1. Introduction

Bilinguals and multilinguals who have acquired a second and subsequent languages both naturally and through formal instruction are of particular interest for investigating mental processes, including the conceptual and value-based modeling of consciousness amid the interference between native and foreign value systems in the process of acquiring new languages and cultures [1], [2], [3], [4]. The analysis conducted within the framework of contemporary trends in linguistic and cross-cultural studies, as well as intercultural communication [5], [6], addresses the factors shaping ethnic mentality in the process of acquiring a second and subsequent languages. It is evident that language and culture are closely related. Language is the carrier of culture, and culture is transmitted through language. Scholars insist that the presence of culture representations in a second or foreign language teaching is inevitable: “By tradition and necessity, second or foreign language instruction often addresses cultural issues, and teachers who teach English as a second or foreign language are often called upon to explain English-speaking cultures and cultural differences, and to help students adjust to the target culture” [7, P. 943].

This analysis responds to the need to explore the mechanisms for preserving national identity in the context of the progressive development of bilingualism and even multilingualism — a phenomenon driven by the growing number of people studying foreign languages and cultures, as well as the expansion of intercultural communication.

2. Research methods and principles

Objective. The research is aimed at examining the potential for developing a model of bilingual mentality in the process of acquiring new languages and cultures.

Procedure and Methods. Recognizing the scale and complexity of the research objective, the authors have limited themselves to formulating the problem and substantiating the principle of co-study of a foreign language and culture alongside the native language and culture. This is grounded in the distinction of three aspects of the ethnic worldview: the real, the conceptual, and the linguistic. This task was addressed by evaluating the experience of teaching the “The Russian World” and “Regional Studies of Russia” courses introduced into the curriculum at the Faculty of Foreign Languages and Area Studies at Lomonosov Moscow State University. The language material used to form a conceptual and value-based worldview in the process of learning a foreign language, particularly English, is in the focus of the research that has exploited the textual, contextual, and conceptual methods of analysis.

3. Main results

Modern research has convincingly demonstrated that “the very essence of language lies in the fact that it is not merely a set of units, but a system that exists in reality only as a multitude of utterances; in other words, language is first and foremost a process of communication, an endless process of constructing sentences” [8, P. 15]. In the creation of speech, the primary means of representing meaning is the repertoire of linguistic resources shaped by the cultural and national mentality of native speakers [9], [10]. The specifics of the syntactic functioning of linguistic units — including certain “collocational” and “colligational” characteristics [11] — are determined by such phenomena as the acquisition by language elements of expressively, emotionally, and evaluatively marked, and in some cases, entirely new semantic properties at the level of actual speech [12]. These properties expand their range of associative characteristics and reflect the process of creating new conceptual spaces.

Moreover, some experts claim an ideological shift from a monolingual to a multilingual perspective: an innovative emergent view of teaching and assessing multilinguals as a whole. That is, rethinking multilingualism in a situated, interactional, dynamic, and changing context, moving from an ideology of language as problems, to language as resources as well as ethical issues and social impacts on language assessment [13, P. 916].

It is important to pay close attention to the sociocultural aspects of word usage and its national specificity: “We might well define language at least in part as 'the expressive dimension of culture'. It follows that people who function in more than one cultural context will communicate more effectively if they know more than one language” [14, P. 34]. It is precisely in the process of speech production that the issue of the cultural barrier, the cultural component, and the presence of background cultural knowledge about the world of the target language becomes particularly acute:

This issue becomes particularly relevant when perceiving a literary text. The fictional world constructed by the author incorporates elements of the surrounding reality, historical experience, and national identity, which, as a rule, enables the author to achieve the effect of authenticity in the depiction of events and characters within the literary work. In this sense, a literary text can be regarded as a secondary modeling system: it is secondary with respect to the world of objective reality, yet it also performs a modeling function by creating a certain worldview with conceptual and value-based orientations of the characters.

