The article presents the classification and description of speech and communication disciplines in their historical evolution and current state. The twentieth century can be called the era of communication, but it is obvious that communicative interaction ideas were described earlier in disciplines associated with practical speech. The normative sciences of speech should include grammar, rhetoric, logic, poetics, which originated in the "ancient cradle", and in the Russian cultural and historical tradition acquired an original image that cannot but be interesting to a foreign reader. Moreover, the Russian speech sciences have learned a lot from the European experience. At the same time, such original scientific directions have developed in Russia, the specificity of which comes from the very nature of the Russian language: literature, speech culture, functional stylistics. Since the 70s of XX century in Russia, not only restored the classic disciplines but prevalent are science communication by different names: the theory and practice of communication, Communicology, communication study, intercultural communication, etc. In parallel, analogues of Western sciences with an original national interpretation arose: pragmatics, imageology, public relations. Special mention should be made of the communicative teaching methods established for the practice of teaching foreign languages (and Russian as a foreign language), together with the original theory of describing the Russian language in order to teach it to foreigners. Many theories of Russian and Western scholars, in particular, general philology in Russia and Media Ecology in the West, which developed in parallel with similar communicative ideas, deserve attention
The second half of the twentieth century and the beginning of the new millennium can be characterised as an active offensive of the ideas of communication, communication, effective speech interaction. Moreover, it cannot be said that these ideas were absent in the previous philological or linguistic science. However, it was necessary to prove that the conglomerate of linguistics, which studies the system and levels of language, and literary studies, which studies the theory and practice of artistic and literary creativity, does not exhaust the entire breadth of philological knowledge. Philology should concern all kinds and types of literature (and not just fiction as the "highest form of verbal creativity"), and philology itself is not only a "service of understanding" or interpretation of the text, but the science of the structure of the verbal community of people, the laws and rules of speech communications, which, in turn, are based on the principles of cultural tradition and effective creative work.
In this article, the authors would like to present the classification and description of communicative disciplines (sciences and arts) as they developed in the domestic Russian tradition. This problem seems to be important not only for the Russian scholar-reader, but also for our foreign colleagues, as with all new-globalistic trends, unifying image of the world of science, the national-cultural tradition persists and will persist. Therefore, it is essential for Russian specialists (scholars and teachers) to navigate the nationally specific traditions of other cultures and civilisations and our foreign colleagues to represent the national traditions of Russian science. Moreover, science directly enters into pedagogical practice (for example, the construction of the educational process in universities and schools, which can be traced even on the basis of the list of disciplines studied), and into public speech practice, which reflects the specifics of national linguistic consciousness.
Modern communication is a complex cognitive-verbal process related to all areas of life, creativity, and professional activity. The number of sciences that have entered the orbit of the study of communicative activity seems huge, but still countable and limited by modern specific research. It is necessary to investigate:
1) classical sciences (disciplines) that continue their active life and consider modern practice, considering the centuries-old scientific and pedagogical experience. In essence, modern sciences are based on this experience and scientific and cultural tradition. These classical sciences dealing with speech include grammar, rhetoric, logic, poetics, stylistics, the Russian tradition, literature, and culture of speech - the latter disciplines can be attributed to non-equivalent terms since they are absent in Western science.
2) modern processes in science and communicative practice - for this purpose, we describe and include in the description of the discipline created relatively recently and received recognition in scientific circles. These include at least the following: communication theory, communicology, communication studies, intercultural communication, pragmatics, imageology, discourse, public relations and some others. For pedagogical practice in teaching speech, it is necessary to talk about teaching a language's communicative methods. Also, we consider areas such as general philology, the ecology of language, comparing them, for example, with Media Ecology in the American version, since all these sciences are addressed to society's communicative structure.
3) Our foreign colleagues (and this should be considered here in Russia) should be interested to know that such classical areas of research as rhetoric, stylistics 1) have their original interpretation in Russia by the historically formed views on these scientific subjects; 2) in Russia they were carefully engaged (even in Soviet times, and even more up today) research in the field of American, French, German, Japanese rhetoric , various theories of communicative linguistics and "linguistic existence"; 3) it is essential for our collection that the influential school has been developed in Russia over the past half-century (or a lot of scientific and pedagogical schools with outstanding scholars) on the communicative teaching Russian as a foreign language (RFL).
