CC BY
167УДК 811.111-26 DOI: 10.24412/2658-5138-2021-5-25-38
ББК 80
THE ROLE OF STEREOTYPES IN CROSS-CULTURAL
COMMUNICATION
Maksimova, S.Yu., ORCID: 0000-0003-4277-8446, Saratov State Law Academy, 1, Volskaya
str., Saratov, 410056, Russia svetlana_maksimova2010@mail.ru
Matsyupa K.V., ORCID: 0000-0002-6388-5120, Saratov State Law Academy, 1, Volskaya str.,
Saratov, 410056, Russia, kseniashido@mail.ru
25
Ilyukhin N.I., ORCID: 0000-0002-8890-093X, Saratov State Law Academy, 1, Volskaya str.,
Saratov, 410056, Russia, tringla@mail.ru
The article touches upon issues of stereotypes. Analysis of existing stereotypes and their nature is
necessary for understanding factors of cross-cultural communication. The globalization process
is inevitable and people from different cultures and countries tend to interact more often not only
directly, but through different digital instruments. Stereotypes can be helpful in the situation, when
a person understands their essence and transfers their meaning through his or her own background.
Stereotypes can be harmful too, when a person takes them for granted and does not try to interpret
images of other nations. The purpose of the study is to analyze essential features of stereotypes,
to examine its nature and definitions, to find tools of their creation in the modern world. The
methodological basis: study of the theory of stereotypes, linguistic observation and communica-
tive analysis of modern film characters’ speech in order to represent the image, they create by
their verbal behavior. Results: a language does play an important role in the process of stereotype
creation. After watching different films people associate communicative behavior of their charac-
ters with real representatives of a nation, country or culture.
Keywords: stereotype, cross-cultural communication, interethnic interaction, pop culture, verbal
behavior.
РОЛЬ СТЕРЕОТИПОВ В МЕЖКУЛЬТУРНОЙ КОММУНИКАЦИИ
Максимова Светлана Юрьевна, кандидат филологических наук, доцент, доцент кафедры
иностранных языков, Саратовская государственная юридическая академия,
svetlana_maksimova2010@mail.ru
Мацюпа Ксения Владимировна, кандидат филологических наук, доцент, доцент кафедры
иностранных языков, Саратовская государственная юридическая академия,
kseniashido@mail.ru
Илюхин Никита Игоревич, кандидат филологических наук, доцент кафедры
иностранных языков, Саратовская государственная юридическая академия, tringla@mail.ru
Статья посвящена исследованию стереотипов. Анализ природы существующих
стереотипов необходим для понимания процесса межкультурной коммуникации.
Глобализация в современном мире неизбежна, и люди разных культур и стран, как правило,
взаимодействуют сейчас не только напрямую, но и с помощью различных цифровых
инструментов. Стереотипы могут быть полезны в тех ситуациях, когда человек понимает
их значение и пропускает через свой собственный опыт. В тоже время стереотипы могут
быть опасны, когда человек принимает их без интерпретации. Цель исследования –
проанализировать основные особенности стереотипов, изучить их природу, рассмотреть
различные подходы к определению понятия, а также найти современные инструменты
создания стереотипов. Методологическая основа: исследование теории стереотипов,
26
лингвистическое наблюдение и анализ речи некоторых современных киногероев с целью
изучения образа, который они создают своим вербальным поведением. Результаты: язык
действительно играет важную роль в процессе создания стереотипа. После просмотра
фильмов люди ассоциируют особенности коммуникативного поведения их героев с
реальными представителями той или иной нации, страны или культуры.
Ключевые слова: стереотип, межкультурная коммуникация, межэтническое
взаимодействие, поп культура, вербальное поведение.
