Ecology of the Russian language and axiological dominants of student’s consciousness in developing communicative competences of future translators

Introduction. The article considers the problem of enhancing future translators training in linguistics at tertiary level within the modern paradigm of language ecology and translation axiology. The importance of streamlining the principles of ecolinguistics, conceptual didactics, and linguistic hermeneutics in the educational process, as well as the cognitive-axiological model of translation is emphasized. Factors of various spectrum, ecolinguistic ecological-personal, and ecopsychological, are taken into consideration. Purpose setting. The aim of the study is to analyze the linguistic and extralinguistic causes and conditions of the Russian language ecology violation, to raise future translators’ awareness of the language ecology impact on the axiological dominants of translation, to identify possible solutions to this problem. Methodology and methods of the study. The theoretical and methodological basis of the study was presented in the works of domestic and foreign scientists in the field of ecolinguistics, linguistic conceptual didactics, and linguistic hermeneutics, which revealed new approaches to developing competencies of future translators in linguistics in line with the ecology of language and the axiological paradigm of translation. Theoretical and applied methods have made it possible to outline the range of factors influencing decisions of translators. Results. Dominant approaches to enhance educational process within the paradigm of language ecology and axiology of translation were identified. Factors influencing language ecology in modern Russian society and streamlining the axiological dominants in the worldview of the linguistic society members were detected. The article presents a model for developing communicative competencies of future translators in linguistics within the framework of the cognitive-axiological model of translation in order to maintain the axiological dominants of translation and the Russian language ecology. Conclusion. The article presents significant theoretical and practical results aimed at increasing the efficiency of training translators in linguistics in modern realities. The factors influencing the choice of translator’s solutions under the influence of the ecology of language and axiological dominants are revealed, practical recommendations on the organization of the process of training future linguists-translators at the university are proposed.

1. Dictionary of Sociolinguistic Terms. Ed. V. Ju. Mihal’chenko. Moscow, Russian academy of sciences, 2006, 312 p. (In Russ).

2. Sapir E. Language and environment. American anthropologist, 1912, vol. 14, Issue 2, pp. 226–242.

3. Likhachev D. S. Russian language conceptosphere. Russian literature. The Anthology. Ed. V. P. Neroznaka. Moscow, Academia Publ., 1997, pp. 279–288 (In Russ).

4. Couto H. H. do. Ecological approaches in linguistics: a historical overview. Language Sciences, 2014, vol. 41, pp. 122–128.

5. Jakhnych M. A., Ionova S. V. Forms of address as a manifestation of speech culture in Internet communication. Ecology of language and communicative practice, 2013, no. 1, pp. 246–256. (In Russ).

6. Skovorodnikov A. P. To the ecology of Russian language. Philological sciences, 1992, no. 5–6, pp. 104–111. (In Russ).

7. Kushnina L. V. ‘Border language’ as a special translation phenomenon. Philological notes, 2010. URL: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/pogranichnyy-yazyk-kak-osobyy-perevodcheskiy-fenomen (accessed 09.26.2024) (In Russ).

8. Bernatskaya A. A. To three aspects of language ecology. Bulletin of KrasSU. Humanities, 2003, no. 4, pp. 32–38 (In Russ).

9. Kuznetsova M. D. Personal determinants of subjectivity. URL: https://publications.hse.ru/mirror/pubs/share/folder/v6jb0zs2wi/direct/62771971?sclid=m1djol2wyi974813556 (accessed 09.26.2024) (In Russ).

10. Chernyshov S. V. Linguoconceptodidactics as a promising contemporary linguodidactic research area. Bulletin of the VSU. Linguistics and Intercultural Communication Series, 2016, no. 2, pp. 130–135 (In Russ).

11. Zakirova A. F. Pedagogical hermeneutics. Moscow, 2006 (In Russ).

12. Sirotinina O. B. Reflections on how the struggle for the ecology of language should be understood Ecology of language and communicative practice, 2013, no. 1, pp. 177–193 (In Russ).

13. Hecke P. From Linguistic to Hermeneutics: A Functional and Cognitive Approach to Job 12–14. The Netherlands: BRILL, 2010. 444 р.

14. Buzuk L. G. Hermeneutic-linguistic model of textual communication. Bulletin of Tver State University. The «Philosophy» series, 2015, no. 4, pp. 88–94 (In Russ).

15. Ivanova O. A., Krivoruchko A. I., Pogorelaja N. G. The axiological paradigm of translation: the question of subjective and objective criteria for assessing the quality of translation. Modern problems of science and education, 2015, no. 1 URL: https://science-education.ru/ru/article/view?id=19527 (accessed 09.23.2024) (In Russ).

16. Catford J. A Linguistic theory of translation. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1965.

17. Nida, Eugene A. Theories of Translation. Pliegos De Yuste, 2006, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 11–14.

18. German I. A., Pishhal’nikova V. A. Introduction to linguosynergetics. Barnaul, 1999, 130 p. (In Russ).

19. Jasvin V. A. Educational environment: from modelling to design. Moscow, Smysl publ., 2001, 365 p. (In Russ).

20. Panov V. I. Ecological Psychology: Experiences in Methodology Building. Moscow, Nauka Publ., 2004, 197 p. (In Russ).