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of the article is to study the evolution of the content of speech and communicative disciplines in the Russian philological tradition. The authors study the content and change in the subject of research of these disciplines in different eras of development of Russian philological science.
The characterisation of each science (discipline) is carried out using a historical and descriptive definition taken from the most authoritative sources. Of course, our description also used the method of critical assessment of the material taken. As far as nationally specific material is analysed, a comparative method becomes natural, making it possible to compare domestic material with other national traditions - where such a comparison may be appropriate. A holistic analysis of each science also presupposes a method of component analysis of its constituent parts.
Classic and modern speech science
Classifications of philological sciences have been undertaken more than once in the Russian scientific tradition. Let us point out one of the most authoritative, belonging to Rozhdestvensky and Blinov (2005), who write: "In order, to explore, summarise and create conditions for the development and functioning of all the body language of communication, there are philological sciences" (p. 44.). Philological sciences, according to the author, are divided into applied, 2 regulatory and fundamental. This division shows the historical evolution of the emergence and development of scientific knowledge: the "old time" are applied science in which "knowledge due to the immediate practice of human activity '(as calligraphy, orthoepy, record keeping, archiving, and bibliology, etc.); normative sciences address all types of texts, establishing general rules for oral and written speech (these include grammar, rhetoric, poetics, lexicology and lexicography, later in the Russian tradition - the culture of speech); the most recent are fundamental sciences, which do not directly go back to practice, but prepare the basis for creating normative rules (these include comparative historical and comparative linguistics, typology of languages, theory and history of literature, history of literary language, history of the language of fiction, dialectology) (Rozhdestvensky and Blinov, 2005, pp. 44-45) .
In our opinion, the description of communication disciplines should be carried out according to the principle of historical-evolutionary development, which consists in the fact that the culture of scientific creativity is based on classical and new scientific disciplines. Classical disciplines can experience periods of criticism, renewal and transformation; new emerging disciplines are born in connection with a new texture of speech or a new language situation in society. Therefore, our description is conditionally divided into two parts: 1) Russian classics, conditionally divided into two periods (pre-Soviet and Soviet) and 2) a new time, when from the 70s-80s of the twentieth century, new communicative disciplines entered science, as well as restored some of the classics, previously criticised.
Russian speech and communication disciplines borrow from the ancient tradition - and here, Russian and Western schools share a standard "ancient cradle of scientific civilisation". Nevertheless, from the beginning of the emergence of Russian science, one can speak of its national interpretation of many ideas.
In the European tradition, it is common to consider grammar, rhetoric, logic, and poetics as classical "sciences of speech". Grammar was viewed as normative teaching on the correctness of speech, building a system or language levels. Rhetoric is the science/art of persuasive and embellished speech (ars bene et ornate dicendi). Logic, called "dialectics" in the Russian tradition, was contrasted with rhetoric as the doctrine of proving "truth" regardless of the participants' interests in the speech. Poetics is the science/art of artistic speech, the content of which is fiction: if rhetoric deals with real speech, then poetic genres are associated with the fictional content of speech (epic, lyric, drama). The first three sciences (grammar, rhetoric, logic) formed in the Russian tradition a trivium (trivium) of the humanities in the first classification of sciences, available in the "Legend of the Seven Free Wise Men ", written, according to our assumption, immediately after the Time of Troubles (Annushkin, 2015, p. 491; Spafari, 1978).
The fact that all of these sciences relate specifically to speech is recorded in the first characteristics of these sciences, available in Mikhail Usachev's Rhetoric of 1699: grammar "teaches only good verb, and not red" (grammar teaches only to speak correctly, not decorated ), and rhetoric "is the science of good, red, and about all things decently verb" (rhetoric is a science correctly, decorated and it is appropriate to talk about any subject ) (Annushkin, 2002, p. 81).
The first scientific printed manual on the theory of speech belongs to the founder of Russian philological science Lomonosov. He called his work "A Brief Guide to Eloquence " (Lomonosov, 1952). The term "eloquence" is a Lomonosov innovation, for before Lomonosov in greater circulation or rivalry with him were synonyms " red", " red-speaking ", " red-eyed " and so on.