Introduction
In today’s world, in an era of integration, cultural exchange in the process of
formation of a unique cultural space, intercultural communication, which is carried
out at different levels and involves a large audience in the process of communica-
tion, is of great importance. A certain influence on the development of intercultural
communication has a scientific and technological progress, which opens up new
opportunities for communication and formation of new types and forms of commu-
nication, while the main condition for their effectiveness is mutual understanding,
tolerance and respect for the culture of partners in the dialogue. Many scholars, lin-
guists, sociologists, psychologists, ethnographers, ethno-psycholinguists pay con-
siderable attention to the phenomenon of perception of one culture by another, due
to the fact that centuries-old traditions associated with the separation of cultures and
linguistic differences affect the relationship between people of different cultures
and, consequently, the effectiveness of their cooperation and mutual understanding
[1: 7].
In the process of communication between representatives of different cultures,
stereotypes are of significant importance. It is well known that people understand
each other through the prism of established stereotypes. When meeting representa-
tives of other nations and cultures people usually have a natural tendency to perceive
their behavior from their culture position, to measure it with their own standards.
Misunderstanding of other people’s language, symbolism of gestures, facial expres-
sions and other elements of behavior often leads to a distorted interpretation of the
meaning of their actions, which easily generates a range of negative feelings: wari-
ness, contempt, and even hostility. Because of such cross-cultural or cross-ethnic
contacts, the most typical traits that are specific to a particular people or culture are
revealed. A basis of an ethnic stereotype is usually a skin color, an eye shape, lip
shape, a hair type, height, a person’s character, a religion, sexual orientation, or
27
ethnic background and behavior (taciturnity, restraint, greediness, etc.). For exam-
ple, stereotypes about politeness and thinness of the English, eccentricity of the
Italians, frivolity of the French or a “mysterious Russian soul”. Europeans who first
met the Japanese were and still are shocked by the fact that the Japanese talk about
the saddest things (illness or death of close relatives) with a cheerful smile. This
became the basis for the stereotype of heartlessness, cynicism and cruelty of the
Japanese, but in fact it is only a Japanese attempt not to disturb others with their
personal sorrows.
Where do stereotypes come from? There is nothing surprising or frightening
about the fact that people use stereotypes in their lives. According to professional
research, about two-thirds of human behavior is defined by stereotypes. Among
them, there are those that save a person from having to discover America and re-
invent the wheel every time. Formation and adoption of stereotypes by humans oc-
cur in various ways. Firstly, the stereotypes are developed in the process of sociali-
zation. Secondly, they are mainly acquired in the process of communication with
people a person most often interacts, these are parents, friends, peers, teachers, etc.
Thirdly, stereotypes can arise through limited personal contacts. Finally, a special
role in the stereotypes formation is played by the media. For most people, press,
radio and television are authorities. This occurs when an individual does not have
sufficient knowledge to form his or her own opinion or attitude.
The status of a source of information is of great importance. For example, a
result of informational influence on people conducted by a well-known politician or
public person is quite obvious. The higher the authority of the source, the greater
the credibility of that information among the audience. Even if some individuals
take the information from such a source critically, it will remain fixed in their minds.
That is how ethno-cultural stereotypes are gradually formed.
1. The problem of definition
So what are stereotypes? There are several definitions of stereotypes, which
reflect different understanding of their main constituent factors and different ap-
proach to the definition of the essence of a stereotype. A debate has been going on
for a long time about the definition of the concept of “stereotype”, attempts have
been made to identify ways of forming and spreading national stereotypes in soci-
ety, the question of their influence on relations between peoples has been discussed.
There is no consensus among researchers regarding the legitimacy of using the word
“stereotype”. The term “stereotype” (Greek stereos – solid, typos – imprint) was
28
introduced by an American sociologist W. Lippman [2: 10]. Lippmann understood
the stereotype as a special form of perception of the world around us, which has a
certain influence on our sense data before these data reach our minds. According to
Lippmann, an individual, trying to understand the world around him in all its con-
tradictions, creates a “picture in his head” of those phenomena, which he has not
observed directly. The man has a clear idea of most things even before he has di-
rectly confronted them in life. Such stereotypes are formed under the influence of
individual’s cultural environment. These definitions are characterized by viewing
the stereotype as a product of consciousness characteristic of a given society. Be-
sides, “stereotypes are understood as stable, regularly repeated forms of behavior.
