“Modern Russian” - The modern pedagogical concept of “lesson” is originally Russian. The purpose of the lesson is... Language telecommunications: Lesson... Role-playing games (formation of communicative competence). Cultural telecommunications: The main requirement for a modern Russian language lesson is. The word “lesson” in pagan times was a type of “magical, witchcraft damage to a person.”
“Functions of language” - But the air turned out to be not free in the future. S.Ya.Marshak Dictionary I look at the dictionary more diligently every day. Reading..., I learned about..., as if I had been there myself. It is not always easy to express your thoughts clearly, accurately and figuratively. You can write it in the conclusion. Every text carries some information. No, it’s not a dictionary that lies in front of me, but an ancient scattered story.
“International significance of the Russian language” - Three functions of the Russian language in the modern world. Russia is a multinational state. What reasons led to the inclusion of the Russian language among international languages? True love for one's country is unthinkable without love for one's language. The Russian language is a means of communication, an instrument of cognition and a form of human thinking.
“Business Russian” - The negative side. Characters of the discussion. Business Etiquette. Different types and genres of advertising. Business papers. D. Carnegie. Study, research and analyze important contemporary issues. About Russian speech etiquette. Rules of dispute, polemics, discussions, debates. Public speech, interview, commentary.
“Russian language in the world” - Russian language in the modern world. Space. Russian is one of the official languages. Status of the Russian language in the world. Advantages of the Russian language. Participation in the development of relations with Russia. A new world in the future. Russian language. Status of the Russian language. Linguist. Journalists. Great predecessors. Literary works.
“The role of the Russian language” - The Russian language will begin to be studied along all meridians. Russian language by total number of speakers. Dictionary entry. Russian ranks third in the world. The heroes switch to Russian. The Russian word is “advice.” Russian language in international communication. True love for your country. Russian language. The word is a great thing.
There are a total of 25 presentations in the topic
48. Human factor in language: Linguistic mechanisms of expressiveness / Ed. V. N. Telia. – M., 1991.
49. Cherednichenko T. Russia of the 90s in slogans, images, ratings. – M., 2000.
Chapter V
Communicative and speech portrait of a business person (leader, manager, entrepreneur)
§ 1. Professional communicative behavior and professional communicative personality
Communicative behavior- this is the verbal and accompanying non-verbal behavior of a people, an individual or a group of people in the process of communication, regulated by the norms and traditions of communication of a given society. A special case of communicative behavior is professional communicative behavior. Professional communication behavior is a type of group communicative behavior regulated by the norms and traditions of communication of a particular society. Professional communicative behavior of an individual is distinguished by a number of characteristic features: speech, communication and behavioral, which together constitute a stereotypical sensory image of a representative of a certain profession in the mind of a native speaker.
Communicative personality can be defined as the communicative individuality of a person or the average communicative individuality of a certain society, which is a set of linguistic characteristics and features of the communicative behavior of an individual or society that are perceived by members of this society as characteristic of a given type of personality. Under professional communicative personality one should understand the professionally determined component of the national communicative personality.
Of particular interest among professional communicators is communicative personality of a business person . Business people traditionally attract general attention; the speech and behavior of business people are often the subject of close attention of others, since a business person, usually a manager, is always distinguished by a higher role status and material support.
Business people are bosses, managers, production organizers, businessmen, entrepreneurs, managers. What unites people of these professions? First of all, the scope of activity, namely control various processes, resources, people.
Entrepreneurs, businessmen, managers are not only relatively new professions for Russia, but also a new social group, whose representatives are united by high incomes, a more or less similar lifestyle, special morality and psychology, and special speech behavior. Since this group is still in its formation stage, it is quite difficult to outline its boundaries. So, for example, it is clear that businessmen include people who have their own business, their own business. However, this “own business” can be very different if it is run by bankers, builders, lawyers or doctors. But, despite professional differences, they are all united by a common business goal - making a profit . And this latter largely influences the stereotypical image of a business person.
T. A. Milekhina in her book “Russian Entrepreneurs and Their Speech” writes that in the created stereotypical image of a business person, the attitude of Russians towards wealth plays a large role. In the Russian national way of perceiving and understanding reality, a person’s attitude towards money has always been complex and ambiguous. The persistent belief “rich means a thief” can be called one of those specific to Russia, while in other countries, for example in America, on the contrary, “rich means smart.”
Russian communicative culture has a very restrained, cool attitude towards wealth, which, according to a number of researchers, was formed under the influence of Orthodox ethics, based on the Christian dogma about the sinfulness of the flesh. Money And business- words of non-Russian origin. Word money could have appeared in Russian speech no earlier than the 13th century, when the Russian lexicon was replenished with many Turkic borrowings. Another keyword is business- in its original internal form is not the name of any specific type of activity, but simply means busyness, as if lack of free time, leisure. At the same time, the modern Russian concept of “business” is initially an idea of professional mediation, which has no tradition of naming, since in the Russian ethnic consciousness trade has always been perceived as an unproductive craft. Name dealer in the Russian tradition the word was preferred merchant, the internal form of which does not coincidentally highlight the act of purchase rather than sale. Even in a seemingly neutral word own there is some evaluative connotation hidden. Thus, we can say that in the national Russian tradition, an ideological antinomy of the market, built on the laws of purchase and sale in monetary terms, and a spiritual and value-based attitude to life, disdain for the objective and material world of wealth, has historically been formed. Researchers of Russian national character note in this regard the typical mental attitude of Russians towards wealth: “Our people have a trait that baffles many economists and sociologists - the spirit of non-acquisitiveness, expressed in the absence of the desire for material wealth, hoarding.”
Thus, in the everyday consciousness of Russian speakers, a critical perception of entrepreneurship, calculation, and commercial acumen has developed. This, obviously, is the main reason why business people in Russia are either wary or hostile.
Another characteristic feature of modernity is the emergence communication professions , which are impossible to master without the necessary communication skills. In an increasingly competitive environment, the success of any enterprise or business largely depends on the communication skills of professionals. In professions of the “person-to-person” type, professional communicators are required, which include specialists who have diverse skills in verbal behavior and consciously select options for such behavior depending on the personality of the partner (partners) and the situation in order to achieve maximum efficiency of business interaction.
