One of the most important theoretical problems of the study of political cultures is to get out of the circularity that involves defining as political a discourse or cultural expression because it speaks of politics or is enunciated by a politician. The entrance of linguistic pragmatics as an instrument of analysis can move forward in this direction. From this point of view, a discourse or a cultural manifestation will not be political only because it "talks about politics" (semantic criterion), but because it performs certain types of transforming acts of intersubjective relations (syntactic and / or pragmatic criterion): it gives a place to "authorized" subjects (with "right to speak"), establishes "duties", builds "expectations", generates "trust".

One of the most important theoretical problems of the study of political cultures is to get out of the circularity that involves defining as political a discourse or cultural expression because it speaks of politics or is enunciated by a politician. The entrance of linguistic pragmatics as an instrument of analysis can move forward in this direction. From this point of view, a discourse or a cultural manifestation will not be political only because it "talks about politics" (semantic criterion), but because it performs certain types of transforming acts of intersubjective relations (syntactic and / or pragmatic criterion): it gives a place to "authorized" subjects (with "right to speak"), establishes "duties", builds "expectations", generates "trust".