ATLAS OF LANGUAGE

AT-CORE-239-035 · ATLAS 260

Power

The capacity to shape the actions, interpretations, rules, or possibilities of others.

Part of the subject path Philosophy of Language, Thought and Knowledge

Why is this entry in the Atlas?

G · Foundational concept R2 · Necessary foundation

Power supplies the baseline for analysing naming, exclusion and institutional access. Its effects on another person's possibilities differ from recognised authority and can operate without an explicit threat or command.

Colours and admission grounds

The rectangular label identifies the entry function: F – linguistic figure or procedure; A – analytical concept; G – foundational concept; E – selected concrete case. The rounded badge indicates the admission ground: R1 – distinctive contribution; R2 – necessary foundation; R3 – justified illustrative case. This editorial rationale explains the current selection rather than claiming an undocumented original selection history.

Explanation

Power is the capacity to shape the actions, interpretations, rules, or possibilities of others effectively. It appears not only in visible command. Institutions establish access, categories, and procedure; discourses make some statements self-evident and others barely sayable; resources allow actors to enforce decisions or keep issues off an agenda. Power is relational and situated: it exists among participants, draws upon knowledge, law, property, violence, habit, or consent, and may encounter resistance. Authority denotes recognised validity, whereas power can operate without recognition. Language is medium, object, and diagnostic of these relations: those able to name, record, translate, or silence organise the field of action. The movement therefore follows not merely an individual but the relations in which possibilities become unequally distributed, normalised, and open to change.

Movement of thought

1. Several participants first meet with unequal resources, positions, knowledge, and capacities for action. 2. Rules, names, decisions, or exclusions structure which options become accessible, risky, or invisible to whom. 3. The organised practice repeats and may appear self-evident although it favours particular interests and positions. 4. A counter-test seeks dependence, alternatives, and resistance and separates power from influence, authority, competence, and isolated causation. 5. The field of action returns as a changeable relation; once power becomes visible, its conditions can be contested and redistributed.

Scientific use case

Sociology, political science, discourse studies, and conversation analysis examine decisions, agendas, categories, access, and resistance. Comparative cases test which mechanisms actually sustain effects.

Example

An editorial board decides not only which contributions are printed but which topics count as newsworthy. Power operates through selection and through the boundary of visibility.

Counterexample

Someone accidentally knocks an object over and causes a change without controlling other participants or their possibilities. Causal efficacy alone is not social power.

Distinction

Distinguish it from authority, violence, coercion, domination, influence, control, causation, competence, and naming power; identify mechanism, relation, reach, and possibility of resistance.

Effect on thought and perception

Power enables coordination and collective capacity but may asymmetrically restrict possibility, naturalise interests, and conceal responsibility behind procedures.

Resonance

A decision draws lines through the field of possibility; even unspoken, it influences which voices approach, withdraw, or resist.

Etymology

Technical core term; individual etymological review pending

Provenance

Unresolved relation network → second core-concept review → Metzler/HWRh cross-check → ATLAS 239

Cite this entry

Reich, Michael (Hrsg./ed.): „Power“. Atlas der Sprache, AT-CORE-239-035. ATLAS 260, data model 1.6.0. https://atlasoflanguage.com/concept/AT-CORE-239-035

https://atlasoflanguage.com/concept/AT-CORE-239-035

The address remains stable; editorial content may evolve. Editorial reading state: 2026-10-15. Include your access date for precise references.

Historical background

Foucault’s 1982 essay examines power through actions affecting others’ possible actions, distinguishing this relation from mere capacity and immediate violence. It supplies one historically situated analytical approach, not an exhaustive definition of power. The inspected online transcription points to the 1983 book printing; that is distinct from the essay’s date. Its English second part is attributed to Leslie Sawyer’s translation.

How conceptual history changes the analysis

Ask who can shape the options available to others. This is an Atlas investigative question, not a rule that turns every influence into a proven instance of domination.

Additional example

Original example: An editor decides which objections may appear alongside an article. This shapes contributors’ available responses. Countercheck: possessing editorial responsibility is not itself evidence of abuse; procedures, appeals, and the actual decisions must be examined.

References for the historical section

Historical source evidence and Atlas applications remain separate; this import does not assert new first attestations or a fresh exhaustive source verification.