge: Polity Press.
  26. Shynkaruk, V. (2009). Worldview and philosophy. In L. Huberskyi (Ed.), Philosophy (pp. 163-173). Kyiv: Znannia.
  27. Taylor, G.H. (2021). Addressing contemporary challenges to hermeneutics. Études Ricoeuriennes / Ricoeur Studies, 12(1), 71-89. doi: 10.5195/errs.2021.531.
  28. Waisbord, S. (2022). Communication: A post-discipline. Cambridge: Polity Press.