"The subject of rhetoric is speech" - with these words begins the first textbook "General Rhetoric" of the 4-volume cycle "Theory of Literature", compiled in the middle of the 19th century by Davydov according to the most authoritative guidelines of the time. The merit of rhetoric during this period was the systematisation of all kinds and types of " literary works", which included not only genres of fiction, but all types of prose: historical, philosophical, scientific, educational, business, oratory.
In the middle of the 19th century, rhetoric was criticised and removed from the teaching - it was replaced by the theory and history of “slovesnost” (“an art to make a speech” a hard-to- translate term of Russian science, meaning 1) the ability of speech, 2) the totality of all verbal and speech works), in university science started to dominate the science of language - "linguistics" (European), in Russian, "rechevedeniye"( language + knowledge ).
The restoration of Russian rhetoric in modern Russia began in the 70s and 80s of the twentieth century and today's rhetoric can be characterised both by the classical science/art of convincing and decorated prose speech and as a fundamental science about the rules and laws of building verbal communication in the new information society. In practice, rhetoric is designed to teach creative thought and its implementation in an appropriate speech. In Russia there are more than two dozen scientific schools united in the Russian Association of Researchers, Teachers and Teachers of Rhetoric. The Association research various aspects of verbal communication in professional and private communication (Annushkin & Shcherbakov, 2020, pp. 9-43).
The relevance of rhetorical ideas for teaching good speech and effective communication of both compatriots and foreigners has been proven by time. It is essential to note the importance of all the components that make up the rhetorical canon: 1) the choice of the topic and the finding of the required speech content (the system of commonplaces, or toposes as the basis of argumentation ); 2) composition (construction of different parts of speech); 3) choice of words and the syntactic organisation of speech, which constitute the originality of the speech of the writer/speaker; 4) pronunciation as a set of all sound components affecting the listener.
When Russian scholars talk about speech, they mostly mean "the use of language." This could be called "linguistic practice" and here the terms speech - language - word used as "an instrument, a communication tool" can be considered synonyms. Significantly, the founder of modern methods of teaching Russian as a foreign academician Kostomarov (1930-2020) devoted his last book to stylistics as the science of "the use/uses of language" (Kostomarov 2019, p. 132). It is the "use of language" that is, according to Kostomarov, "the subject of stylistics" - by the way, in the last works of Kostomarov always questioned the Saussurean opposition of language - speech - speech activity (langue, parole, langage), which has acquired "amazing popularity in Russian linguistics of the twentieth century." (Kostomarov 2005, p. 53). A scholar was characterised by an all-encompassing view of the "life of language", therefore, in the Humboldt opposition, he more appreciated the "energy" of "people's creativity" (also the expression of Kostomarov) than "ergon " (passive device of the language).
The subject of Russian stylistics, according to one of the most authoritative textbooks, is
the expressive capabilities and means of different levels of the language system, their stylistic meanings and colours (otherwise called connotations), as well as the patterns of language use in different spheres and situations of communication, and as a result of this, a kind of the organisation of speech, specific to each sphere. "Style is a speech, textual phenomenon" (Kozhina et al., 2008, p. 28). and it is in the Russian scientific tradition that functional styles have emerged: scientific, official-business, journalistic, artistic, church-religious. The stylistic resources of the language are investigated, as a rule, through the study of verbal imagery, synonymous means of stylistics, stylistically coloured vocabulary, resources of phraseology, word formation and, finally, stylistic means of syntax.
Historically, in the Russian tradition, rhetoric as a true prose doctrine was opposed by poetics as a fiction doctrine (epic, lyrics, drama). After the criticism of rhetoric in the middle of the 19th century and its withdrawal from the teaching staff, Russian philologists' main attention went to the side of fiction - and this is connected with the greatness of Russian fiction. The division of Russian philology into linguistics and literary criticism took place in the second half of the 19th century and is associated with the emergence of fundamental theoretical knowledge of language and comparative historical and typological linguistics. The study of real speech has disappeared from scholars' attention - this is partly related to the modern Russian mentality, brought up more on poetry and "novels". This explains the interest that scholars and philologists showed to practical Russian speech after the October Revolution of 1917 (for instance, collections "Russian speech" and numerous textbooks on political public speech in the 1920s).