Leader, entrepreneur, manager, businessman - these are typical communicative professions. Conscious management of communication, predicting the results of contact, creating conditions for optimal interaction are not just an urgent need in communication professions, but a quality by which the level of not only a particular specialist is assessed, but also the entire organization (company, plant, holding) that he represents, generally.
For executives, managers, entrepreneurs, businessmen, production organizers, the most important part of their professional appearance is communicative competence - the ability to communicate in any situation. Moreover, these professions belong to areas of increased speech responsibility, in which the ability to communicate is assumed to be the main and necessary condition for the success of professional activity. “Business is the ability to talk to people,” say enterprising Americans. One of the outstanding managers of the USA, the president of the world's largest auto giant - Ford and Chrysler - Lee Iacocca in his book "Manager's Career" writes: “Management is nothing more than setting people up for work. The only way to set people up for energetic activity is to communicate with them."
48. Human factor in language: Linguistic mechanisms of expressiveness / Ed. V. N. Telia. – M., 1991.
49. Cherednichenko T. Russia of the 90s in slogans, images, ratings. – M., 2000.
Chapter V
Communicative and speech portrait of a business person (leader, manager, entrepreneur)
§ 1. Professional communicative behavior and professional communicative personality
Communicative behavior- this is the verbal and accompanying non-verbal behavior of a people, an individual or a group of people in the process of communication, regulated by the norms and traditions of communication of a given society. A special case of communicative behavior is professional communicative behavior. Professional communication behavior is a type of group communicative behavior regulated by the norms and traditions of communication of a particular society. Professional communicative behavior of an individual is distinguished by a number of characteristic features: speech, communication and behavioral, which together constitute a stereotypical sensory image of a representative of a certain profession in the mind of a native speaker.
Communicative personality can be defined as the communicative individuality of a person or the average communicative individuality of a certain society, which is a set of linguistic characteristics and features of the communicative behavior of an individual or society that are perceived by members of this society as characteristic of a given type of personality. Under professional communicative personality one should understand the professionally determined component of the national communicative personality.
Of particular interest among professional communicators is communicative personality of a business person . Business people traditionally attract general attention; the speech and behavior of business people are often the subject of close attention of others, since a business person, usually a manager, is always distinguished by a higher role status and material support.
Business people are bosses, managers, production organizers, businessmen, entrepreneurs, managers. What unites people of these professions? First of all, the scope of activity, namely control various processes, resources, people.
Entrepreneurs, businessmen, managers are not only relatively new professions for Russia, but also a new social group, whose representatives are united by high incomes, a more or less similar lifestyle, special morality and psychology, and special speech behavior. Since this group is still in its formation stage, it is quite difficult to outline its boundaries. So, for example, it is clear that businessmen include people who have their own business, their own business. However, this “own business” can be very different if it is run by bankers, builders, lawyers or doctors. But, despite professional differences, they are all united by a common business goal - making a profit . And this latter largely influences the stereotypical image of a business person.
T. A. Milekhina in her book “Russian Entrepreneurs and Their Speech” writes that in the created stereotypical image of a business person, the attitude of Russians towards wealth plays a large role. In the Russian national way of perceiving and understanding reality, a person’s attitude towards money has always been complex and ambiguous. The persistent belief “rich means a thief” can be called one of those specific to Russia, while in other countries, for example in America, on the contrary, “rich means smart.”
Russian communicative culture has a very restrained, cool attitude towards wealth, which, according to a number of researchers, was formed under the influence of Orthodox ethics, based on the Christian dogma about the sinfulness of the flesh. Money And business- words of non-Russian origin. Word money could have appeared in Russian speech no earlier than the 13th century, when the Russian lexicon was replenished with many Turkic borrowings. Another keyword is business- in its original internal form is not the name of any specific type of activity, but simply means busyness, as if lack of free time, leisure. At the same time, the modern Russian concept of “business” is initially an idea of professional mediation, which has no tradition of naming, since in the Russian ethnic consciousness trade has always been perceived as an unproductive craft. Name dealer in the Russian tradition the word was preferred merchant, the internal form of which does not coincidentally highlight the act of purchase rather than sale. Even in a seemingly neutral word own there is some evaluative connotation hidden. Thus, we can say that in the national Russian tradition, an ideological antinomy of the market, built on the laws of purchase and sale in monetary terms, and a spiritual and value-based attitude to life, disdain for the objective and material world of wealth, has historically been formed. Researchers of Russian national character note in this regard the typical mental attitude of Russians towards wealth: “Our people have a trait that baffles many economists and sociologists - the spirit of non-acquisitiveness, expressed in the absence of the desire for material wealth, hoarding.”
Thus, in the everyday consciousness of Russian speakers, a critical perception of entrepreneurship, calculation, and commercial acumen has developed. This, obviously, is the main reason why business people in Russia are either wary or hostile.
Another characteristic feature of modernity is the emergence communication professions , which are impossible to master without the necessary communication skills. In an increasingly competitive environment, the success of any enterprise or business largely depends on the communication skills of professionals. In professions of the “person-to-person” type, professional communicators are required, which include specialists who have diverse skills in verbal behavior and consciously select options for such behavior depending on the personality of the partner (partners) and the situation in order to achieve maximum efficiency of business interaction.
Leader, entrepreneur, manager, businessman - these are typical communicative professions. Conscious management of communication, predicting the results of contact, creating conditions for optimal interaction are not just an urgent need in communication professions, but a quality by which the level of not only a particular specialist is assessed, but also the entire organization (company, plant, holding) that he represents, generally.