They are a kind of templates, stamps, patterns of behavior accepted in a particular
culture”. Some scholars define a stereotype as “a schematic, standardized image or
representation of a social phenomenon or object, usually emotionally colored and
stable. It expresses a person’s habitual attitude to a phenomenon, developed under
the influence of social conditions and previous experience” [6: 447]. S.G. Ter-Mi-
nasova argues that despite being schematic and generalized, stereotypical percep-
tions contain initial knowledge about other peoples and other cultures and thus pre-
pare the ground for communication with them, weakening the culture shock [10].
V.A. Ryzhkov interprets a stereotype as "a communicative unit of a given ethnic
group, capable of producing a stimulating, typifying effect on the socialized con-
sciousness of an individual through the actual presentation of socially sanctioned
needs, forming in it appropriate motives [9]. V.V. Krasnykh considers a stereotype
as a “fixed mental “picture”, which is the result of the reflection in the mind of a
person “typical” fragment of the real world” [5: 178]. When examining the role of
stereotypes in intercultural communication it is necessary to remember that stereo-
types are always national. Sometimes it is possible to find analogues in different
cultures but special attention should be paid upon such situations when stereotypes
coincide in general but differ in detail. This is very important for successful com-
munication. E.I. Rogov defines a stereotype as “a stable and simplified image of a
phenomenon in the absence of information. Stereotypes allow a person to signifi-
cantly reduce the time of reaction to the changing reality, accelerate the process
cognition” [8: 193].
Differences in stereotypes in different cultures are related to many aspects. For
example, topics of conversation: what can and cannot be talked about with people
29
from other cultures, attitudes to time, behavior of people from different cultures in
public places, etc.
A stereotype is a widely held but fixed or conventional image of a thing, person
or a group of people. They come about as a result of lacking in knowledge or when
information is unattainable, hence a substitution of thoughts and opinions is imple-
mented. This often leads to misjudgement and unfair discrimination toward certain
people and situations. They are mostly based on extreme characteristics attributed
to a specific group of people and they normally have negative values attached to the
group in question.
A stereotype is a popular concept denoting an approximate grouping of people
in terms of some easily distinguishable attribute, supported by widespread ideas
about features of these people. The Oxford English Dictionary defines a stereotype
as a “widely held but fixed and oversimplified image or idea of a particular type of
person or thing” [4]. Stereotypes are ideas about the way of life, customs, manners,
habits, i.e. about the system of ethno-cultural traits of a particular nation. Various
terms can be found in the academic literature – national stereotypes, ethnic preju-
dice, ethnic representations, national images, and others, expressing the same phe-
nomenon.
Among other things, they cover racial groups (“Asians are good at math”),
political groups (“Republicans are rich”), genders (“Women are bad at math”), de-
mographic groups (“Florida residents are elderly”), and activities (“flying is dan-
gerous”). As these and other examples illustrate, some stereotypes are roughly ac-
curate (“the Dutch are tall”), while others much less so (“Irish are red-headed” only
10% are; “Swedes are blue-eyed blondes”).
Despite validity or invalidity, truth or falsity of stereotypes, they are an integral
element of any culture and by the very fact of their existence affect psychology and
behavior of people, influence their consciousness and interethnic contacts. While
generalized, stereotypical perceptions of other peoples and cultures prepare people
to interact with a foreign culture. After all, in the process of cross-cultural commu-
nication, one partner perceives the other with and through his or her actions. The
construction of relations with another person largely depends on adequacy of un-
derstanding of actions and their reasons. Therefore, stereotypes allow us to make
assumptions about causes and possible consequences of the relationship with the
other person.