In the Russian scientific tradition of the 20th century, instead of the absent rhetoric, several disciplines have developed at once: the culture of speech, the linguistics of the text, later psycholinguistics, pragmatics, the psychology of communication, and some other disciplines designed to deal with the laws and rules of speech. In the encyclopedia "Russian language" the culture of speech is explained as mastery of the norms of the literary language in its oral and written form, in which the choice and organization of linguistic means are carried out, allowing in a certain communication situation and subject to the ethics of communication to ensure the greatest effect in achieving the goals of communication " (Shiryaev, 1997, p. 204).
It is characteristic that here the culture of speech is defined as "a field of linguistics dealing with the problems of speech normalisation, developing recommendations for the skillful use of the language ". In other words, Linguistics, as a science dealing with the language as a means of communication, certainly had to declare a certain area, which is directly responsible for our successful speech practice. Moreover, it is precisely the lack of sufficient material in theoretical linguistics to describe a communicative practice that prompted Soviet linguists-Russianists to turn to the idea of communication. One of the authors of this article recalls the statement of the then young director of the Pushkin State Russian Language Institute Kostomarov at the Academic Council in the late 1970s, who defended the idea of communicative content in textbooks of Russian as a foreign language: "After all, there was not only grammar but also rhetoric."
Modern communication disciplines
The idea of communication as a practical communication and real use of the language, which must be introduced both in the scientific description and in the practice of teaching, began to take possession of the minds at least from the 70s of the twentieth century. In linguistic science, one can give an example of the book by Golovin, who proposed the idea of communicative qualities of speech, that restored the updated classification of a "merit requirements, conditions, properties" (synonyms are plentiful!), which describe the guides for good speech and successful communication (Golovin, 1980). We believe that such a subject as the culture of speech could have arisen only in Russia because due to the variability of stress, the variety of synonyms and the variety of verbal forms and syntactic constructions, it was necessary to normalise speech practice and offer recommendations and rules for the use of the language.
For researchers, international communication undoubted interest should cause the normative sciences in different linguistic traditions: wherein the Russian language has been the norm of speech, in the Anglo-Saxon tradition is present English Standard. Contemporary Russian linguists show great interest in Western colleagues' experience - see, in particular, the research of Germanova (2019).
The listed speech disciplines are directly related to modern public speech practice: for example, Russian rhetoricians held an International Conference on Information and Digital Technologies in 2020 (Rhetorical traditions and communication processes in the era of digitalization, 2020); XXIVth International conference dedicated to teaching rhetoric and communicative activity of the teacher in modern language situation when you have to work on online or in different forms of Internet communication (Teaching rhetoric in the digital age, in 2021). The basic idea that inspires communication specialists is today it is difficult to distinguish between the idea of "speech" from the idea of "communication": a style of speech forms the lifestyle because it is an instrument of social control.
The latter idea is close to Russia's new modern communication disciplines in the second half of the 20th century. It can only partially be asserted that Russian scholars' concepts were borrowed from Western European linguistics, but these concepts have acquired their appearance and character as often happens on Russian soil. First of all, it should talk about the theory and practice of communication. This was the name of most of the university courses taught, which proclaimed the idea of speech interaction, communication in the 1970-1980s. Today we can talk about the terminological diversity ("polyphony") of the names of sciences that are related to communication and are called: communication science, communicology, communication science, intercultural communication, although the very idea of communication is at the basis of all these sciences, and the science was simply called " communication".
In our opinion, the very idea of communication, like the term itself, could arise only as a result of the emergence of a new texture of speech, called mass communication. The emergence and development of mass communication date back to the first half of the 20th century, and research on communication as an independent area of social sciences dates back to the 1920s - and they are undoubtedly associated with the technical development of communication media (Borisnyov, 2003, p. 7-8).
In the latter, the media's most significant role has always been played - the media (newspapers, radio, television, cinema), therefore, most researchers, when analysing communication and its theories, prefer to talk about "the development of information means and systems." However, communication is certainly applied to all types of texts (verbal works), so you need to explore all kinds of oral and writing the second communication.
