CC BY
40
Original Paper УДК 372.881.1
DOI: 10.29025/2079-6021-2019-3-195-202
Soft skills formation by inductive method of grammar teaching at a non-linguistic university
Julia M. Bobritskaya,
State Forest Technical University Named after S.M. Kirov, St. Petersburg, Russia, ORCID ID: 0000-0002-2970-332Х e-mail: jmblta@gmail.com
F<]
Irina Yu. Lyubomirova1
Saint Petersburg University of the Humanities and Social Sciences, St. Petersburg, Russia ORCID ID: 0000-0002-8383-6887, e-mail: irisya76@mail.ru
Received: 26.06.2019 /Accepted: 15.07.2019 /Publishedonline: 25.09.2019
Abstract: The article discusses the potential of inductive approach to grammar teaching at a non-linguistic university from the point of view of students' soft skills formation. The modern higher education system differs greatly from that of the pre-Bologna Process period. Fundamental knowledge nowadays is not enough to get a well-paid and perspective job. Employers pay much attention to soft skills of employees: problem-solving skills, adaptability and flexibility, team-work skills, responsibility, analytical and interpersonal skills. Foreign language is one of the few university subjects which gives both teachers and students the opportunity of soft skills formation, especially in the process of inductive grammar mastering. Though deductive grammar teaching is widely used in university training in the framework of the cognitive-practical method, it is less productive in the development of analytical and creative thinking of students as well as in the formation of such soft skills as problem solving, team work and leadership skills. An experiment was carried out in St. Petersburg Forest Technical University to find out the opportunities of soft skills formation with the help of inductive grammar teaching method.
Keywords: inductive approach, grammar teaching, soft skills, non-linguistic university.
For citation: Bobritskaya J.M., Lyubomirova I. YU. Soft skills formation by inductive method of grammar teaching at a non-linguistic university. Current Issues in Philology and Pedagogical Linguistics. 2019; 3: 195202. DOI: 10.29025/2079-6021-2019-3-195-202 (In Russ.).
Оригинальная статья
DOI: 10.29025/2079-6021-2019-3-195-202
Формирование гибких навыков индуктивным методом преподавания грамматики в неязыковом вузе
Ю.М. Бобрицкая,
Санкт-Петербургский государственный лесотехнический университет, г. Санкт-Петербург, Россия ORCID ID: 0000-0002-2970-332Х, e-mail: jmblta@gmail.com
актуальные проблемы филологии и педагогической лингвистики, 2019, № 3
пг
И.Ю. Любомирова1 ,
Санкт-Петербургский гуманитарный университет профсоюзов, г. Санкт-Петербург, Россия ORCID ID: 0000-0002-8383-6887, e-mail: irisya76@mail.ru
Получена: 26.06.2019 /Принята: 15.07.2019 /Опубликована онлайн: 25.09.2019
Резюме: В статье рассматривается потенциал индуктивного подхода к преподаванию грамматики в неязыковом вузе с точки зрения формирования у студентов гибких навыков. Современная система высшего образования сильно отличается от системы до Болонского процесса. Сегодняшних фундаментальных знаний недостаточно, чтобы получить хорошо оплачиваемую и перспективную работу. Работодатели уделяют большое внимание таким навыкам сотрудников, как навык решения проблем, адаптивности и гибкости, навык командной работы, ответственности, аналитическим навыкам и навыкам межличностного общения. Иностранный язык - один из немногих предметов в университете, который дает как преподавателям, так и студентам возможность формирования этих навыков (софт скилов), особенно в процессе индуктивного усвоения грамматики. Хотя дедуктивное обучение грамматике широко используется в университетской подготовке в рамках когнитивно-практического метода, оно менее продуктивно в развитии аналитического и творческого мышления студентов, а также в формировании таких гибких навыков, как решение проблем, командная работа и лидерские качества. В Санкт-Петербургском лесотехническом университете был проведен эксперимент по выяснению возможностей формирования гибких навыков с помощью метода индуктивного обучения грамматике.
Ключевые слова: индуктивный подход, преподавание грамматики, гибкие навыки (софт скилы), нелингвистический университет.
Для цитирования: Бобрицкая Ю.М., Любомирова И.Ю. Формирование гибких навыков индуктивным методом преподавания грамматики в неязыковом вузе // Актуальные проблемы филологии и педагогической лингвистики. 2019; 3: 195-202. DOI: 10.29025/2079-6021-2019-3-195-202.
