Kazakhstan Realities in the Perception of Representatives of American Ethnolinguoculture
Abstract
The purpose of the article is to describe the axiological characteristics of the realities of modern Kazakhstan society and the ethnic character in the perception of representatives of American ethnolinguoculture by using experimental data. Based on the analysis and description of associates obtained as a result of the associative experiment and sociocultural questionnaire survey, conclusions were drawn about the national-cultural markedness of a linguistic sign. The use of the method of the free-associative test helped to obtain objective and subjective characteristics for each stimulus word. The analysis of associates of American informants determined the novelty of the approach to the problem of intercultural communication in multicultural Kazakhstan society. The generalisation and analysis of associates and answers to questions on the sociocultural topic made it possible to construct a conceptual structure of the image of Kazakhstan and its realities in the consciousness of a linguistic personality of another culture. Also, in the article, an attempt was made to conduct a sociocultural questionnaire survey as an alternative research method. The answers and comments of respondents made it possible to comprehend and describe the respondents’ attitudes and opinion on the national-cultural values of the Kazakh people, to determine a range of discussion problems in different worldviews and to counter sociocultural realities in intercultural communication.
Keywords
Intercultural Communication, Associative Experiment, Ethnolinguoculture, Linguistic Consciousness, Ethnodescriptors, Kazakhstan
References
Akpinar, N.-J., Alfano, S., & Kersten, G. (2017). The role of sentiment and cultural differences in the communication process of e-negotiations. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, 293, 132-144.
Alimzhanova, A. S., Aldambergenova, G. T., Mantayeva, T. S., & Gabitov, T. H. (2015). Kazakhstan: The choice of civilizational priorities. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 6(5S1), 582-588.
Aljanova, N., Bobassova, K., & Rysbekova, S. (2016). A semiotic analysis of the yurt, clothing, and food eating habits in Kazakh traditional cultures. International Journal of Critical Cultural Studies, 14(1), 27-36.
Apresyan, Yu. D. (2006). Yazykovaya kartinamiraisistemnayaleksikografiya [The language picture of the world and systemic lexicography]. Moscow: Yazyki slavyanskih kultur, 912.
Drotianko, L., &Yahodzinskyi, S. (2016). Information environment as the intercultural communication space. MATEC Web of Conferences, 106, 01006. DOI: 10.1051/matecconf/20171060100 SPbWOSCE-2016 6
Fiedler, E., Jansen, R., & Norman-Risch, M. (2004). America in Close-up. Harlow, UK: Longman Group UK Ltd.
Galiev, A. (2016). Mythologization of history and the invention of tradition in Kazakhstan. Oriente Moderno, 96(1), 46-63.
Kiynova, Zh. K., Sansyzbayeva, S. K., & Akhmetzhanova, A. I. (2017). Axiological characteristics of ethnocultural realities in cross-cultural communication. Voprosy Kognitivnoy Lingvistiki, 3,142-147.
Karasik, V. I. (2002). Yazykovoi krug: Lichnost, kontsepty, diskurs [The language circle: Personality, concepts, discourse]. Volgograd, Russia: Peremena.
Kecskes, I. (2017). Context-dependency and impoliteness in intercultural communication. Journal of Politeness Research, 13(1), 7-31.
Kim, Y. Y. (2014). Interpersonal communication. Interpersonal communication in intercultural encounters (pp. 517-540). UK: University of Oklahoma, pp. 517-540.
Kubryakova, E. S. (2010). Lingvokulturologicheskij status dramy [Linguistic and cultural status of drama]. Voprosy kognitivnoj lingvistiki, 2, 64-73.
Lichman, Y. Y., & Doroschenko, T. M. (2016). Traditions of art and craft decoration and architecture of Kazakh yurt as a source of modern art. European Journal of Science and Theology, 12(3), 221-232.
Nusupzhanovna, N. D., & Sailaubekkyzy, A. (2017). The spiritual and moral values: Tradition and transformation. Man in India, 97(2), 753-762.
Privalova, I. V. (2005). Interkultura iverbalnyiznak (lingvokognitivnyeosnovymezhkulturnoikommunikatsii): Monografiya [Interculture and Verbal Sign (Intercultural Communication Linguocognitive Basics): Monograph]. Moscow, Russia: Gnosis.
Sorokin, Yu. A. (1994). Ehtnicheskaya konfliktologiya [Ethnic Conflictology]. Samara: Russkii litsey, 94.
Tarasov, E. F. (1996). Mezhkulturnoe obshchenie – novayaontologiyaanalizayazykovogosoznaniya [Intercultural Communication – New Ontology of the Analysis of Linguistic Consciousness]. In N. V. Ufimtseva (Ed.), Etnokulturnaya spetsifikayazykovogosoznaniya [Ethnocultural Specificity of Linguistic Consciousness] (pp. 7-22). Moscow, Russia.
Tarasov, E. F. (2003). Predislovie [Foreword]. In Yazykovoe soznanie: ustoyavsheesyaispornoe: tez. XIV mezhd. simpoziumapopsikholingvistikeiteoriikommunikatsii, Moskva, 29-31 maya 2003 g. [Linguistic Consciousness: Traditional and Controversial: Theses of the XIVth International Symposium on Psycholinguistics and Communication Theory, Moscow, May 29-31, 2003] (p. 3). Moscow, Russia.
Trompenaars, F., & Woolianis, B. (2003). Business Across Cultures. Capstone Publishing Ltd.
Ufimtseva, N. V. (2004). Predislovie [Foreword]. In N. V. Ufimtseva (Ed.), Yazykovoe soznanie: teoreticheskieiprikladnyeaspekty: Sb.st. [Linguistic Consciousness: Theoretical and Applied Aspects: Collection of Articles] (pp. 3-5). Barnaul, Russia: Publishing house of Altay University.
Vezhbitskaya, A. (2001). Ponimanie kultur cherez posredstvo klyuchevyh slov (Yazyk. Semiotika. kul'tura. Malaya seriya). Monografiya [Yazyki slavyanskoj kul'tury]. Moscow, 288.
Vorkachev, S. G. (2002). Koncept schast'ya v russkomyazykovomsoznanii: opytlingvokul'turologicheskogoanaliza [Concept of happiness in the Russian language consciousness: the experience of linguistic and cultural analysis]. Krasnodar, 142.
Wang, W., & Zhou, M. (2016). Validation of the short form of the intercultural sensitivity scale (ISS-15). International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 55, 1-7.