Russian science (until the 1990s, Soviet science) developed in partial orientation and contacts with Western science, however, being "sociable and receptive" (Pushkin), it formed its approaches to the development of communication theory and some of its branches ... In our opinion, these should include:
1) the Theory of Communication (see works: Pocheptsov, 2001; Yakovlev, 2006; Nazarchuk, 2009 - the latter explores it in modern philosophy);
2) Communicology (under this term Sharkov explores communication, who wrote not only textbooks of communicology, but also a reference dictionary);
3) Communicativistics (this term has become popular, especially among Russian researchers, linguists, one of the most influential is the magazine "Modern communication study ", Ch. Editor Goikhman ). It is characteristic that the problems of the science of communication include general problems of the theory of communication; speech and intercultural communication; communication and education; image, advertising and business communication; communication on the Internet. Obviously, in the perspective of communication included problems many modern disciplines that have arisen in the new information and computer civilisation imageology (in parallel with the rhetorical theory of the creation of the speaker of the image), public relations, business communication (in parallel with the theory and practice of business communication) and etc.
4) Intercultural Communication - exists as a theory and practice of building effective communication between representatives of different national cultures: "the mission of intercultural communication is to harmonise the concepts of both linguistic theory and cultural theory" (Goikhman, 2020, p. 5). Cultural affiliation obliges each culture's representative when he enters into communication with another culture's carriers. Therefore, today we can talk about intercultural communication's crucial social function of establishing interpersonal ties. Simultaneously, there is also a pedagogical "applied" component in each of the listed disciplines, which consists of forming intercultural communication rules through teaching intercultural communication. So, Persikova outlines three rules of intercultural communication:
"1. Information conveyed on a non-verbal level presents the most significant difficulties for interpretation by members of a different culture.
2. To achieve communication understanding, it is necessary to train active listening participants in intercultural interaction.
3. It is necessary to foresee and prevent possible errors in communication with representatives of different cultures. Otherwise, the planned intercultural contact may break down due to the negative impression produced "(Persikova, 2007, p. 35-65).
Many more relatively recently formed sciences with practical application (the term "practical science" is not accidental) can be classified as communicative disciplines. The emergence of these disciplines is justified by changing communication conditions, the emergence of new conditions, and communication situations when technical means (media) dictate new theories. The theories themselves base new terminology on traditional ideas. By the way, this is how Lomonosov created new words in the context of the emergence of new Russian science in the 18th century. Let us take the following disciplines as an example:
1) pragmatics is defined as "an area of research in semiotics and linguistics, in which the functioning of linguistic signs in speech is studied" (Arutyunova, 1990, p. 389). The founder of pragmatics, Charles Morris, singled out in pragmatics "the relationship between linguistic expressions, their meaning and use in speech" (Morris, 1983, p. 39). When the founders of pragmatics write about language and its functioning laws, it is very similar to those they write about Russian scholars analyse suitable functional styles and function "language in speech" (Kozhina et al., 2008, p. 66-101). In any case, the thesis of " the use of language in the speech" and studies is, speech as a communication process, of course, with his new terminology is something new that brought in the idea of communication pragmatics of science and art analysis process of communication. So, pragmatics developed the theory of speech act, classification of speech acts, strategy and tactics of speech behaviour, trying to study all spheres of language, intentions and speech means of speakers, genres, and communication situations. The "new" science trying a new way to present the idea of the traditional classical rhetoric, for example, the pragmatic task communicant considered to draw attention to the main ideas of the text or the author of a creative manner; the same ideas of persuasion, embellishment, appropriateness of speech are discussed, only changed into new formulations and shifting semantic accents. So, instead of persuasion, it will be said about the "effectiveness" of speech, or instead of " adornment " - about expressiveness, instead of "appropriateness" - about "compliance with the super-task of the statement." The novelty in the shift in emphasis and creates new scientific direction.
2) imageology is undoubtedly predominantly a "communicative-speech" discipline since it is through communicative-speech means that "an opinion is formed in any group of people about a particular object (about a person, object, phenomenon) based on the image of this object formed in them". Although the idea of a particular object (person) is based on a set of semiotic means, for example, in imageology they speak of a " habitus image" (habitus - appearance, the external appearance of a person), but the primary attention is paid to the "verbal image" (Panasyuk, 2007, p. 21-27).
