INTERACTION OF SLAVIC LANGUAGES: THE POSSIBILITIES OF DISCURSIVE MODELING

UDC 81’33

  • Barkovich Alexander Arkadievich – DSc (Philology), Associate Professor, Head of the Department of Informatics and Applied Linguistics. Minsk State Linguistic University (21, Zakharova str., 220034, Minsk, Republic of Belarus). E-mail: albark@tut.by

DOI: https://doi.org/10.52065/2520-6729-2021-243-1-52-57

Key words: discursive modeling, interlingual activity, crosslingual interference, Slavic languages, discursive hypermodel, extralinguistic influence.

For citation: Barkovich А. А. Interaction of slavic languages: the possibilities of discursive modeling. Proceedings of BSTU, issue 4, Print- and Mediatechnologies, 2021, no. 1 (243), pp. 52–57 (In Russian).DOI: https://doi.org/10.52065/2520-6729-2021-243-1-52-57.

Abstract

The article is devoted to the problematics of discursive interpretation and representation of the interaction of Slavic languages. The interaction of not only individual speakers, but also cultures, languages, including Slavic ones, increasingly becomes the subject of scientific reflection. The study of the mutual influence of languages, in turn, contributes to understanding the prerequisites and prospects for the development of communicational situations, which is extremely in demand in the applied aspect of linguistic research. The discursive methodology is undoubtedly relevant for the study of the interlingual activity and the corresponding crosslingual interference, since in practice, contacting languages are always subject to the influence of powerful extralinguistic factors. Modern science is becoming more and more interdisciplinary and syncretic – in this respect, not only private models of specific communicational situations, but also large-format models of speech practice of discursive quality are in demand. In this context, hypermodels of discourse are of great scientific significance: they are not only describe empirical material, but also contribute to the synthesis of broad generalizations as well as lead to the creation of a qualitatively new metalanguage knowledge. The presented discursive hypermodel allows to investigate complex and multidimensional cases of interaction of Slavic languages, in particular, in the Russian-Belarusian context, considered as an example of intra-Slavic interaction, and in the Polish-German context, considered as an example of extra-Slavic interaction. The obtained metalinguistic data allowed to draw conclusions about the typologically significant features of the interaction of Slavic languages.

Download

References

  1. Barkovich A. A. Internet Discourse: Computer-Mediated Communication. Moscow, Flinta Publ.: Nauka Publ., 2019. 288 р.
  2. Barkovich A. A. Internetlect and Model of Language Variability: Belarusian and Polish Specificity. Belaruska-pol’skiya kul’turna-mounyya wzayemadachynenni: ad gistoryi da suchasnastsi: zbornik navukovykh artykulau [Belarusian-Polish Cultural and Linguistic Interrelationship: from History to Nowadays: collection of scientific articles]. Minsk, Belaruskaya navuka Publ., 2016, pp. 21–27 (In Belarusian).
  3. Bakhtin M. M. The Problem of Speech Genres. Literaturno-kriticheskiye stat'i [Literary-Critical Articles]. Moscow, Khudozhestvennaya literatura Publ., 1986, pp. 428–472 (In Russian).
  4. Dijk Van T. A. Jazyk. Poznaniye. Kommunikatsiya [Language. Cognition. Communication]. Moscow, Progress Publ., 1989. 312 p.
  5. Zaprudski S. Some Comments on the Study of “Trasianka”, or Calls for the Belarusian Humanities and Social Sciences. Arche [Arche], 2009, no. 11–12, pp. 157–200 (In Belarusian).
  6. Liskovets I. V. Trasianka: Origin, Essence, Functioning. Antropologija. Fol'kloristika. Lingvistika [Anthropology. Folklore. Linguistics], 2002, issue 2, pp. 329–343 (In Russian).
  7. Khentschel G. Belarusian, Russian and Belarusian-Russian Mixed Speech. Voprosy yazykoznaniya [Questions of Linguistics], 2013, no. 1, pp. 53–76 (In Russian).
  8. Barkovich A. Informational Linguistics: The New Communicational Reality. Newcastle upon Tyne, Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2020. 271 p.
  9. Barkovich A. Trasianka and Surzhik as Phenomena of Crosslingual Interference. 6th International Scientific Interdisciplinary Conference on Research and Methodology “Functional Aspects of Intercultural Communication. Translation and Interpreting Issues” [conference paper]. Moscow, Russia, November 15, 2019, vol. 6, pp. 340–350.
  10. Czesak A. Współczesne teksty śląskie na tle procesów językotwórczych i standaryzacyjnych współczesnej Słowiańszczyzny. Kraków, Księgarnia Akademicka Publ., 2015. 366 s.
  11. Gumperz J. J. Interactional Sociolinguistics: A Personal Perspective. Tannen Deborah, Schiffrin Deborah, Hamilton Heidi E. [et al.]. Handbook of Discourse Analysis. Oxford, Blackwell Publ., 2001, pp. 215–228.
  12. . Karaś H. Dialektologia polska. Available at: http://www.dialektologia.uw.edu.pl. (accessed 20.12.2020).
  13. Lakoff R. T. Nine Ways of Looking at Apologies: The Necessity for Interdisciplinary Theory and Method in Discourse Analysis. Tannen Deborah, Schiffrin Deborah, Hamilton Heidi E. [et al.]. Handbook of Discourse Analysis. Oxford, Blackwell Publ., 2001, pp. 199–214.
  14. Schilling-Estes N. Investigating Stylistic Variation. J. K. Chambers, P. Trudgill, N. Schilling-Estes [et al.]. The Handbook of Language Variation and Change. Malden, 2002, pp. 375–401.
  15. Titscher S., Meyer M., Wodak R., Vetter E. Methods of Text and Discourse Analysis. London, England, Sage Publications, 2000. 288 p.
  16. Thomason S. G. Language Contact. Washington, Georgetown University Press Publ., 2001. 240 p.
  17. Trudgill P. Dialects in Contact (Language in Society 10). Oxford and New York, Basil Blackwell Publ., 1986. 174 p.
  18. Urbańczyk St. Zarys dialektologii polskiej. Warszawa, PWN Publ., 1953. 76 s.
  19. Van Dijk T. A. Multidisciplinary CDA: A Plea for Diversity. Wodak Ruth, Meyer Michael [et al.]. Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis. London, Sage Publ., 2001, pp. 95–120.
10.02.2021