For executives, managers, entrepreneurs, businessmen, production organizers, the most important part of their professional appearance is communicative competence - the ability to communicate in any situation. Moreover, these professions belong to areas of increased speech responsibility, in which the ability to communicate is assumed to be the main and necessary condition for the success of professional activity. “Business is the ability to talk to people,” say enterprising Americans. One of the outstanding managers of the USA, the president of the world's largest auto giant - Ford and Chrysler - Lee Iacocca in his book "Manager's Career" writes: “Management is nothing more than setting people up for work. The only way to set people up for energetic activity is to communicate with them."
Social sensitivity in our understanding is high sensitivity in the sphere of communication, fear of new situations, increased anxiety when the circumstances of interaction change.
This study was conducted by V. N. Kunitsyna in 1991. It used a sensitivity scale that included a statement of intolerance of direct eye contact in a conversation, delicacy towards the interlocutor and partner, an acute internal reaction to compliments addressed to the subject and excessive emotionality of other people.
Among the highly sensitive (there were 26 people), many were autistic, introverted, and alienated. Teenagers in this group are more constrained and do not have expressive movements. They have high rates of isolation, shyness, unsociability, low self-control and self-regulation, low rates of communication skills, and great dissatisfaction with communication. However, they are responsible and conscientious, partner-oriented. Frustrated, but not conflicted, anxious, suspicious, dreamy and self-critical.
Sensitivity interferes with leadership (among the group of leaders, not a single person with high sensitivity was found). Contact, compatibility and adaptability in highly sensitive individuals are reduced.
Compared to the shy ones (total group – 107 people), many indicators of the sensitive ones look better and are closer to the norm. They are more satisfied with communication and partner-oriented, trusting, more courageous in communication than shy ones, but more autistic in comparison.
Very high autism, in which sensitive people are surpassed only by especially shy and schizoid people, is a characteristic accompanying sign of excessive sensitivity.
The communication success rates of sensitive and shy people are almost equally low.
If we compare the level of sensitivity in other groups selected from the general array, it turns out that V sphere of communication are hysterical people, overly trusting people and people with low self-esteem.
Thus, excessive trustfulness is not true trust, which is characterized by responsiveness and sensitivity. It lacks these properties and represents a defensive, manipulative trust that goes hand in hand with suspicion.
Analysis of sensitivity at different levels of contact shows the inverse relationship between these properties: the higher the contact, the lower the sensitivity. Thus, we can conclude that sensitivity refers to personal qualities that reduce contact and the success of communication.
Sensitivity and shyness, being close in many manifestations, have a significant difference: sensitivity as accentuation and psychopathy is formed at the age of 16-19, and personal shyness is formed in the early period of a child’s life.
Epileptoid orientation. These accentuators are unusually sociable, hypersocial, but at the same time gloomy, jealous, conflictual, prone to idleness and affectivity. They show a complete lack of shyness; they do not like collective and competitive games.
To conclude this paragraph, we will say that character accentuations underlie many communication defects. That is why it is so difficult to wean a child from demonstrative behavior or excessive self-confidence, from stubbornness or the desire to assent in everything, the habit of not looking into the eyes when talking or fiddling with his ear, scratching his nose, speaking in a raised voice or, conversely, speaking in a barely audible voice. These and other communication defects become a character trait, a behavioral habit, and often act as a saving screen behind which uncertainty, tension, and anxiety are hidden.
Rigidity and anxiety as factors of defective communication
Personality properties that lead to persistent communication defects may also include anxiety, rigidity and some similar properties.
Anxiety
Anxiety as a personality trait, it manifests itself in special difficulties and shortcomings in communication, making it inferior, curtailed, and one-sided. It interferes with open, sincere communication, introduces an element of suspicion, unfounded fears, and is an interfering factor.
Often, an anxious person does not understand well what exactly they are telling him, what they are offering him, what they are asking him about, because we are overwhelmed by fears, the expectation of a breakdown in agreements, and anxiety for a variety of reasons. Anxious people often make requests or assign the same task to several people at once. It is precisely this circumstance that predetermines failure: each hopes that the other will carry out this assignment.
Anxiety
(anxiety, fear)
an individual psychological feature consisting of an increased tendency to experience anxiety in a variety of life situations, including those where nothing predisposes to this.
Repeated failures and subsequent disappointment in people, resentment and misunderstandings only increase anxiety. A vicious circle is formed. An anxious person often blames himself for being too gullible and again plays it safe, and everything repeats again.
Anxiety(anxiety, fear) is an individual psychological feature consisting of an increased tendency to experience anxiety in a variety of life situations, including those where nothing predisposes to this (Platonov, 1984).
According to K. Izard, anxiety is an affective-cognitive structure consisting of the dominant emotions of fear associated with one or more fundamental emotions, especially suffering, guilt, and anger. This is a psychological state that has a specific emotional and psychological orientation and special psychophysiological manifestations - changes in the autonomic nervous system and body functions (Izard, 1982).
There are two types of anxiety:
A) neurotic – an unconscious experience of anxiety directed to the future, with a certain content, in which criticism and the possibility of correction are preserved;
b) psychotic – a powerful, uncontrollable, completely uncorrectable, meaningless experience.
Personality characteristics anxious people are as follows: anxiety, disruption of activity, intolerance of difficult situations, self-doubt, feelings of inferiority.
An anxious person perceives the outside world as filled with dangers; anxiety increases in situations of threat to self-esteem and personal adequacy; accurate assessment of actions and self-regulation are reduced. An anxious person quickly panics if, for unknown reasons, a meeting is postponed, a business partner is delayed, or uncertainty arises. Often such people develop peculiar defensive fixed reactions - automatisms; twitching shoulders, raising eyebrows, biting lips, etc.
An anxious and suspicious person has pronounced characteristics: a mania for order, a desire to regulate everything, to create rules and prohibitions for himself. Such people are characterized by particular rigor in judgment, frugality and stinginess. All these properties turn out to be very burdensome for partners in informal communication.
M.K. Kasvinov in the novel “Twenty-three steps down” gives a vivid description of the anxious and insecure person that, in his opinion and the memories of his contemporaries, Russian Tsar Nicholas II was.
