Liberal Arts in Russia EN-rus logo
russian flagRussian
ISSN 2305-8420 (Print)
ISSN 2312-6442 (Online)
Current Issue

Lingua-ecological problems in academic discourse: a comparative study

Liberal Arts in Russia. 2020. Vol. 9. No. 1. Pp. 61-69.
Get the full text (Russian)
Kazantseva E. A.
Ufa State Petroleum Technological University
1 Kosmonavtov Street, 450062 Ufa, Republic of Bashkortostan, Russia
Fatkullina F. G.
Bashkir State University
32 Zaki Validi Street, 450076 Ufa, Republic of Bashkortostan, Russia


The article presents some findings of a comparative study of lingua-ecological problems in academic discourse in the Russian and English-speaking cultures. Academic discourse, which is understood here as the total of discourse practices taking place in the process of knowledge acquisition and exchange, has become a warning zone of lingua-ecological risk in the Russian context. Ecologically imbalanced discourse practices imbibed in an academic setting result in both lack of academic achievement and de-ecologization of Russia’s social communicative space. Based on our previous theoretical and practical intra-cultural research this new study focuses on comparative description of academic discourse practices from three angles: lingua-cultural, psycholinguistic, and lingua-pragmatic. The main reason underlying this approach is the employment of European standards in the Russian educational reform. The lingua-cultural analysis showed that student-centeredness, which is characteristic for the English-speaking academic cultures, conflicts with teacher-centeredness typical for Slavic academic cultures where respect to the teacher and teacher authority is indisputable. The psychological portrait of the main participants of academic discourse suggests that the majority of lingua-ecological problems are universal due to the planetary-scaled change in the modern children and adolescents. In the Russian context, though, these problems are furthered by the emotional state in which teachers find themselves due to loss of respect and prestige of their profession. The pragma-linguistic approach revealed underuse of rules and strategies of politeness, reversed model of the speech-act structure of a discourse event, and three ecologically-unsafe categorical emotional situations (humiliation, reprisal, bias) in the Russian context.


  • • lingua-ecology
  • • academic communicative space
  • • emotions and cognition
  • • lingua-culture
  • • psycholinguistic portrait
  • • pragmatic linguistics


  1. Krongauz M. A. Russkii yazyk na grani nervnogo sryva [Russian language on the verge of a nervous breakdown]. 3D. Saint Petersburg: Astrel', 2013.
  2. Dzyakovich E. V. Teoriya i praktika obshchestvennogo razvitiya. 2010. No. 2. Pp. 151-156.
  3. Kozlova T. Z. Vlast'. 2018. No. 5. Pp. 118-125.
  4. Fatkullina F. G. Mat-ly IV Mezhdunarodnoi nauchno-prakticheskoi konferentsii "Problemy sovremennoi filologii i aspekty prepodavaniya gumanitarnykh distsiplin v tekhnicheskom vuze", 28-29 yanvarya 2016 g. Ufa: UGNTU, 2016. Pp. 203-209.
  5. Shakhovskii V. I. Emotivnaya lingvoekologiya v sovremennom kommunikativnom prostranstve. Volgograd: VGSPU "Peremena", 2013. Pp. 23-33.
  6. Dunleavy K. N., Martin M., Brann M. Communication Education. 2008. Vol. 57. No. 1. Pp. 1-19.
  7. Morozova G. V. Vestnik PAGS. 2014. Vol. 44. No. 5. Pp. 4-11.
  8. Kazantseva E. A. Vestnik UGNTU. Nauka, obrazovanie, ekonomika. Seriya: Ekonomika. 2017. Vol. 19. No. 1. Pp. 119-126.
  9. Komkina T. A. Issledovanie pokazatelei kachestva obrazovaniya v Rossiiskoi Federatsii s uchetom regional'nykh osobennostei: dis. ... kand. ekon. nauk. Moscow, 2012.
  10. Kazantseva E. A., Fatkullina F. G., Valiakhmetova E. K., Anokhina S. Z., Sayakhova D. K. Modern Journal of Language Teaching Methods. 2018. Vol. 8. No. 12. Pp. 300-310.
  11. Katkenov K. A. Pedagogicheskaya nauka i praktika. 2018. Vol. 22. No. 4. Pp. 17-21.
  12. Kazantseva E. A. Vestnik Bashkirskogo universiteta. 2019. Vol. 24. No. 4. Pp. 1019-1024.
  13. Cowie N. Teaching and Teacher Education 2011. Vol. 27. No. 1. Pp. 29-36.
  14. Fredrickson B. L. The science of subjective well-being. Ed. Eid, R. J. Larsen. New York: The Guilford Press, 2008. Pp. 449-468.
  15. Stemkovskaya Yu. Yazyk kak sredstvo translyatsii kul'tury. Moscow, 2000. Pp. 45-53.
  16. Prosen S., Vitulić H. S., Škraban O. P. Hacettepe Egitim Dergisi. 2014. Vol. 29. Pp. 226-237.
  17. Abramov A. Trebuem prodolzheniya diskussii. Otkrytyi universitet. 2012. URL:
  18. Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English. 4th ed. Harlow: Pearson Education, 2003.
  19. Pavlenok D. V. Vestnik IGLU. 2014. Vol. 26. No. 1. Pp. 49-54.
  20. Natsional'nyi korpus russkogo yazyka. URL:
  21. Fadeikin F. N. Filosofiya i nauka. 2014. Vol. 13. Pp. 155-159.