Introduction
Nowadays most of us are living very practical lives. The question "what for" concerning any activity has become one of the main questions to be answered before this activity starts. If compared with the Soviet period when higher education was first of all considered to be sort of a basis (fundamental knowledge) for further development in some professional sphere, nowadays a university diploma is very often just one of the certificates backing up the ability of an applicant to occupy a certain position in a company. In the age of information overload employers appreciate soft skills (a combination of a person social and communication skills, personality or character traits, career attributes, social and emotional intelligence) higher than hard skills (knowledge and professional skills).
Hard skills are something which goes without saying, besides that they can be learned and perfected over time, while soft skills are more difficult to acquire but their lack can give hard skills no chance to reveal. One can know a lot about a certain problem but have no problem solving skills. Without leadership skills and ability of working in a team even thorough knowledge of a subject will never help a person to make the company he/ she is working for competitive.
According to the data of an annual survey conducted by the National Association of Colleges and Employees (NACE) employers consider the following attributes to be the most important for candidates to the positions in their companies: leadership, team-work ability, communication skills, problem-solving skills, strong work ethic, analytical skills, flexibility/adaptability, computer skills and interpersonal skills [8]. For Russian employers among the most important personal qualities and soft skills are: responsibility, communicational skills, and stress resistance: flexibility/adaptability, problem-solving skills and team-work skills [9].
Foreign language is one of the few university subjects which can encourage students to develop and improve all the soft skills needed to be successfully employed and climb to the top of a career ladder. Most university subjects imply getting knowledge while the task is much more complicated - it is necessary to form one kind of activity (working) in the framework of another kind of activity (studying). [1] For the students of
humanitarian (to say nothing of linguistic) universities foreign language lessons make up large part of their curriculum, while in so-called technical (non-linguistic) universities both the quantity and the quality of these lessons leaves much to be desired: they are traditionally organized mainly as reading and translating specialized texts. This lesson scheme is highly supported by the backwash effect - foreign language exam requirements for a non-linguistic university. It is very hard to change the situation for better for at least two reasons:
1. The very choice of a technical higher school means that a person who chooses it has no intention to master humanitarian subjects, a foreign language being one of them. According to the conclusions made by Bozhovich E.D., a student's studying activity can be productive and motivated only if the student accepts the requirements of teachers and understands the tasks which are set. [2]
2. The level of skills and knowledge of a foreign language of the most part of students is very low. And even if this level is high enough to improve communication skills, many students simply do not want to deal with a foreign language any more after their school experience.
Everything in teaching and studying process is deeply interconnected: no motivation - no result and vice versa - no result - no motivation. It makes this process a vicious circle. Entrance tests which have been organized for Forest Technical University students since the 90s of the previous century show stable decline in students' level of foreign languages knowledge and skills. The most difficult problem for the students is lack of grammar knowledge. The problem of grammar teaching has always been one of the key ones. But one can hardly compare the scale of this problem and the scope for its solving at a university if compared with a secondary school. Nobody of those applying to a higher school has a "two" (unsatisfactory mark in the schools of Russia) in his/her school diploma. It means they were taught a foreign language for at least 8 years at school. Some of them can speak and know grammar, many of them know such formal indicators as "s" for the plural or "-ed" ending for the Past Tense. But if a teacher asks about "s" for verbs, not nouns there is no answer. And the question about "-ed" ending of V3 for the Passive Voice is very rarely answered. Another problem is that most students at the beginning of their first year feel themselves still schoolchildren not realizing their responsibilities and the fact that university teachers are first of all facilitators and not controllers.
Grammar teaching in a non- linguistic university is both a very complicated and an extremely challenging task because it means not simply teaching - it involves correcting, explaining and building up motivation. It has become an especially difficult problem since the introduction of the Unified exams system. Having a number of advantages like giving young people all over the country equal opportunities for entering higher schools, this system has led to a number of problems. University diploma nowadays is not simply an element of prestige, it is sort of guarantee that one can find a well-paid job with great perspectives of promotion. Hence the situation when young people who cannot enter the university or specialty they dream about, try to enter any higher school. And they do enter universities. Many of them graduate from their universities and get diplomas which they will never mention but for the interviews and resumes sent to the companies working in absolutely different spheres than those stated in their diplomas. Being motivated to get only the final result - their diploma - many students are not process-oriented at all. So they are not motivated to solve everyday educational problems and prefer escaping any activity at the lessons to making even small effort to improve their skills.