“The usual facial expression was characterized by a strange, “mysterious” half-smile. It was drowned in a thick mustache and a small oval beard of a light reddish color... He spoke slowly, in a quiet, chesty voice, pondering each phrase, why the conversation was replete with long pauses that embarrassed the interlocutor ... During a conversation, sometimes he gave the impression of a person who was not entirely confident in himself, hesitating, but trying to hide his hesitation and uncertainty, which was outwardly revealed by a twitch of the shoulder, frequent deliberate coughing, accompanied by unconscious stroking of the beard and mustache with his hand." (Kasvinov, 1982, p. 127).
Rigidity
Like increased anxiety, rigidity, and lack of plasticity (especially characteristic of choleric and melancholic people), it creates defective communication and prevents a person from quickly adapting to changing conditions. For rigid people, situations of confrontation and discussion are difficult, for example. Usually they try to get away from such situations not due to incompetence or unpreparedness, but because they already have experience of unsuccessful interactions in a stressful situation.
Watching the debates of rivals in elections, we see how one of the disputants can get stuck for a long time on some problem, get hung up on old grievances, while the more plastic and flexible partner begins to take advantage of this circumstance, quickly changing topics, introducing new facts and catching his clumsy interlocutor in contradictions.
Rigidity in psychology is understood as inertia, viscosity, adherence to dogmas. The opposite of rigidity is: Flexibility. Between them there are many shades of plasticity.
Rigidity is a state and personality trait, a property of temperament and character, active resistance to change, close to stubbornness, which manifests itself in both thinking and behavior. This is a fixed form of behavior that often occurs in situations of stress.
According to K.K. Platonov, rigidity – difficulty, even complete inability, in changing the program of activity planned by the subject in conditions that objectively require its restructuring (Platonov, 1984).
Other authors emphasize varying degrees of awareness of rigid actions, which makes it difficult to adjust an individual’s own actions when there is an objective need to make changes in accordance with changed conditions. According to G.V. Zalevsky, rigidity is the difficulty or inability to adjust the program, elements of activity and behavior in accordance with the requirements of the situation with varying degrees of their awareness and acceptance (Zalevsky, 1971).
To study rigidity, the TOP (Tomsk Rigidity Questionnaire) was created. It identifies 7 types of rigidity: actual, premotor, dynamic, praxic, cognitive, emotional-affective, psychosocial. The questionnaire assesses such manifestations of rigidity as inadequate constraint of behavior, difficulty transitioning to new relationships, fixation on private topics of conversation, blind attachment to trivial solutions to a problem, difficulty changing skills, inertia, and conservatism.
Rigidity
difficulty, even complete inability, in changing the program of activity planned by the subject in conditions that objectively require its restructuring.
Rigid personalities are usually authoritarian and very conservative in their views, attachments, and habits. A separate group consists of socially rigid individuals who poorly anticipate the roles of others and poorly perform their roles. The positive side of rigidity is a person’s low susceptibility to distracting influences, but this property does little to compensate for the communication defects that any partner of a rigid person is forced to face.
1. Communication defects are interference created by a person with certain personal characteristics; they are expressed in the curtailment of contacts and the content of communication, unintentional distortion of the true motives of the interlocutor, a decrease in the success of communication and satisfaction with communication on the part of the partner.
2. Accentuations of character and the development of psychological defense in the subject inevitably make communication defective both in content and in methods of interaction, and in the final results of this interaction. The strong development of psychological defense interferes with normal human communication, erects psychological barriers between people, and prevents mutual understanding and cooperation.
3. Communication disorders are a mixture of defective and at the same time destructive interaction that is detrimental to relationships. The motivation for such interactions is often unconsciously hostile and destructive.
4. Anxiety and rigidity are personality traits that lead to persistent communication defects, which are expressed in the following:
· suspicion and various fears due to anxiety interfere with open, sincere communication;
· insufficient regulation of one’s states and actions leads to violation of obligations, fussiness, increased emotionality, irritability;
· excessive regulation and frugality, pedantry, often observed in highly anxious people, complicate communication;
· rigidity manifests itself in excessive conservatism, difficulty in transitioning to new relationships, intransigence in disputes and discussions, in situations of confrontation and rivalry.
Basic Concepts
Communication defects
Character accentuations
Anxiety
Rigidity
Self-test questions
1. What are communication defects?
2. What type of accentuation is associated with the greatest communication defects?
3. What are the manifestations of communication defects in anxious and rigid people?
4. What manifestations in interaction would you classify as communication defects? Give examples.
additional literature
Karvasarsky B. D. Neuroses. – M., 1980.
Korolenko T. P., Donskikh T. A. Seven paths to disaster. – Novosibirsk: Science, 1990.
Kunitsyna V. N. Psychological consequences of intensive professional communication. Thinking and communication in specific types of practical activities. – Yaroslavl, 1984.
Levitov N. D. Mental state of anxiety and anxiety // Questions of psychology. -1969. – No. 1; Questions of psychology. – 1971. – No. 5.
Sokolova E. T., Nikolaeva V. V. Personality features in borderline disorders and somatic diseases. – M.: Argus, 1995.
^
K.F. Sedov (Saratov) Theoretical model of psycholinguistic personology
The current stage of development of domestic psycholinguistics marks a transition from the study of the general properties of communication, consciousness, and speech behavior to attempts to determine the uniqueness of communicative manifestations that are inherent either in a social group or are characteristics of an individual. In other words, scientists are increasingly interested in how people's communications and speech in their thoughts differ from each other.
In different cities of our country, scientists from various directions and scientific schools have accumulated a significant amount of approaches and methods for modeling the individual personal characteristics of a person’s communicative competence (idiostyle, speech portrait, communicative personality) [see, for example: Axiological linguistics ...
2006; Erofeeva 1991, 1996; Karasik 2007; Linguistic
Personology. 2006; Naumov 2006 and others]. And now, finally, the moment is coming when the critical mass has exceeded the threshold when quantity must turn into quality: disparate research is being integrated into an independent direction of ChL-science. To designate this direction, two competing terms are used - psycholinguistics of individual differences And psycholinguistic personology.