3) Public relations - also a new "speech-communicative" discipline, which arose from the need to form an opinion about a person, party, company, etc. Public Relations are also defined as public or public communication, although Russian companies, government structures, and public organizations need this science to apply to various communication types. It seems that the ideas of public relations came to Russia only in the 1990s of the perestroika years - see, for example, the textbook by Lukieva, where the following definitions are given, extracted from American-English sources: PR – promoting the establishment of mutual understanding and goodwill between an individual, an organisation and other people, groups of people or society as a whole through the dissemination of explanatory material, the development of exchange (information) and assessment of public reaction (Lukieva, 2006, p. 6).
However, it should be noted that "public relations" have existed at all times, as Rozhdestvensky, citing examples of ancient societies of different times and totalitarian regimes. The dynamics of social, political and economic life are impossible without the need to convince the population or population groups of the advisability of stabilising or renewing or changing social management objects. This cannot be done without various types of dialogues, communicative activities of all types.
However, we would like to give two more topical examples of developing the idea of communication in modern science and speech practice.
The first is associated with the use of the term as "communication" in the methodology of teaching foreign languages. In the 70s of the twentieth century in the Russian (then still Soviet) science, the communicative method of teaching RFL - Russian as a foreign language was proclaimed. It was based on the idea of communication, which was innovative for that time, like communication, which should be taught to foreigners. Of course, it is believed that the communicative method to teach foreign languages. It is believed that the method was formed in the UK in1950s. However, it is clear that a national school of communicative method of teaching foreign languages was established in Russia. One of its critical areas of which was teaching Russian as a foreign language.
Perhaps this peculiarity is associated with the specificity of Russian scientific terminology. The communicative technique is aimed primarily at the possibility of communication, interconnection, and practical use of the language. This is where translation difficulties lie in wait. The Russian word "obscheniye (a talk)" is usually translated into English as "communication", but it is loaded with many meanings for the Russian. Communication is considered a state or process of a successful "general" interaction (collective or individual) through speech. Therefore, the authoritative Russian Methodists connect communication with the idea of "dialogue", "communicativeness lies in the fact that our training should be organized in such a way that, in terms of its main qualities, features, it was similar to the process of communication" (Passov, 1991, p. 36).
The main postulates of the communicative methodology are formulated as follows: 1) considering the individual characteristics of students; 2) speech orientation of the learning process; 3) learning functionality, i.e. all words are acquired in activity; 4) situational communication, i.e. connection with the context of the activity; 5) the novelty of the learning process.
Let us turn to in the accumulation of teaching experience trials. The contribution of Russian scholars in the creation of a methodology of teaching Russian to foreigners is: 1) in a unique theory description of the Russian language from the standpoint of the methodology of its teaching, 2) in the formation of the real experience of communicative teaching, which summarises both in textbooks and in practical demonstrations of this experience. This experience is evidenced by the works of Khavronina, whom we dedicate our paper to (Khavronina, 2019; Khavronina & Shirochenskaya, 2019).
We see the second example of scientific intercultural and communication interaction in the birth of similar ideas in Russian and Western science. So, formulated Russian school of the Moscow University of the theory of general philology and cultural studies as a science of historical and cultural development of humanity in the form of technology evolution text creation (see: Rozhdestvenskiy, 1979) clearly echoes the Media Ecology Marshall (McLuhan, 1962; McLuhan, 2013), founder of communication theory. Several provisions, in particular, four kinds of literature (verbal works) - oral, written, printed, mass communication - Rozhdestvensky coincides with the preliterate culture, written culture, the " Gutenberg galaxy " (the period of printed communication) and the current stage of electronic means of communication, deduced by McLuhan. As McLuhan calls culture a "communication system" and Rozhdestvensky understood culture as a "form of communication". However, the comparison of the scientific terminology concerning the "ecology of language" and which was developed in Russia is also quite peculiar, since "ecology" began to be understood as its original meaning - the improvement of the "house" (the ancient Greek oikos ), i.e. society as a whole with the help of the device of verbal communications - see, for example, the Russian journal "Ecology of Language and Communicative Practice" (editor-in-chief Skovorodnikov).
