CC BY
42
DOI 10.23947/2414-1143-2021-26-2-47-55 UDC 316.7:008
CONCEPTUAL MEANING OF A LINGUISTIC PERSONALITY DEVELOPMENT IN THE POLYLINGUAL SPACE OF THE NORTH CAUCASUS REGION
© Olesya S. Makarova, Veronika G. Pavlenko, Artem S. Goncharov
Stavropol State Pedagogical Institute, Stavropol, Russian Federation
The structural and functional properties of the development of a linguistic personality in a bilingual and multilingual environment are investigated. Particular attention is paid to the factors influencing the development of the linguistic personality in the multicultural and multilingual space of the North Caucasus region. The main features of the development of a linguistic personality are revealed, a general characteristic is given to the levels of language proficiency, as well as to those factors that can form a linguistic complex in the social and linguistic space due to the assimilation of new cultural concepts and value attractors. The factor of native and foreign language proficiency among representatives of the Caucasian culture is assessed. To study sociolinguistic material, the concept of Weinreich's linguistic contact and the concept of Weisgerber's linguistic personality are presented, the results of research of modern sociolinguists M.M. Kashapov and V.N. Toporov. The dialogue of cultures in a multilingual environment is analyzed from the point of view of the demonstrated linguistic and non-linguistic reactions, which are most clearly manifested in the course of the collision of different linguistic cultures. The totality of linguistic and cultural contradictions gives rise to many barriers: social, psychological, linguistic. It is emphasized that their leveling is possible only when an integral contact is established between the communicator and the recipient where the fullness of speech activity is manifested and the essence of the linguistic personality is revealed.
Key words: intercultural communication, linguistic personality, multilingualism, linguo-mental complex, poly-lingual space, lexicode, cultural concept.
[О.С. Макарова, В.Г. Павленко, А.С. Гончаров Концептуальное значение развития языковой личности в полилингвальном пространстве Северо-Кавказского региона]
Исследуются структурно-функциональные свойства развития языковой личности в двуязычной и многоязычной среде. Особое внимание уделяется факторам, влияющим на развитие языковой личности в поликультурном и полилингвальном пространстве Северо-Кавказского региона. Выявляются основные особенности развития языковой личности, даётся общая характеристика уровням владения языком, а также тем факторам, которые могут сформировать в социальном и языковом пространстве линвгоментальный комплекс за счёт усвоения новых культурных концептов и ценностных аттракторов. Оценивается фактор владения родным и иностранным языком у представителей кавказской культуры. Для изучения социолингвистического материала приводится концепция языкового контакта Вайнрайха и концепция языковой личности Вайсгербера, используются результаты исследований современных социолигвистов М.М. Кашапова и В.Н. Топорова. Диалог культур в многоязычной среде анализируется с точки зрения демонстрируемых языковых и неязыковых реакциях, которые проявляются наиболее наглядно в ходе столкновения различных лингвокультур. Совокупность языковых и культурных противоречий порождает множество барьеров: социальных, психологических, языковых. Подчеркнуто, что нивелирование их возможно только при установлении целостного контакта между коммуникатором и реципиентом, где и проявляется вся полнота речевой деятельности и раскрывается сущность языковой личности.
Ключевые слова: интеркультурная коммуникация, языковая личность, многоязычие, лингво-ментальный комплекс, полилингвальное пространство, лексикод, культурный концепт.
Olesya S. Makarova - Ph.D. in Pedagogy, Associate Professor, Stavropol State Pedagogical Institute, Stavropol, Russian Federation.
Veronika G. Pavlenko - Ph.D. in Philology, Associate Professor, Stavropol State Pedagogical Institute, Stavropol, Russian Federation.
Artem S. Goncharov - Student, Stavropol State Pedagogical Institute, Stavropol, Russian Federation.
Макарова Олеся Сергеевна - кандидат педагогических наук, доцент, Ставропольский государственный педагогический институт, г. Ставрополь, Российская Федерация.
Павленко Вероника Геннадиевна - кандидат филологических наук, доцент, Ставропольский государственный педагогический институт, г. Ставрополь, Российская Федерация. Гончаров Артем Сергеевич - студент, Ставропольский государственный педагогический институт, г. Ставрополь, Российская Федерация.
