Types and forms of communicative activity. Basic rules of communicative activity of the organization. Game as a creative communication action

Microcommunication

Table 2.1 presents 7 forms of microcommunication, where individual personality acts as an active recipient (imitation) or an active communicator (dialogue, management); as communication partners, either another individual, or a social group, or a mass aggregate (society as a whole) can be. The content of microcommunication is fairly obvious; on interpersonal level - this is either the assimilation of forms of behavior, skills, external attributes of the selected role model - sample copy, or exchange of ideas, arguments, proposals between interlocutors - friendly or business conversation, or instructions for execution by their subordinate - team. On group level are possible reference (the same imitation, but not of an individual, but of a social group with which an individual wishes to identify himself, for example, imitation of merchants of the nobility or "new Russians" aristocrats of the spirit; note that there is a negative reference when a person consciously avoids the signs of the group he rejects) or team management - management, organization, group leadership; finally on a mass level, communication actions serve to socialization - the development by a person of norms, beliefs, ideals generally accepted in a given society, in order to “be like everyone else”, and authoritarianism, i.e., despotic control of the masses of subject people (absolutism, tyranny, autocracy - political forms of authoritarianism). Note that the dialogical relations of an individual with a group or a mass are excluded, because dialogue is possible only between partners of equal level. The imitation of a friendly conversation between the general and the soldiers does not count, because this is a "quasi-dialogue".

Occurs practically important question: is it possible learn microcommunication?This question is extremely important for educators, businessmen, people (businessmen), managers, politicians, who in fact are microcommunication professionals. This question is also of interest to people who want to be successful in society, to achieve spectacular self-expression and public approval. There are many witty and boring tips, recommendations, rules, for example: be silent or say something better than silence; use words prudently, not for nothing one mouth, but two ears; the power of speech lies in the ability to express a lot in a few words; people obey not the one who is smarter than the others, but the one who speaks the loudest, etc.

Developed since antiquity rhetoric- the doctrine of eloquence, illuminated by the authority of Plato and Aristotle, in the 20th century as scientific discipline took shape style, studying language norms and their areas of application educational institutions began to teach culture of speech and managers and politicians began to be taught the rules business communication, social conflictology and the art of arguing. There is no lack of guidelines. Let's take a look at some of them.

Do not perform incomprehensible speech acts; the meaning of the speech should be clear to the listeners.

Do not perform insincere speech acts; speech should correspond to the real thoughts, intentions, experiences of the speaker.

Be consistent and make sure that subsequent speech acts are logically connected with the previous ones.

Speech must be purposeful, the speaker must have an idea that is realized in speech, etc.

Especially a lot of useful advice concerns non-verbal means of microcommunication: gestures, facial expressions, postures, distance between interlocutors, volume and intonation of speech. However, acquaintance with the streams of educational, scientific and practical literature leads to an unequivocal conclusion: microcommunication activity cannot be “learned” from books, there are no ready-made recipes, because it is art, i.e. creative and productive, playful, and not reproductive and ritual activity. The success of any oral presentation or written communication depends primarily on the abilities and talents of their authors. For example, you can memorize Letters to a Son by the English aristocrat Philip Chesterfield (1694-1773) or study the best-selling books of the successful businessman Dale Carnegie (1888-1955), but this does not guarantee spiritual freedom, the ability to "win friends and influence people" or confidence V public speaking. Nevertheless, it is very useful to get acquainted with these classic works.

midicommunication

The five forms of midicommunication include such social communication phenomena as fashion - imitation-based transmission in the social space of material forms, patterns of behavior and ideas that are emotionally attractive to social groups (we note that fashion is a product of neoculture, paleoculture did not know fashion); negotiation - the usual way of resolving conflicts and reaching agreements between social groups; group hierarchy develops in large institutions (managers - workers), in army units, in estate-caste societies, where contacts between groups are clearly regulated; environmental adaptation turns into a communication problem for national diasporas living among foreigners; for non-Christians, for example, Muslims among Christians; for underground revolutionaries, etc.; leadership of society carried out by creative groups, generating ideological meanings that determine the spiritual (not material!) Life of society. Let's take a closer look at this form of midicommunication.

Worldview meanings are knowledge that explains the observed phenomena, the origin of man and the universe, the meaning human life, ideals, norms and incentives for social activity. The social groups that develop these meanings and the communication messages in which they are imprinted turn out to be in the center spiritual life of society. These centers shift in the course of socio-cultural evolution.

Archeoculture is peculiar mythocentrism, the guardian of which was the caste of priests, who owned the sacred esoteric knowledge. Paleoculture is characterized religioceptprism, in the mainstream of which were literature, art, education, philosophy. Since the 17th century (the century of universal geniuses), Western European neoculture has been developing under the auspices of secular knowledge, headed by philosophy and in the 19th century gradually moved to science-centrism. Physicists, economists, political scientists determined the spiritual climate in democratic Western countries. Otherwise it was in Russia.

Neo-cultural modernization began, as you know, with the stormy reform activity of Peter I, which was continued in a milder manner by Catherine I. The main military-political and economic power Russian society XVIII century was the nobility. After 1761, when, according to the decree of Peter III "On the Liberty of the Nobility", confirmed by Catherine, this class was freed from compulsory public service and received a free hand for cultural creativity, a luxurious, brilliant, albeit superficial noble culture was created, the golden age of which started by N. M. Karamzin, and finished by M. Yu. Lermontov. In the spiritual life of Russia XVIII - the first half of XIX century, a characteristic "two-center" has developed: one ideological center - Orthodox Church(remember the Uvarov triad "Orthodoxy, autocracy, nationality"), and the other center was in Western Europe, from where the Russian nobles drew either the ideas of Voltaire and Rousseau, or the liberalism of Madame de Stael and Benjamin Constant, or the utopian socialism of A. Saint-Simon and C. Fourier.

However, since Pushkin's time, a phenomenon began to occur in the spiritual life of Russia, unknown to Western Europe - the center of spiritual life literature has become and talented writers - writers, poets, critics became "masters of worldview thoughts" of Russian society, teachers and prophets. The second half of the XIX century - the era of Russian literary centrism. The well-known words of A. I. Herzen date back to this time: “For a people deprived of public freedom, literature is the only tribune, from the height of which it makes you hear the cry of your indignation and your conscience. The influence of literature in such a society takes on proportions long lost in other European countries. The well-known role of literature in preparing public opinion for the abolition of serfdom (D. V. Grigorovich, I. S. Turgenev, N. A. Nekrasov), in the emergence and deployment of nihilism, populism, Tolstoyism, the emancipation of women, the glorification of the images of selfless militants of underground Russia . There is a tendency of teaching, preaching, accusation characteristic of critical realism. Literary centrism became a school for educating the raznochintsy intelligentsia, which shook the colossus of the Russian autocracy.

The phenomenon of literary centrism in Russian history is interesting and instructive due to the fact that it shows the revolutionary potential hidden in the bowels of the seemingly most peaceful and harmless social and communication institution - fiction.

Soviet time- domination politicocentrism, the content of which was determined by a group of leading communist ideologists according to the formula G y M. On the basis of the Leninist principle of party membership, a gigantic propaganda system was created. This system had the following features:

Only a managerial monologue was allowed, setting out ideologically sustained truths; doubts, objections, dissent, pluralism were unconditionally excluded, so there was no room for dialogue;

Centralized management, ensuring consistency and coordination of all impacts on mass consciousness;

Mobilization of all communication resources: mass media, fiction, cinema, visual arts, theater;

As a result, the high efficiency of the communist education of a person of a new formation was ensured - homo sovieticus. Homo sovieticus is a product of the Soviet communication system, its own offspring, grown on fertile soil social mythology. The case of Lenin-Stalin, the communist future of mankind, the party - the mind, honor and conscience of the era, hostile environment and spy mania - these were strong myths that ideologically ensured both the cult of Stalin's personality and the unity of the people in the years of pre-war, military and post-war trials.

macro communication

Macrocommunication forms of communication interaction, which in Table. 2.1 named borrowing achievements(M P M), interaction of cultures(M d M) and information aggression(M at M), are clearly visible in the thousand-year history of interaction between the Russian state and Europe. Moreover, fluctuations from imitation to dialogue and vice versa are easily noticed. Information aggression is a relatively new phenomenon that appeared only in the 20th century.

The baptism of Rus' at the end of the 10th century is an indisputable act of macrocommunication imitation. Time Kievan Rus, the Vladimir-Suzdal principality, specific civil strife and the Tatar-Mongol yoke - this is the period of "humble apprenticeship" among the Bulgarians and Greeks, when the Russian scribe was "a poor spirit, begging under the windows of European temples of wisdom with the fruits of someone else's pile, grains from a spiritual meal, on which there was no place for him” (V.O. Klyuchevsky). But gradually the Russian Church acquired its rights as a spiritual paleocultural center and freed itself from the tutelage of the Patriarchs of Constantinople. In 1346, not a Greek sent from Tsargrad, but a Russian man, Alexy, became the Moscow metropolitan. In 1380, Sergius of Radonezh blessed the Grand Duke of Moscow Dmitry for the battle with Mamai. The 15th century is the time when the Muscovite state gained political independence and ideological independence, for the Church of Constantinople, having found itself in the territory since 1453 Ottoman Empire capitulated to the papacy. Phase M p M ended.

