Tomsk State Pedagogical University Bulletin
RU EN






Today: 06.12.2025
Home Search
  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Bulletin Archive
    • 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
  • Rating
  • Search
  • 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

Academic military-educational discourse: towards a description model // Tomsk State Pedagogical University Bulletin. 2023. Issue 6 (230). P. 49-57

Тhe article is devoted to the description of the academic military-educational discourse as a speech activity aimed at training officers of the highest command. The academic military-educational discourse, due to the cognitive and communicative focus of the research, is analyzed by the authors based on the model of describing institutional discourse developed by V. I. Karasik. The materials of the study were methodological developments, summaries of classes of the Military Academy of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation (VAGSH of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation) from the personal archives of the authors. In the main part of the article, considerable attention is paid to identifying specific features of the academic military-educational discourse, the purpose of which is to acquire new knowledge by officers in the field of operational and strategic levels, as well as training officers of the armed forces of the highest military qualification, specialists in the field of defense and security of the country in the aspect of management practices. The scientific novelty of the work lies in the fact that for the first time the academic military-educational discourse is analyzed, its main discourse-forming characteristics are described. The basis of the allocation of academic military educational discourse within the framework of military educational discourse is the classification of military education adopted in Russia: primary, secondary, higher. It is the specificity of the learning process taking place at different levels of education that has caused the need to separate the academic military-educational discourse into a separate version of the military-educational discourse. As a result of the analysis, the authors of the article identified the purpose, strategies, participants of the discourse, described the chronotope, values and genre organization of the academic military educational discourse. Since academic military-educational discourse, like other types of military-educational discourse, is a polysemiotic education, the authors introduce the parameter “communication code” into the model of describing academic military-educational discourse, which emphasizes the essential role of nonverbal communication code for establishing successful communicative clarity between its participants. In the work, according to the presented model, the features of the academic military-educational discourse, the communicative behavior of its participants, as well as key communicative strategies and its genre organization are characterized. The results of the study will be of interest to specialists working in the field of discourse analysis.

Keywords: military discourse, military educational discourse, V. I. Karasik model, institutional discourse, communication, military education

836
2

Professional linguistic consciousness of Russian-speaking and foreign-speaking military specialists according to the data of a psycholinguistic experiment: using the example of the “Service” and “Collection” stimuli // Tomsk State Pedagogical University Bulletin. 2025. Issue 6 (242). P. 43-54

Currently, professional language awareness is in the field of close attention of Russian linguists. Scientists are interested in the content of images of professional linguistic consciousness of people of different professions, including military specialists. This article is devoted to the description of the specifics of the professional linguistic consciousness of Russian-speaking (Russian) and foreign-speaking (foreign) military specialists from near and far abroad who master the academic military educational discourse. The practical significance of this research is related to the possibility of using the results obtained when reading courses on the study of linguistic consciousness, professional linguistic personality. The purpose of the article is to describe the specifics of the professional linguistic consciousness of Russian-speaking and foreign-speaking military specialists based on a comparative analysis of the obtained associations of three focus groups. The research material was the data obtained as a result of the analysis of the conducted free associative experiment. The respondents were Russian-speaking and foreign-speaking (Kazakhstan and Mali) students of the Military Academy of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation. These military personnel study at the same military educational institution according to the same educational programs, however, foreign-speaking students are distinguished not only by belonging to different cultures, including professional ones, but also by their level of proficiency in Russian (Kazakh military specialists − C1, Malian military specialists − B2). The lexical units “Service” and “Collection”, which capture significant concepts of academic military educational discourse, were chosen as incentive words. As a result of the study of the associative potential of the listed stimulus words, the peculiarities of the representation of lexical units in the linguistic consciousness of military specialists were revealed. Data analysis has shown that professional linguistic consciousness is formed under the influence of native culture. It was also proved that the level of language proficiency, knowledge of professional culture, determines the worldview of the professional personality of a military man, while the profession determines the common core of the world model, as evidenced by the data obtained during a free associative experiment.

Keywords: free associative experiment, professional linguistic consciousness, Russian-speaking military personnel, foreign-speaking military personnel, psycholinguistic experiment, military specialists

66

© 2025 Tomsk State Pedagogical University Bulletin

Development and support: Network Project Laboratory TSPU