The relevance of the research lies in the need for a more detailed study of the internal linguistic factors affecting the development and transformation of the multicultural and multilingual space of the North Caucasus region. A linguistic personality in the context of intercultural communication faces a number of difficulties caused by the presence of many linguistic cultures and their ethnolinguistic characteristics, which give rise to multilingualism in a limited linguistic space. Cultural interaction and intercultural communication of representatives of Russian and Caucasian cultures have always had a special character, but only at the present stage of development of ethnolinguistics and sociolinguistics, we get the opportunity to explore not only all spheres of public life in a particular region, but also to reveal the entire linguistic dynamics on the example of the development of a linguistic personality.
The practical significance of the study is due to the possibility of establishing the relationship between the linguistic personality and the ethnolinguistic characteristics of the peoples of the Caucasus in the context of the polycultural and polylingual space, taking into account the possible collision of different linguocultures in the educational environment or in everyday life. Studying the levels of language proficiency and the orientation of the linguistic personality in the social and linguistic space, we also directly touch upon all the specifics of intercultural communication and the interaction of Russian and Caucasian cultures, due to which the result of the analysis is an integral linguistic characteristic of the dualism of foreign cultural content in the North Caucasus region.
The novelty of the research lies in the multilevel analysis of ethnic societies and civic identity from a sociolinguistic and culturological standpoint, which makes it possible to reveal the relationship between the categories of the linguistic personality and the constituents of the linguistic component in public life and in the context of the multicultural and multilingual space of the North Caucasus region.
The purpose of the study is to reveal the conceptual meaning of a linguistic personality defining its internal linguistic factors influencing the transformation of linguocultures and their ethnolinguistic characteristics in the process of intercultural communication of Russian and Caucasian cultures.
The study of the factors influencing the development of the levels of linguistic personality in the North Caucasian region was carried out by such researchers as: M.U. Zubayrayeva [3], M.M. Kashapov [4], M.A. Neymark [7], S.YA. Sushchiy [11], A.I. Temir-bolatova [12], V.N. Toporov [14]. Moreover, the works of M.M. Kashapov and S. Ya. Sushchi are of the greatest scientific interest since it is they that reflect the linguistic dynamics and reveal the main factors influencing the development of the linguistic personality in the multicultural and multilingual space of the North Caucasus region.
Today, in the context of the integration of Russian and Caucasian culture in the North Caucasus region there are a number of factors that positively and negatively affect the development of the entire region. Economic factors are established using statistics, labour market indicators, production and productivity in enterprises, percentage of net income, etc. But these are all indicators that can be obtained through the analysis of external factors of the development of the region, which, as a rule, lie on the surface, while linguistic factors are hidden in the structural and functional components of the linguistic world and the linguistic space of those linguocultures whose languages are considered the most prestigious, updated in a regional context.
The popularity of a foreign language in this case can be disregarded, since it is taught at the school stage, but does not affect the ethnolinguistic features of the region, since in real speech activity outside the educational aspect, a foreign language is practically not used by representatives of the Caucasian culture who are -the bodies of the language. A foreign language does not affect the expansion of the linguo-mental complex due to new cultural concepts and value attractors, since this occurs only as a result of the unconscious actualization of the national culture at the first, cognitive level of the linguistic personality, that is, if, for example, if the English language is not native to any of the person's closest relatives, then it will not exert an ethnoliguistic influence on the linguistic-mental complex, only the linguistic one [8, p. 165].
The intertwining of ethnocultural ties in the context of a polycultural and multilingual region creates many contradictions between the real and nominal level of language proficiency. It often happens those representatives of the Caucasian culture understand their native language well, but do not know how to write it, this indicates that the level of linguistic personality is the first or zero [11, p. 95]. At the zero level of language proficiency, familiarization with the culture of the ethnos takes place, the primary structural elements and properties of the language are learned, with the help of which a person masters ordinary semantics. This saturates the linguo-mental complex with cultural concepts reflected in the modern social and linguistic space, in which most of the native speakers reside (if we are talking about small linguistic cultures) [20, pp. 45-46].
