CC BY
50
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.18454/RULB.10.13 Гусакова Н.Л.1, Огнева Е.А.2, Бойчук И.В.3
1 Доцент, кандидат психологических наук, 2доцент, доктор филологических наук, 3доцент, кандидат
филологических наук, Белгородский государственный национальный исследовательский университет ЛИНГВОКУЛЬТУРОЛОГИЧЕСКИЕ АСПЕКТЫ МЕЖКУЛЬТУРНОЙ КОММУНИКАЦИИ
Аннотация
В статье рассмотрены лингвокультурологические аспекты межкультурной коммуникации с целью выявления взаимосвязи степени интерпретации кросскультурных символов языковой личностью коммуниканта и процессом успешной межкультурной коммуникации. В результате исследования было доказано, что межкультурная коммуникация основывается на интерпретации кросскультурных символов как базовых мотивационных факторов коммуникации, зависящих от параметров языковой личности. Именно структура культурологически обусловленной языковой личности коммуниканта предопределяет успех межкультурной коммуникации. Определена роль параметров языковой личности в процессе межкультурной коммуникации.
Ключевые слова: межкультурная коммуникация, языковая личность, кросскультурные символы.
Gusakova N.L.1, Ogneva Е.А.2, Boychuk I.V.3
1Associate professor, PhD in Psychology, 2associate professor, PhD in Philology, 3associate professor, PhD in Philology,
Belgorod State National Research University LINGUO-CULTURAL ASPECTS OF CROSS-CULTURAL COMMUNICATION
Abstract
The article deals with the linguo-cultural aspects of cross-cultural communication. The aim of article is to identify the relationship between lingual personality's interpreting degree of cross-cultural symbols and successful process of cross-cultural communication. As a result it is proved, that cross-cultural communication is based on interpretation of cross-cultural symbols as one of the most important motivate factors of communication. It should be emphasized that the lingual personality is the main component of communicative process. It is identified, that individual parameters of lingual personality form the individual lingual world view which reflects objectively the world perception by people having different cultures. The role of lingual personality parameters of emigrant at the successful cross-cultural communication is identified.
Keywords: cross-cultural communication, lingual personality, lingual personality of emigrant, cross-cultural symbols.
Introduction. Linguo-culturology is one of the most actual scientific branches. In 1997 Yu. S. Stepanov represented the term "linguoculturology" to study the correlation between culture and language. There are some fundamental researches of N.F. Alefirenko [1], A.T. Khrolenko [6], S. Bochner [7], A. Jakobs [8], J. Metge and P. Kinloch [9] and etc. Many linguo-culturologists research for the mental bases of language to understand the tendencies of people development in the past and in the present. According to V.V. Vorobyev, "one of the most important issues of linguoculturology is the research of Russian national personality" [3, P. 3-5].
Methods. Methodology of linguo-culturological researches is based on conceptology, hermeneutics, and general philology. The linguo-culturological researches is to discover as language paradigm of culturological discourse, as basic pragmatic functions of linguo-culturological units in any communicative situations. We use the linguo-cultural analysis as the base method of cross-cultural communication researches.
Discussion. It is evident, that cross-cultural communication is based on cross-cultural interpretation. According to O.A. Leontovich there are some factors of national and cultural language specificity of cross-cultural communication, such as: 1. Representation of cultural traditions of the people: permits, prohibitions, stereotypical acts and etiquette characteristics of communicative universal facts. 2. Representation of social situation and social functions of communication. 3. Representation of local social situation in the peculiarities of the course of mental processes and various activities, such as the psycholinguistic base of speech activity, and the paralinguistic phenomena. 4. Determination of language specifics of community and research the symbols as cultural symbols [4, P. 191-192]. Motivation of cultural symbol represents the correlation between the concrete and abstract elements of symbolic
content. Such correlation distinguishes the symbol and the sign, because the sign illustrates the connection between the signified and the signifier. A sign becomes a symbol as the whole spectrum of secondary conventional values of interpretation. The symbol has the properties of the sign, although the symbol does not imply a direct reference to the denotation.