Russian "humble disciples", encouraged by recent victories over the Tatars, abandoned the union with the Latins and decided to serve Orthodoxy in their own way. At the beginning of the 16th century, the idea of Russian messianism arose - “Moscow is the third Rome”, national pride ripens. Russian "book men", according to the same Klyuchevsky, began to teach: "Brothers! do not be arrogant; If someone asks you if you know philosophy, you answer: you don’t know Hellenic greyhounds, you don’t read rhytarian astronomers, you haven’t been with wise philosophers, I’ve seen philosophy below my eyes. Previously, the Russian scribe loved articles translated from Greek in various branches of knowledge: in mineralogy, logic, medicine, rhetoric, now he furiously shouted: “Everyone who loves geometry is abominable before God; I am not learned in words, I have not studied dialectics, rhetoric and philosophy, but I have the mind of Christ in myself. Ivan IV, who started the Livonian War for access to the Baltic Sea and was about to marry Elizabeth of England, of course, considered himself not a student of European wisdom, but an equal partner of any monarch. Muscovy was ready for a dialogue of cultures according to the formula M d M.

XVII century - the time of gradual rapprochement with Europe. A German settlement appears in Moscow, regiments of a foreign system, free-thinking Russian nobles like A. L. Ordin-Nashchokin dress at home in European dress, tsar’s children are taught by a graduate of the Kiev Academy, former Jesuit Simeon Polotsky. However, Russian people do not lose their national dignity. Peter's transformations - unconditional discipleship, a new "breach under the windows of European temples of wisdom", a new phase M p M.

German dominance assumed such proportions that the Russian guards willingly gave the crown to the charming Elizabeth, mainly because she was "Petrov's daughter." But the illiterate Russian nobles were irresistibly attracted by the charms of European civilization, and it was no accident that D. I. Fonvizin put into Ivanushka’s mouth (the comedy Brigadier) a confession: “my body was born in Russia, but my spirit belongs to the French crown.” Europe XVIII century gave the cultural elite of the Russian nobility, firstly, an atheistic education in the spirit of Voltaire and Diderot, and, secondly, Freemasonry, focused on spiritual and mystical searches.

The bloody French Revolution caused a negative reaction in Russian society and led to disappointment in the ideals of the Enlightenment. Macrocommunication imitation began to fade. In 1795, N. M. Karamzin bitterly wrote in Melidor's Correspondence to Filaret: “Where are the people we loved? Where is the fruit of science and wisdom? Age of enlightenment, I don't recognize you; in blood and flame, in the midst of murder and destruction, I do not recognize you... I cover my face.” Paul I, fighting the revolutionary infection, banned the import of foreign books into the Russian Empire. Aggressive Napoleonic Wars and the Patriotic War of 1812, it would seem, should finally alienate Russia from crazy Europe, but the Russian officers returned from foreign campaigns with criticism not of Europe, but of their Fatherland. The Decembrists were Russian patriots, but they thought along Western lines.

In the 1940s, two currents of Russian thought took shape and began to openly compete: Westernism and Slavophilism. The dispute between Westerners and Slavophiles is a struggle two macrocommunication ideologies. The Slavophiles asserted Russia's right to an equal dialogue with the West and saw Russia's mission not in conquering Europe with brute gendarme force, but in imparting new meanings to it (Orthodox ethics, catholicity, altruism) that would heal decrepit and decaying Europe from weakness (communication formula M at M). Westerners emphasized Russia's belonging to Western culture and urged to refrain from arrogant spiritual separatism and still willingly perceive the achievements of European progress, especially in terms of science, technology, democracy, aesthetics (communication formula M p M).

The Nikolaev official ideology, which had assimilated the role of the "gendarme of Europe", saw in Western culture a hotbed of sedition, which should be mercilessly suppressed. The perversity of this ideology has shown Crimean War. Reforms of Alexander II - Western-style modernization ( M p M); counter-reforms Alexander III- an attempt to "freeze" Russia in the spirit of Orthodoxy, autocracy, nationality, but it was too late. The pendulum of Russian history was rapidly moving to the West.

Liberalism, constitutional democracy, social democracy, Marxism - all these are not Russian, but imported fruits. Perhaps only anarchism, adorned with the names of M.A. Bakunin and P.A. Kropotkin, is a domestic work. The Bolsheviks began the construction of communism according to the Marxist scenario, developed not for Russia, but for industrialized Europe. The script had to be overhauled, and now the pendulum of history carries away Soviet Union into the unknown. We cannot copy either bourgeois democracy, or bourgeois culture, or bourgeois science, we will go our own way, we will overtake and outstrip America and Europe. military victory, and then - iron curtain, the fight against cosmopolitanism and servility to the West, ideologically sustained nationalism in the Soviet way. There is no longer a communication dialogue; this is according to the formula M at M, information aggression (Table 2.1).

The Soviet Union has always waged an active offensive ideological struggle against any non-communist doctrines. The role of communicators in the international arena was played by the Comintern (III Communist International, created in 1919, dissolved in 1943) and "fraternal communist parties" that existed in most countries of the world. A convincing argument in favor of the "advantages of socialism" was the victory of the USSR in the Great Patriotic War. This argument was fully exploited by communist propaganda; in the post-war years, a third of the world had a Soviet orientation.

But the ideological opponents of the country of the Soviets did not doze off either. Since 1946, the Cold War began, which was a true information war, a war for the trust and sympathy of the world community. It was a confrontational dialogue according to the formula M d M. Skillfully planned propaganda campaigns followed one after another, using the Hungarian events of 1956 and the “Prague Spring” of 1968, space flights and sporting achievements, the Olympic Games and youth festivals, the Vietnam War and the Afghanistan War. The struggle was on an equal footing, but in the 70s the United States managed to outplay the Soviet strategists. The Soviet Union was drawn into an exhausting arms race, into a provocative "star wars" program. Economic exhaustion, aggravated by the mediocrity of the aging Politburo, led to a fall in the country's prestige, to the loss of the won positions. The Cold War ended with the defeat of the USSR, a defeat not on the battlefield, but in the virtual space of information wars. The confrontation between the USSR and the West is over. Replacing the formula M d M again, as in the time of Petrova, the student formula came M p M.

It should be noted that the concepts of micro-, midi-, macrocommunication do not match with the concepts of interpersonal, group, mass communication, although they intersect with them. If we refer to Table. 2.1, it can be seen that out of 7 types of microcommunication, only 3 belong to the interpersonal level, and macrocommunication is represented only in three cases out of seven at the level of mass communication. In this regard, let us clarify the subject theories of mass communication.

L. V. Petrov offers the following definition: "mass communication- this is the creation of a single social field based on a process that includes, on the one hand, the extraction, processing and transmission of socially significant information using relatively fast technical devices, carried out by specialized institutions; and, on the other hand, the reception and assimilation of this information by numerically large, socially diverse, dispersed audiences. Thus, in the case of mass communication, technically equipped "specialized institutions" in the form of the press, cinema, radio, television act as communicants, and mass audiences act as recipients. Such communication interaction is characterized by the formula G y M(leadership of society), and precisely the problems of social management, as L.V. Petrov, "the creation of a unified social field" is the main subject of the theory of mass communication. Thus, this theory does not study all forms of mass communication, but only one of its formsG y M, which can be called midi mass communication. Therefore, it cannot be considered either a theory of macrocommunication, or even a general theory of mass communication.

Communication activities-- is the activity of transmitting information from the source (communicator) to the recipient (recipient) through a specific channel. Between the communicator and the recipient, "feedback" can be carried out, that is, the process by which the communicator receives information about the extent and quality of the recipient received the information.

Three forms of communication action are possible:

· imitation;

ImitationЇ one of the oldest forms of meaning transfer, used by higher animals and birds; not without reason, some scientists considered the herd instinct to be a source of imitation. Imitation is understood as the reproduction by the recipient of the movements, actions, habits of the communicant. Imitation can be voluntary and involuntary (unconscious).

· dialogue;

Dialogue-- a form of communication interaction mastered by people in the process of anthropogenesis in the formation of human language and speech. Participants in the dialogue treat each other as equal subjects with certain meanings. Between them develops subject-- subject relationship, and their interaction is creative in the sense that a socio-psychological community of partners is achieved, denoted by the word " We".

management.

Control- such a communication action when the communicant considers the recipient as a means of achieving his goals, as an object of control. In this case, between the communicant and the recipient are established subject-object relationship. Management differs from dialogue in that the subject has the right to monologue, and the recipient cannot discuss with the communicant, he can only report his reaction through the feedback channel.

The boundaries between these forms are conditional, they can merge and complement each other.

The communication process includes the following steps.

1. The need for communication (it is necessary to communicate or find out information, influence the interlocutor, etc.) - encourages a person to make contact with other people.
2. Orientation for the purposes of communication, in a situation of communication.
3. Orientation in the personality of the interlocutor.
4. Planning the content of his communication - a person imagines (usually unconsciously) what exactly he will say.

Unconsciously (sometimes consciously) a person chooses specific means, phrases that he will use, decides how to speak, how to behave.

Perception and assessment of the interlocutor's response, monitoring the effectiveness of communication based on the establishment of feedback.

Adjustment of direction, style, methods of communication.

Communication can be:

1. oral and written
2. verbal and visual
3. communicative and metacommunicative
4. hierarchical (with the priority of direct communication) and democratic (with the priority of feedback).
5. aggressive and favorable

Communication models

two-stage model (media - opinion leaders - recipients)

One of the most important stages in the study of the impact of the media on the audience was the discovery by the American P. Lazarsfeld in the late 40s of the last century, a two-stage model of communication.

The impetus for this was the results of surveys that showed that the coverage of the population when they got acquainted with the message two weeks after its transmission was higher than immediately after the transmission itself.

Further analysis showed that the increase in coverage was the result of discussing these messages with those who were called "opinion leaders". Moreover, not only the coverage has increased, but also the degree of influence of the message on the audience.

· the spiral of silence (E. Noel-Neumann) - a German researcher of public opinion; The essence of the model is that the media can manipulate public opinion by giving the word to the minority instead of the majority.
gatekeeper model (Kurt Lewin)

The "gatekeeper" is the one who controls the flow of news, can change, expand, repeat, withdraw information. It is known that out of hundreds or thousands of messages, editors select only 10% for publication in their publication. Sociologists are interested in the principles by which selection takes place. When selecting, editors are guided by their values and their ideas about what might be of interest to the listener. The second benchmark is based on the ranking tables.