According to the linguistic theory developed by O.S. Akhmanova and her adepts, the most comprehensive analysis of a work of literary art can be accomplished by taking into account the functioning of language units in three dimensions: the semantic (the analysis of the direct semantics of linguistic units), the semiotic (the analysis of metaphorical and figurative meanings), and the metasemiotic (the analysis of the ideological or ethical content of the work, drawing on extralinguistic information that indicates, among other things, the place of the given work within the author's overall oeuvre, the literary tradition, and the context of the era [15].

Nationally specific features of social life form the basis of the corresponding concepts from which a national worldview and the national specificity of verbal behavior are constructed. Since the worldview is embedded in the national language, cultural realia can be defined as the linguistic expression of phenomena that are specific to a given national mentality. The uniqueness of a national conceptual worldview becomes evident when comparing different languages. Z.D. Popova and I.A. Sternin emphasize that “the existence of a linguistic expression for a concept and its regular verbalization maintain the concept in a stable, steady state and make it commonly known” [10, P. 56]. Language is the best accomplishment of our social and cognitive competences and bridges society and cognition. Usage-based approaches investigate how we learn language while we are engaged in the interpersonal communicative and cognitive processes that shape language: “Usage-based researchers acknowledge that language development is situated in a social context, with a learner’s cognitive processes influenced by and responding to the characteristics of a given usage event” [16, P. 182]. Thus, the social and cognitive-psychological are assumed as closely intertwined. Eventually, teachers’ views of the relationship among cultures have great impact on the outcome: “students’ positive and objective attitudes toward the target culture as well as the culture of their own may mostly facilitate second language acquisition” [7, P. 943]. Moreover, a person’s world view, beliefs, and presuppositions affect individual understanding of second culture. Thus, comparative analysis of languages allows, on the one hand, to identify the absence in one language not only of the concept that is present in another, but also of the linguistic units through which this concept is represented. In this respect, comparative analysis of texts and their translations into Russian plays a particularly important role in articulating the concept and its nationally specific features.

The functional approach to the implementation of ‘co-study’ principle in acquisition foreign languages and cultures takes into consideration the following aspects:

1) what is being acquired is a new worldview with a symbolic system (language) for conveying meaning;

2) how language is acquired importantly involves creative learner involvement in national culture (first and foremost, national history, literature, traditions);

3) understanding of foreign language and culture is impossible, should their acquisition is isolated from native culture and language.

To research into the interaction of these aspects a special topic was chosen: the Great Patriotic War of 1941–1945. This epoch constitutes the backbone of the Russian national character and history, and much more attention should be paid to this glorious period. The research material consisted of English and Russian language texts used to reveal the nationally specific features of the corresponding worldviews. The use of the continuous sampling method was nevertheless limited to the task of analyzing the corpus of texts devoted to the Great Patriotic War 1941–1945. In the Russian worldview, the concept of the Great Patriotic War has acquired a special status of ideologeme, while forming the foundation of an integrated system of values and moral concepts among Russians — a system represented, in particular, by works of fiction, memoirs, and documentary literature in Russian.

To assess the present status of awareness about the events of the Great Patriotic War and Second World War as well as possible prospects of further exploration of that epoch, with comparative analysis of literary and mass media texts in Russian and English, an inquiry was organized: the respondents — 107 4-year students of MGIMO university — were offered to answer the following questions:

1) what literature have you read about that historical period;

2) what works do you consider most impressive, and why;

3) what books have you read in Russian and what books — in English;

4) how can you compare them, what differences in national characteristics and attitudes can you expose;

5) do you think it is important to translate more books about the Great Patriotic War in foreign languages, namely English.

When asked about their opinion about the importance of the literature about the Great Patriotic War, most of the participants (98%) rated it as ‘very important’. But an option such as ‘I read it long ago (at school)’ was also rated high (78%). The elicited information about the urgency of translation the books about the Great Patriotic War from Russian into English as another characteristic of the attitude of the Russian people to the national history and their resentment towards the western attempts to revise the History of the Second World War: the respondents’ reaction showed that it was ranked as ‘very important’ by 76%, ‘important’ by 21% and ‘not important’ only by 3% of the participants. As for the other items in the list of the national characteristics described in the literature about the Great Patriotic War, for example, self-sacrifice, patriotism, bravery, stamina, almost each of them was rated as ‘very important’ or ‘important’ by all the respondents. The views and considerations of the participants about the importance of cherishing the memory about the heroes and victims of the Second World War undoubtedly indicate that they mostly present a valuable set of features and qualities since they received a high evaluation by the majority of the respondents.