What is grammar? It is very similar to a game rules. One cannot play a game not knowing its rules. One cannot speak a foreign language without knowing grammar rules, only so-called "broken foreign language". It is obvious that communication skills involve verbal, aural and written communication. From the point of view of a foreign language learning it means the ability of rendering the ideas accurately and clearly which inevitably leads to grammar mastering again.
Literature review
Scott Thornbury in his book "How to teach Grammar" gives as many as 13 arguments proving that grammar teaching should be the basis for a foreign language teaching on the whole. [6] He mentions such grammar functions as «sentence-making machine», an instrument for fossilization overcoming. From over twenty years experience in teaching the English language grammar at a technical higher school we can make a conclusion that fossilization in the process of a foreign language learning is a widespread problem among non-linguistic university students. They are very persistent in defending their opinion that they have reached their summit in a foreign language learning and are ready for doing piles of grammar exercises not even expecting to obtain any practical result. The typical question at the beginning of their foreign language course at the university is "How many texts should I translate and how many exercises should I do to get my credits?" Having a set of the Internet translating programs it is no problem for them to "translate" any text and they are not industrious
enough to edit the translations. It leads to the lack of motivation for further mastering foreign language skills -a situation which is very difficult to overcome. To build up motivation one should compare his/her results with his/her own previous results not paying attention to the results of other people. And these results should be steadily improving because only making progress can successfully motivate in studying. [16] In the opinion of Penny Ur, Stephen D. Karshen [7, 5] and other proponents of grammar teaching it is also a teacher's instrument for classwork organizing and not only the basis for language acquisition as well as the primary stage for creativity development. For the students of a non-linguistic university knowing grammar also means being confident. It is the lack of confidence that makes students either not speak at all or learn texts by heart without understanding them.
At the same time, although grammar mastering seems to be an obvious priority in a foreign language learning, there is a widespread opinion that it is no use trying to explain the rules because the easiest and most productive way of grammar learning is through practice. It was as early as in 1622 that Josef Webb started discussion of this viewpoint. It has always been rather popular and has been recently supported by an American linguist Stephen Krashen in his hypothesis of "natural order": a foreign language should be acquired the same way as a native language is acquired by children, not from the easiest things to the most complicated but in a natural order paying no attention to all the rules and forms [6]. The two approaches to grammar teaching mentioned above are called "inductive" and "deductive".
Rational kernel can be found in both points of view: it goes without saying that rote learning of a foreign language grammar rules gives students an ability of doing exercises "just to do the exercises" [4] being absolutely helpless in real communication. However, free communication without knowing any grammar rules makes a person think that he/she speaks fluently and gives him/her an illusion of communication. In fact it is very often not true: all interpreters can give examples of "perpendicular" conversations of Russian and foreign specialists when one side says something in "broken" English another side understanding it and answering one way and giving a reply from different sphere. For example,
"- Would you like me to send you an invoice?
- Yes, we discuss it in speaking" ("broken" English and misunderstanding the word "invoice" as "in voice"-orally).
At a non-linguistic higher school, when deciding on either inductive or deductive approach to grammar teaching, a teacher should keep in mind that his/her task is twofold:
1. To help students overcome interlanguage interference. When a student is weak at a foreign language grammar he, naturally, tries to introduce the grammar rules of his native language into the grammar system of a foreign language. In the English language learning these are, first of all, the Passive Voice; word order in sentences; the verb "to be" and the Modal Verbs equivalents.
2. To combine teaching a foreign language in a "productive" way and developing soft skills needed in students' further professional activity.
Methods
It was the problem of interlanguage interference which made the authors of this article start introducing the approach of inductive grammar teaching into the Forest Technical University practice. At the very beginning this method was used for teaching a group of students from Turkmenia who spoke both Russian and English badly. All attempts to explain any English grammar rules had been a failure before we asked them to write two similar sentences in their native language - one in the Past and one in the Present tense. Then the students were asked to analyze the difference between the sentences. After they had understood that to transform a sentence from one tense to another they needed a different verb form they were offered two similar sentences in English. And it was the first really productive lesson and the beginning of inductive grammar teaching for us. Certainly we cannot state that it is a universal way for all students. But inductive teaching can be considered to be a universal approach to university training because it is:
a) based on the main cognitive operations: "comparison, analysis and synthesis, abstraction and concret-ization, induction and deduction" [3, 316]. And cognitive activity is the leading one for university students.
b) it can help to form the main soft skills such as problem-solving, team-work, flexibility, etc.
