ROSSICA V. BELAROSSICA: UNIVERSAL AND CULTURE-SPECIFIC FEATURES OF RUSSIA- AND BELARUS-CENTERED DISCOURSES

ROSSICA V. BELAROSSICA: UNIVERSAL AND CULTURE-SPECIFIC FEATURES OF RUSSIA- AND BELARUS-CENTERED DISCOURSES

Author:  E.V. Beloglazova¹, N.K. Genidze²

Affiliation:  ¹Herzen State Pedagogical University of Russia (St. Petersburg, Russia) evbeloglazova@herzen.spb.ru ²St. Petersburg State University of Economics (St. Petersburg, Russia)

Abstract:  The paper focuses on the comparison of two variations of foreign-culture-oriented discourse – the English-language descriptions of Russia and Belarus based on ad hoc corpora of titles Rossica-T and Belarossica-T.
The research aims at identifying both universal and culture-specific markers of foreign-culture-oriented discourse.
The methodology employed combines automatic processing of the textual data with the AntConc corpus manager tools, as well as the deep analysis and manual annotation of the data. The particular foci of the research are the corpora keywords, key clusters, collocates analysis, semantic prosody, and key concepts.
The research allowed to confirm the hypothesis on universal linguistic mechanisms of language adaptation to external culture and on culturally non-specific markers of a foreign-culture-oriented discourse – the xenonyms of the target culture. Yet, it also allowed to identify the specific features of the Russia- and Belarus-centered discourses both on the surface and deep levels – the culture-specific keywords, clusters, and constructions, corresponding to the key concepts of the discourses under observation.
The research established the presence of a discourse canon regulating both the contents and the specific ideological lens of the given cultures’ description.

Keywords:  : xenonym, culturonym, language of secondary cultural orientation, Russia-centered discourse, Belarus-centered discourse, cognitive mainstays of foreign culture centered discourse, formal markers of foreign culture centered discourse.

References:  Белоглазова Е.В., Генидзе Н.К. Дискурсо- и жанрово-обусловленная прецедентность в заголовках произведений Rossica: сравнительное корпусное исследование // Когнитивные исследования языка. 2023. № 3-2(54). С. 614-617. [Beloglazova E.V., Genidze, N.K. Diskurso- i zhanrovo-obuslovlennaja precedentnost' v zagolovkah proizvedenij Rossica: sravnitel'noe korpusnoe issledovanie // Kognitivnye issledovanija jazyka. 2023. № 3-2(54). S. 614-617.]
Белоглазова Е.В., Генидзе Н.К. Стереотипное и творческое в заголовках Rossica: корпусное исследование // Известия Восточного института. 2022. № 4(56). С. 104-113. DOI 10.24866/2542-1611/2022-4/104-113. [Beloglazova E.V., Genidze N.K. Stereotipnoe i tvorcheskoe v zagolovkah Rossica: korpusnoe issledovanie // Izvestija Vostochnogo instituta. 2022. № 4(56). S. 104-113. DOI 10.24866/2542-1611/2022-4/104-113.]
Болдырев Н.Н., Григорьева В.С. Когнитивные доминанты речевого взаимодействия // Вопросы когнитивной лингвистики. 2018. Вып. 4. С. 15-24. [Boldyrev N.N., Grigor'eva V.S. Kognitivnye dominanty rechevogo vzaimodejstvija // Voprosy kognitivnoj lingvistiki. 2018. № 4. S. 15-24.]
Кабакчи В.В., Белоглазова Е.В. Введение в интерлингвокультурологию. М.: Изд-во Юрайт, 2023. [Kabakchi V.V., Beloglazova E.V. Vvedenie v interlingvokul'turologiju. M.: Izd-vo Jurajt, 2023.]
Новик Е.К., Качалов И.Л., Новик Н.Е. История Беларуси. С древнейших времен до 2013 г. Мн.: Вышэйшая школа, 2013. [Novik E.K., Kachalov I.L., Novik N.E. Istorija Belarusi. S drevnejshih vremen do 2013 g. Mn.: Vyshjejshaja shkola, 2013.]
Baker P. Acceptable bias? Using corpus linguistics methods with critical discourse analysis, Critical Discourse Studies. 2012. Vol. 9 (3). P. 247-256. DOI: 10.1080/17405904.2012.688297.
Firth J. R. Modes of meaning, Papers in linguistics, 1934–1951. London: Oxford University Press, 1957. P. 190-215.
Louw B. Irony in the Text or Insincerity in the Writer? – the Diagnostic Potential of Semantic Prosodies. (Eds.: Mona Baker, Gill Francis & Elena Tognini-Bonelli), Text and Technology: in Honour of John Sinclair, Amsterdam: Benjamins, 1993. P. 157-176.
McCarthy M. Language Teaching. A Scheme for Teacher Education, Vocabulary. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990.
Partington A., Marchi A. Using corpora in discourse analysis. In D. Biber & R. Reppen (eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of English Corpus Linguistics. Cambridge Handbooks in Language and Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015. P. 216-234. DOI:10.1017/CBO9781139764377.013.
Partington, A. Patterns and Meanings – Using Corpora for English Language Research and Teaching. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 1998.
Rayson P. From key words to key semantic domains // International Journal of Corpus Linguistics. 2008. Vol. 13 (4). P. 519-549.
Richards B. Type/Token Ratios: what do they really tell us? // Journal of Child Language. 1987. Vol. 14. P. 201-209. DOI:10.1017/S0305000900012885.
Scott M. PC analysis of key words – and key key words. System. 1997. Vol. 25(2). P. 233-245.
Scott M. WordSmith Tools version 4. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004.
Stubbs M. Text and Corpus Linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell, 1996.

Acknowledgments:  The research was supported by an internal grant of the Herzen State Pedagogical University of Russia (project No. 1VG).

For citation:  Beloglazova, E. V., & Genidze, N. K. (2023). Rossica v. Belarossica: universal and culture-specific features of Russia- and Belarus-centered discourses. Voprosy Kognitivnoy Lingvistiki, 4, 108-115 (In Russ.).

Pages:  108-115