Representation of students' cultural identity within the framework of the discipline "Intercultural Communication"

This article examines the representation of the cultural identity of political science students within the discipline “Intercultural Communication” in several aspects (“I” - “Other”, group culture, discourse and pragmatics). The article emphasizes the need to rethink such concepts as “group culture”, “identity”, “political discourse” and “intercultural competence” for the development of cultural identity and the formation of intercultural communicative competence of future political scientists in accordance with modern realities. The article examines how a written text (essay) represents the cultural identity of students in situations of intercultural interaction, what markers activate cultural identity in intercultural communication, and determines the extent to which the intercultural communication of interlocutors depends on the influence of their cultural identity. The research data were collected from 25 students of the Political Science major studying in 2023–2024. Although the results of the study are not conclusive, they indicate that cultural identity dominates students' ethnocentric views and that stereotypes continue to influence the negotiation of identities in intercultural communication.

1. Vinokurova M. A., Vasilyeva N. P. The role of intercultural communication in the higher education system. The world of science. Sociology, philology, cultural studies. 2019;(4). Available from: https://sfkmn.ru/PDF/43KLSK419.pdf. (In Russ.)

2. Scollon R., and Scollon S.W. Intercultural communication: A discourse approach.2001. 2nd ed., Blackwell Publishers.

3. Yakimovich A. K. "Friend-foe" in cultural systems. Questions of philosophy. 2003;(4):48–60. (In Russ.)

4. Miller A. I. Nation as a framework of political life. Pro et Contra. 2007;11(3(37)):6–20. (In Russ.)

5. Mezhuyev V. M. The idea of a national state in a historical perspective [Electronic resource]. In: Civil society in Russia: Scientific electronic library. Available from: https://www.civisbook.ru/files/File/1992-5-6-2- Mezhuev.pdf. (In Russ.)

6. Sheigal E. I. Semiotics of political discourse. Moscow; Volgograd: Peremena; 2000. 367 p. (In Russ.)

7. Yapparova V., Miftakhova A. Development of communicative competence at the lessons of russian as a foreign language in preschool children. INTED2018 Proceedings.2018:6927–6932.

8. Kubryakova E. S. On the concepts of discourse and discursive analysis in modern linguistics. In: Discourse, speech, speech activity: functional and structural aspects: Collection of reviews. Moscow; 2000:7–25. (In Russ.)

9. Generalova S. N. The concept of "political discourse" in the linguistic and cultural paradigm. Bulletin of the Leningrad State University named after A. S. Pushkin. 2010;5(1):95-101. (In Russ.)

10. Gizatullina A. R., Gumerova M. I. Ways of expressing evaluativeness in the ideologems of the postPerestroika period (based on the material of the Izvestia newspaper). Philology and Culture. 2016;2(44):63–68. (In Russ.)

11. Gudykunst, W. B. Anxiety/uncertainty management (AUM) theory: Current status. In: R. L. Wiseman (Ed.), Intercultural communication theory (pp. 8-58). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

12. Chernobrovkina E. P. Content analysis in linguistic research. Bulletin of the BSU. Language, literature, culture. 2011;(11). Available from: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/kontent-analiz-v-lingvisticheskih-issledovaniyah [Accessed 22 January 2024]. (In Russ.)

13. Gudzovskaya A. A., Myshkina M. S. Identity diagnostics: "The test of twenty statements" (TDV): a textbook. Samara: Samara University Press; 2023. 148 p. (In Russ.).