As for the participants’ opinion about the qualities that characterize individual’s behavior during the war (attitude to other people, community and society), the data revealed that self-sacrifice, compassion, empathy, and respect for dignity (78%), heroism, courage, and high ethics (99%) and a reputation for honesty, integrity and fairness (75%) received ‘very important’ evaluation from the participants. Nearly similar responses were obtained for the question concerning the importance of studying other nation’s history and enhancing keen interest in globe history and humanity, including cross-cultural experience and engagement, was rated as ‘very important’ by 78%, ‘important’ by 21% and ‘not so important’ by ony 0,5% of the respondents. Overall, the participants’ autobiographical accounts about their family war experience supported their rating of patriotism, its constituents and related qualities as highly valued, respectful, and relevant. Such an output of the survey may be considered of great significance for the organization of the educational process, first of all, teaching, learning, and acting in the best interests of the society as a whole. The respondents demonstrated that good citizenship and social responsibility, engagement in community affairs, and awareness of contemporary issues are among attributes that graduates of the higher education institutions should achieve. Therefore, students are guided towards these attributes by introducing the principle of ‘co-study’ of national and foreign history and culture in the process of learning foreign languages, with taking into account the historical and social context. To illustrate, some respondents in the study (78%) suggested translation of the literature about the Great Patriotic War from Russian into English as a project to prevent the revisionists’ attempts to tarnish the Glory of the Victory of the Russian people over fascist Germany and militarist Japan in 1945. This initiative deserves endorsement and promotion as an educational, community-based learning and problem-solving project with the view of encouraging students to further develop their skills of cross-cultural studies as well as to bolster their sense of personal and social responsibility.

4. Discussion

Today, linguists and translators, as well as specialists in intercultural communication, are faced with new challenges in our turbulent times: not only fostering contacts and strengthening cooperation between nations, but also disseminating truthful information about Russia, worthy of her great role in the history of the world community. In our view, in the year marking the 80th anniversary of our Victory in the Great Patriotic War, special emphasis should be placed on preparing students to engage in communication on this most important topic. Thus, it would likely be of interest both to our compatriots and to international audiences to read about the episode when Prime Minister Churchill, on behalf of the British Crown, presented a ceremonial sword to Stalin at the Tehran Conference in 1943. This sword was specially forged by order of King George VI and entered history as Sword of Stalingrad: In honor of the defenders of Stalingrad, King George VI of the United Kingdom commissioned a ceremonial longsword to be presented to the Soviet Union: Thirty six inches long, with a hand grip bound in 18 carat carat gold wire and a pommel of rock crystal, the blade was inscribed in Russian and English with the words: TO THE STEEL-HEARTED CITIZENS OF STALINGRAD. THE GIFT OF KING GEORGE VI. IN TOKEN OF THE HOMAGE OF THE BRITISH PEOPLE [17].

Amidst ongoing debates about the practical implementation of talent and creativity of linguists and translators, it is quite natural to suggest that acquaintance with the Anglophone tradition of interpreting the events of the Second World War should be combined with comprehensive exploration of the rich spiritual heritage created by Soviet and Russian writers, many of whom were front-line soldiers themselves — such as K. Simonov, B. Polevoy, V. Bogomolov, Yu. Bondarev, and A. Surkov. Moreover, today new opportunities are emerging for the development of translation skills: in preparation for intercultural communication, our students have ample opportunities to “practice” translating from Russian into foreign languages, in order to tell the truth about the history of this country.