Before proposing principles for possible modeling of idiostyle, it is necessary to define the main categories of the intended scientific field. What exactly is the subject of research?
As partial synonyms, scientists use the following designations: linguistic (speech, communicative) personality; linguistic (speech, communicative) consciousness; linguistic (speech, communicative) behavior; language (speech) activity; as well as communicative competence (individual, personality, person); idiostyle; speech (linguistic, communicative) portrait and many others. etc.
First, let's look at personality.
The term linguistic personality became very widespread in Russian linguistics in the 90s. G.I. introduced him into the horizons of science. Bogin, after which he picked up and canonized in his book Yu.N. Karaulov. The authority (scientific and administrative) of a scientist led to the fact that any communicative characteristic that acts as a distinctive ability of a text, profession, age, literary work, style, etc. began to be called a linguistic personality. and so on. The author of this article did not escape the influence of such a trend and actively used the term in his works for twenty years. However, over time, the meaning of the terminological phrase “linguistic personality” lost its clarity and became more and more vague. As a result
The term stopped “working”. To improve matters, linguists with a penchant for terminology creativity introduced similar designations as synonyms: speech personality, communicative personality [see, for example: Krasnykh 2003; Sternin 2001]. However, the increase in the number of synonymous terms does not clarify, but even further confuses the essence of the problem.
In psychology, where this term actually came from, there are a significant number of concepts that represent the rationale for this concept. The overwhelming majority of psychologists believe that personality is the result of the socialization of the individual, during which he is introduced to the cultural values developed by humanity over the millennia of its formation. The term personality is usually interpreted in connection with the related concepts of individual and individuality: a person is born into the world as an individual, becomes an individual, and defends his individuality. So, personality is a relatively stable set of psychological properties, which is formed as a result of the inclusion of an individual in the space of inter-individual connections. This is a holistic multi-level and multifaceted semiotic formation, which is a model that reflects and expresses the system of cultural and psychological characteristics of a person. Communication ability
One of the most important facets of personality; it can be measured and have an individually expressed character. Just like the personality as a whole, this property can become an object of modeling.
The tradition of using terminological combinations, where the word personality comes after a qualifying adjective, usually forces the inclusion of the designated concept in a system of binary oppositions: strong-willed, emotional, aggressive, cooperative, elitist personality / weak-willed, unemotional, non-aggressive , non-cooperative, non-elite personality. The law of structural-semantic analogy forces us to look for an element of binary opposition in terms of linguistic, speech, communicative personality. Therefore, with an abundance of synonymous designations, in my opinion, it would be better to sacrifice the indicated terms and refuse to use them. The nominations “speech portrait of a personality” are much more consistent with the Russian language; communicative (genre, text, status-role, orthological, etc.) competence of the individual; communicative behavior of the individual, etc. Perhaps I'm wrong.
In order to fit the psycholinguistics of individual differences into the general space of *RL science, it is necessary to correlate the subject of this scientific branch with the general subject of psycholinguistics. Such a subject, in our opinion, should be considered communicative competence, which is considered in the individual psychological aspect [see: Gorelov, Sedov 2005: 5-10]. The subject of psycholinguistic personology, in line with the stated approach, will be a model of the communicative competence of the individual. It includes aspects (facets) that show the communicative component of different levels of personality. A person’s communicative individuality consists of a combination of typological traits of communicative competence, which belong to different typologies that differentiate individuals on the basis of various grounds (more on that below).
What is considered the object and (which is no less important) the research material? The main object of psycholinguistics of individual differences is communicative (speech) behavior, discourse, revealed to the scientist in the form of a process and a product - specific speech works, be it coherent and integral texts or the results of associative or any other experiments. In modern science there is no unity in the interpretation of the meaning of the term “discourse”. However, now in most works of domestic and foreign scientists [see, for example: Arutyunova 1999; Karasik 2002; Krasnykh 2003; Makarov 2003 and many others. etc.] a tradition has developed within the framework of which, under the word discourse a holistic speech product is understood in the diversity of its cognitive and communicative functions. We do not set ourselves the task of a detailed summary and critical analysis of all points of view on the phenomenon under consideration that have accumulated in science to date. Let us highlight only some of the accents necessary to clarify the methodological foundation of the proposed model. From our point of view, the most convenient working definition of discourse may be a definition from the standpoint of a phenomenological approach. Discourse - ob jective - existing - verbal - sign structure , which accompanies the process of social interaction between people. Let us emphasize the interactive nature of discourse: it imprints interaction, dialogue. In its objectivity, it resembles a multifaceted crystal, the sides of which are capable of reflecting various features of this interaction: national-ethnic, social-typical (genre), concrete-situational, verbal-mental, formal-structural, and many others. etc. Each of the facets of the phenomenon under consideration can become the basis for highlighting a special aspect of the consideration of discourse, which, in turn, can form an independent section in the general theory of discourse.
Specific discourses represent the material of analysis, which must be dissected using research tools.
Communicative behavior is only the visible part of the iceberg, under which are hidden latent mechanisms that determine the implementation of communicative competence in socially significant interaction between people. These are phenomena of consciousness (linguistic, communicative, cognitive), which creates the prerequisites for the flow of speech thinking.
Thus, the system of categories of psycholinguo-personology takes on the following form:
the communicative competence of an individual, specified in its various aspects and levels, is the subject of research;
communicative behavior in the variety of forms of its discursive existence (from tests, speech fragments, to one-word reactions of association experiments) is the object of research;
the speech works themselves are research material;
latent mechanisms of consciousness and the processes of verbal thinking carried out on their basis - a motor hidden for external observation, in which drive belts from communicative competence to real discourses work - are the subject of independent research.
The level of innate prerequisites for the formation of communicative competence.
Level of formation of communicative character traits.
Level of formation of speech thinking.
Level of genre-role competence.
Level of cultural and speech competence.
This aspect of the analysis of communicative behavior should take into account the psychophysiological properties that are transmitted to a person genetically. They constitute an innate set of inclinations that create the prerequisites for success in certain types of communication, and constitute the base layer for the development of communicative competence. Such inclinations include temperament, the profile of functional asymmetry of the brain and constitutional features (physique).