30
Stereotypes are used to identify people with certain traits and qualities, and to
predict their behavior on this basis. Thus, the stereotypes play a very important role
in communication in general and in the process of intercultural contacts. The corre-
lation between a person’s cultural background and personality traits attributed to
him/her is usually not adequate. For example, when communicating with Italian
people, who intensely gesticulate during conversations, the Germans, who are used
to a different style of communication, may have a stereotype of extremely expres-
sive and unorganized Italians. The Italians, in turn, consider the Germans a cold and
reserved nation, etc. Stereotypes of typical representatives of certain nations exist
in our minds: the English are conservative, the French are excited and frivolous, the
Germans are neat and hardworking, the Spaniards are proud, etc. It is not normal in
Russia to smile at strangers. “Laughter without reason is a sign of foolishness,” says
a Russian proverb. An American, a Frenchman, a German, an inhabitant of Northern
Europe, or an Arab, would consider silence in response to an offer as a form of
rejection.
Stereotypes can be useful for communication if:
they reflect group norms and values, rather than specific qualities of a single
individual in a given group;
they are descriptive rather than rating. It implies that the stereotypes reflect
real and objective qualities and traits of people of a given group, but not their as-
sessment as good or bad;
they are accurate and adequately express traits and characteristics of a group
which one belongs to.
A.V. Pavlovskaya also notes a positive role of stereotypes: “Stereotypes allow
a person to make an idea of the world as a whole, to go beyond their narrow social,
geographical and political world” [7: 17].
Stereotypes become ineffective and make communication difficult if:
they make it difficult to identify people’s individual characteristics. Stereo-
typing assumes that all members of a group possess the same traits.
they are based on half-truths and distortions when inaccurate ideas are given
about people whom an intercultural contact takes place with.
31
Winston Churchill once said that the United States and Great Britain are going
to get more and more mixed up together. No doubt, the English and American peo-
ple are alike in many important aspects. However, the differences between the two
are often extreme and sometimes crucial.
2. Anglo-American Cross-Cultural Outlook
Englishmen even if they know that their ancestors were from different parts
conjoined with multiplicity of tribes coming to the island treat everything and eve-
rybody from a mixed point of view: respect and contempt. They are sure that Eng-
land is one of the civilized countries in the world, especially in the way people act
and behave in society. England is the land of law and order. It was not always in
such a way but for 100 years and even more it has been the very paragon of law-
abidingness, orderliness, the right and fairness. For English people it is not a surprise
that they are the nation of old customs and traditions, stereotypes known and
laughed at all over the world, but they love the way they are and cherish old English
Victorian style; they somehow even nowadays create a self-image of enigmatic
“foggy hazy Albion”, being proud of it.
Pride is also common for Americans who think that their nation is unique and
differs from other ones. However, and here comes the 1st paradox, there are no pure
Americans in America. There is a mixture of blood in every American: Irish, Mex-
ican, Italian, Russian, Jewish, Indian, etc. Variety of nations and ethnic groups leads
to well-known American “political correctness” with hierarchy of origins, sex, na-
tionality and class – so it is like diversity within the unity! The Melting pot. Such
are Americans (and British people, and all other people in the world) where an in-
digenous character is absorbed and sponged by immigration waves in a course of
history.
In 1980-s there was a popular song, few lines out of which can be applied to
the idea of how the British see other people.
Germans live in Germany,
Yankee lives in Oklahoma,
Spanish live in Spain
But Englishman lives at home…
Their home is their castle and it is valued a lot showing certain disrespect (hid-
den in most cases not to be blamed for harassment or intolerance) to other countries
and people there. It is interesting that British people as well as Americans are 100%
32
sure in their own superiority so that other nationalities definitely want to be and to
live like them.
The world is separated into various places with certain attitudes. According to a
cultural survey, neighbors of Englishmen on the British Isles (the Welsh, the Scottish,
and the Irish) should not be trusted, although the image of Scots is that they are intel-
ligent, the Irish are brave and the Welsh are just nice. The French and the English
have always been partners based on a “love and hate” contract – the history cannot
but prove it. The English like France because of wine, cuisine (because even coffee
in Great Britain tastes like a chemistry experiment) and warm climate, but despite
that France is not for French people – so every holiday it is invaded by English tourists
trying to “conquer” that valuable country. All these aspects can be explained foremost
by the past long and bitter opposition of these two allies.