The historical and cultural development of humanity testifies that the basic idea of European civilisation is the idea of the word, expressing man's very nature, for man is a " verbal creation ". Word-Logos is realised in a concrete historical speech of human activity, which, after preliterate culture period creates a written speech and, as a consequence, the science of speech, forming a school, religious and cultural institutions and the very state of (and "the state is the talk", at Plato). The development of the texture of speech (in Russian terminology - speech material processed by certain instruments of speech, in Anglo-American terminology - media communication) leads to the creation of a "printed galaxy" (McLuhan), or "printed literature" (Rozhdestvensky) ... It was then when academic science, fiction, journalistic work appeared. However, the real restructuring of the life of humanity began with the creation of new means of communication at the end of the 19th - beginning of the 20th centuries in the form of a telephone, telegraph, cinema, radio, mass press, and along with them - new sciences, among which the science of communications in various names has barely become perhaps the most important. We are currently going through the most critical stage in humanity's life when the development of mass technologies (Internet, digitalisation) is fundamentally the communicative life of society and a particular person. Simultaneously, the system of sciences in each national-cultural community is changing and improving - this is why an objective view of the nature and evolution of scientific and theoretical views, an honest exchange of ideas of various scientific schools for the general benefit of its organisation is so important.
Annushkin, V. I. (2015). Istoriya russkoj ritoriki v svete russkoj istorii [History of Russian rhetoric in the light of Russian history]. Ancient Russia: Space of the book word. Historical and philological research (pp. 489–497). Languages of Slavic culture. [in Rus.].
Annushkin, V. I. (2002). Istoriya russkoj ritoriki. Hrestomatiya [History of Russian rhetoric] Reader. 2nd ed., Flinta. [in Rus.].
Annushkin, V. I., & Shcherbakov, A. V. (2020). Metodologiya sovremennogo ritoricheskogo obrazovaniya: rossijskie nauchnye shkoly novogo vremeni [Methodology of modern rhetorical education: Russian scientific schools of modern times]. Scientific dialogue, 6, 9-43. [in Rus.] DOI: 10.24224/2227-1295-2020-6-9-43 [in Rus.].
Arutyunova N. D. (1990) Pragmatika [Pragmatics]. Linguistic encyclopedic dictionary. Sovetskaya enciklopediya, 1990. P. 389. [in Rus.].
Borisnyov S. V. (2003) Sociologiya kommunikacii. Ucheb. posobie dlya vuzov [Sociology of communication. Study guide for universities]. UNITY-DANA. 269 p. [in Rus.].
Germanova, H. H. (2019). Anglijskij yazyk skvoz' prizmu sociolingvistiki: teoreticheskie aspekty yazykovogo var'irovaniya [English through the prism of sociolinguistics: theoretical aspects of linguistic variation]. MGLU. [in Rus.].
Goikhman, O. Ya. (2020). Principy mezhkul'turnogo povedeniya v obshchestve [Principles of intercultural behavior in society]. Modern communication science, 3(46), p. 5-8. [in Rus.].
Golovin, B. N. (1980). Osnovy kultury rechi [Fundamentals of speech culture]. "High School". 335 p/
Khavronina, S. A. (2019). Govorite po-russki. Uchebnoe posobie dlya inostrancev [Speak Russian. Study guide for foreigners]. Russian language. Courses. 208 p. [in Rus.].
Khavronina, S. A., & Shirochenskaya, A. I. (2019). Russkij yazyk v uprazhneniyah. Russian in exercises [Russian language in exercises. Russian in exercises]. Russian language. Courses. 384 p. [in Rus.].
Kozhina, M. N., Duskaeva, L. R., & Salimovskij, V. A. (2008). Stilistika russkogo yazyka: uchebnik [Stylistics of the Russian language: textbook]. Flinta: Nauka. 464 p. [in Rus.].
Kostomarov, V. G. (2005). Nash yazyk v dejstvii: ocherki sovremennoj russkoj stilistiki [Our language in action: Essays of modern Russian stylistics]. Gardariki. 287 p. [in Rus.].
