title: Linguistic and cultural discrepancy, or Sui Mei Travels about the Soviet Union
metadata.name: dc.contributor.author
metadata.value: Kleiner, Yuri
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.accessioned
metadata.value: 2021-03-03T17:25:29Z
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.available
metadata.value: 2021-03-03T17:25:29Z
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.issued
metadata.value: 2020-12
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.identifier.citation
metadata.value: Kleiner Yu. Linguistic and cultural discrepancy, or Sui Mei Travels about the Soviet Union. Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Language and Literature. 2020, 17 (4): 720–737.
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.identifier.other
metadata.value: https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu09.2020.414
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.identifier.uri
metadata.value: http://hdl.handle.net/11701/25109
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.description.abstract
metadata.value: Soviet textbooks of foreign languages, in particular English, very accurately reflect those tendencies
  which affected the evolution of the approach to teaching and its goals, from exchanging
  information to unidirectional (“addresseeless”) communication that was thematically limited
  by the realities of a closed society. The material of textbooks changed from original works
  slightly colored ideologically in the late-1920s towards texts that were completely removed
  from the realities of countries of the studied languages in the 1930s — 80s. The practice based
  on “word-for-word translation” methodology resulted in (a) entire lexical spheres having no
  equivalents in the English-speaking world (e. g. The Moscow News lexicon), (b) incorrect designations
  of borrowed notions (“currency exchange office” instead of Foreign Exchange), and
  (c) “reification,” creating notions based on reinterpreted borrowings. All this is fundamentally
  different from borrowing words together with respective notions under natural conditions
  (e. g. in émigré communities). Later on, the method of direct borrowing began to be used in
  Russia and as a result, a significant layer of neologisms was formed in the vocabulary of the
  modern Russian language. A large portion of the neologisms had equivalents (some of them
  previously borrowed) and this resulted in a new synonymy with further ousting of one of the
  synonyms (e. g. tendencija → trend, specialist → ekspert, etc.), or a division of meanings, including
  even the formation of words in their own right (messač’< message), etc. An alternative to
  this tendency can be a conscious attitude to language processes (native speakers’ control of
  borrowings), which in turn, depend on competence in both contacting languages and, in the
  last analysis, the organization of education in the country.
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.language.iso
metadata.value: ru
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.publisher
metadata.value: St Petersburg State University
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.relation.ispartofseries
metadata.value: Vestnik of St Petersburg University. Language and Literature;Volume 17; Issue 4
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: foreign languages
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: teaching
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: cultural/linguistic correspondence
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: borrowing
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.title
metadata.value: Linguistic and cultural discrepancy, or Sui Mei Travels about the Soviet Union
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.type
metadata.value: Article
metadata.lang: en_GB
resources.filename: 720-737.pdf
resources.url: https://dspace.spbu.ru/bitstream/11701/25109/1/720-737.pdf
resources.format: Adobe PDF
resources.size: 790,26 kB