Jacobson's model (represents speech communication in the form of six factors, each of which corresponds to a special function of language: emotive, conative, phatic, metalinguistic, poetic, referential).

Functional aspect in language learning, orientation to the communication process inevitably led to the discovery communicative unit higher order through which verbal communication takes place. Such a unit is text, which is conceived primarily as a dynamic unit, organized in conditions of real communication.

For the speech organization of the text, external, communicative factors are decisive. And therefore the generation of the text and its functioning are pragmatically oriented, i.e. text is created when a certain goal setting and operates in certain communication conditions.

Communication conditions, or specific speech situations, lend themselves to typology, thus, texts oriented to certain communicative conditions should also have typological features. It is primarily the theory of the text, a scientific discipline that has gained access to sociolinguistics, psycholinguistics, and many others, that is engaged in the establishment of these signs.

2.2. Types, levels and forms of communication

activities

Three subjects belonging to different levels of the social structure can act as communicants and recipients: an individual personality ( AND), social group ( G), mass population ( M) 12 . They can interact with each other, for example I - I, G - G, MM, or among themselves, for example I - G, THEM, G - M etc. Abstractly speaking, there are 9 types of social communications. But this is not enough. As shown in section 2.1, communication actions can be carried out in the form of imitation, dialogue, control. Dialogue is the interaction of equal partners, which is possible between subjects of the same social level, and not different levels, because different levels of subjects, for example AND And M, are not equal. There can be imitation or management between different levels of subjects, but not a dialogue of equal participants.

We accept the following notation. Those types of communication activities where the active, purposeful subject is AND, or G, or M, will be called respectively microcommunication, midicommunication, macrocommunication. The types where AND, or G, or M act as an object of influence, let's call interpersonal, group and mass communication, respectively, understanding under them the levels of social communications. The resulting two-dimensional classification of types and levels of communication activity is shown in fig. 2.2.

As follows from Fig. 2.2, there are 7 forms of microcommunication, 5 forms of midicommunication and 3 forms of macrocommunication. Each of the forms manifests itself at the interpersonal, group, mass level. We systematize and designate the resulting 15 forms of communication activity in the form of table 2.1.

To complete the picture of possible forms of communication activity, one should take into account quasi-communication, when the communicator calls imaginary the subject and acquires a sense of dialogue with him. This includes the phenomenon fetishization, which N. D. Kondratiev described as follows: “it begins to seem to people that things have special supernatural properties to be valuable, to have the prerogatives of holiness, greatness, a source of law, etc. In other words, people begin to endow things with significant properties that are not physically inherent in them , just as savages attributed the properties of an omnipotent deity to idols” 13 . The creation of all kinds of "idols", the cult of leaders, etc., ultimately has the goal of creating an omniscient and omnipotent "quasi-communication" partner.

Now let's consider in more detail the listed forms of communication activity, distributing them by types of social communication: micro-, midi-, macro-communication.

Legend:

AND- individual;

G- group;

M- mass aggregate;

R- recipient;

TO- communicator;

p - imitation; d - dialogue; y - control.

Rice. 2.2. Types and levels of communication activities

Table 2.1

Forms of communication activity

communicator.	Communic.	Conditional designations	Name
			copying


			reference (reference group)
			management collective
			socialization


			negotiation
			group hierarchy
			adaptation to
			management society
			borrowing achievements
			interaction
			informational aggression

2.3. Types of communication activities

2.3.1. Microcommunication

Table 2.1 presents 7 forms of microcommunication, where the individual acts as an active recipient (imitation) or an active communicator (dialogue, control); as communication partners, either another individual, or a social group, or a mass aggregate (society as a whole) can be. The content of microcommunication is fairly obvious; on interpersonal level - this is either the assimilation of forms of behavior, skills, external attributes of the selected role model - sample copy, or exchange of ideas, arguments, proposals between interlocutors - friendly or business conversation, or instructions for execution by their subordinate - team. On group level are possible reference (the same imitation, but not of an individual, but of a social group with which an individual wishes to identify himself, for example, imitation of merchants of the nobility or "new Russians" aristocrats of the spirit; note that there is a negative reference when a person consciously avoids the signs of the group he rejects) or team management - management, organization, group leadership; finally on a mass level, communication actions serve to socialization - the development by a person of norms, beliefs, ideals generally accepted in a given society, in order to “be like everyone else”, and authoritarianism, i.e., despotic control of the masses of subject people (absolutism, tyranny, autocracy - political forms of authoritarianism). Note that the dialogical relations of an individual with a group or a mass are excluded, because dialogue is possible only between partners of equal level. The imitation of a friendly conversation between the general and the soldiers does not count, because this is a "quasi-dialogue".

A practically important question arises: is it possible to learn microcommunication?This question is extremely important for educators, businessmen, people (businessmen), managers, politicians, who in fact are microcommunication professionals. This question is also of interest to people who want to be successful in society, to achieve spectacular self-expression and public approval. There are many witty and boring tips, recommendations, rules, for example: be silent or say something better than silence; use words prudently, not for nothing one mouth, but two ears; the power of speech lies in the ability to express a lot in a few words; people obey not the one who is smarter than the others, but the one who speaks the loudest, etc.

Developed since antiquity rhetoric- the doctrine of eloquence, illuminated by the authority of Plato and Aristotle, in the 20th century took shape as a scientific discipline style, studying language norms and areas of their application, began to teach in educational institutions culture of speech and managers and politicians began to be taught the rules business communication, social conflictology and the art of arguing. There is no shortage of guidelines. Let's take a look at some of them.

Do not perform incomprehensible speech acts; the meaning of the speech should be clear to the listeners.

Do not perform insincere speech acts; speech should correspond to the real thoughts, intentions, experiences of the speaker.

Be consistent and make sure that subsequent speech acts are logically connected with the previous ones.

Speech must be purposeful, the speaker must have an idea that is realized in speech, etc.

Especially a lot of useful advice concerns non-verbal means of microcommunication: gestures, facial expressions, postures, distance between interlocutors, volume and intonation of speech. However, acquaintance with the streams of educational, scientific and practical literature leads to an unequivocal conclusion: microcommunication activity cannot be “learned” from books, there are no ready-made recipes, because it is art, i.e. creative and productive, playful, and not reproductive and ritual activity. The success of any oral presentation or written communication depends primarily on the abilities and talents of their authors. For example, you can memorize Letters to a Son by the English aristocrat Philip Chesterfield (1694-1773) or study the best-selling books of the successful businessman Dale Carnegie (1888-1955), but this does not guarantee spiritual freedom, the ability to "win friends and influence people" or confidence in public speaking. Nevertheless, it is very useful to get acquainted with these classical works 14 .

2.3.2. midicommunication

The five forms of midicommunication include such social communication phenomena as fashion - imitation-based transmission in the social space of material forms, patterns of behavior and ideas that are emotionally attractive to social groups (we note that fashion is a product of neoculture, paleoculture did not know fashion); negotiation - the usual way of resolving conflicts and reaching agreements between social groups; group hierarchy develops in large institutions (managers - workers), in army units, in estate-caste societies, where contacts between groups are clearly regulated; environmental adaptation turns into a communication problem for national diasporas living among foreigners; for non-Christians, for example, Muslims among Christians; for underground revolutionaries, etc.; leadership of society is carried out by creative groups that generate worldview meanings that determine the spiritual (not material!) life of society. Let's take a closer look at this form of midicommunication.

Worldview meanings are knowledge that explains the observed phenomena, the origin of man and the universe, the meaning of human life, ideals, norms and incentives for social activity. The social groups that develop these meanings and the communication messages in which they are imprinted turn out to be in the center spiritual life of society. These centers shift in the course of socio-cultural evolution.

Neo-cultural modernization began, as you know, with the stormy reform activity of Peter I, which was continued in a milder manner by Catherine I. The nobility was the main military-political and economic force of Russian society in the 18th century. After 1761, when, according to the decree of Peter III "On the Liberty of the Nobility", confirmed by Catherine, this class was freed from compulsory public service and received a free hand for cultural creativity, a luxurious, brilliant, albeit superficial noble culture was created, the golden age of which started by N. M. Karamzin, and finished by M. Yu. Lermontov. In the spiritual life of Russia in the 18th - the first half of the 19th century, a characteristic “two-center” developed: one ideological center was the Orthodox Church (remember the Uvarov triad “Orthodoxy, autocracy, nationality”), and the other center was in Western Europe, from where the Russian nobles drew Voltaire’s ideas. and Rousseau, then the liberalism of Madame de Stael and Benjamin Constant, then the utopian socialism of A. Saint-Simon and C. Fourier.

However, since Pushkin's time, a phenomenon began to occur in the spiritual life of Russia, unknown to Western Europe - the center of spiritual life literature has become and talented writers - writers, poets, critics became "masters of worldview thoughts" of Russian society, teachers and prophets. The second half of the XIX century - the era of Russian literary centrism. The well-known words of A. I. Herzen date back to this time: “For a people deprived of public freedom, literature is the only tribune, from the height of which it makes you hear the cry of your indignation and your conscience. The influence of literature in such a society assumes proportions long lost in other European countries. The well-known role of literature in preparing public opinion for the abolition of serfdom (D. V. Grigorovich, I. S. Turgenev, N. A. Nekrasov), in the emergence and deployment of nihilism, populism, Tolstoyism, the emancipation of women, the glorification of the images of selfless militants of underground Russia . There is a tendency of teaching, preaching, accusation characteristic of critical realism. Literary centrism became a school for educating the raznochintsy intelligentsia, which shook the colossus of the Russian autocracy.