As is known, temperament is a stable system of psychophysiological traits of a person’s personality, which is predetermined by the peculiarities of the course of his higher nervous activity. Since the times of Hippocrates of Kos, who in the 5th century BC was one of the first to describe the types of temperament and their main behavioral manifestations, and the Greek Galen, who proposed terms for them at the beginning of the century, we continue to divide people into these four types : sanguine, choleric, phlegmatic, melancholic. Later, our compatriot I.P. Pavlov gave their justification from a psychophysiological position.
No one doubts that temperament influences the nature of speech behavior, how a person behaves in a communicative conflict, etc. And when drawing up a speech portrait, the researcher must take into account this personal characteristic of a person. However, it is not always possible to establish a direct connection between the characteristics of communicative behavior and temperament [see, for example: Erofeeva 1991; Alekseev 1996]. Most often, temperament in speech manifests itself indirectly and most of all influences the formation of communicative character traits.
Another psychophysiological personality trait that affects speech behavior and acts as a component in the model of communicative competence is profile functional asymmetry of the brain.
In neuropsychology, the asymmetry profile is expressed by the ratio of dominance of one of the arms, legs, vision or hearing [for more details, see: Bragina, Dobrokhotova 1981; Sedov 2007 b]. The most important role is played by the identification of motor (here the hand plays the main role) factors. The determination of such profiles provides the basis for diagnostics and self-diagnosis in order to identify innate inclinations that create the prerequisites for a person’s success or failure in various types of activities and, above all, in speech activities. At the same time, it must be said right away that this problem, due to its extraordinary complexity, is very far from a final solution. Very often, the statement of motor and sensory dominance does not correspond to the types of left- or right-hemisphere thinking.
One thing can be said for sure: according to the type of thinking, people are divided into left-brain and right-brain people. And, as usually happens when compiling typologies, there is a mixed, transitional type - ambihemispheric people, in whom two types of thinking coexist. Very roughly distinguishing between the two types of thinking presented above, we can say that left-hemisphere people gravitate toward verbal-logical operations. Their head is “full of words” that form strong verbal networks of syntagmatic associations. It is these networks that facilitate speech production. The thinking of right-hemisphere people more strongly affects the emotional-imaginative side of the personality. The division into left- and right-brain brains is often called the division into “thinkers” and “artists.” Left-hemisphere people primarily resort to left-hemisphere strategies to process information, while right-hemisphere people prefer right-hemisphere strategies [see, for more details: Sedov
The peculiarity of the profile of functional asymmetry, or more precisely, the dominance of left- or right-hemisphere thinking in an individual, constitutes an important feature of the speech portrait. Like temperament, this characteristic is not directly manifested in speech; Most of all, it influences the formation of other levels of communicative competence: genre-role and, especially, the level of formation of speech thinking.
Finally, the third innate prerequisite for the formation of a person’s communicative uniqueness is, strange as it may seem, the uniqueness of his body build and constitution. The most consistent relationship between the constitution and psychological properties of the individual is demonstrated by the concept of the German psychiatrist Ernst Kretschmer. Conducting clinical observations of patients suffering from various forms of mental disorders, the scientist drew attention to the fact that there is a relationship between the type of build of a person and his attraction to one or another type of illness. This allowed him to assert that body type in a certain way correlates with the mental characteristics of ordinary healthy people. Based on many years of research, Kretschmer identified four constitutional types.
Leptosomatic (from the Greek leptos - fragile, soma - body) - (Don Quixote type) tall stature, fragile physique, cylindrical body shape, elongated face, flat chest, narrow shoulders, long lower limbs, thin bones. Face: elongated thin nose, undeveloped lower jaw. The extreme form of this type is characterized by asthenicity - from the Greek. asntenos - weak.
Picnic (from the Greek pyknos - dense) - (Sancho Panza type) - small or medium height, roundness of the body (narrow shoulders with a full body - barrel-shaped), obesity, protruding belly, round head on a short neck.
Athletic (from the Greek athlon - fight) - strong physique, tall or average height, well-developed muscles, broad shoulders with narrow hips. Face: oval, lower jaw well developed.
Dysplastic (from the Greek dys - bad, plastos - formed) is a kind of “non-grade product”, a type characterized by various kinds of deformations of the physique.
According to Kretschmer's observations, healthy people with a certain type of build have in their psyche properties characteristic of various diseases: a leptosomatic person tends to schizophrenia, a picnic person - to manic-depressive psychosis, an athletic person - to epilepsy. The most obvious here is the opposition between the leptosomatic and pyknic types.
The constitutional type of leptosomatics corresponds to the psychological type - sh i z o t i m i k. Its features: isolation, isolation from reality, perseverance, a tendency to daydreaming, abstract thinking. In communication, these people demonstrate a penchant for logical reasoning, a sense of purpose in acquiring new knowledge, and a penchant for sciences that are not directly related to reality (mathematics, philosophy). However, their intuition is poorly developed, they demonstrate self-centeredness, and an inability to switch on an emotional level to the point of view of their interlocutor.
The constitutional type of picnic corresponds to the psychological type - c i k l o t i m i k. Its characteristics are somewhat diametrically opposite: they are sociable realists, gravitating towards everyday comfort. Cyclothymics easily build interpersonal communication, adapting to the interlocutor on an emotional level, demonstrating a high level of empathy (empathy). Despite the fact that they have a good understanding of the motives of people’s behavior, they find it difficult to construct generalizations and logical conclusions that are not related to specific reality.
As an intermediate, Kretschmer cultivated the so-called viscose type, which corresponds to the alytic body type. The main psychological characteristics of this type are the perception of the surrounding world as an arena of struggle. Athletics are people who go through life like a steeplechase runner. When building relationships with other people, they are prone to communicative conflicts and verbal aggression. Possessing very great energy, people of this type often do not know how to use it wisely, demonstrating a lack of flexibility and tolerance in relations with partners in social interaction.