The first and second levels of language proficiency reflect the ability to navigate in the language space. At the first level, a representative of linguistic culture continues to familiarize himself with single semantics, learns functional styles of speech, and masters spoken language well. There is an actualization of value attractors, the connection between modern ethno-linguistic features of the language and the factors of its historical and cultural development is better felt. At this level, verbal associations are quite logical, a holistic picture of the world is being built, a linguistic personality is capable of self-identification and consolidation with representatives of a different culture. Also, a clear idea of the properties of objects and phenomena is built, there is a certain hierarchy of motives, attitudes and there are stable goals. The worldview continues to form [19, p. 64].
The second level of language proficiency shows the connection of its bearer with the culture of an ethnos, ethnic group and reflects the ability to include non-ordinary semantics in speech activity. At this level, many cultural concepts and even value attractors are determined by the personality traits, its emotional-cognitive and worldview components. As a rule, the properties and typification of thinking of a linguistic personality with a second level of language proficiency is not determined only by the national culture, but, to a greater extent, by personal claims emanating from a strict hierarchy of motives [13, p. 372].
We can say that the levels of development of a linguistic personality, in a sense, predetermine its position in society, and specifically in the social and linguistic space. With the increasing complexity of the hierarchy of motives in the development of a linguistic personality, the factor of groundless conflicts, as well as conflicts on a national and ideological (cultural, religious) basis, which are possible, for example, at the first level, when cultural concepts and value attractors are determined by national culture, and ideology and worldview not yet fully formed. In most cases, this leads to confrontation, the creation of conflict situations, the cause of which is directly the heterogeneity of the levels of development of a linguistic personality, levels of language proficiency and the presence of many ethnolinguistic contradictions in a single linguistic space [10, p. 89].
So, ignorance and inability to navigate in the linguistic space leads, as a rule, to an increase in ethnic, cultural and even religious-confessional differences, to their objectifica-tion, which can affect the ethical, moral and ideological component of the representatives of two or more cultures entering into direct or indirect confrontation [4, p. 79]. It can be said
that the richer and more heterogeneous the linguistic world in which a linguistic person lives, the more prospects are given to his/her development, but at the same time, more contradictions appear, i.e., sociocultural, ethnolinguistic, which make it difficult to master the native language, as well as the one that seems to be the most promising and prestigious in the linguistic space [17, p. 285].
In fact, therefore, the communicative side of intercultural interaction between representatives of two or more ethnic communities is always of a dualistic nature. As a rule, ethnolinguistic features bring together linguistic cultures, nevertheless, linguistic and ethnic communities (especially if their representatives are linguistic personalities), coming into contact with speakers of a different language, experience discomfort associated with poor-quality perception of linguistic information [12, p. 266]. Even if the "failure" occurs at the level of lexicodes, and not differentiated semantic features - semes, a semantic barrier still arises, which is more difficult to escape, the more developed migration flows, as well as some negative integration aspects of inculturalism [19, p. 62].
In the conditions of a multicultural and multilingual region, the importance of the integral and systematic development of a linguistic personality acquires particular importance. In the North Caucasus region, the systemic study of the language in its statistics and dynamics is determined by both a special interest in the language in general and the need to understand linguistic processes in their sociolinguistic and general humanitarian coordinates. A close connection between the direction of development of a linguistic personality can be traced both in cultural growth and in the course of active interaction of many ethnic groups, covering all spheres of social life [18, p. 57].
Cultural interaction and intercultural communication of representatives of Russian and Caucasian cultures have a special character, which has been formed for more than two hundred and fifty years. The Catherine era made it possible to overcome the socioeconomic and cultural confinement of the North Caucasus, when the first professional translators from the Caucasian languages appeared, and the Cossacks got the opportunity to dwell on the fortress cities that later entered the Azov-Mozdok line [1, p. 329]. The further reign of Paul I and Alexander I predetermined the development trend of the entire region as a whole.
Now we can state that intercultural communication has expanded significantly, covering most of the socio-cultural relations in the region, but this has led to the actualization of ethnolinguistic differences (which are manifested in everything: starting with traditions and customs, norms of behavior in society and ending with the specification of national clothes and cuisines) [5, p. 73].