Soviet time - domination politicocentrism, the content of which was determined by a group of leading communist ideologists according to the formula G y M. On the basis of the Leninist principle of party membership, a gigantic propaganda system was created. This system had the following features:

Only a managerial monologue was allowed, setting out ideologically sustained truths; doubts, objections, dissent, pluralism were unconditionally excluded, so there was no room for dialogue;

Centralized management, ensuring the consistency and coordination of all influences on the mass consciousness;

Mobilization of all communication resources: mass media, fiction, cinema, visual arts, theater;

As a result, the high efficiency of the communist education of a person of a new formation was ensured - homo sovieticus. Homo sovieticus is a product of the Soviet communication system, its own offspring, grown on the fertile soil of social mythology. The case of Lenin-Stalin, the communist future of mankind, the party - the mind, honor and conscience of the era, hostile environment and spy mania - these were strong myths that ideologically ensured both the cult of Stalin's personality and the unity of the people in the years of pre-war, military and post-war trials.

2.3.3. macro communication

Macrocommunication forms of communication interaction, which in Table. 2.1 named borrowing achievements (M P M),interaction of cultures (M d M) andinformation aggression (M at M), are clearly visible in the thousand-year history of interaction between the Russian state and Europe. Moreover, fluctuations from imitation to dialogue and vice versa are easily noticed. Information aggression is a relatively new phenomenon that appeared only in the 20th century.

The baptism of Rus' at the end of the 10th century is an indisputable act of macrocommunication imitation. The time of Kievan Rus, the Vladimir-Suzdal principality, specific civil strife and the Tatar-Mongol yoke - this is the period of "humble apprenticeship" among the Bulgarians and Greeks, when the Russian scribe was "a poor spirit, begging under the windows of European temples of wisdom with the fruits of someone else's pile, grains from a spiritual meal where he had no place” (V.O. Klyuchevsky). But gradually the Russian Church acquired its rights as a spiritual paleocultural center and freed itself from the tutelage of the Patriarchs of Constantinople. In 1346, not a Greek sent from Tsargrad, but a Russian man, Alexy, became the Moscow metropolitan. In 1380, Sergius of Radonezh blessed the Grand Duke of Moscow Dmitry for the battle with Mamai. The 15th century was the time when the Muscovite state gained political and ideological independence, for the Church of Constantinople, having found itself on the territory of the Ottoman Empire since 1453, capitulated to the papacy. Phase M p M ended.

M.: Publishing house "Strategy", 1998. Sokolov A.V. Generaltheorysocialcommunications: Proc. allowance. St. Petersburg: Mikhailov, 2002 ... Chukhrukidze. M.: Logos, 2002. 424 p. Sokolov A.V. Generaltheorysocialcommunications: Proc. allowance. St. Petersburg: Mikhailov, 2002 ...

The text of lectures on the subject "General Linguistics" for students of the specialty
1-210601-01 (4 hours)
Lecture plan:

NOTE: the study of this topic is immediately preceded by the topic "Language, speech, speech activity", immediately after this topic, the topic "Sociologism in linguistics. Sociolinguistics." is considered.

The communicative-activity approach in teaching foreign languages actualizes the need for future teachers to master the basics of communication theory, knowledge of its relationship with linguistics, mastering the main communication models as types of text-discursive models.
Communication (lat. Communication - I make common, connect, communicate) can be considered as a type of purposeful activity, one of the means of which is speech, and a sign, integral form of organization is text. There are many different definitions of communication, and among them there is not one that would satisfy everyone. As E.A. Selivanova (p. 33), "the variety of definitions of communication is due, firstly, to the multiplicity of its methods, only one of which is the verbal-sign fixation of the transmitted information, and secondly, the difference in the purpose of the information transmission (informing, inciting, prohibiting, learning, emotional and aesthetic impact, destabilization, etc.); thirdly, discreteness/nondiscreteness of temporal and spatial parameters of text generation and its perception; fourthly, the way information is addressed (cf.: retial (mass) communication and axial (specifically addressed))".
Communication theory and linguistics are different subject areas. A natural question arises: what is the ratio general theory communication (and there has been a lot of talk about it lately) and linguistics as a theory of language? On the one hand, the concept of communication seems to be broader than the concept of speech activity, since communication almost obviously includes areas that go beyond the scope of speech activity - such as, for example, speech influence, argumentation, non-speech sign means, etc. and so on. On the other hand, communication is already a sphere of linguistics, if we consider that the general theory of linguistics is composed of the theory of the language system, the theory of speech activity as the functioning of the system, and the theory of text as the product of such functioning.
According to many scientists, for example V.B. Kasevich, "the most adequate approach to clarifying the relationship between two spheres and, accordingly, two theories will be functional: if we proceed from functions, then the theory of language - linguistics - studies language means, the process of their use and the product of this process, and communication theory - the purpose of using linguistic and non-linguistic means, as well as the result achieved by the corresponding processes.
The most significant difference is the following: linguistics, in principle, can build abstract models without asking about their adequacy to a natural prototype, but communication theory directly bases the modeling of dynamic connections in society, between people, and therefore cannot be distracted from the "human factor" (a phrase of dubious semantics, but firmly established in use)".
The area of intersection of the theory of communication and linguistics is recognized, first of all, the theory of speech acts in linguistics and, in particular, the theory of illocutionary and perlocutionary functions. The theory of speech acts proceeds from the fact that the basic unit of communication (speech act) is not a sentence or any other linguistic expression, but the performance of a certain kind of action, such as, for example, an affirmation, a request, a question, an order, an expression of gratitude, an apology, congratulations, etc. The various types of speech acts, examples of which have just been given, are usually called, following Austin, illocutionary acts, contrasting them with acts of another kind - perlocutionary (a term introduced by Austin) and propositional. The perlocutionary act is the effect that the utterance has on the addressee. This does not mean the very fact of understanding the meaning of the statement by the addressee, but those changes in the state or behavior of the addressee that are the result of this understanding. A certain statement, or demand, or question, or threat, etc., can change the addressee's stock of knowledge (if he believes in the truth of what is being reported and takes into account the received message), can irritate or amuse him, frighten him, convince him of his wrong, to force him to perform some act or refrain from previously planned actions, etc. The achievement of all these results (not necessarily included in the speaker's intentions) are examples of perlocutionary acts.
Various illocutionary acts, such as a statement, often aim to achieve a certain perlocutionary effect (for example, a message about something or a statement is meant to convince the interlocutor of something, all the more so for a question, request or order aimed at the corresponding verbal or behavioral response of the addressee). However, in the theory of speech acts, it is specifically emphasized that the illocutionary act, which is a speech act proper, should be clearly distinguished from the perlocutionary act, which may or may not be achieved with the help of language tools. Within illocutionary acts, auxiliary propositional acts are distinguished, such as pointing to an object (referring to some object) and expressing a certain proposition. The difference between an illocutionary act and a propositional act is based on the fact that the same reference and expression of the same proposition can occur in different illocutionary acts. For example, in a message about a certain person and in a question about the same person, the same act of reference occurs, although the illocutionary acts as such are different. Similarly in saying Please write him a letter; Will you write him a letter and Will you write him a letter? the same proposition is expressed, although various illocutionary acts are performed - a request, a prediction (or prescription) and a question.
Illocutionary force is not necessarily expressed by explicit linguistic means (as in the examples above). So, for example, the statement I will leave no later than seven o'clock can be perceived under appropriate conditions as a promise, warning, threat, prediction - in each case this statement will express the same propositional content in conjunction with one or another illocutionary force, and, hence we will be dealing with various illocutionary acts.
On the other hand, the explicit expression of illocutionary force is not limited by grammatical means (which include mood, special structure of an interrogative sentence, intonation).
A very interesting class of statements containing explicit indicators of illocutionary force are statements that Austin called performative, for example: I swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and only the truth; I congratulate you on the occasion; I give up; I propose a draw; I invite the presidium to take their seats; I promise to behave well; Thank you for everything you have done for me; I'm sorry; Recommended for printing I hereby trust Ivanov to receive the money due to me; I bequeath the library to my grandchildren; I make a protest; I announce a break (reprimand, gratitude); I ask for the hand of your daughter, etc. Performative utterances are represented by formally declarative sentences containing a (performative) verb in the form of 1 l. present indicative tense. Unlike ordinary declarative sentences, which report something, in particular (if they contain a 1st person verb) describe an action or state of the speaker, performative statements do not describe any act, they are the act itself: to say "congratulations" is tantamount to congratulations (the act of congratulations usually cannot be performed by other, non-verbal means), to say “I swear” means thereby to swear, to say “thank you” means thereby to thank, etc.
In the theory of speech acts, a distinction is also made between direct and indirect acts. In the first case, the speaker says exactly what he says (literally, that is, he means what he says), and in the second he wants to say something more than he says (different meanings of the verb to speak / say). A textbook example of this kind is formally an interrogative sentence Could you pass me the salt?, usually used in a drinking situation as an expression of a request. Therefore, in the case of an inadequate reaction of the interlocutor, based on a literal interpretation of an indirect speech act, it is not always easy to accuse him of a deliberate violation of the principle of communicative cooperation (cf .. for example, the “question” of a teacher addressed to a student engaged in extraneous matters during explanations in the class: " Ivanov, I'm not bothering you?" - and a "polite" answer: "No, no, not at all, please continue" or the answer to the "question": "Can I put you a salad?" - "You can, but I don’t eat it I will", etc.).
The theory of speech acts was developed in the works of Grice, who developed the mechanisms of speech implication. According to Grice, the information transmitted in a speech act is divided into two parts. What is really said, what is said (in the first meaning of the verb to speak / say, which does not mean such a use of this verb, as in examples like: What do you want to say with this remark ?; or: His remark says that he did not understand anything), is the logical content of the statement. For all the rest of the information that can be extracted by the listener from a particular utterance, Grice proposed the term "implicature" so as not to confuse the corresponding phenomenon with the implication in the logical sense. The implicatures themselves are divided into two varieties - conventional and non-conventional, in particular, “communication implicatures”, or “discourse implicatures” (conversational implicatures). Conventional implicatures include all those non-truth-condition aspects of information that are conveyed by an utterance only by virtue of the meaning of the words or forms it contains. Conventional implicatures (apparently not much different from what is usually called presuppositions) are closely related to what is said (in the strict sense) in the sentence. On the contrary, the implicatures of communication are related to the linguistic content of the utterance only indirectly. They are derived from the content of the sentence, but owe their existence to the fact that the participants in the speech act are connected by the common goal of communicative cooperation.
From general principle cooperation, some more specific rules of verbal communication follow, which Grice called communicative postulates, or "maxims of communication" (conversational maxima):