It is very difficult to identify clearly identifiable psychological characteristics in dysplastic patients.
As temperament and features of the profile structure of the brain, body type indirectly influences the process of formation of a person’s communicative individuality, creating a certain set of inclinations for success/failure in a particular area of speech activity.
In modern psychology of individual differences, other innate personality traits are also highlighted. For a more detailed acquaintance with other points of view, we refer the reader to specialized literature [see, for example: Ilyin 2004].
2. Level formation of communicative character traits.
In psychology, character is usually defined as a set of relatively stable socio-psychological personality traits that are manifested in its interaction with other people. It is believed that character is formed by the age of seven and changes very little throughout a person’s life. Despite the fact that the relationship between a person’s character and his discursive behavior is obvious from the standpoint of common sense, a consistent and systematic study of such a relationship has not yet been carried out in linguistics. This is due to the fact that character and language ability are not directly related to each other. Therefore, the search for manifestations of character (as well as temperament) at the level of language does not make sense. In communication, character is expressed in the strategic and tactical preferences of the speaker, in the path he chooses to achieve a particular communicative goal.
As parameters that serve as criteria for identifying communicative character traits, the following oppositions can be distinguished:
Dominance/non-dominance;
Mobility/rigidity;
E x s t r a v e r s i o / i n t r o v e r s i o n;
Conflict/non-conflict;
C entration / cooperat ion. Dominance, as well as non-dominance
Mobility/rigidity are communicative qualities of character associated with plasticity, the ability to restructure as the interaction unfolds. A mobile linguistic personality easily and quickly changes speech means depending on the situation, the nature of the interlocutor, and the topic of communication. A rigid communicator demonstrates an inability to instantly switch from one speech tactic to another; he enters the topic of conversation for a long time and thoroughly and cannot quickly change its course.
The identification of extraversion/introversion as features of a personality’s speech portrait goes back to the concept of the classic of psychoanalysis K.-G. Cabin boy. An ex-travert is a person who is burdened by loneliness; As a rule, he has a lot of friends, relations with whom are rather superficial. In his speech behavior, an extrovert demonstrates an outward focus: he strives for communication with any interlocutor and prefers the fact of communication to the fact of its absence. An introvert, on the contrary, is burdened by large companies; he has few friends, but his relationships with them have the character of a strong and deep affection. In communication, an introvert prefers a heart-to-heart conversation to external dialogue in the genre of everyday chatter; he needs not just communication, but communication that presupposes understanding.
A person’s character is most clearly manifested in interaction by how a person builds relationships with a communication partner. Therefore, it is appropriate to subdivide communicative character traits according to the ability to cooperate in everyday speech behavior. The classification is based on a single criterion: the dominant attitude towards the participants in communication. Here we can distinguish three types of linguistic personalities: conflict; centered; cooperative. Each of the designated types is represented by two subtypes.
The conflict type demonstrates the attitude against communication partner. This type of character is based on aggressiveness, which in communicative behavior manifests itself in various speech forms [for more details, see: Sedov 2007]. It is presented in two varieties: conflict-aggressive and conflict-manipulative.
Conflict-aggressive The subtype is characterized by the fact that one of the participants demonstrates to the communication partner a negatively charged emotional attitude (direct aggression), which is expressed in obvious hostility. An aggressor is a socially and psychologically flawed person.
Conflict-manipulative a type of character manifests itself in the form of indirect (hidden) aggression. Here we are also faced with psychological impairment, which is overcome through the communicative partner. The manipulator asserts himself, placing the interlocutor in a specific communication situation in a lower status position compared to himself. In order to achieve a sense of social worth, a communicator of this kind must cause moral discomfort to the interlocutor (“say something nasty”). An extreme form of verbal aggression is communicative sadism, when a communication partner becomes the object of verbal bullying.
The centered type of character finds expression in the attitude to be ignored communication partner. There are also two varieties here: active-centered and passive-centered.
^ Active-centered subtype (active egocentric) sometimes in its speech manifestations resembles conflict-manipulative discourse: it also contains interruptions of the interlocutor, arbitrary changes in the topic of conversation, etc. However, here it is necessary to state the difference: if a conflict manipulator does not respect a communication partner, wanting to impose his point of view on him, then an active egocentric person is simply not able to take the point of view of another participant in communication.
Passive-centered This type of communication is characterized by the withdrawal of one of the communication partners into himself. Such a passive egocentric usually looks like a harmless, absent-minded (sometimes downtrodden) “hedgehog in the fog.” He is hardly able to go beyond his own inner world. This feature of speech behavior, as a rule, becomes the result of the work of psychological defense mechanisms, which usually reflect some features of the individual’s upbringing. Typically, the speech behavior of such a linguistic personality contains a discrepancy between the tactics chosen by the speaker and the communication situation and the intentions of the interlocutor, which indicates an inability to switch to the listener’s point of view. This is also expressed in the mention of names unknown to the interlocutor as known; in fundamentally banal reactions to information concerning a communication partner; in inadequate reactions (inappropriate remarks); in shifting the conversation to topics that concern only the speaker, and a complete lack of interest in topics that interest the listener, etc.
The cooperative type of speech behavior is characterized by a dominant attitude in communication per partner communications. At the level of communicative behavior, they manifest themselves in two subtypes: cooperative-conformal and cooperative-actualizing.
Cooperative-conformal a type of discourse is characterized by the fact that one of the participants in communication demonstrates agreement with the point of view of the interlocutor, even if he does not fully share this point of view, which, as a rule, is a consequence of the fear of conflict and confrontation. This attitude is manifested in demonstrating interest in the other participant in communication in the form of clarifying questions, assenting, showing sympathy, consolation, compliment, etc. In real communication, this usually looks like an imitation (to varying degrees of convincing) of being attuned to the communication partner.