The dynamics of linguistic processes in the emerging polylingual space depends on a combination of factors that determine the nature of correspondences and contradictions in the linguomental complex of representatives of various linguistic cultures. Ethnolinguistic features largely determine the path of development of society and language, and overcoming the linguistic and cultural barriers that inevitably arise when two or more distinctive cultures collide allows society to improve. In this context, we can say that the full development of the linguistic personality in representatives of different linguocultures and the stabilization of intercultural interaction is hampered not so much by the linguomental specification as by the impossibility of objective perception of cultural concepts and value attrac-tors of representatives of a different culture through the prism of mentality [15, p. 80].
In modern sociolinguistics, a rather interesting parallel is drawn between the concepts of "confidence", "stereotype" and "belief". In the knowledge of any social, cultural process or phenomenon, a person proceeds from feeling, experience or judgment, as a rule, combining feeling and experience, or experience and judgment. Having determined the structure and functions of the investigated process or phenomenon, a person acquires "confidence", which later becomes his "belief", denoting the correctness and reliability of
the studied data. However, in this respect, confidence has no distinctive features from the concept of "stereotype" [14, p. 743].
As F.G. Safin said [9], a belief is just a stable stereotype, the formation of which is influenced by various directions of the social life of an individual. Moreover, the stereotype seems to be an even more objective formation of the knowledge gained, since to "conviction", if this concept is explicated epistemologically, not so much empiricism, but often a sensational component is added. On the example of the linguistic space and even the simplest speech activity, we can observe the same thing when language barriers arise between representatives of two different linguistic cultures - lexical and semantic [9, p. 83].
The lexical barriers that arise in the colloquial, official-business and journalistic styles of speech are associated with a changed, non-ordinary semantics, different variants of explication and semantic use of monemes and concepts, a possible change in the phonetic and grammatical properties of certain words with an unstable structure. A situation arises when the communicator is not able to correctly convey information to the recipient, and the recipient cannot perceive the original semantics of words, especially if he/she speaks the first or zero level of the language, and the communicator - the second one using extraordinary semantics [19, p. 58].
Based on the experience of teaching a foreign language, it can be noted that lexical barriers are very often combined with semantic, phonetic and logical barriers, due to the internal structure of the language itself. Here, the linguistic personality suffers to a greater extent due to multiple violations of functional styles, which leads to a misunderstanding not only of linguistic norms, but also of the essence of the language. In fact, violations of the norms characteristic of the style associated with the lexical barrier will lead to the loss of the original terminological meanings, the emergence of expressiveness and imagery unacceptable for the scientific style. Moreover, due to ignorance of the lexical rules and norms of the language, a participant in intercultural communication may use vernacular or jargon, which are uncharacteristic for the scientific style of speech and lead to the emergence of an expanding semantic barrier in communication.
At the present stage of the development of cultural and linguistic policy in the North Caucasus region, it is necessary not only to develop a set of measures to organize events aimed at general cultural development, but also to develop a linguistic personality in the context of a multilingual region and a multinational state as a whole. The current policy is aimed primarily at preserving the identity of the culture of the peoples of the Caucasus, as well as maintaining cultural identity [7, p. 32]. But, despite the large amount of financial resources allocated to actualize the problem of the contradiction of linguistic cultures in the multilingual and multicultural space, the main policy framework still remains limited to the educational system, in which the implementation of even bilingual personality development seems practically unattainable due to the complexity of teaching children their native languages. This applies to both the didactic-pedagogical and methodological components of the learning process [14, p. 816].
Inculturalism in the education of the North Caucasus region in the last decade has expanded due to the improvement of the legal and institutional basis of the educational process, however, the linguistic space in many subregions still does not meet all the requirements necessary for the full development of a linguistic personality, when there is a situation of bilingualism and multilingualism. In many republics, multilingualism is widespread, and at least two languages belong to the Iberian-Caucasian family [6, p. 107].