Deductive teaching method is widely used in university training in the framework of the cognitive-practical
method. The main principle of the method is explaining a rule first followed by different examples from spoken language. It is considered rather productive especially in teaching complicated topics. If we speak about grammar topics which are really hard to master, the initial information can be taught with the help of deductive
method. For example, we started explaining the topic "the Subjunctive Mood" with explaining the rule for the First Conditionals. Having practiced the topic, we moved to analyzing the difference between the First and Second Conditionals smoothly switching over to the inductive method of grammar teaching.
For Russian students the lead in grammar learning activity was also analyzing the difference. Students were given pairs of similar sentences with the only difference in predicate forms. Choosing the right verb form for a predicate is one of the most complicated problems for non-linguistic university students. At the first stage students were asked just to compare pairs of sentences and underline the parts which were different. For example: My group mate is having his lunch. -My group mate was having his lunch. My group mate is having his lunch. - My group mate has had his lunch.
The second stage was analyzing the forms which differed and explain what changed in the situation described. After that team work started - the academic group of 16 students was subdivided into 4 smaller groups. Students of each subgroup were asked to make up a little story about their group mate using the same verb forms. Finally students presented their stories and chose the most logic or the funniest one.
When mastering the Passive Voice students of a non-linguistic university have great problems because this grammar phenomenon is formed very different in the Russian language if compared with the English language. In Russian we get prepared to hear the Passive Voice at the very beginning of a sentence because it is the subject which is different from the subject in the Active Voice sentences:
Он спросил... in the Active Voice changes for Его спросили ...
In English in both voices it is He asked ... He was asked ...
This grammar topic is being very problematic for non-linguistic university students. So we decided to ask them to derive the formula of the Passive Voice formation themselves. They compared pairs of similar sentences in the Active and Passive Voice:
He asked many questions. - He was asked many questions.
People paid for their participation. - People were paid for their participation.
Next step was a rule deriving by students and comparing their interpretation with the explanations in Grammar sections of their textbooks. Then students were asked to formulate the rule with their own words and write it down. The teacher was monitoring the students' work helping those who had some difficulties. The final stage was illustrating the rule. It was a team work in smaller groups, the students strongest in grammar supervising the process. After that students of both subgroups translated their sentences into Russian and asked their group mates to translate them back into English.
Results
As a result of applying the inductive method when working with the above-mentioned grammatical structures, it was revealed (Table 1) that 18 out of 19 students completed the tasks correctly; the structures being learnt both in the process of group and individual work.
Table 1
Results observed
Student Ratio of sentences with grammar mistakes/ total number of sentences before Ratio of sentences with grammar mistakes/ total number of sentences before
1 14/16 0/16
2 15/16 0/16
3 13/16 0/16
4 16/16 0/16
5 16/16 2/16
6 15/16 0/16
7 14/16 0/16
8 15/16 0/16
9 13/16 0/16
10 15/16 0/16
11 16/16 0/16
12 14/16 0/16
13 15/16 0/16
14 14/16 0/16
15 16/16 0/16
16 14/16 0/16
17 13/16 0/16
18 15/16 0/16
19 16/16 0/16
Another very illustrative example of inductive method of grammar teaching productivity is controlled writing task carried out by students with the help of cues. The aim of the task was to check grammar knowledge, so students were given the main idea of the essay, its approximate volume and the verbs they needed in their infinitive form. The students were reminded that first of all they had to evaluate the situation which they were going to describe and only then they could choose the necessary tense and tense form of the verbs. Not all students wrote the essay without any mistakes but they could analyze the mistakes they made. It means that the problem-solving skill was formed.
Many university kinds of tasks and problems can be and should be solved only in a team. That is why a lot of scientific studies are dedicated to the investigation of group behavior, group psychology, group development, etc. [11, 12, 13, 14, 15] At the same time team work ability is considered to be one of the key skills of a successful job candidate. For team work skill formation the concept of deep end exercises was used. These were not exactly exercises with a final communicative aim but the idea was very similar: a group of students was subdivided into two smaller groups each having to make a grammar exercise. Their aim was to arrive to the best possible result- no mistakes at all. Everybody participated and got a certain number of sentences to be done. Then students exchanged their papers and analyzed each work. They had to come to a joint variant in the course of discussion, ideal in their opinion. After that a group representative defended their variant.
