Home → Releases → 2023, №2 (50) →

LINGUISTIC AND CULTURAL CHARACTERISTICS OF PEDAGOGICAL DISCOURSE

Linguistic Theory. Cross-cultural Communication Theory , UDC: 81’42:37 DOI: 10.25688/2076-913X.2023.50.2.10

Authors

  • Karasik Vladimir Ilyich Doctor of Philology, Full Professor

Annotation

The paper deals with pedagogical discourse treated as a type of institutional communication determined by a functional demand of any society to socialize its new members. Three types of such discourse have been described in Linguistics: a pedagogical discourse proper, an academic discourse and a classroom communication. Socialization of new society members is realized by transferring knowledge and forming the necessary competences and skills. A very important feature of pedagogical discourse is applying a scientific worldview to the level of a student. This type of institutional communication is characterized by certain emblematic properties of its agents. Values, norms and traditions of this discourse are mainly concentrated in the expression of reverence for learning and respect to teachers and students and corresponding modes of behavior. The ethnic specificity of pedagogical discourse is mostly evident in the traditions shared by different cultures. Communicative strategies of pedagogical discourse are determined by its essential features — measured adaptation of transferred information and skills in the forms of explanation, control, evaluation and organization of learning. The genre system of pedagogical discourse makes up a combination of verbal modes of oral and written communication aimed at socializing new members of society. Modern technologies have a great impact on pedagogical discourse mainly in the spheres of distant education and neuron network.
Tags:
genres of communication. , institutional communication , norms , pedagogical discourse , traditions , types of knowledge , Values

How to link insert

Karasik, V. I. (2023). LINGUISTIC AND CULTURAL CHARACTERISTICS OF PEDAGOGICAL DISCOURSE Bulletin of the Moscow City Pedagogical University. Series "Pedagogy and Psychology", 2023, №2 (50), 118. https://doi.org/10.25688/2076-913X.2023.50.2.10
References
1. 1. Dimova, G. V. (2002). The behavior of the teacher as a «discursive» personality in pedagogical interaction. IGLU Bulletin. The series «Linguistics». Vol. 4. Linguistic phenomena in historical retrospect and perspective: epistemology, diachrony, typology, 152–159. (In Russ.).
2. 2. Kan-Kalik, V. A. (1987). To the teacher about pedagogical communication: teacher’s book. Prosveshchenie. (In Russ.).
3. 3. Karatanova, O. A. (2001). Pedagogical discourse as one of the types of institutional communication. Science Journal of Volgograd State University. Series 9(1), 103–106. (In Russ.).
4. 4. Lenets, A. V. (1999). Pragmalinguistic diagnostics of the speech behavior of a German teacher [Abstract of the dissertation for the PhD (Philology): 10.02.04. Pytigorsk]. (In Russ.).
5. 5. Milovanova, J. V. (1998). Genre-speech features of pedagogical discourse. Linguistic personality: genre speech activity: abstracts of scientific conference reports. Peremena, 63–64. (In Russ.).
6. 6. Mikhalskaya, A. K. (1998). Pedagogical rhetoric: history and theory. Academia. (In Russ.).
7. 7. Oleshkov, M. Yu. (2012). Pedagogical discourse: textbook. Nizhny Tagil. State socio-pedagogical academy. (In Russ.).
8. 8. Vernadsky, V. I. (1989). Biosphere and noosphere. Nauka. (In Russ.).
9. 9. Drozdova, D. R. (2015). The main manipulative tactics in academic discourse. Baltic Humanitarian Journal, 1(10), 28–30. (In Russ.).
10. 10. Zubkova, Ya. V. (2009). Constitutive attributes of academic discourse. Ivzestia of the Volgograd State Pedagogical University. Philological Sciences, 5(39), 28−32. (In Russ.).
11. 11. Krapivkina, O. A. (2015). Subject verbalization in academic discourse. Science Vector of Togliatti State University, 4, 121–124. https://doi.org/10.18323/2073-5073-2015-4-121-124 (In Russ.).
12. 12. Stebletsova, A. O. (2020). Academic discourse in Western research at the turn of the 21st century: Evolution of approaches and concepts. Science Journal of Volgograd State University. Series 2. Linguistics, 19(5), 5–13. (In Russ.).
13. 13. Gabidullina, A. R. (2009). Educational and pedagogical discourse: categorical structure and genre originality [Dissertation … Doctor of Philological Sciences: 10.02.02. Donetsk]. (In Russ.).
14. 14. Koroteeva, O. V. (1999). Riddle as a kind of educational definition in real communication. Linguistic personality: Aspects of linguistics and linguodidactics. Peremena, 51–56. (In Russ.).
15. 15. Tokareva, P. V. (2005). Communicative strategies and tactics in educational discourse. Issues of modern philology and methods of teaching languages at the university and school: conference materials, 199–204. (In Russ.).
16. 16. Karasik, V. I. (2002). Language circle: personality, concepts, discourse. Peremena. (In Russ.).
17. 17. Standards for the design of the course work according to GOST 2023 + sample. (2023). Zaochnik.ru. https://zaochnik.ru/blog/standardy-oformlenija-kursovoj-raboty-po-gostu (In Russ.).
18. 18. Lebanese, I. (2023). Requirements for the research paper presentation design. Pandia.ru. https://pandia.ru/text/80/128/51539.php (In Russ.).
19. 19. Free online dictionary, thesaurus and reference materials. (2023). Collins. https://www.collinsdictionary.com (In Russ.).
20. 20. Pervukhina, S. V. (2014). Structural-semantic and discursive-pragmatic characteristics of the adapted text: monograph. FGBOU VPO RGUPS.
Download file .pdf 389.87 kb