Cooperative-actualization the subtype of speech behavior reflects the highest level of a person’s communicative competence in terms of the ability for speech cooperation. In this case, the speaker is guided by a basic principle, which can be defined as the desire to put oneself in the point of view of the interlocutor, look at the situation depicted in the speech through his eyes. The fundamental difference between the behavior of an actualizer and a conformist is the double perspective in communication: orientation not only towards the communicative partner but also towards oneself. More precisely - the desire arouse an informal interest in the interlocutor, the ability to tune into his “wave” [for more details, see:
Sedov 2004, 2007].
The formation of character is also influenced by the characteristics of the emotional-volitional sphere of the individual. For example, according to the predominance of positive or negative emotions, people are divided into optimists and pessimists. The influence of the emotional sphere on the formation of communicative competence is the subject of special consideration [see, for example: Shakhovsky 1987; 1996].
Based on the presence/absence of strong-willed properties, people can be roughly divided into goal-oriented and unpurposeful, etc.
Let us recall once again that character is manifested in communicative behavior at the level of pragmatic strategies and tactics that determine the structure of the interactive interaction of communicants.
Features of a person’s communicative behavior at the character level are well determined by accentuation, i.e. slight deviation from the average norm (within the normal range of psychological health). In the psychology of individual differences, there are different typologies of character accentuation. They belong to practicing psychiatrists and are the result of empirical observations. Without the possibility of a detailed description of the types of character accentuations, we refer the reader to
Book by A.E. Lichko.
^ 3. Level formation of speech thinking.
The hidden, latent mechanism for the implementation of communicative behavior and its variety - speech activity - is speech thinking, which includes operations of generating a discourse and operations of decoding a speech message. In modern psycholinguistics, there are rich traditions of studying the formation and understanding of utterances [see, for example: Gorelov, Sedov 2005; Winter 1985; The human factor in language... 1991, etc.]). With minor differences, most models of speech generation represent a system of stages, the passage of which leads to the development of thought into discourse. Summarizing the views existing in modern science on the problem of the relationship between speech and thinking, I.A. Zimnyaya identifies three main stages in the process of transition of thought into utterance: motivational - stimulating, formative and implementing.
The first level of the process of forming a statement - motivational and motivating, according to the scientist, “represents an “alloy” of motive and communicative intention. Moreover, the motive is the motivating beginning of a given speech action, while the communicative intention expresses what communicative goal the speaker pursues, planning one or another form of influence on the listener” [Winter 1985: 90-91]. The second level of speech generation - formative - “is the level of the actual formation of thought through language.<...>This level is responsible for the logical consistency and syntactic correctness of a speech utterance” [Ibid: 93]. It is represented by two sublevels - meaning-forming and formulating. In the complete division of the generation of utterances, the following stages of transformation of thought into discourse can be distinguished:
Mot and in this act of speech activity (Why, for what purpose am I speaking?), and first the speaker must have formed an attitude towards communication in general (this does not exist, for example, in a dream).
A communicative intention, which is realized in the form of an attitude towards a certain typical situation of social interaction between people - towards a specific speech genre, be it the genre of greeting, compliment, quarrel, report, chatter, etc.
The semantic content (intention) of the future statement (Not only “why”, but also “what exactly will I say”, will I start with a question or with a statement?). Here a holistic (perhaps still unclear, diffuse) semantic “picture” of the future utterance is formed: the meaning, semantics already exist, but specific words and syntactic structures do not yet exist.
The formed internal program (plan) begins to transform: the mechanism of recoding begins to work, translating meaning from the language of images and diagrams into a specific national language - words with their meanings.
Development of the nuclear meaning (theme) into a speech whole constructed in accordance with the psycholinguistic norm of textuality.
In this case, a syntactical scheme of the future utterance is first formed. “Inner words”, i.e. the meanings of words already become “prototypes” of external words and gradually occupy “their” syntactic positions.
The next stage of speech generation is grammatical structuring and morphemic selection of specific vocabulary, after which:
The syllable-by-syllable motor program of external speech and articulation is implemented.
Age-related psycholinguistics, which studies the process of formation of an individual’s communicative competence in ontogeny, is most interested in highlighting the levels of formation of speech thinking. A series of works by the author of this article is devoted to the study of this problem [see, for example: Sedov 2004]. Their results clearly show that in normal speech development, each age stage of personality evolution corresponds to a certain level of a person’s ability to implement latent mechanisms of speech thinking. Activation of the process of formation of speech thinking is planned after the individual completes the stage of self-learning of language, which usually coincides with the beginning of his school childhood. It is during this period of a person’s speech biography that the text (discourse) becomes the dominant of his development, and speech thinking acquires the character of discursive thinking. After completing the stage of self-learning of language as a system, the linguistic personality, within the framework of discursive behavior, is capable of speech actions based on activity within a specific situation. By the end of primary school age, the child acquires the ability to perform the most important latent operations of folding and unfolding information, which will form the basis of his inner speech. The ability to internally plan speech activity allows a teenager, when constructing discourse, to break away from a specific situation and construct holistic, coherent speech works that carry complex, hierarchically organized textual meanings. However, the internalization of external speech activity into intraspeech activity in younger adolescents is not yet very deep: complex semantic constructions at the deep meaning-forming level of generating and understanding utterances are not yet available to them. The discursive behavior of middle school students, despite the automated processes of creating texts, is not always meaningful; speech and thinking in the process of constructing texts have not yet completely merged. Such a connection, with the normal development of communicative competence, is observed only towards the end of school childhood. It is at this age that a schoolchild acquires the ability to construct complex verbal and logical operations in inner speech. This is due to an even greater internalization of external speech processes, which affects the most profound meaning-forming stages of speech activity - the stages of plan formation, based on subtle operations of anticipation, compression and recoding of information from a verbal code to a code of individual personal meanings, and many others. etc.
The path of development of a person’s discursive thinking can be represented as a process that accompanies the socio-intellectual formation of personality, in which, during the internalization of external non-speech forms into intra-speech forms, there is an increasing convergence of textual methods of modeling reality and deep cognitive-mental processes.
Methods for determining the levels of development of speech thinking and the criteria for such identification, applied to the study of the communicative competence of children, can be successfully applied to the creation of speech portraits, models of communicative competence of adult native speakers.