Such team work helps to form not only necessary skills mentioned above but contributes to the formation of adequate self-esteem of students, increases the level of motivation to learn a foreign language, develops self-control skills. For successful implementation of educational activities self-assessment should as much as possible correspond to the level of achievements and abilities of a student. Adequate self-esteem directly affects learning outcomes, as well as contributes to the formation of a student as an active subject of learning; determines the level of his claims, motivation, helps him to adapt to the requirements of the social environment, to set goals and objectives that contribute to the most complete self-expression of the individual, the disclosure and development of his/her abilities. In the process of learning, students see personal results and have the opportunity to compare them with their previous ones. When a student masters self-control and self-esteem skills he turns into a subject of learning activities which allows him to exercise on his own, without the direct intervention of a teacher.
Conclusion
Learner training is an integral part of the modern paradigm of lifelong learning. When combined with the strategy of inductive teaching it leads to the formation of soft skills which nowadays are appreciated by employers at least as high as hard skills and qualifications. Inductive vs deductive in grammar teaching at a university means meaningful vs rote learning. At a young age much information is absorbed spontaneously, in playing or repeating. At a higher school nowadays nobody can afford big volumes of grammar rules practicing in the classroom. Due to the lack of time and low motivation deductive methods do not work anymore while cognitive strategies can give double result - grammar rules knowledge and soft skills development.
It is also very important that when formulating a grammar rule and practicing it students take responsibility for their findings. One of the greatest barriers to self-assessment and self-improvement is the attitude that the responsibility for assessing performance and progress lies solely with the teacher Awareness raising is one of the key points of lifelong education and learner-centered approach while one of the greatest barriers to self-assessment is the attitude that the responsibility for assessing performance and progress lies solely with the teacher.
The process of different grammar topics mastering in the framework of inductive approach can help activate such personal qualities as flexibility, adaptability, responsibility and form such soft skills as team-work skills, leadership skills, and problem-solving skills.
References
1. Verbitskiy, A.A. Active studying at a higher school: context approach / A.A. Verbitskiy, Moscow: Visch. Shcola, 1991, 294 p.
2. Bozhovich, E.D. Psychologic features of young people personality development / E.D. Bozhovich, Moscow: Znanie, 1979, 40 p.
3. Maklakov, A.G. General Psychology: Textbook for higher school, SPb.: Piter, 2010, 583 p.
4. Passov, E.I. Communicative method of teaching foreign language speaking / E.I. Passov, 2nd ed., Moscow: Prosveschenie, 1991, 223 p.
5. Krashen, Stephen D. Second language acquisition and second language learning, Oxford: Pergamon Press, 1981, 151 p.
6. Thornbury, Scott. How to Teach Grammar, Oxfordshire: Longman, 2004, 182 p.
7. Ur, Penny. Grammar Practice Activities. A Practical Guide for Teachers, NY: Cambridge University Press, 1999, 148 p.
8. NACE Job Outlook 2016: What employers want to see on your resume. Available at https://www.good-call.com/news/nace-job-outlook-2016-what-employers-want-to-see-on-your-resume-03807 [Access at 20 June 2019].
9. Kantemirova, O. Petersburg employers named the five qualities of an ideal employee. Available at https:// www.rbc.ru/spb_sz/01/11/2018/5bdb04 c09a7947624eda2e9e [Access at 20 June 2019].
10. Obozov, N.N. Psychologic processes and functions in the conditions of individual and cooperative activity /N.N. Obozov: Communication problem in psychology / ed. by B.F. Lomov, Moscow: Nauka, 1981, pp. 24-44.
11. Petrovskiy, A.V. Threefactor model of "significant other"/ A.V. Petrovskiy: Psychologic problems, 1991, no 1, pp. 7-18.
12. Hriascheva, N.U. Creativity as a person self-realization factor in ever changing world/N.U. Hriasche-va: Psychologic problems of a person self-realization. V. 2 / ed. by A.A. Rean, L.A. Korostileva, StP.: StPSU publishing house, 1998, pp. 171-174.
13. Crichevskiy, R.L. A small group psychology / R.L. Crichevskiy, Moscow: MSU publishing house, 1991, pp. 30-34.
14. Parigin, B.D. Leadership as an instrument of unity integration / B.D. Parigin: Social psychology. Problems of methodology, history and theory, StPb: IGUP, 1999, Chapter 10, pp. 239-252.
