Tomsk State Pedagogical University Bulletin
RU EN






Today: 18.02.2026
Home Search
  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Bulletin Archive
    • 2026 Year
      • Issue №1
    • 2025 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
    • 2024 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
    • 2023 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
    • 2022 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
    • 2021 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
    • 2020 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
    • 2019 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
    • 2018 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
    • 2017 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
    • 2016 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
    • 2015 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
    • 2014 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
    • 2013 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
      • Issue №13
    • 2012 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
      • Issue №13
    • 2011 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
      • Issue №13
    • 2010 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
    • 2009 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
    • 2008 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
    • 2007 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
    • 2006 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
    • 2005 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
    • 2004 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
    • 2003 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
    • 2002 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
    • 2001 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
    • 2000 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
    • 1999 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
    • 1998 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
    • 1997 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
  • Search
  • Rating
  • News
  • Editorial Board
  • Information for Authors
  • Review Procedure
  • Information for Readers
  • Editor’s Publisher Ethics
  • Contacts
  • Manuscript submission
  • Received articles
  • Accepted articles
  • Subscribe
  • Service Entrance
vestnik.tspu.ru
praxema.tspu.ru
ling.tspu.ru
npo.tspu.ru
edujournal.tspu.ru

TSPU Bulletin is a peer-reviewed open-access scientific journal.

E-LIBRARY (РИНЦ)
Ulrich's Periodicals Directory
Google Scholar
European reference index for the humanities and the social sciences (erih plus)
Search by Author
- Not selected -
  • - Not selected -
Яндекс.Метрика

Search

- Not selected -
  • - Not selected -
  • - Not selected -

#SearchDownloads
1

Axiological Dominant “Family”: the Specifics of Representation in Linguodidactic Discourse (Based on Textbooks on Russian as a Foreign Language) // Tomsk State Pedagogical University Bulletin. 2023. Issue 1 (225). P. 32-40

The purpose of the article is to analyze the specifics of the representation of the family value dominants existing in Russian culture, presented in the textbooks on Russian as a foreign language by Russian and foreign authors. The material of the study are textbooks on Russian as a foreign language by Russian, Chinese and English-speaking authors written in the period from 2007–2018, with a total volume of more than 3,100 pages. We selected dialogues and narrative texts related to the topic of “family” from these materials using a continuous sampling method, allowing to analyze axiological dominants and linguistic means of their expression in various family aspects. The analysis of the obtained data was carried out using the methods of contextual analysis, lexical and semantic as well as comparative analysis. Family is one of the main value dominants for the Russian people. In textbooks on Russian as a foreign language, Russian authors mainly use positive value judgments, neutral or negative value judgments are used rarely. Chinese authors of the textbooks on the Russian language broadcast mainly a positive assessment of the family institute. English-speaking authors prefer neutral connotations. Individual parameters are also evaluated in different ways. In relationship between spouses, Russian authors often promote husband’s authority. Considering family responsibilities, household management is assigned exclusively to a woman, while work is typical for both men and women. Foreign authors mainly present in their textbooks a model of joint household management; husband’s authority in their works is not mentioned. Children are the dominant value in most cultures, however, it was found that when referring to children, Chinese authors use exclusively neutral vocabulary, while Russian and English-speaking authors prefer emotional expressions (mostly positive, less often negative). When describing the relationship to older relatives (especially grandmothers), Russian authors use value judgments that are of an exceptionally positive nature. In contrast, Chinese authors use a neutral assessment of grandparents. English-speaking authors in their works do not describe the relationships between children and grandparents. Among Russian and foreign authors there is also a variability in the specifics of describing the relationship between parents and their children. Unlike English-speaking authors, who do not focus on the mutual relationship of children and parents and use mostly neutral vocabulary when describing this value category, Russian and Chinese authors emphasize respect for parents and mutual concern. The analysis showed, that despite the general ideas about good and approved that exist in different cultures, the authors of the textbooks on the Russian language implicitly represent the value orientations inherent in their culture. The specificity is determined not only by the differences in the choice of certain lexical groups, but also in the subconscious emphasis on values that are significant for the culture of the authors of the materials.

Keywords: Russian as a foreign language, linguodidactic manual, family, axiological dominant, linguoculturological aspect

1350
2

The concept of "friendship" in educational materials on russian as a foreign language: value aspect // Tomsk State Pedagogical University Bulletin. 2024. Issue 3 (233). P. 7-15

Anthropocentric approach of modern science, as well as the undoubted value potential of textbooks on the Russian as a foreign language, has led to the need to identify the features of the representation of the concept of “friendship” that exist in the textbooks on Russian as a foreign language (RFL), and to analyze them from the axiological point of view. The material for this study are textbooks on Russian as a foreign language by Russian authors published in the period from 2007–2019, with a total volume of more than 2 500 pages, selected in accordance with certain requirements. From the received corpus of educational materials, there were selected dialogues and narrative texts related to the topic “friendship” with the help of a continuous sampling method. The application of an axiological approach to the analysis of the obtained data allowed to identify the cultural features of the representation of the concept of “friendship” that help foreign students to form a certain picture of the world in a foreign student. Lexical and syntactic units were analyzed by using the methods of contextual, comparative and lexic and semantic analysis. Statistical methods of data processing were also used. The value category of “friendship” belongs to one of the most significant in all cultures of the world. Analysis of the specifics of the translation of this concept in educational materials on the Russian as a foreign language allowed to specify, how the picture of friendship, represented to a foreign student, contributes to the adequate formation of the picture of the Russian world in his mind. It is revealed that the topic of friendship in textbooks appears from the elementary level and can also be found in texts about love, work, and leisure. A friend in RFL textbooks is mostly “used” for joint leisure or joint activity (80 % of all cases). The qualitative and quantitative analysis made it possible to specify the evaluative load of adjectives and to identify such valuable component of friendly relations as the long-term friendship. Adjectives that are used to describe a nationality of a friend/girlfriend are also frequently used. It is noted that the duration of friendship mainly appears in friendly relations between males. The frequency analysis of evaluative adjectives also allowed to conclude that RFL textbooks are focused mainly on such important qualities of a friend as kindness and closeness, which generally corresponds to the frequency of word usage in the National Corpus of the Russian Language. The analysis of examples selected from textbooks on Russian as a foreign language also revealed preferences in the translation of the models of friendship from the point of view of the gender distribution of participants. It was revealed that the largest number of examples do not allow to determine the gender of communicants or demonstrate friendly ties in the company of friends of a mixed type. The model of friendly relations between two males takes the second place, which is twice the number of similar examples describing friendship between two females. Friendship between a man and a woman is represented in an absolute minority and often subconsciously represents not a friendly, but a love affair. The model of friendly relations between males, as well as friendship between the actors of opposite sex, is characterized in textbooks on RFL by mutual support, whereas in examples describing friendship between females or between a man and a woman, assistance to a friend mainly appears. In the examples from RFL textbooks describing friendship, along with the positive evaluation components, the negative ones also exist, but their number is much smaller. In general, a positive image of friendship is broadcasted. The analysis showed that, in general, the values related to friendship are correctly represented in textbooks on the Russian as a foreign language, although not always fully. Gender differentiation in certain aspects of friendship is observed. If taking into account the obtained results, it may further allow foreign students to discover what values exist in the world of friendship among Russian people, which will also contribute to a deeper understanding of the peculiarities of Russian culture as a whole.

Keywords: Russian as a foreign language, RFL textbook, friendship, friend, culture, concept, axiological aspect

1065

2026 Tomsk State Pedagogical University Bulletin

Development and support: Network Project Laboratory TSPU