These postulates allow the speaker to embody his communicative intention without resorting to a verbal expression of what can be inferred (“calculated” - the implicatures of communication have, according to Grice, the property of “computability”) by the listener using these postulates from the direct meaning of the statement. They are intended to explain how the "speaker's meaning" (i.e., what the speaker means) can include more than the literal meaning of a sentence (as in the case of indirect speech acts), how it can deviate from the literal meaning (as in the case of metaphor) or even be the opposite of it (as in the case of irony).
The interdisciplinary field of knowledge, called the theory of dialogue (it must be admitted, is still completely insufficiently developed, including in the proper linguistic aspect) is especially important for the development of the theory of communication. After all, the theory of communication is object-centric, it is not interested in monologues turned into space - simply because the latter do not create a communicative field. Communication is always a dialogue; its subject (addresser) generates a text - in a broad sense, i.e. including verbal and non-verbal components, in order to change the information state of a particular object (addressee), single or, more often, multiple, and, as a result, usually its behavior. Accordingly, the addresser must have maximum information about the addressee: one cannot pretend to change an unfamiliar object, the "black box" method is hardly productive here. The more adequate, the more detailed the model of the target object, the less effort should be made to provide feedback, because a reliable model makes it possible to fairly accurately predict the effect of communicative efforts. Hence the connection between the theory of communication and the recently deservedly popular theory of reflexive control, which proceeds precisely from saving the cost of receiving feedback signals due to the predictability of the reactions of the controlled object.
Coordination of speech actions in a dialogue occurs at two levels: subject-logical (cognitive coordination) and pragmatic (modal coordination). The nature of cognitive and modal coordination in a dialogue depends on the principles and rules of conventional behavior adopted in a given social sphere of communication in general and in a given speech genre in particular. The main factors influencing the nature of the coordination of speech behavior are the status-role characteristics of the interlocutors and the degree of official / informal relations between speakers. In a dialogue with a vertical type of relationship, the main role in the coordination of speech behavior belongs to the interlocutor with a higher social status. So, in the informative and regulative genres of communication, the function of unilateral control of the interlocutor's speech behavior is performed by the addresser, in whose interests this dialogue is carried out. In a dialogue with a horizontal type of relationship (for example, an exchange of opinions), both participants, to one degree or another, depending on their personal and psychological characteristics, take part in its coordination. Usually, the main role in the coordination of speech behavior in a horizontal type of relationship is assigned to the addressee, the “second interlocutor”, who, with the help of his response speech moves, “maintains” or “holds” the speech initiative of the first interlocutor.
In the work of A.A. Reformatsky discussed the joint existence of several sign codes in an oral communicative act and touched upon problems related to the functioning of signs of a different nature in the text. A.A. Reformatsky believed that without solving the issues of how the non-verbal communicative activity of a person of a given culture and society takes place and what is the ratio of non-verbal units of dialogue with verbal ones, "modeling of communication systems and the thought process itself is unthinkable." The scientist emphasized the exceptional importance of gestural, or, in other words, kinetic, human behavior as links between mental and speech activity. According to A.A. Reformatsky, in the act of oral communication, a simple coding of meaning or recoding of information is never carried out. Different systems of sign information processing coexist in it in parallel, and "although they somehow compete in principle, they do not overlap each other, but represent a more complex ratio."
According to the ratio of the verbal and non-verbal components of the oral text, two types of communication and two types of culture are clearly opposed -
high kinetic and low kinetic. A high-kinetic culture strongly combines verbal utterance and bodily sign behavior. High-kinetic communication is especially characteristic of the regions and cultures of the Mediterranean, South America, southeast Europe and some others. In a low-kinetic culture, which is characteristic, for example, of the population of North America, Scandinavia, or northern Germany, the verbal component sharply predominates. There are also intermediate cultures. Of the cultures studied to date, these include, for example, the cultures of the Czech Republic, China, and Japan. According to G.E. Kreidlin, Russia also belongs to the intermediate cultures. Today, representatives of various sciences - linguists, sociologists, psychologists and specialists in the field of non-verbal semiotics, a complex science, one of the tasks of which is to identify and describe the nature and mechanisms of non-verbal sign communication - conduct field and laboratory studies, the purpose of which is to identify patterns that determine dialogic interaction of verbal and non-verbal sign codes. The action of individual parameters and combinations of parameters that determine the communicative activity of a person, as well as the identification of those semantic areas that gestures serve together with speech, comes to the fore. In many situations of communication, non-verbal signs and behaviors are more effective than verbal ones, and for expressing certain types of content and in some situations, for example, when speech is difficult due to high level background noise or when communicating with young children who have poorly mastered speech, they can only be used.
R. Dirven and M. Vespur (p. 194) schematically display the relationship between the verbal and non-verbal in communication, distinguishing the means of expression into verbal (text), non-verbal and paralinguistic (interpretative keys of communication) associated with the interpretive basis of the speaker / listener - the fund of their knowledge , ideas, feelings (see diagram 1).
Verbal communication can be oral and written and printed. In connection with the spread of technical channels of information (television, cinema, radio), oral communication is replenished with new speech genres with non-traditional properties for interpersonal oral communication.
Verbal communication in its various forms, taking into account non-verbal communicative factors, is one of the objects of the linguistic theory of text and communication and is considered as a purposeful linguo-psycho-mental activity of the sender and addressee for the implementation of information exchange.

The text in the aspect of communication is considered as "a holistic semiotic form of psycho-linguistic human activity, conceptually and structurally organized, dialogically embedded in internalized being, the semiotic universe of an ethnos or civilization, serving as a pragmatically directed mediator of communication" (Selivanov, p. 32). The text participates in the exchange of communicative activity as a subject-sign carrier of the exchange” (Sidorov, p. 69).