The founder of American sociolinguistics, Uriel Weinreich, in his work "Language Contacts" states the following: "Multilingualism is undoubtedly a phenomenon not only significant, but also quite common and widespread; multilingualism as something exceptional. This highly idealized view has a number of sources. Another feature of multilingualism, which is easily represented as a variable, is the degree of proficiency in each given lan-
guage by the same speaker. Completely free and all-round proficiency in two languages is, of course, very different from mastering only the beginnings of a second language; but again, the difficulty of the task facing a person and the nature of his failures when duplicating monolingual norms of each of the languages are similar in both cases" [1, p. 53]. It turns out that multilingualism in the global linguistic world is a significant and widespread phenomenon, while the degree of language proficiency, the level of development of a linguistic personality depends not only on knowledge and ability to use both languages at once, but also on how much a person is able to master the norms of both languages, given that he often duplicates mistakes made when learning the first language.
In support of this, we note that, even so, in the course of training, in classes on "Native Speech", one can quite often observe how students, in dialogue with the teacher or with each other, only half speak their native language, while the most difficult parts of the sentence are built mainly in Russian. Such mixed multilingualism can testify not only to the complete absence of full-fledged bilingual development in schools, but also to the weakness of the didactic and pedagogical side of teaching the native language, in comparison with Russian and foreign [16, p. 91].
This phenomenon is especially common in cities where neither students nor parents have a desire to focus on learning their native language, which does not allow the skill of natural speech activity to unfold, and as we remember from the concept of the linguistic personality of J. Weisgerber, a linguistic personality can to fully reveal himself only if a person deepens in the study of his native language, so even if a representative of the Caucasian culture can perfectly master the Russian language, he will never reach the level that he could achieve by mastering his natural, native language and that language, which is most common in a specific social and linguistic space [20, p. 184].
Paradoxical as it may seem, the studies of A.I. Temirbolatova [12] in the corpus of cognitive linguistics prove that, indeed, in 9 out of 10 cases when a representative of the Caucasian culture knows both his native and Russian languages, his linguistic personality is distinguished by extraordinary semantics, and the linguo-mental complex reflects cultural concepts and value attractors inherent in only national, but also his own, personal culture [12, p. 307], which is being transformed at the same time by the polylingual and multicultural space in which it exists. This also confirms the idea of the need to develop polylin-gualism in the context of intercultural communication between two heterogeneous cultural and linguistic communities.
According to the definition of the founder of pedagogical science, Ya.A. Komenski, the idea of polylingualism or "polygloty" has a long history. According to his concept, "a literate person should know several languages: the native language - for" private life ", the language of neighboring peoples -" for communication "with them, Latin -" for reading books of scientific content "and additionally:" for philosophers and doctors - Greek and Arabic, for theologians - Greek and Hebrew. " At the same time, special importance should be attached to the native language and Latin, which should be "studied with equal care." [3, p. 4] And in modern times, Komenski's remark seems more than relevant, with the amendment that instead of Latin one has to study mainly English, since research in the most practical, in our opinion, scientific fields - sociology, economics and psychoanalysis - is carried out mainly in English in the USA and Canada.
So, intercultural communication in the North Caucasus in modern times is rather contradictory: on the one hand, many researchers dealing with the social and political-economic side of the issue have already established the measures necessary to resolve conflict situations, however, they did not affect the linguistic component in full, in fact, did not consider the relationship of the linguistic personality and ethnolinguistic characteristics of the peoples of the Caucasus in the context of the multicultural and polylingual space, demonstrated linguistic and non-linguistic reactions during the clash of different linguistic
cultures. Since the structure of a linguistic personality is multidimensional, in order to fully analyze the linguistic knowledge of a person and their manifestation in an individual-personal experience, it is necessary to find confirmation of the alleged level of language proficiency among the concepts, attractors and associates that permeate the active thesaurus and pragmatics of the speaker. Based on this, we can say that the dualism of foreign cultural content in the region is expressed by the receptive-interpretive activity of the linguistic personality, and this is only an indirect dialogue that does not fully reflect the constituents of the linguistic component in public life.
Литература
1. Вайнрайх У. Языковые контакты. Состояние и проблемы исследования. М.: БГК Им. И.А. Бодуэна Де Куртенэ. Серия: Корпус гуманитарных дисциплин, 2000. 274 с.