Kostomarov, V. G. (2019). Stilistika, lyubov' moej zhizni…[Stylistics, the love of my life...] St. Petersburg: Zlatoust; Pushkin State Russian Language Institute. 184 p. [in Rus.].
Lomonosov, M. V. (1952). Kratkoye rukovodstvo k krasnorechiyu [A Quick Guide to Eloquence]. In: Polnoye sobraniye sochineniy. 7: Trudy po filologii. 1739—1758. Leningrad: Izd-vo Akad. nauk SSSR, pp. 89—378. [In Rus.].
Lukieva, E. B. (2006). Teoriya i praktika svyazej s obshchestvennost'yu. CHast' I. Osnovy PR [Theory and practice of public relations. Part I. Basics of PR]. Tomsk: TPU Publishing House. [in Rus.].
McLuhan, M. (2013). Galaktika Gutenberga. Stanovlenie cheloveka pechatayushchego. [The Gutenberg Galaxy. Becoming a typist]. 2nd ed. Academic Project, Gaudeamus. [in Rus.].
McLuhan M. (1962). The Gutenberg Galaxy: The Making of Typographic Man. — Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1962.
Morris, Ch. (1983). Foundations of the theory of signs. In Semantics. Moscow: Raduga. p. 37-89.
Nazarchuk, A. V. (2009). Teoriya kommunikacii v sovremennoj filosofii [Theory of communication in modern philosophy]. Progress-Tradition. 320 p. [in Rus.].
Panasyuk, A. Yu. (2007). Imidzh. Enciklopedicheskij slovar' [Image. Encyclopedic Dictionary]. RIPOL classic. 767 p. [in Rus.].
Passov, E. I. (1991). Kommunikativnyj metod obucheniya inoyazychnomu govoreniyu. [A communicative method of teaching foreign language speaking]. Prosveshchenie, 223 p. [in Rus.].
Persikova, T. N. (2007). Mezhkul'turnaya kommunikaciya i korporativnaya kul'tura: Uchebnoe posobie [Intercultural communication and corporate culture: Textbook]. Logos. [in Rus.].
Pocheptsov, G. G. (2001). Teoriya kommunikacii [Theory of communication]. "Refl-book", Kiev: "Vakler". 656 p.
Ritoricheskie tradicii i kommunikativnye processy v epohu cifrovizacii [Rhetorical traditions and communication processes in the era of digitalization. (2020). Proceedings of the XXIIIth International Scientific Conference (6-8 February 2020). FGBOU VO MGLU, 2020. [in Rus.].
Rozhdestvensky, Yu. V., & Blinov, A. V. (2005). Vvedenie v yazykoznanie [Introduction to linguistics]. Publishing Center "Academy". 336 p. [in Rus.].
Rozhdestvenskiy, Yu. V. (1979) Vvedenie v obshchuyu filologiyu. [Introduction to General Philology]. "High School", 1979. [in Rus.].
Shiryaev E. N. (1997) Kultura rechi [Culture of speech] // Russkij yazyk. Enciklopediya [Russian language. Encyclopedia]. 2nd edition, corrected and revised. Moscow, Publishing House "Great Soviet Encyclopedia", Publishing House "Drofa". p. 204-206. [in Rus.].
Spafari, Nikolay (1978). Esteticheskie traktaty [Aesthetic treatises]. Preparation of texts and introductory article by O.A. Belobrova. Leningrad.160 p. [in Rus.].
Yakovlev, I. P. (2006). Klyuchi k obshcheniyu. Osnovy teorii kommunikacij [Keys to communication. Fundamentals of the theory of communications]. SPb.: " Avalon", "Alphabet-classic". 240 p. [in Rus.].
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
About this article
01 September 2021
Print ISBN (optional)
The Russian language, methods of teaching, Russian language studies, Russian linguistic culture, Russian literature
Cite this article as:
I. Annushkin, V., A. Budnik, E., & G. Zsukova, A. (2021). Communicative Disciplines In Modern Science, Pedagogical And Public Speech Practice. In & V. M. Shaklein (Ed.), The Russian Language in Modern Scientific and Educational Environment, vol 115. European Proceedings of Social and Behavioural Sciences (pp. 225-236). European Publisher. https://doi.org/10.15405/epsbs.2021.09.25