Umberto Eco builds a more complex scheme, considering the text as an integral act of communication, which includes various semantic codes, using which the reader interprets it. With this approach, the author and the reader (or rather, the “reader model”, Lettore Modello, or, as it is designated in translation, “M-Reader”) are included in the framework of the text, however, “not as real poles of the act of communication, but as “actant roles”. ” of this message.
The concept of text has been significantly transformed in connection with the introduction of the concept of discourse into linguistic use. It is generally accepted that the concept of discourse was introduced by the founder of transformational and distributive analysis, Z. Harris in 1952. As one of the aspects of distribution, discourse was considered by 3. Harris on the basis of a network of equivalence between phrases and chains of phrases as an utterance, a superphrasal unit in the context of other units and the situation associated with them.
In modern linguistics, the term "discourse" is used in various meanings, but the most commonly used are mainly four meanings of this concept.
The first meaning of discourse as a text, statements, immersed in a certain socio-cultural situation, is similar to the understanding of discourse by 3. Harris.
In the linguistics of the text of the 70s, the terms "discourse" and "text" were usually identified, which was explained by the absence in some European languages of the word equivalent to the Franco-English "discourse", it was forced to replace it with the name "text". This terminological identification has led to the fact that discourse and text have come to be regarded as equivalents. So, in the “Concise Dictionary of Text Linguistics Terms” by T.M. Nikolaev's discourse has the following versions: “coherent text; oral-colloquial form of the text; dialogue; a group of statements related to each other in content; speech creation as a given, written or oral” (p. 33). To separate the concepts of text and discourse, the distinction between the aspects that they represent was initially used: discourse is social, and text is linguistic. This was facilitated by the influence of the concept of E. Benveniste, who considered discourse to be speech inseparable from the speaker, as well as the work of the Dutch scientist T. van Dsyk, who considered the text as a static object, and discourse as a way of its actualization in certain mental and pragmatic conditions. In this meaning, the discourse was also correlated with the statement: “the statement is a sequence of phrases enclosed between two semantic gaps, two stops in communication; discourse is a statement viewed from the point of view of the discursive mechanism that governs it” (Quadrature of Meaning, p. 27). Transposing this difference to the opposition of text and discourse, we can say that the text as an utterance, immersed in the conditions of its production and perception, functions as a discourse.
The second meaning of discourse comes from the first. It was the result of T. van Dyck's development of the concept of the communicative nature of the text. In the early 80s, the scientist chose a different key word for the definition of discourse - a communicative event. He emphasized: “Discourse, in the broad sense of the word, is a complex unity of linguistic form, meaning and action, which could be best characterized using the concept of a communicative event or a communicative act ... The speaker and the listener, their personal and social characteristics, others aspects of the social situation are undoubtedly relevant to this event” (1989, pp. 121-122). With regard to written texts, the scientist notes the need to analyze texts from the point of view of the dynamic nature of their production, understanding and the action performed with their help. From his point of view, discourse is an essential component of sociocultural interaction, character traits which - interest, goals and styles (1989, p. 53). The main features of discourse in the second meaning are contextuality, personality, processuality, situationality, isolation.
The contextuality of the discourse is associated with its other features and is described as a set of “expressed events, their participants, performative information and “non-events”, i.e. a) the circumstances accompanying the events; b) background explaining the event; c) assessment of the participant in the events; d) information correlating discourse with events”, determined not so much by the sequence of sentences, but by the common world for the creator of the discourse and its interpreter.
The personality of discourse is two-sided: on the one hand, it is a concrete interaction of two individual consciousnesses (addresser and addressee), on the other hand, it is an expression of oneself, one's individual consciousness in a communicative situation (this problem is being actively developed by discursive psychology). P. Serio, comparing the speaker and the subject of the utterance, notes that the latter acquires existence only in the act of utterance and is a category of discourse, “the reality of speech” (Quadrature of meaning, p. 16).
The procedural nature of discourse lies in considering it not as a finished product, but as a process that takes place in the presence of at least two participants who interpret each other’s statements in spontaneous communication and jointly develop the discourse structure in each this moment. In a discrete act of communication, the procedural nature of discourse is manifested in activity conjugation based on the text of the phases of generation and reception.
The situationality of discourse is provided by its temporal and spatial coordinates. The situational, eventful approach to the definition of discourse allows us to involve a lot of communicative, social and other extralingual factors in the study of the text.
The third meaning of discourse is the most common in modern linguistic literature, it comes from the position of the French semiotic tradition about the identification of discourse with speech, mainly oral. In the Explanatory Dictionary of Semiotics, A. Zh. Greimas and J. Kurte define discourse as a concept identical to the text in the aspect of the semiotic process: “In the first approximation, discourse can be identified with the semiotic process, which ... should be understood as the whole variety of ways of discursive practice, including linguistic and non-linguistic practice...” (p. 488). Correlating discourse with the communicative process and imposing them on the relationship between language and speech, semiotics considered discourse as an event strictly tied to the act of speech, which models, varies and regulates language norms and protogrammatic forms of linguistic consciousness, translating it into speech.
The pragmatic differentiation of the entire discursive array of the language led to the metonymization of the term "discourse" and its use in the fourth meaning as a type of discursive practice. In this understanding, discourse is a communicative-pragmatic pattern of speech behavior that occurs in a certain social sphere, having a certain set of variables: social norms, relationships, roles, conventions, indicators of interactivity, etc. This meaning of discourse is used in functional pragmatics, which considers it as units, forms of speech, interactions that can be part of everyday speech activity, but can also manifest themselves in the institutional area. The main property of discourse in this sense is the regularity of the co-presence of the speaker and listener (face-to-face interaction). These regular interactions are considered in the aggregate as the interaction of representatives of certain social groups (doctor - patient, politician - citizen) or within a separate area of social relations (teach - learn), etc. In such cases, the discourse may to some extent approach the concept of "functional style" or, rather, substyle. Yu.S. Stepanov considers that the reason for the fact that with the living term “functional style” another one was required - “discourse”, is the peculiarities of national linguistic schools: “while in the Russian tradition ... “functional style” meant, first of all, a special type of texts ..., but also the lexical system corresponding to each type and its own grammar, in the Anglo-Saxon tradition there was nothing like this, primarily because there was no stylistics as a special branch of linguistics ”(Language and science of the end of the 20th century, p. 36).
Yu.S. Stepanov believes that discourse cannot be reduced to style - discourse is a kind of sublanguage in the language, a possible alternative world in the world of language. This, according to the scientist, changes the original thesis about language as a system of systems to the position about language as a system different systems. Yu.S. Stepanov connects discourse with a special world, “behind which stands a special grammar, a special lexicon, special rules of word usage, special semantics”, as well as his own ideal addressee (ibid., pp. 42–44).
Discourse in the metonymic meaning of the substyle and form of speech is widely used in modern pragmalinguistics and speech science to highlight the totality of the discursive implementation of a certain speech genre (socially, culturally, etc. contextualized).
In this lecture, we will continue to use the term discourse mainly in the second meaning - as a communicative situation in the totality of its components.
The model of a communicative situation (discourse) is a systemic correlation of certain components that mediate information exchange and communicative actions, as well as the ratio of some operations, the result of which is the transfer of information from the source-addresser through its text to the recipient-addressee. In the scientific literature, a monolingual communicative situation was modeled differently depending on the focus of its consideration (technical, cultural, philosophical, semiotic, aesthetic, linguistic, etc.) and type (for example, written, oral, artistic, scientific, etc.). d.). Communicative models displayed a different number of discourse components, different directions of connections between them. However, in general, all communication models were based on one traditional communication link "addresser - text (message) - addressee", regardless of the distinction between personal and transpersonal communication.
This leads to the division of communication, based on the number of interlocutors, more often addressees, into internal (internal dialogue of one person), interpersonal (dialogue of two), communication of small groups (3-5 people), public (20-30 or more), organizational (100 and more), mass (1000 and more) or differentiation of communication into axial (axis - axis), i.e. specifically addressed, and retial (gete - network), i.e. mass, where the addressee is the one who is in the transmission zone.
The most widespread (including in linguistics) are information and technical models of communication (see one of the variants of such a model in diagram 2 below).
A special place in this model is given to the code. The code establishes: 1) a repertoire of symbols opposed to each other; 2) rules for their combination; 3) occasional one-to-one correspondence of each symbol to some one signified. Language and speech, with their consistency, are such a code. One of the ways to complicate the code
2

Is the introduction of elements of redundancy, which removes entropy and increases predictability. The language code has a high degree of redundancy. In any language, there are two tendencies: towards redundancy, which increases predictability and reduces the entropy of communication, and towards economy, which also increases predictability, because the removal of non-existent components can increase the speed of information processing.
Another model we are considering belongs to I.P. Susov, who creatively developed the ideas of C. Pierce and C. Morris. The scientist presented a closed multi-relational model by introducing into it two significations - content: generated by the addresser and perceived by the addressee - as well as two pragmatems: intention (intention) and interpretant. Important in the I.P. Susov is the distinction between one statement (sign form) and two meanings, based on the pragmatic sign concept of C. Pierce. This model, which can be called pragmatic, is based on a triangle that includes two anthropocentric communicants and a reference situation as the context of an utterance. All components of the metascheme are mutually correlated and conditioned (see Scheme 3). Having critically revised the iconic model of Ch. Morris, I.P. Susov emphasizes that she “does not take into account the fact that signs (both simple, t
etc.................

Types of communication activities
Since communication takes place in various forms and through various channels, it involves different kinds communicative activity: speaking, listening, reading, writing, etc. Communication is a two-way process, and therefore actions on the part of the sender and recipient of information are synchronized, being a kind of mirror reflection of each other. So, speaking is always paired with listening, and gestures and facial expressions are paired with their visual perception. These patterns are universal both for communication within one culture and for MC. The specificity of MC can manifest itself in a different distribution of types of communicative activities between a native speaker and a non-native speaker as a result of a different level of cultural and linguistic competence. For example, a communicator with poor command of the language is likely to speak less than his interlocutor who is a native speaker. To a person with low level language competence often has to resort to facial expressions and gestures, etc. This pattern is one of the manifestations of asymmetry in MC.
MK context
The information that forms the basis of communication does not exist in isolation, but in a macro- and micro context, against the background of a certain picture of the world, which is formed throughout the life of an individual. The term “context” itself is used in MK theory in two ways. This duality, in particular, is well reflected in the works of E. Hall. From his point of view, the concept of context is associated with two completely different, albeit interconnected, processes, one of which is carried out inside the human body, and the other outside it. Interior the context includes the past experience of the communicant, programmed in his mind and structure nervous system. Under external context, in turn, implies the physical environment, as well as other information implicitly contained in the communicative interaction, including the nature of interpersonal relationships between communicants and the social circumstances of communication (Damen 1987: 77 - 79).

If we proceed from this point of view, then the whole set of presuppositions and background knowledge, value attitudes, cultural identity and individual characteristics linguistic personality. This can also include the mood (humorous, serious, friendly, etc.) with which the communicant enters into communication and which, in the terminology of R. L. Weaver II, constitutes the “psychological context of communication”: (Weaver II 1993: 22 – 23).

In concept external context includes place (local context), time (chronological context), sphere and conditions of communication that determine its nature. For MC, an important circumstance is on “whose” territory (own, foreign or neutral) the communication takes place. Geographical position determines the varieties of culture that make up the background of the communicative process. At the same time, the state can be considered as a macrocontext, and the specific place where communication is carried out as a microcontext. In this case, a number of steps will be visible between the concepts of micro- and macrocontext: state - region - city / village - specific location of communicants (for example, street, school or office). The local context will influence a number of parameters of intercultural communication and determine its specificity. A communicator who is on his own territory feels more comfortable than a foreigner and is better oriented in the space of his own culture. In the capitals, intercultural differences are leveled to a greater extent than in the outback, where ethnic traditions are preserved and there are various forms of manifestation of provincialism. The nature of communication in the workplace and at home will differ in the degree of deepening into everyday culture and the influence of personal factors.

The temporal context, that is, the chronological period to which a particular communicative situation belongs, also influences its outcome. In different periods of time, relations between states and their international authority develop differently, which, in turn, determines the nature of the self-identification of MC participants, their sense of completeness/inferiority, attitude towards a communication partner and other manifestations of the dynamic nature of MC.

From a chronological point of view, communication can be simultaneous and multi-temporal. At the same time, simultaneity is a relative concept, due to the linearity of communication. However, simultaneous communication can be considered in person and on the phone, as well as on the Internet in on-line mode. There is a small gap between sending and receiving Email, longer in time - between sending and receiving a regular letter. There is also communication through years and epochs with the help of literary works, monuments, paintings, etc. Due to the non-simultaneous development of different cultures, there is a mismatch in synchrony (leading / lagging behind in some parameters), which can cause misunderstanding in MK.

Another parameter of the external context is the sphere of communication, the features of which, according to B.Yu. Gorodetsky, directly or indirectly reflect the circle of potential participants in the dialogue and the types of life functions they satisfy (Gorodetsky 1989: 16). It seems possible to single out the following areas of communication for MC:

diplomatic activity;
professional contacts;
trade, business;
international exchanges;
studying abroad;
trips;
migration;
hostilities.