Stereotypical ideas of the Brits about the Germans are the following: the Ger-
mans are organized, serious, and time adhering but they tend to bully others (no one
knows where Englishmen get this viewpoint) and the Germans cannot cook…
Italians according to Britons are too emotional, the Spanish are over-energetic
and loud, but Spain heads the list of UK’s 10 top holiday destinations abroad. Rus-
sians are too gloomy and smart; the Belgians and Scandinavians are a little bit slow-
thinkers; people from the Southern countries are dangerous and inconceivable (alt-
hough Asian and Orient food is tasty to British people, and there are a lot of workers
from these countries in the UK occupying leading managing, supervisory and ser-
vice slots in business sphere). Such is the controversy of English people: there is an
exception and lots of “ifs and buts” for every statement.
A bright example is the way British and American people see each other
through the prism of cultural code and cliché. Americans have a “warm” feeling
towards Britons, as Great Britain is the country of good literature and music (espe-
cially The Beatles and The Rolling Stones). The Americans are very much inter-
ested in the Queen’s family, monarchy and they just revel in scandals and gossips
happening in the UK; sometimes even coming especially to see multiple royal cer-
emonies and participate in special occasions. However, at the same time they cannot
understand why these Brits are not willing to get the American way of life, why they
behave like isolated islanders, still have their pound system and are vehement about
the Brexit. But English people do not accept this global “Americanism” and are sure
that there is nothing to boast about. Firstly, every American has English roots be-
33
cause of English settlers who came to the USA long time ago. Secondly, the Amer-
ican culture being pop and invasive is not civilized and badly influences a true Brit-
ish one. Thirdly, how a nation could be proud of itself when it even speaks the
“wrong” English knowing nothing about RP and having literacy suffrage slightly
acceptable due to the English educational standards. At the same time Englishmen
make a conclusion that it is worth having America as a good companion with polit-
ical and commercial benefit, playing bromance against Russia. But this fact does
not stop criticism and comparison of the countries.
Talking about countries, traditions and outlook images one must remember a
popular saying: “If you want to know the country – learn its humor”. That is true,
especially when talking about specific British humor. English people seldom say
what they really think and that forms a basis for its national laughter – a hidden
meaning, reticence, understatement and irony.
Two Englishmen are walking in the mountains. One says: “According to the
map we have to walk 6 miles, but it is already 10 miles distance!” The other one
replies: “That’s right. But don’t you think that 10 miles are better than 6 especially
in my company!”
The main topic for American humor cannot be exactly specified, but jokes are
based on stereotypes known all over the world, some of which are connected with
lawyers and others are smart and briskly:
“Question: Why sharks do not bite lawyers? Answer: They are polite with col-
leagues!” OR “Have you heard that laboratories nowadays use advocates instead
of rats?! First of all, they form a majority, secondly, no one feels pity for them and
finally, there are things for which laboratory rats are not suitable!”
Some even call America the nation of law and lawyers, it is the country governed
by the rule of law not men. An American idea of law applicability is close to unfor-
tunate obsession, being pride and prejudice at the same time. Actions and cases are
sometimes frivolous, absurd and useless: a man jumped under the tube himself but
sued the organization for causing physical mutilation; a lady sued the State Pennsyl-
vania lottery for emotional distress because she did not win; a man decided that a
golf-club should pay him monetary compensation because his golf ball had hit him
on the rebound. Such causes of action seem ridiculous but not for the Americans
whose rights are guaranteed by the Constitution (“We the People…”) and every
“wounding” of such rights and freedoms leads to a court procedure.
34
English people are aware that their Bill of Rights is the life foundation, but,
unfortunately, they are not keen in English law and jurisprudence, so a precedent,
which is a relic from King’s history, and presumption of innocence form their legal
knowledge. A cultural stereotype of an English bobby – polite, ready to help, having
no guns; and an American cop, reading out “Miranda’s warning” exists in reality.