Correlation between the sign and symbol has an important role in the specificity of cross-cultural discourse consisting of different linguistic personalities and the conditions of communication. Lingual personality of emigrant as an object of linguistic researches generalizes cultural-linguistic and communicative-activity values, knowledge, attitudes and behaviors. The lingual personality consists of the following components: 1) value component has a system of values, and life meanings. It is the content of education. The value component allows a person to form an initial and deep view of the world, forms the linguistic world view, the hierarchy of spiritual representations that form the base of a national character and realize in the process of linguistic dialogue; 2) culturological component contributes cultural studies, such as the rules of speech and non-verbal behavior; 3) personality component characterizes individual and deepest things in each person [5, P. 119]. Individual parameters of lingual personality form he complex combination of psychophysiological, social, national-cultural and linguistic peoples' differences. It leads to the fact that at the level of cross-cultural communication the differences between linguistic personalities reach a certain critical volume that can have both positive and negative impact on the success in the cross-cultural communication. English and Russian cultures had some similar things in the past, such as mytho-archetypal beginning. English culture is the unity of many tribes' cultures such as Brits, Scots, Celts, and Anglo-Saxons, then Norman culture. But Russian culture is the unity
of culture of pagan Slavic, Christian Byzantine, and Western European.
Different cultural identity is the base of cross-commutation shock. The study of the cross-cultural communication principles allows identifying the causes of communicative shock. Such identification is the way of overcoming the results of communicative shock. The process of cross-cultural peoples interaction bases on studying the particular of communication using complex approaches, qualitative changes in the choice of research methods of lingual personality as the subject of successful cross-cultural communication [4, P. 9]. Any lingual personality has an "evaluation scale". For example, lingual personality of emigrant uses this "evaluation scale" to represent the surrounding world as the linguo-cultural model. This model is a structural property and powerful factor of personality self-determination, because a representative of any particular culture has a certain cultural fund, that is, a set of knowledge that provides a certain outlook in the field of national and world culture. The cultural fund is basic units included in any national culture. The person's belonging to a particular culture determines his mentality as the basis of another culture perception usually by reading literature and cross-cultural communication. In cross-cultural communication the lingual world view is very important thing as a guide in the communicative process between the lingual personality of emigrant and the society. The lingual world view is the basis of personal self-identification and largely depends on linguo-cultural specificity of society. It is the format of lingual semantics code. Individual lingual world view can be an actual or a relic thing. But, a relic specificity of lingual world view can be the base to form new mental structures. As a result of such new lingual world view forming we identified the difference between the archaic semantic system of language and the actual mental model that is valid for a lingual group. E.E. Brazgovskaya said about the differences of cross-cultural discourse of society and "social creative text" [2]. Cross-cultural discourse has certain national sign, therefore V.V. Vorobiev says: "linguistic signs and expressions require an extra-linguistic way of their representation and interpretation" [3, P. 81-82], whereas lingual world view can have the form of a linguistic one. This thesis means that lingual world view can form linguistic
competence, but it proves to be meaningfully more complicated. The issue of culturological relativity of lingual world view is very important. It is apparented in the variability of forms and categorization of the meanings system.
Differences of lingual world view formed under the influence of complex cognitive structures. Such influence is important for the forming as discursive models, as literary text models. Lingual and linguo-cultural world views are consistent with each other because of the dialectical connection of language and thought as a reflection of the world in people mind. Lingual and linguo-cultural world views have at the same time a number of differences due to their functional specificities. Researches of lingual world view in dynamics are carried out with the social-dynamic study of cultural interaction. The social-dynamic approach in the study of lingual world view suggests that the lingual world view is in the status of permanent development. The components of this system reflect the specificity of life and culture of social and national community which is the base of cross-cultural communicative shock, because of ethno-connotation. Ethno-connotation has the deep level of the supposed multi-layered model of cultural concepts-sphere. It has a certain structure and specific parameters of ethno-conotants content. The ethno-connotation appearance in the cross-cultural communicative processes bases on the degree of correlation between form and meaning of cultural code.