2. Гончаров А.С., Ануприенко И.А. Межкультурная коммуникация в северокавказском историческом регионе в первой половине XIX века. // Молодой ученый. Международный научный журнал. 2020. № 27 (317). С. 328-330.
3. Зубайраева М.У. К вопросу о формировании билингвальной и полилингваль-ной языковой личности // Современные проблемы науки и образования. 2016. № 3. 12 c.
4. Кашапов М.М. Социальный мир человека. Материалы всероссийской конференции «Человек и мир: социальное поведение личности в изменяющемся мире». Ижевск: ERGO, 2007. 312 с.
5. Клычников Ю.Ю. История и культура народов Северного Кавказа. М.: Юрайт, 2018. 117 с.
6. Колчина О.Н. Диалог культур в структуре языковой личности. М.: LAP Lambert Academic Publishing, 2011. 188 с.
7. Неймарк М.А. Мягкая сила в мировой политике. // Обозреватель-Observer. 2016. № 1. С. 31-42.
8. Панченко Н.В., Качесова И.Ю. Аспекты общей и частной лингвистической теории текста. М.: Наука, 2015. 281 с.
9. Сафин Ф.Г. Вызовы этничности и тенденции проявления идентичности / Ф.Г. Сафин, Ф.Г. и др / Под ред. Ф.Г. Сафина. СПб.: Свое издательство, 2015. 148 с.
10. Солодкова Т.И. Эмоциональный интеллект как личностный ресурс. М.: LAP Lambert Academic Publishing, 2012. 148 с.
11. Сущий С.Я. Северный Кавказ. Реалии, проблемы, перспективы первой трети XXI века. М.: Ленанд, 2013. 429 с.
12. Темирболатова А.И. Проблемы языковой политики и языкового строительства на Северном Кавказе. Ставрополь: СГУ, 2012. 314 с.
13. Тишков В.А. Российский народ: история и смысл национального самосознания / В.А. Тишков. М.: Наука, 2013. 649 с.
14. Топоров В.Н. Язык. Личность. Текст: сборник статей к 70-летию Т. М. Николаевой. М.: Языки славянских культур, 2017. 978 с.
15. Чемоданов Н.С. Сравнительное языкознание в России: Очерк развития сравнительно-исторического метода в русском языкознании / Н.С. Чемоданов. М.: Книжный дом Либроком, 2010. 96 c.
16. Шпильная Н.Н. Языковая картина мира в структуре речемыслительной деятельности языковой личности. М.: Ленанд, 2017. 152 с.
17. Baudouin de Courtenay I.A. A Pioneer of Structural linguistics. Victoria: University of Victoria, 2018. 311 p.
18. Goksoy S. Reasons of the problems that academicians experience in management of teaching and learning process. Journal of Pedagogical Research. 2018. № 2. pp. 55-62.
19. Hill A.A. Introduction to linguistic structures: Fromsound to sentence in English. New York: Harcourt, Brace, 2018. 202 p.
20. Weisgerber J.L Muttersprache // Historisches Worterbuch der Philosophie. Hrsg. v. J.Ritter, K.Griinder. Band 6. - Basel, Stuttgart, Schwabe - Darmstadt, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 2009. 232 S.
References
1. Weinreich U. Yazykovyye kontakty. Sostoyaniye i problemy issledovaniya [Language contacts. Research status and problems]. Moscow: BGK Im. I. A. Boduena De Kurtene. Seriya: Korpus gumanitarnykh distsiplin, 2000. 274 p. (In Russian).
2. Goncharov A.S., Anuprienko I.A. Mezhkulturnaya kommunikatsiya v severokav-kazskom istoricheskom regione v pervoy polovine XIX veka [Intercultural communication in the North Caucasian historical region in the first half of the 19th century]. Mo-lodoy uchenyy. Mezhdunarodnyy nauchnyy zhurnal. No. 27 (317) / 2020. pp. 328330 (In Russian).
3. Zubayraeva M.U. K voprosu o formirovanii bilingvalnoy i polilingvalnoy yazykovoy lichnosti [On the formation of a bilingual and multilingual linguistic personality]. Sov-remennyye problemy nauki i obrazovaniya. 2016. No. 3. 12 p. (In Russian).