But this ideal view does not solve problems in society, penal institutions, protection
of people’s life. Once English politicians decided even to start a campaign sharing
experience between the jail systems, so some local British prisons were under the
supervision of the US bodies of penal authorities, but that was not effective. In its
turn, the American government keep trying to limit some rights of citizens, espe-
cially the right to bear a gun. No doubts, American Association of Marksmen is
against it, so nothing is going to restrict it and the saddest episodes of shootings are
coming up repeatedly. A bizarre thing is also an attempt to “protect” people from
their unlawful harmful behavior and consequences by writing endless instructions
how to use guns, washing machines, tin openers, sharp knives, toaster and even
thread and a needle…as if it could prevent something! Sometimes when one reads
the strange road signs, state laws and manuals one can get an idea that along with
normal world there is a crazy one with inhabitants using working hairdryer in the
shower, putting metal objects in a microwave, eating washing powder, playing with
a loaded rifle or doing something else. But, alas, such is the controversy of existence
where signs and labels govern our life.
Way of life, habits and social formulas cannot but influence a natural and sig-
nificant integral feature – a language people speak and English is not a deviation
from that norm.
English people are proud of their mother tongue but they do not use it in full
spectrum. Complete Oxford Dictionary has 23 volumes more than 500 000 words,
whereas German and French dictionaries are not so impressive. The Shakespearian
vocabulary included 30 000 words (some of which he invented himself), a modern
vocabulary of an Englishman is only 8000 words – it is not expanded at all. English
linguists fight against this tendency saying that American English badly influences
the British one but it is the globalization that is the reason – absence of a proper
language is a modern norm. Still due to a classical idea of a typical English language
American pronunciation is considered to be awful and doubtful, spelling – vulgar
and too simple. Americans, on the other hand, think that their way of communica-
tion is direct and understandable, available for everyone and helps to get a direct
35
way to an American way of life with an American dream. So arguments for or
against a British or American language will always be and seem to be a kind of an
everlasting cultural game.
Every aspect of Anglo-American outlook image presents its peculiar matching
variants, advantages and disadvantages, similarities and controversies. Time goes
by, people change but there will always be something unique long-term for every
country so that even the outlook image shows its stability and at the same time cor-
respondence to an intercultural world pattern.
3. Language and stereotypes
Modern pop culture influences stereotypes about several nations, as well as
language. Various native languages are perceived differently and create an opinion
about a person speaking and obviously about a nation, because the speaker is a rep-
resentative of the country. There are several examples of ways, how pop culture and
language work together to build the image of a nation. One of the ways is visual art.
The importance of films nowadays is great. Pandemic life has made its contribution.
Due to lockdowns all over the world, streaming services, such as Netflix, HBO etc.
are very popular among people. The high demand for such services is explained by
their accessibility: everyone can download a special application on TV, computer
or phone and enjoy films and TV-shows. Modern films play an important role in
minds of generations, especially teenagers.
There are several trends in the sphere of film production, which create stereo-
types, connected with several nations. For example, producers of American and
British films and TV-shows chose a Russian character and actor, when they need to
show mafia representatives or a criminal. Such character has some specific verbal
and nonverbal characteristics, as well as other physiological features. As an exam-
ple, we decided to take an English-American TV series “McMafia”, which tells a
story of a Russian family, living in the UK. The main character is a former head of
the Russian Mafia and is shown intoxicated, being too conservative, even intolerant,
speaking only Russian, and hoping to return to his homeland:
– How are you, papa? / Как ты, папа?
– Сколько раз можно говорить? Я – русский человек. Ты мой сын. Говори со
мной по-русски. Твоя мать счастлива [pointing at the girl dancing with the Afro-
American man]. Твоя сестра влюблена в Майкла Джексона. / How many times
must I tell you, I’m Russian, you are my son, speak to me in Russian. Your mother
is happy. Your sister is falling in love with Michael Jackson.
36
– You are in England. You can’t talk like that. / Ты в Англии. Тут так говорить
нельзя.