Conclusion. To sum up, lingual world view has pragmatic parameters and manifests itself in realities, which include concepts related to the life and worldview of the society that created them. So, it is evident, that cross-cultural communication is based on cross-cultural interpretation which bases on four factors of national and cultural language specificity having cultural symbols.
It is proved, that cultural symbol is one of the most important motivate factor of cross-cultural communication having the lingual personality parameters of emigrant as the base. The lingual personality parameters consist of the following three components: value component, culturological component, personality component. The lingual personality parameters are the base of the lingual world view forming in cross-cultural communication process. The lingual world view is very important thing as a guide in the communicative process between the lingual personality and the society.
Список литературы / References
1. Алефиренко Н. Ф. Лингвокультурология: ценностно-смысловое пространство языка / Н. Ф. Алефиренко. - М.: Флинта: Наука, 2010. - 288 с.
2. Бразговская Е. Е. Текст культуры: от события - к событию / Е. Е. Бразговская. - Пермь, 2004. - 284 с.
3. Воробьев В. В. Лингвокультурология / В. В. Воробьёв. - М.: РУНД, 2008. - 340 с.
4. Леонтович О. А. Русские и американцы: парадоксы межкультурного общения / О. А. Леонтович. - Волгоград: «Перемена», 2002. - 435 с.
5. Маслова В. А. Лингвокультурология / В. А. Маслова. - М.: Академия, 2001. - 208 с.
6. Хроленко А. Т. Основы лингвокультурологии / А. Т. Хроленко. - М.: Флинта: Наука, 2004. - 184 с.
7. Bochner S. Cultures in Contacts: studies in cross-cultural interaction / S. Bochner. - New York: Pergamon Press, 2013.
8. Jakobs A. Cross-cultural communication / A. Jakobs. - Borne: the Netherlands, 2011.
9. Metge J. Taking past each other: Problems of cross-cultural communication / J. Metge, P. Kinloch. - New Zealand: Victoria University Press, 2014.
Список литературы на английском / References in English
1. Alefirenko N. F. Lingvokulturologiya: tsennostno-smyslovoye prostranstvo yazyka [Linguoculturology: value and meaning space of language] / N. F. Alefirenko. - M.: Flinta: Nauka. 2010. - P. 288 [in Russian]
2. Brazgovskaya E. E. Tekst kultury: ot sobytiya - k sobytiyu [Cultural text: from event to event] / E. E. Brazgovskaya. - Perm, 2004. - P. 284 [in Russian]
3. Vorobyev V.V. Lingvokulturologiya [Linguoculturology] / V.V. Vorobyev. - M.: RUND. 2008. - P. 340 [in Russian]
4. Leontovich O. A. Russkiye i amerikantsy: paradoksy mezhkulturnogo obshcheniya [Russians and Americans: paradox of cross-cultural communication] / O. A. Leontovich. - Volgograd: «Peremena». 2002. - P. 435 [in Russian]
5. Maslova V. A. Lingvokulturologiya [Linguoculturology] / V. A. Maslova. - M.: Akademiy [Academy], 2001. - P. 208 [in Russian]
6. Khrolenko A. T. Osnovy lingvokulturologii [Basics of linguoculturology] / A. T. Khrolenko. - M.: Flinta: Nauka. 2004. - P. 184 [in Russian]
7. Bochner S. Cultures in Contacts: studies in cross-cultural interaction / S. Bochner. - New York: Pergamon Press, 2013.
8. Jakobs A. Cross-cultural communication / A. Jakobs. - Borne: the Netherlands, 2011.
9. Metge J. Taking past each other: Problems of cross-cultural communication / J. Metge, P. Kinloch. - New Zealand: Victoria University Press, 2014.