A. Appadurai considers new “non-isomorphic” ways of global cultural information flows, which are carried out with the help of:

ethnic groups (ethnoscapes) - immigrants, refugees, tourists, etc.;
financial resources (finanscapes);
equipment and technical means(technoscapes);
funds mass media(mediascapes),
ideoscapes (Appadurai 1990).

These streams are also directly related to various areas of communication as types of communicative context.

In addition, there is the possibility of considering the context from other angles of view. Thus, M. L. Makarov singles out “existential context - the world of objects, states and events; situational context - an extensive class of social determinants (type of activity, subject of communication, level of formality or formality, status-role relations, place of communication and situation, socio-cultural environment)<...>; actional context is a subclass of situations that are constructed by speech actions themselves” (Makarov 1998: 114 – 116).

Moments of external similarity between the contexts of communication can mislead participants in the MC. For example, the sphere of professional communication in different cultures differs in terms of the degree of formality/informality, the communication strategies used, the nature of the relationship between the boss and subordinates, etc.

The distinction between high-context and low-context cultures, developed by E. Hall, is considered traditional for communication science. Low-context cultures are those in which most of the information exchanged by communicants is encoded in messages at an explicit level. In high-context cultures, by contrast, most information exists at the level of context (internal or external). High-context cultures are traditional, resilient, emotional, and unwilling to change, while low-context cultures are associated with dynamism and a high level of technological development. Due to the active use of context, the nature of information transfer in high-context cultures is economical and efficient.

Almost all researchers unhesitatingly classify American culture as low-context culture. Since the essential role of context in communication is usually associated with collectivism, many scholars tend to consider Russian culture to be high-context.

It seems, however, that Russia, which throughout its history has experienced significant influences from both the West and the East, occupies an intermediate position between low-context (Western) and high-context (Eastern) cultures. On the one hand, Russians are proud of their directness and express information quite explicitly (for example, in business communication situations), on the other hand, in the emotional sphere, they tend to encrypt some of the information in an implicit, indirect, complicated form.

When cultures come into contact, there is a danger of both underestimating and overestimating the role of context in communication. For example, Americans do not always sufficiently take into account the role of contextual information when communicating with representatives of high-context cultures, as a result of which communication partners regard their behavior as impolite and tactless. Americans, in turn, accuse representatives of high-context cultures of unwillingness to clearly and clearly express their thoughts and be truthful.

On the other hand, Americans who come to Russia with the belief that this is a high-context culture begin to look for hidden meanings in the behavior of Russians, hidden behind explicit communication, which can also lead to communication failures.

In general, MC is characterized by lower-context communication than communication within native culture, since the MC participants are intuitively aware that their foreign partners are not familiar enough with the foreign cultural context. In such situations, it is important to observe a sense of proportion and behave in such a way that the clarification of the context really serves the purposes of communication, and does not turn into “chewing” information that is offensive to the interlocutor. Establishing a reasonable balance between known and new information requires an understanding of both native and foreign cultures.
^ Information Content Options
Communicative competence involves the ability to choose a topic of communication acceptable to both parties. Weather, children, occupation, pets are considered “safe” topics when communicating with unfamiliar people. "Dangerous" topics include religious and political beliefs (Crystal 1987: 117), sexual, ethnic and racial issues. S. A. Sukhikh and V. V. Zelenskaya propose to distinguish between three classes of topics: neutral, subject-professional and personal (1998: 11). It seems that the latter are the most dangerous, due to the fact that they hurt the communicants “for the living” and can cause different emotional reactions.

Different cultures have different degrees of sensitivity and tolerance towards certain topics. For example, the question of the salary of the interlocutor is considered absolutely unacceptable in the United States. Due to the large role that the concept of political correctness plays in the United States today, the range of undesirable topics has increased dramatically and includes issues of feminism, marital status, ethnic origin, etc.

In terms of topics, conversations can be monothematic and polythematic (Gorodetsky 1989: 17), with fixed and non-fixed topics. An important skill for MI is communicative flexibility, which, in particular, is manifested in the ability to switch topics (especially in unpleasant situations). The frequency of switching topics is also nationally determined and, in case of discrepancies between cultures, can be qualified as impatience or, conversely, importunity. Sometimes the topic of the conversation is built around a keyword, the misunderstanding of which can lead to a lack of “thematic coupling” between partners and to a communicative failure. For example, when an American guest asks a Russian colleague about “faculty”, he usually means faculty members. If a Russian interlocutor understands this word in the British sense - how "faculty", then for some time the communicants will carry on a conversation, not realizing that we are talking about different concepts.

As V. I. Karasik rightly notes, “the thematic, stylistic and structural unity of discourse is its constitutive feature, which is realized in the case of disintegration of the text.” (Karasik 1998: 188). Violation of the semantic integrity of the text makes the MC participants resort to feedback in order to double verify the content of the discourse - for the logical coherence of statements and intercultural differences that can cause misunderstanding.

Volumetric characteristics of communicants' statements may also differ depending on cultural affiliation. For example, everyone knows that Georgian toasts are very lengthy, while Russian ones are rather laconic ( "For your health!"). Cross-cultural differences can lead to the fact that the interlocutor will be classified as too verbose, or, conversely, taciturn. For example, Nancy Reagan's hostility towards Raisa Gorbacheva is known. “From the moment we met, she kept talking and talking and talking,” recalls N. Reagan. “I couldn’t put in a word.” D. Tannen rightly notes that, perhaps, Raisa Gorbacheva at that moment was perplexed why Nancy was silent all the time, placing the burden of maintaining a conversation on her (Tannen 1990: 201).

Intercultural communication also differs in stylistic tone and genre. For Americans, as you know, a cheerful, optimistic attitude is traditional, while Russians are more prone to philosophizing and pessimism.

In general, MK is distinguished by a high degree of structure and ritual. In intercultural communication, two opposing tendencies are fighting: on the one hand, the need to comply with the rules and norms necessary for the successful interaction of representatives of different cultures, on the other hand, the importance of taking into account the numerous variables that determine the dynamic nature of international communication.

Ways to encode information
The word is just a shell

The film, the sound is empty, but in it

The pink dot beats

It glows with strange fire.

^ Ars. Tarkovsky
The concept of code is one of the key to the theory of communication. In essence, coding is the conversion of one signal system to another ( The Oxford Companion to the English Language 1992: 228). To encrypt information, an internal code ("language of thought") or an external code (existing in verbal and non-verbal form) can be used.

The mechanisms of inner speech correlate with the universal subject code (in the terminology of N. I. Zhinkin), on which a person’s own experience, linguistic and practical knowledge is recorded in the memory, activated as needed and acting as the basis for understanding new information. There is a widespread opinion that in the deep structures of speech generation "the national-linguistic specificity of information is neutralized by universal schemes of meaning formation, however, this specificity clearly (explicitly) appears in surface structures communications" (Gorelov 1990: 233).

Verbal signs, paralinguistic means, gestures, facial expressions, pantomime (body language), proxemics (physical distance), social distance, clothing, cosmetics, takesika (touch) can act as external codes.

The cultural code also includes architecture, interior design, artifacts, graphic symbolism, artistic and other forms of influence (dances, parades, etc.), smells, colors, taste preferences, various forms of pleasure, one way or another associated with the mouth (smoking, gum chewing), the influence of temperature, cosmetics, signals used by the police, drivers, symbolism associated with time, and even silence (Yerasov 1997: 445). Some other types of codes are also distinguished, such as, for example, the code of nature, the code of bodily senses (vision and smell), the code of movement (Sofronova 1998), etc.

Verbal and non-verbal codes have their own complex structure, functioning at different levels. S.A. Sukhikh and V.V. Zelenskaya write about the exponential level of a sign, subject code, with its own conceptual syntax, which organizes connections in semantic structures and fixes the picture of the world. Code elements are organized into semantic spaces - "chunks" and more rigidly ordered structures - frames and scripts (Sukhikh, Zelenskaya 1998: 82).

In order for communication to take place, it is necessary that the sender and recipient of information use the same code, or at least similar codes. The more common elements contain codes of the addresser and addressee, the greater the likelihood of mutual understanding between them. For example, Russians and Ukrainians can understand each other quite well due to the similarity of the East Slavic languages.

The illusion of communicators is that, while communicating in their native language, they are the masters of the code, appropriating it and using it at their own discretion. In fact, if we analyze in detail the intention of a linguistic personality and its implementation, it turns out that only a small part of the information encoded in verbal and non-verbal signs corresponds to the communicative intention of the personality. Unfortunately, we do not have control over a significant portion of the information that the interlocutor receives from us (and about us) through the code.

If the codes match, communication channels are opened; if they do not match, these channels are blocked. Blocking can be complete or partial. With a complete blockage, communication participants are usually aware of the difficulties that have arisen and turn on feedback. With partial blocking, there is an illusion of communication, when at least one of the participants seems to be communicating normally. T. M. Dridze calls such illusory communication "pseudo-communication" (Dridze, 1996: 147). Elements of one code, interspersed in another code, become the causes of partial or complete blocking of communication channels.

Based on the point of view of J. Steiner, who likens communication within one culture to the process of translation (Steiner 1975: 48), then MT is a double or even triple translation: interlingual, intercultural and interpersonal, and at each level specific ways of encoding the relevant information are used. Some researchers write about the presence of two codes: the actual language and cultural (Hoopes 1980: 29); others see them as part of a single code (Salso 1996: 359). In any case, it must be recognized that there is a close relationship and interdependence between the linguistic and cultural aspects of communication, as a result of which it is often difficult (or even impossible) to determine where one ends and the other begins. Therefore, when analyzing MC, we consider it appropriate to explore the cultural and linguistic code as a complex, multicomponent structure.