– Оксана. Я тебе объясню. / Oksana. I can explain.
– Господи, посмотри на себя. Нажрался как свинья. Не трогай меня! Идиот.
/ Take look at yourself. You’ve got drunk. Don’t touch me! Idiot [3].
At the same time, the main character is shown as a person with deep soul. He
misses his homeland, hopes to return to Russia, because he feels as “a stranger in a
strange land”.
– Я отдам им деньги, бизнес, недвижимость. Все, что захотят. Я просто
хочу уехать в Москву. / I’ll give them money, business, property. Everything they
want. I just want to go back to Moscow.
– What are you doing? / Что делаешь?
– Кормлю уток. Что мне еще делать в вашем дурацком парке? Вот, кормлю
уток. / Feeding the ducks. What else am I going to do in your stupid park? Feeding
the ducks [3].
It should be noted that other members of the Russian family represent the ste-
reotypical images about Russians, too. For example, the wife of the main character:
she loves only one man, in spite of his temper and treats her son’s girlfriend as a
part of the family even after their break up, because the family for her is the most
important thing in life:
– Ты знаешь, со сколькими мужчинами у меня мог быть роман в этом
городе? / Do you know how many men in this city I could have an affair with?
– Уверена со многими / Lots, I’m sure.
– Я идиотка. Я люблю одного человека всю мою жизнь. / I am idiot. I fell in love
with the same man all my life.
– Ты знаешь, когда кто-то часть семьи – ты чествуешь его боль. Ты мне
теперь как дочь.
– You know, when someone is the part of the family, you feel his pain. You’re like
my daughter now [3].
Conclusion
Despite the globalization, people still have stereotypes about different nations.
These images can reflect cultural and historical background of people. Some of them
are actual, the others are old-fashioned. However, it is difficult to say that they are
37
absolutely true, rather the opposite. Nevertheless, all stereotypes have a certain im-
pact on people’s behavior, consciousness and interethnic communication process.
Pop-culture and language peculiarities (accent, sound, tempo, intonation) play an
important role in establishing stereotypes in the modern world. A Film industry here
is the best example, because movies are the most popular type of visual art nowa-
days, connecting cultural peculiarities with the speech of characters and their verbal
and non-verbal behavior.
References
1. Ageev, V.S. (1999). Mezhgruppovoje vzaimodeistviye [Intergroup interaction]. М.: Izd-
vo Mosc. universiteta (in Russian).
2. Lippman, W. (1922). Public Opinion. New York, 1922 (in English).
3. McMafia. TV Series (2018-2020). The UK (in English).
4. The New Oxford Dictionary of English (2001). Oxford University Press (in English).
5. Krasnykh, V.V. (2002). Etnopsykholinguistika i linguoculturologiya: kurs lektsiy [Eth-
nopsycholinguistics and linguoculturology: the course of lectures]. М.: Gnozis (in Russian).
6. Kratkiy politicheskiy slovar’ [Concise political dictionary] (1987). М.: Politizdat (in Rus-
sian).
7. Pavlovskaya, A.V. (1998). Rossiya i America. Problemy obshcheniya kultur [Russia and
America. The problems of cultures’ interaction]. М.: Izd-vo MGU (in Russian).
8. Rogov, E.I. (2006). Obshchaya psikhologiya. Kurs lektsiy [General psychology.
The course of lectures]. Rostov: Izd-vo “Vlados-Press” (in Russian).
9. Ryzhkov, V.A. (1985). Regulyativnaya funktsiya stereotipov [Regulative function of ste-
reotypes]. Znakovyje problemy pis’mennoy kommunikatsii [The main issues of written communi-
cation]. Kuibyshev: Kuibyshevskiy gosudarstvenny pedagogicheskiy institut, 15-21 (in Russian).
10. Ter-Minasova, S.G. (2000). Yazyk i mezhkulturnaya kommunikatsiya [Language and
cross cultural communication]. M.: Slovo (in Russian).