4. Kashapov M.M. Sotsialnyy mir cheloveka. Materialy vserossiyskoy konferentsii «Che-lovek i mir: sotsialnoye povedeniye lichnosti v izmenyayushchemsya mire» [The social world of man. Materials of the All-Russian conference "Man and the World: Social Behavior of a Person in a Changing World"]. Izhevsk: ERGO. 2007. 312 p. (In Russian).
5. Klychnikov Yu.Yu. Istoriya i kultura narodov Severnogo Kavkaza [History and culture of the peoples of the North Caucasus]. Moscow: Yurayt. 2018. 117 p. (In Russian).
6. Kolchina O.N. Dialog kultur v strukture yazykovoy lichnosti [Dialogue of cultures in the structure of a linguistic personality]. Moscow: LAP Lambert Academic Publishing. 2011. 188 p. (In Russian).
7. Naimark M.A. Myagkaya sila v mirovoy politike. Obozrevatel [Soft power in world politics. Observer]. 2016. No. 1. pp. 31-42 (In Russian).
8. Panchenko N.V., Kachesova I.Yu. Aspekty obshchey i chastnoy lingvisticheskoy teo-rii teksta [Aspects of general and particular linguistic text theory]. Moscow: Nauka. 2015. 281 p. (In Russian).
9. Safin F.G. Vyzovy etnichnosti i tendentsii proyavleniya identichnosti [Ethnicity Challenges and Identity Manifestation Trends]. Saint Petersburg: Svoye izdatelstvo. 2015. 148 p. (In Russian).
10. Solodkova T.I. Emotsionalnyy intellekt kak lichnostnyy resurs [Emotional intelligence as a personal resource]. Moscow: LAP Lambert Academic Publishing. 2012. 148 p. (In Russian).
11. Sushchiy S.Ya. Severnyy Kavkaz. Realii, problemy, perspektivy pervoy treti XXI veka [North Caucasus. Realities, problems, prospects of the first third of the XXI century]. Moscow: Lenand, 2013. 429 p. (In Russian).
12. Temirbolatova A.I. Problemy yazykovoy politiki i yazykovogo stroitelstva na Severnom Kavkaze [Problems of language policy and language construction in the North Caucasus]. Stavropol: SGU. 2012. 314 p. (In Russian).
13. Tishkov V.A. Rossiyskiy narod: istoriya i smysl natsionalnogo samosoznaniya [Russian people: history and meaning of national identity]. Moscow: Nauka. 2013. 649 p. (In Russian).
14. Toporov V.N. Yazyk. Lichnost. Tekst: sbornik statey k 70-letiyu T.M. Nikolayevoy [Language. Personality. Text: a collection of articles for the 70th anniversary of T.M. Nikolayeva]. Moscow: Yazyki slavyanskikh kultur. 2017. 978 p. (In Russian).
15. Chemodanov N.S. Sravnitelnoye yazykoznaniye v Rossii: Ocherk razvitiya srav-nitelno-istoricheskogo metoda v russkom yazykoznanii [Comparative linguistics in Russia: Essay on the development of the comparative-historical method in Russian linguistics]. Moscow: Knizhnyy dom Librokom. 2010. 96 p. (In Russian).
16. Shpilnaya N.N. Yazykovaya kartina mira v strukture rechemyslitelnoy deyatelnosti yazykovoy lichnosti [The linguistic picture of the world in the structure of the speech-thinking activity of the linguistic personality]. Moscow: Lenand. 2017. 152 p. (In Russian).
17. Baudouin de Courtenay I.A. A Pioneer of Structural linguistics. Victoria: University of Victoria, 2018. 311 p.
18. Goksoy S. Reasons of the problems that academicians experience in manage-ment of teaching and learning process. Journal of Pedagogical Research. 2018. No. 2. pp. 55-62.
19. Hill A.A. Introduction to linguistic structures: Fromsound to sentence in English. New York: Harcourt, Brace. 2018. 202 p.
20. Weisgerber J.L Muttersprache. Historisches Worterbuch der Philosophie. Hrsg. v. J.Ritter, K.Griinder. Band 6. Basel, Stuttgart, Schwabe - Darmstadt, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 2009. 232 p. (In German).
29 March, 2021