For MK, it is necessary to form a special control mechanism, which, in parallel with the language component of the code, would supervise its cultural component. It is unrealistic to know all the richness of a foreign culture, but it is possible to form an openness to its perception, so we are talking about developing the ability to perceive the signals of turning on the cultural code and the readiness to decode it, which could minimize, if not eliminate completely, moments of intercultural misunderstanding.

However, it must be kept in mind that the use of the same code does not guarantee successful communication. The latter depends on the level of cultural and linguistic competence of the participants in communication. In addition, the ambiguity of verbal and non-verbal signs also reduces the efficiency of the code. The specificity of the English language, which exists in different territorial variants, leads to the fact that the same elements of the language code can be used to convey different values(for example, in American and British English).

The cultural-linguistic code is closely related to the mentality and national character of its carrier and influences the selection and presentation of information. What is actually encoded in a linguistic sign? The word "Lincoln" is only a proper name, but its pronunciation activates the information encoded in the communicant's memory. This information unfolds into a chain of associations: "Lincoln - President of the United States - first president - log cabin - Civil War- killed in the theater", etc., and the content of this chain is different for different individuals and depends on the amount of their cultural literacy, background knowledge, presuppositions, etc. It is the internal encoding of information that explains why a word or phrase can remain an empty sound for some people and be filled with deep meaning for others.Therefore, the information at the two ends of the communication chain (ie, encoded by the sender, and then decoded by the recipient) never completely matches.

Thus, one cannot but agree with the view that every decoding is a new encoding (Lodge 1984: 25). However, unlike communication within one culture, where individuals or groups use the "subcodes" of a single national-cultural code, MI involves a complete recoding of information using countless verbal and non-verbal signs. The complexity of MC lies in the fact that the addresser A encodes the message in context using presuppositions and background knowledge inherent in his culture, while the addressee B decodes the message using a different set of presuppositions and background knowledge. The decoding of information is actually a new encoding, that is, the translation of information into its own code.

Successful use of codes in MC requires the ability of communicators to "join" codes, to isolate similar elements in them that can be relied upon in the process of communication. So, the ability to find in Russian and English language words with similar roots (for example, of Latin and Greek origin), as well as using such universal elements as numbers, dates, proper names as a support, makes it possible even for people who have little command of a foreign language, in in general terms understand the content of the newspaper text.

The language acting as a means of intercultural communication, as a rule, is native for one side and foreign for the other (except for those cases when representatives of different countries but speakers of the same language are in contact). In such an asymmetric situation, the use of the same language does not guarantee a smooth implementation of the encoding/decoding process. Firstly, due to the different levels of linguistic competence, information encoded by a native speaker cannot be adequately retrieved by a foreigner. In addition, the habit of a non-native speaker to encode information in units of their native language can cause an automatic transfer of the encoding method to another language. In this case, cultural and linguistic interference will occur, which can become a communication barrier.

Ways of encoding information also differ depending on the social affiliation of the individual. Dialects, slang, professional jargon, etc. are used as codes used to distinguish one social group from another. This circumstance can make it difficult to decode messages in MK. For example, Russian students who have mastered literary English well in Russian university, are lost when they find themselves in the United States among their peers who speak in youth jargon. On the other hand, specialists from the same field (for example, mathematicians or computer scientists) can understand each other even with a very limited level of language proficiency, since in their professional activity use the same codes.

Not being static, the code is modified under the influence of numerous historical and social factors. For example, researchers note that in the Soviet era there were two independent, but opposed to each other codes - one for the ritualized world public life and the other for interpersonal interaction (Anderson et al.). Today, the encoding of information in Russian linguistic culture differs significantly from the situation ten years ago in terms of the use of lexical, grammatical, syntactic means, the role of borrowings, the share of verbal and non-verbal means, visual and auditory images, genre and situational relevance, etc.

The decoding of non-verbal messages also depends on how well the corresponding codes fit in the contacting cultures. Music, visual images, etc. can act as a code. The language of music is traditionally considered universal, but using it as a code also requires a certain level of competence on the part of users. If the communicant does not understand folk music, then it is not significant for him. In addition, even if the sender can decipher the emotional side of the message, an important part of the transmitted information may be "behind the scenes" (for example, linking a piece of music to a certain historical period, authorship, cultural). The same thing happens with visual images. For example, analogues of American works of monumental applied art of the 1930s and 1940s, created during the New Deal period of President Roosevelt, in Russia have a pronounced stamp of "socialist realism" and ideological and historical associations that are different from American ones.

The concept of restricted (restricted) and expanded (elaborated) language code was introduced into linguistics by B. Bernstein in 1960. According to his theory, an expanded code differs from a limited one in greater complexity and verbal differentiation. It is commonly used in professional communication, fiction and other situations that require detailing of meanings and a creative approach to expressing emotional nuances. In contrast, a limited code is acceptable for situations of informal communication, where there is no need to use complex vocabulary and build detailed statements, since the communicants already understand each other perfectly. From a linguistic point of view, a limited code has a fairly high degree of predictability and is complemented by gestures and intonational means. Various social groups to varying degrees, own these codes. Class distinctions are especially noticeable when it comes to deployed code, since mastering it requires a high level of language competence.

We propose to use the concept of an expanded and limited cultural-linguistic code in relation to MC. In this case, we are talking about both the level of language proficiency and knowledge of culture and the ways it is encrypted in linguistic signs. Obviously, when communicating with a foreigner, it is advisable to use a limited cultural and linguistic code, except for cases when the cultural and linguistic competence of a foreigner approaches the level of a native speaker. It should be remembered, however, that the use of a restricted code is only partially applicable to MC situations and up to certain limits. Everyday communication, which "flows dotted<...>, is characterized by spontaneity, strong situational dependence, pronounced subjectivity, violations of logic and structural design of statements”, phonetic and semantic fuzziness, replacement of words with approximate substitutes (Karasik 2000a: 6), difficult to understand from the point of view of a non-native linguoculture. Therefore, it is optimal for MC to use simple and accessible language tools while maintaining phonetic and semantic clarity, which facilitates the communication process.

The idiolect type of the communicant's personality can influence the variation of the communication code (Lupyan 1986: 21; Sukhikh, Zelenskaya 1998: 91), hindering or helping the implementation of communication. Significant factors in this case are the level of code proficiency, that is, the adequacy of the used signs of communicative intention, the ability to combine verbal and non-verbal code, to encode an emotional state, etc.

The processes of mixing and switching codes are also relevant for MK. The term "code mixing" refers to hybridization, and "code switching" refers to the transition from one language to another. Both are obviously present to some extent in the speech of all bilinguals. Thus, a communicant who speaks languages A and B can use three systems: A, B and C. Hybrid forms can be used when communicating with another bilingual, but not with a monolingual speaking language A or B ( The Oxford Companion… 1992: 228). Hybrid languages include Hinglish (Hindu + English) in India, Engalog or Taglish (Tagalog + English) in the Philippines, Frenglish (French + English) in Quebec, etc.

Varieties of hybrid languages are pidgins and creoles. Pidgins are a creative reworking of natural languages used as a means of interethnic communication in a mixed population. Their characteristic features are limited lexicon, simplified grammatical structure, modification of the phonological system, as well as functional limitations (Crystal 1987: 334; Vinogradov 1990: 374). Pidgins are auxiliary in nature and die off as they are no longer needed. Creole languages are formed on the basis of pidgins and become native to certain communities of their speakers (Dyachkov 1990: 245). A kind of hybridization of codes is observed during intensive language contacts among highly educated communicators.

The transition from one language to another in the process of communication is called code switching. This phenomenon can be observed during contacts of representatives of any groups using different codes. In itself, switching codes has a sign. For example, in the famous film grease John Travolta's character switches from "normal" language to slang and turns into a different person. As a result, his girlfriend does not recognize her lover in a "tough" guy, with a characteristic gait and manner of speaking.

As A. D. Schweitzer rightly notes, code switching in bilingualism is nothing more than a reaction to a change in the social situation (Schweitzer 1983: 28). For example, a typical situation is when members of a Russian family living in the United States speak Russian among themselves, and outside the home - in English. It is not uncommon for a Russian mother to address a child who has grown up in the United States in Russian, and he answers her in English. In this case, the switching of codes goes along the line: speaking / listening.

It is interesting how communicators use code switching to communicate with different categories of interlocutors. For example, a Negro teacher at an American college speaks pure English in class. literary language. However, while talking on the phone with his father, who lives in the US South, he switches to Black English. Otherwise, the father will definitely ask him: “What’s wrong with you?”

Switching codes for a person who is not accustomed to living in conditions of bilingualism is a rather difficult task that requires restructuring speech apparatus, linguistic thinking and even psychological attitude. This explains why even a person with good knowledge foreign language it takes time to "get involved" in a new cultural and linguistic space.

Competent participation in MC requires a gradual mastery of the cultural and linguistic code of the language being studied. At the same time, according to T. N. Astafurova, the goal is “the formation of students' skills of identifying themselves with carriers of a different linguo-socio-cultural code” (Astafurova 1997: 26). It seems that we should not just talk about the mechanical accumulation of cultural and linguistic knowledge, but about the transformation of codes, which is expressed in the formation of a “link” between the internal universal subject code and the new “external” code that a person masters to participate in intercultural communication. Until this "bundle" is formed, the code used by the person remains literal translation from the native language, with an appropriate choice of lexical means and grammatical constructions. It is not able to serve for an adequate expression of the communicative intention of the individual (if we are not talking about the simplest actions that serve purely pragmatic goals). The transformed code gives the individual a sense of communicative contact with the interlocutor based on the unity of the concepts used, background knowledge, presuppositions, allusions and other cultural and linguistic means encrypted in verbal and non-verbal form.

Types and forms of communicative activity. Basic rules of communicative activity of the organization. Game as a creative communication action

Collection of ideal social studies essays

Anti-Soviet rebellion in Hungary (1956)