15. Bennis, W. A theory of group development/W. Bennis, H. Shepard, Human Relations, 1956, no 4, pp. 415-437 (490 p.).
16. Bordovskaya, N.V. Pedagogics: Textbook/ N.V. Bordovskaya, A.A. Rean, StPb.: Piter, 2009, 304 p.
Список литературы
1. ВербицкийА.А. Активное обучение в высшей школе: контекстный подход. М.: Высш. школа, 1991. 294 с.
2. Божович Е.Д. Психологические особенности развития личности подростка / Е.Д. Божович. М.: Знание, 1979. 40 с.
3. МаклаковА.Г. Общая психология: учебник для высшей школы. СПб.: Питер, 2010. 583 с.
4. Пассов Е.И. Коммуникативный метод обучения иноязычному говорению. 2-е изд. М.: Просвещение, 1991. 223 с.
5. Krashen, Stephen D. Second language acquisition and second language learning. Oxford: Pergamon Press, 1981. 151 p.
6. Thornbury Scott. How to Teach Grammar. Oxfordshire: Longman, 2004. 182 p.
7. Ur Penny. Grammar Practice Activities. A Practical Guide for Teachers. NY: Cambridge University Press, 1999. 148 pp.
8. NACE Job Outlook 2016: What employers want to see on your resume [Электронный ресурс]. UTL: https://www.goodcall.com/news/nace-job-outlook-2016-what-employers-want-to-see-on-your-resume-03807 [дата обращения: 15.06.2019].
9. Кантемирова О. Петербургские работодатели назвали пять качеств идеального сотрудника [Электронный ресурс]. URL: https://www.rbc.ru/spb_sz/01/11/2018/5bdb04c09a7947624eda2e9e [дата обращения: 16.06.2019].
10. Обозов Н.Н. Психологические процессы и функции в условиях индивидуальной и кооперативной деятельности / Н.Н. Обозов // Проблемы общения в психологии / под ред. Б.Ф. Ломова. М.: Наука, 1981. С. 24-44.
11. Петровский А.В. Трехфакторная модель «значимого другого» /А.В. Петровский // Вопросы психологии. 1991. № 1. С. 7-18.
12. Хрящева Н.Ю. Креативность как фактор самореализации личности в изменчивом мире / Н.Ю. Хрящева // Психологические проблемы самореализации личности. Вып. 2 / под ред. А.А. Реан, Л.А. Коростылевой. СПб.: Изд-во СПбГУ 1998. С. 171-174.
13. Кричевский Р.Л. Психология малой группы /Р.Л. Кричевский, Е.М. Дубовская // Психология малой группы: теоретический и прикладной аспекты. М.: Изд-во МГУ, 1991. С. 30-34.
14. Парыгин Б.Д. Лидерство как инструмент интеграции общности / Б.Д. Парыгин // Социальная психология. Проблемы методологии, истории и теории. СПб.: ИГУП, 1999. Гл. 10. С. 239-252.
15. Bennis W. A theory of group development / W. Bennis, H. Shepard // Human Relations. 1956. № 4. Pp. 415-437 (490 p.).
16. Бордовская Н.В. Педагогика: учебное пособие / Н.В. Бордовская, А.А. Реан. СПб.: Питер, 2009. 304 с.
Юлия Михайловна Бобрицкая, доцент, кафедра иностранных языков, Санкт-Петербургский государственный лесотехнический университет имени С.М. Кирова; 194021, Институтский переулок, 5у, г. Санкт-Петербург, Российская Федерация; e-mail: jmblta@gmail. com
Julia M. Bobritskaya, Associate professor, Department of foreign languages, State Forest Technical University Named after S.M. Kirov; 194021, 5у Institutsky pereulok, Saint Petersburg, Russia; e-mail: jmblta@ gmail.com
Ирина Юрьевна Любомирова, старший преподаватель, кафедра английского языка, Санкт-Петербургский гуманитарный университет профсоюзов; 192238, ул. Фучика, 15, г. Санкт-Петербург, Российская Федерация; e-mail: irisya76@mail.ru
Irina YU. Lyubomirova, Senior Lecturer, Saint Petersburg University of the Humanities and Social Sciences; 192238, 15 Fucik Str., Saint Petersburg, Russia; e-mail: irisya76@mail.ru
