Features of educational discourse in the system of institutional discourses

Chen' Si Postgraduate Student, Department of the Russian Language and Methods of its Teaching, Faculty of Philology, Peoples' Friendship University of Russia 117198, Russia, Moscow region, Moscow, Miklukho-Maklaya str., 10-2A 1042218129.@pfur.ru Other publications by this author

Ma Xuchen Master of education, Yunnan Minzu University (China) 650504, China, Chenggong District, Yunnan Province, Kunming City, Yuehua Str., Wujiaing, Chenggong Campus, No. 2929 545881743@qq.com

The relevance of the topic of scientific research is due to the wide range of manifestations of educational discourse in the modern world. The teacher–student relationship exists at the levels of educating children and adolescents, mastering the profession by young people, self-development and changing the type of activity among adults. Educational discourse has repeatedly become the object of close study of linguists, among whom one can note B.V. Penkov, O.P. Ushakova, S.N. Zharov, V.I. Karasik and a number of others. However, the systematic understanding of the concept requires further study due to the breadth of its manifestation and functioning. Some issues of the discussed problem have not yet received scientific analysis. The purpose of the study is to systematize the phenomena of modern educational discourse. The theoretical understanding of the concept of "discourse" and its manifestations at different levels of language today occupies the minds of many scientists. Due to the ambiguity of the interpretation of discourse in numerous areas of scientific knowledge, the question of the formulation and description of this term is considered by many researchers, each of whom complements the system of scientific knowledge. Thus, major works on the understanding of the term "discourse" were presented by V.I. Karasik, M.L. Makarov, N.D. Arutyunova, V.B. Kashkin and others.

The achievement of this goal is possible with the successful solution of a number of research tasks, including the definition of the conceptual apparatus of discourse, the classification of types of discourse, the description of the main characteristics, participants and materials of educational discourse, the study of the boundaries of educational discourse in modern society.

In linguistics, it is customary to distinguish several types of discourse. V.I. Karasik was one of the first to propose separating personality-oriented and institutional discourses. This gradation allows for a qualitative analysis of the texts of the discourse, based on the specific tasks of the researcher. Also, G.G. Pocheptsova, G.M. Yavorskaya and other scientists presented their point of view on the typology of the concept under consideration. Consequently, the subject of the study is the educational discourse, and the object is the features of its functioning today.

Educational discourse is institutional and exists at the level of teacher-student relations at different levels of manifestation of these relations. At the same time, it is necessary to separate the immediate situations of communication within this discourse, the documentary consolidation of existing relations and their boundaries in official papers, the methodology of the communication process and texts that support the transfer of information from mentor to student. It should be noted that today the list of information transmission formats that can be used to transmit information has significantly expanded. This is due to the development of science and technology. For example, A.Y. Bagiyan, T.A. Shiryaeva and Yu.A. Chernousova talk about the increasing role of virtual communication in the structure of educational discourse ^[2].

There are several levels of educational discourse, traditionally there are three types: school-administrative, teacher and student. The book speech of the educational discourse corresponds to these levels.

An important part of the need for regular updating of scientific understanding of educational discourse is the fact that it is not formalized, clearly fixed for a long time. Taking into account the inevitable dynamics in the development of science and technology, social institutions, the most in-demand skills in the labor market, psychological characteristics and directions, the field of educational discourse is inevitably transformed.

Understanding the place of educational discourse determines the consistency and structuring of the research methodology. Descriptive, structural and introspective methods, the method of logical comparison were applied.

The theoretical base includes works analyzing the concept of "discourse" from various points of view by such authors as N.D. Arutyunova, V.I. Karasik, B.V. Penkov, as well as studies directly related to educational discourse and its manifestations by A.A. Evstifeeva, S.N. Zharova, Yu.Yu. Pospelova, M.A. Samkova and other scientists.

The practical significance lies, firstly, in the replenishment of the structure of scientific knowledge, and, secondly, in the possibility of using the results of the scientific work carried out in the development of this problem by other authors.

Before turning to the characteristics of educational discourse, it is necessary to formulate the definition of discourse itself as a linguistic phenomenon. N.D. Arutyunova believes that "discourse is a coherent text in combination with extralinguistic - pragmatic, socio-cultural, psychological and other factors; text taken in the event aspect; speech considered as a purposeful social action, as a component involved in the interaction of people and the mechanisms of their consciousness (cognitive processes); "discourse" is speech "immersed in life" ^[1]. V.I. Karasik offers a short and succinct definition: "Discourse is a text immersed in a communication situation" ^[5]. It is interesting that M.L. Makarov, having studied the vast theoretical base, notes the need to remove any limitations from the concept of discourse and accept as a reference the widest use of this term "as a generic category in relation to the concepts of speech, text, dialogue" ^[9].

The widest possible limits of the use of this term are considered by P. Serio. According to his point of view, the concept of "discourse" can mean:

1. any speech utterance, that is, to substitute the term "speech";

2. a sequence of certain statements, which is broader than a phrase, has a more global character and is built according to certain rules of a particular language;

3. the impact on the person to whom the text is addressed, that is, the presence of the addressee and addressee of the utterance, as well as the place and time of its reproduction;

4. the specialization of the term leads to the equalization of the terms "discourse" and "conversation", since it is the conversation that is often considered as the main format of utterance;

5. speech addressed to the listener and the active position of the addressee, only then can speech be considered a discourse;

6. a set of some formal and structural elements of the design of thought, as a result of which the concepts of "language" and "speech" are opposed;

7. restrictions imposed on the communication situation by certain social or ideological views, in this case we can talk about "administrative discourse" or "gender discourse", which require compliance with certain formalities of a variety of statements related to a specific topic;

8. discourse is not equal to utterance, utterance becomes only the fact of composing some coherent thoughts, and discourse is designed to find and describe clear mechanisms that control utterance ^[13].

Based on the opinions presented, it can be concluded that in modern linguistics, the term "discourse" can be understood as a unit of utterance in any form that meets certain formal and substantive requirements, as well as the totality of such utterances. This definition will be taken as a reference in the course of further scientific research.

It should be clarified that the discourse has some properties. For example, V.B. Kashkin speaks about them. He notes that one of the important characteristics of the concept is "fundamental boundlessness", as well as the coherence of the discourse texts and their integrity ^{[7, p. 7]}.

The researcher also raises the question of the typology of discourse, which can be compiled based on various tasks. Thus, the structural-formal classification involves the division into verbal and nonverbal code, oral or written communication, monologue, dialogic or polylogical participants of the discourse, the person speaking. From the point of view of the structural and content approach, the referential context becomes decisive and the gradation is carried out from the point of view of the communicant's position, the scope of discussion activity, the topic or type of text according to the method of presentation. The third criterion for typology is the genre of discourse, which is based on chronotope, extralinguistic and social parameters ^{[7, p. 20]}.

The most widely used in linguistics was the point of view of V.I. Karasik, who proposed to base the typology on the relationship between the participants of the utterance. This point of view generates a gradation into personally-oriented (everyday and existential) and status-oriented communication. That is, on personal and institutional discourses. "The participants of the personal discourse act in the fullness of their qualities, unlike the participants of the institutional discourse, the system-forming feature of which is the status, representative function of a person. Institutional discourse is a specialized cliched kind of communication between people who may not know each other, but must communicate in accordance with the norms of this society" ^{[6, p. 7]}. The scientist calls such types of modern institutional discourse as religious, medical, political, educational, mass information, sports and others.

So, the educational discourse, being institutional, is implemented in the system of organized learning. Its participants observe clear rules of behavior, manners of communication, and the possibility of status communication is conditioned by clear geographical and temporal parameters (place of study, beginning and end of classes) and other signs.

"To determine the type of institutional discourse, it is necessary to take into account the status and role characteristics of the participants in communication," says V.I. Karasik, and also continues that the goal of pedagogical discourse is "socialization of a new member of society" ^{[6, p. 13]}. The educational discourse is thus formed between participants whose roles can be described as "teacher" and "student". The first one has a certain set of knowledge and tools for its translation, and the second one must assimilate and accept this knowledge. Moreover, in the works of many researchers, the dominant role of the teacher is postulated. For example, A.A. Evstifeeva states: "it is the teacher who plays an active role in discourse, in other words, the share of his communicative activity is much higher: the student listens more, perceives information, and the teacher analyzes, explains, corrects and controls. The main strategies of the teacher, thus, which determine his communicative intentions, are: explaining, evaluating, controlling, facilitating, organizing" ^[3].

The basis of educational discourse, as we have already mentioned, is the process of transferring information from teacher to student. It performs a number of important functions:

- informative, direct translation of a certain amount of knowledge from one participant of communication to another;

- pragmatic, which is based on the focus on various kinds of impact on the addressee, for example, appealing to the emotions of the listener;

- emotive, related to the frequency of the use of emotionally expressive speech structures in the process of transmitting information;

- phatic, consisting in the need to establish psychological contact between communication participants and the use of certain language means for this ^{[14, pp. 70-71]}.

At this stage of reasoning, a logical question arises about the method of transmitting information from teacher to student. As M.A. Samkova points out, the educational discourse is based on a textual basis. At the same time, it is the educational text that has such characteristics as the conciseness of the presentation of information, the presence of general and professional knowledge, presentation within a certain method of transmitting information, inclusion in the general system of culture and public consciousness. "The educational text is, firstly, the main content unit of teaching, since it performs very important educational, educational and developmental tasks; secondly, an important component of the educational and pedagogical discourse, where there are three main participants - the teacher, the student and the educational text" ^{[12, p. 144]}. Based on this thesis, we can conclude about the primacy of intellectual interaction within the framework of educational discourse.

Intellectual activity within the framework of educational discourse can be implemented in various situations. For example, in a learning situation, a student interacts with the teacher and the text for the fullest possible development of new and consolidation of already studied information. In the situation of personality formation, the main role is played by the teacher, who, using certain methods, introduces elements of culture and the national picture of the world into the educational material. In a situation of professional communication, it is possible to exchange experience and skills between communicants in the roles of teacher - teacher. In the situation of educational interaction of students, the personality of each participant of the group is formed, including the ability to find methods of influencing others, the ability to work in a team, ways out of a problem, etc. ^[11].

It is obvious that the texts of educational discourse require detailed study. However, this is possible only when the request is detailed by the author of the scientific research. M.L. Makarov argues that as units of discourse analysis, one can distinguish "a hierarchy of phonetic-prosodic units: sound (allophone and phoneme), syllable, phonetic word, syntagma, phrase. In the chain of language expressions there are a number of grammatical units: morpheme, word, phrase, predicative unit, sentence, super–phrasal unity or complex syntactic whole, paragraph. In the process of communication - socially interactive units: action, move, simple and complex exchanges, strategy, transaction or phase, episode, whole communicative event" ^{[9, pp. 178-179]}. Thus, the material of discursive analysis, as a rule, is determined by the author of scientific research and becomes his personal responsibility. Since the vocabulary used, the way of constructing sentences and phrases, documented materials of knowledge transfer and descriptions of the functioning of educational institutions are most important in the framework of educational discourse, the word should be considered as the smallest unit of discourse.

In the modern world, educational discourse goes beyond the boundaries of educational institutions (schools, colleges, universities, etc.). There is such a concept as Longlife Learning - lifelong learning. This phenomenon is included in the system of educational discourse, as it has all its features: data transmission, communication between student and mentor, chronotope and others. "The advantages of Longlife Learning are obvious. This is an opportunity to adapt to changes in society. A person involved in the Longlife Learning process will keep up with society, will be aware of changes in technology, news and political trends, finance, etc. Another advantage is career growth. New jobs and positions are being created all the time" ^{[8, p. 153]}.

At the same time, it is important that school and institute education is rather a tribute to society, a prerequisite for the socialization of a child, a teenager, a young person. And training after receiving basic and vocational education is an opportunity for everyone to improve their skills and be the best specialist.

Within the framework of the Longlife Learning concept, the so-called MOOCs - mass open educational courses - have become widespread. As a rule, these are sites where professional or general knowledge on a narrow topic is updated. They are developed and offered by universities. For example, on the website of the Ogarev Moscow State University, you can visit the MOOC "Financial Literacy" (72 hours), "Modern aspects of catering for schoolchildren" (36 hours), "Pharmacopoeia analysis of medicinal substances derived from isoquinoline, tropane, piperidine" (36 hours), "Fundamentals of project activity" (72 hours), "Modern problems of aesthetics and philosophy of art" (36 hours) and many others. Based on the analysis of the description of such courses, it can be concluded that there are two training formats: in the first, a group is recruited and training takes place online, that is, the teacher lectures in real time using Internet communication, and students receive a task and must complete it; in the second, training takes place entirely in a remote format, the lectures are recorded and each of them has a task that the student performs independently and does not report to anyone for it.

Interestingly, there is already an opportunity to get online and professional education. Thus, the International Institute of Integrative Nutritionology offers to master the profession of "nutritionist" to everyone who does not even have a basic education in medicine or dietetics.

All these resources are also included in the structure of educational discourse.

The conducted research allows us to draw a number of important conclusions:

1. Educational discourse belongs to the institutional type, as it has important features, including purpose, situativeness, the presence of participants and their status-role models.

2. The communicants in the educational discourse are the teacher and the student, that is, the one who has knowledge and methods of their translation, and the one who is ready to learn new information. At the same time, not only facts are embedded in the transmission process, but also values, the social worldview of society.

3. At the center of the educational discourse is the text as such and its special kind - the educational text, which has such features as factfulness, conciseness, brevity and others.

4. Educational discourse today goes beyond the framework of education in an educational institution, the concept of Longlife Learning is becoming widespread, assuming the inclusion of an individual in the structure of discourse throughout life.

5. Educational discourse is always purposeful, includes methods of information transmission, is based on an educational text, has a number of precedent texts of certain genres in its structure. Modern technologies provide a set of new, little-studied linguistics, formats for transmitting and receiving educational information remotely.

The prospects for further research of the problem are revealed in the fact that the participants and goals of the educational discourse are its system-forming features and have not changed for a long time. At the same time, other important elements, such as methods, communication situations, psychological and social signs are regularly transformed as society develops. This idea is confirmed, for example, by M.L. Makarov, who believes that "the study of language and discourse in communicative systems of various functional orientation will receive a new impetus as new communication technologies and new forms of social organizations, new institutions are introduced into public practice" ^{[9, pp. 155-156]}. O.P. Ushakov continues the researcher's thought: "The sphere of educational discourse also reveals new facets in our country in connection with the differentiation of education, the emergence of the educational services market, the emergence of the need for educational institutions in advertising and public relations. Meetings with potential students, career guidance, consulting services, testing - these are a number of areas of communication between educational institutions and their consumers" ^{[14, p. 71]}.

Today linguists have a wide field of study of educational discourse in all its variety of manifestations, especially relevant research concerning new technologies and their application in the educational process.