In this context, translation of the poetry of Konstantin Simonov seems most appropriate: he represents a brilliant example of the lyricism of the wartime generation who fought for the freedom of our great Motherland and who personally experienced all the hardships and deprivations of those years. Simonov’s lyrical works are heartfelt, bitter, and truthful at the same time. In essence, they are profoundly rooted in the people; they are addressed to ordinary men and women. Within them, one finds the full spectrum of emotional suffering endured by the defenders of the Fatherland, as well as their strength, courage, and self-sacrifice. Simonov managed to convey the harsh realities of wartime life, all the difficulties faced by soldiers, and the deep emotional wounds and experiences they endured. The poem “Wait for Me, and I Will Return...” holds a special place in the hearts of Russian people. It makes a profound impression; its simple yet sincere and deeply moving lines touch the soul. Simonov admitted he wrote this poem in 1941 as a personal letter, and only later included it in his collection of lyrics. This poem is a fusion of the personal and the civic, the patriotic and the lyrical:

Wait for me, and I’ll come back

All those deaths despite.

Who forgot me, let them say:

‘Lucky’, — that’s not right.

They will never understand

That I alive can be

Only thanks to your insane

Love and faith in me.

How I’ve survived I think we should

Keep that till the end.

You, of all the people, would

Wait for me, my Friend.

In the contemporary landscape it is important to emphasize that the role of translators is immense: a translator has traditionally undertaken mediation aimed at establishing and promoting friendship between nations, fostering cultural understanding and development. Nowadays, translations of Russian national culture works can serve the noble purpose of acquainting foreign readers with the Russian multiethnic masterpieces, with its history and cultural heritage, and thus promote greater mutual understanding between representatives of different cultures. It is evident that studying such material not only broadens one’s horizons and enriches vocabulary through relevant lexis, but also helps develop the competence to tell foreigners about the most important pages of our national history — in particular, the history of our Victory. Eventually, this kind of linguistic research and translation activities can be considered the implementation of the proposed ‘usage-based approach’ in learning foreign languages and cultures as it puts emphasis on “how language is learned through participatory experience of language processing during embodied interaction in cultural and social contexts where individually desired outcomes are considered as goals to be achieved by communicating concepts, intentions, and meaning with others” [18, P. 477].

The objective, real world outside of language, which surrounds an individual, is perceived through the senses and filtered through culturally conditioned consciousness. As a result, a cultural worldview is formed, which is then reflected in the linguistic worldview. Thus, a person learning a foreign language comes to know three different worldviews of another culture — the real, the cultural-conceptual, and the linguistic — each representing an aspect of ethnic mentality.

In contemporary conditions of real mass communication, it has become increasingly evident that language is the primary means of communication, but by no means the only one. The success of communication depends on many factors (including nonverbal ones), but one of the most crucial is knowledge of the interlocutors’ culture; without it, it is impossible to overcome the cultural barrier, which is inseparable from the language barrier. In this context, culture, of course, does not refer to a collection of the arts (painting, theatre, architecture, and so on), but to traditions, lifestyle, beliefs, ideology, worldview, and the system of values and concepts that define national identity.

Accordingly, teaching people to communicate is a challenging task, further complicated by the fact that communication is not merely a verbal process. Its effectiveness, in addition to language proficiency, depends on numerous factors: the conditions and culture of communication, rules of etiquette, knowledge of nonverbal forms of expression (facial expressions, gestures), and the possession of profound background knowledge, among others.

5. Conclusion

The results of the research make it possible to assume that the development of students’ conceptual and value-based worldview in a bilingual environment should be founded on the principle of co-study of foreign and native authentic texts. This balance makes it possible to overcome cultural barriers while preserving the value-laden concepts of national identity, which, in turn, serves as a criterion for the selection of texts for study.

Such an approach to solving the complex theoretical problem of modelling ethnic mentality is dictated by the practical expediency of extending the successful experience of Moscow State University — our flagship of national education — to other educational institutions, both at the tertiary and secondary levels, and not only in the training of linguist-translators, but also of all specialists undergoing language training. Moreover, the co-study didactics becomes especially relevant in the contemporary context of globalization and targeted ideological interference from the Anglophone world. Further research into bilingual mentality, particularly into the linguistic factors in its formation, contributes to the development of a practical model for the interaction between native and foreign worldviews and for resisting the threat of cultural assimilation. It is worth noting that, according to the Federal State Educational Standard, fundamental national values are designated as a core element of the essential content of education.

The additional file for this article can be found as follows: