The nature and content of psychological-pedagogical problems of multilingualism: linguistic and psychological aspects

Recently the concept of multilingualism has become a defining approach to the problem of language learni ng. Multili ngualism occurs as an individual's language experience, expands culturally from the language used in the fami ly to the language used in soci ety, and then to the acqui si ti on of languages of other peoples. The i ndi vi dual does not “keep” these languages and cultures separate from each other, but forms a communi cati ve competence based on all knowledge and all language experi ence, where languages are i nterconnected and i nteract with one another. One of the most important approaches to both bilingual and multi li ngual educati on i s, i n our opi ni on, the study of psycholi ngui sti c and neuro-li ngui sti c mechani sms of bi li nguali sm and multi li nguali sm formati on. The peculi ari ty of the language si tuati on of the Republi c of Kazakhstan i s the presence of bi li nguali sm, whi ch occured i n the country as a natural process i n a multi nati onal state. However each region of the country has its own speci fi cs i n terms of language. In thi s regard, there i s a need for a regi onal approach to the study of the language si tuati on i n the Republi c of Kazakhstan. It i s worth noti ng that the defi ni ti on of the role and place of Russi an language i n teachi ng a forei gn language i n the context of multi li nguali sm i s i nsuffi ci ently studi ed. Russi an language i s not only a uni versal means of communi cati on generally accepted i n the Republi c of Kazakhstan, but also the mai n means of knowledge of sci ences and support i n learni ng a forei gn language. Li ngui sti c si tuati on of forei gn language teachi ng i n multi li ngual envi ronment i n many respects di ffers from the li ngui sti c si tuati on of learni ng a forei gn language i n a monoli ngual audi ence.


Multi li nguali sm i s understood i n many studi es as the abi li ty of an i ndi vi dual or a whole nati on (or part of i t) to communi cate i n order to achi eve mutual understandi ng by means of two or more languages.

Sci enti fi c, techni cal, and cultural progress helps to attract representati ves of di fferent peoples of the world to i nternati onal li fe, whi ch, i n turn, requi res soci ety to fi nd ways that would help achi eve mutual understandi ng between representati ves of di fferent peoples. The best way out of thi s si tuati on i s to learn several languages that could meet the soci al needs of both the i ndi vi dual and the enti re soci ety. Under these condi ti ons the problem of multi li nguali sm, that i s, knowledge of one's nati ve language and other most common languages, has become parti cularly relevant.

The problem of multi li nguali sm i s multi di mensi onal. The study i ntersects di fferent approaches: psychologi cal, li ngui sti c, and soci al. Yu.D. Desheri ev beli eves that thi s problem should be consi dered i n the soci oli ngui sti c aspect as “a product of language functi oni ng i n certai n soci al condi ti ons” [1].

When consi deri ng the concept of “multi li nguali sm”, i t i s necessary to take i nto account i ts types and vari eti es. Terms of multi li nguali sm, the nature of the relati onshi p of multi li nguali sm wi th thi nki ng, a way of reaffi rmi ng of the speech mechani sms wi th each other, the degree of di fference between languages i n contact, the ki nshi p of languages are the most commonly studi ed aspects of multi li nguali sm [2].

Multi li nguali sm i n the narrow sense i mpli es more or less fluency i n two or more languages: nati ve (Kazakh), non-nati ve (Russi an), forei gn (Engli sh); multi li nguali sm i n the broad sense i s a relati ve command of a second or thi rd language, the abi li ty to use two or more languages i n certai n areas of communi cati on.


Accordi ng to H.Z. Bagi rokov, “bi li nguali sm/polyli ngui sm i s the result of i nterci vi li zed i nteracti on of di fferent cultures of peoples, one of the forms of adaptati on of a completely di fferent or related language culture” [2]. Multi li nguali sm i s the practi ce of alternati ve use of two or more languages, whi ch has emerged as a result of the i nteracti on of di fferent languages and cultures. V.A. Avrori n understands real bi li nguali sm/polyli ngui sm as “almost equal free acti ve knowledge of two or more languages. Real bi li nguali sm/polyli ngui sm begi ns when the degree of profi ci ency i n the second language approaches the degree of profi ci ency i n the fi rst” [3].

However, the degree of profi ci ency i n a second or thi rd language may vary. In accordance wi th the classi fi cati on of T.A. Bartalev, bi li nguali sm/multi li nguali sm i s di vi ded i nto the followi ng types:

  1. normali zed;
  2. one-way normali zed;
  3. non-normali zed.

The normali zed type, accordi ng to the author, i s characteri zed by compli ance wi th the norms (grammati cal, lexi cal-semanti c, phoneti c) of the studi ed languages. A one-si ded normali zed type i s one i n whi ch the speaker adheres to the norm of one, usually nati ve language. Non-normali zed bi li nguali sm/polyli ngui sm i s the use of a second language wi th a vi olati on of i ts norm i n part or i n full [4].

Y.D. Desheri ev i denti fi es two types of bi li nguali sm/polyli ngui sm:

1) contact bi li nguali sm/polyli ngui sm: the result of the common resi dence of two or more peoples (the contact type of bi li nguali sm i s i nherent i n countri es located i n the former post-Sovi et space);

2) non-contact bi li nguali sm/polyli ngui sm, when there i s no contact between two peoples; language acqui si ti on occurs through communi cati on wi th representati ves of people who li ve on the terri tory of another country, or by studyi ng a forei gn language at school or uni versi ty.

T.A. Bartalev allocates acti ve and passi ve bi li nguali sm/multi li nguali sm. He offers a defi ni ti on of acti ve and passi ve bi li nguali sm, consi deri ng acti ve bi li nguali sm/polyli ngui sm as such bi li nguali sm i n whi ch a person i s fluent i n a second language i n all i ts forms. Passi ve bi li nguali sm i s a type of bi li nguali sm in whi ch a person parti ally speaks a second language: understands, but does not speak [4].

V.A. Itskovi ch and V.S. Schwarzkopf offer a broader defi ni ti on of passi ve bi li nguali sm. Passi ve bi li nguali sm/polyli ngui sm “refers to a type of bi li nguali sm i n whi ch a nati ve speaker reads fluently (to a greater or lesser extent) i n a second language, but does not speak i t” [5].

Multi li nguali sm i s characteri zed by varyi ng degrees of profi ci ency i n the fi rst, second, and thi rd languages. “Degree of profi ci ency i n the second (thi rd) language can be both hi gh and low when a li mi ted number of words and basi c rules are learned, and when the abi li ty to express fragmentary opi ni ons of everyday content i s obvi ous” [5].

Wi th acti ve bi li nguali sm/polyli ngui sm the nati ve speaker i s fluent i n the second (thi rd) language and uses i t i n everyday li fe. There i s a di stri buti on of communi cati on functi ons between languages dependi ng on the language envi ronment. Passi ve bi li nguali sm assumes that a nati ve speaker i s fluent i n a second language, but does not use i t due to the lack of an appropri ate envi ronment.

Accordi ng to the degree of extensi veness, bi li nguali sm/polyli ngui sm i s di vi ded i nto the followi ng types: nati onal, terri tori al, and bi li nguali sm of a certai n stratum of soci ety (classi fi cati on by Yu.D. Desheri ev). Each of these classi fi cati ons requi res detai led consi derati on. Nati onal bi li nguali sm/polyli ngui sm, as defi ned by Yu.D. Desheri ev, concerns the people as a whole [1].

Wi th regard to the two last menti oned vari eti es, they can only oppose the fi rst i n aggregate, si nce one and the second do not concern the whole people, but only one or another part of i t: the fi rst is terri tori al, the second is soci al.

Based on the classi fi cati on of T.A. Bertogaev, i ndi vi dual bi li nguali sm/polyli ngui sm i s the property of i ndi vi dual nati ve speakers, i t i s found i n all peoples of the world.

Group bi li nguali sm/polyli ngui sm covers a compact group of the populati on: i t can be, for example, soci o-group (i ntelli gentsi a bi li nguali sm). Bi li nguali sm/polyli ngui sm of the mai n group of nati ve speakers (wi th the excepti on of certai n groups of adults and chi ldren of a certai n age) of the populati on of a certai n country belongs to the mass one [4].

Multi li nguali sm i s defi ned as the use of several languages wi thi n a certai n soci al communi ty; the use by an i ndi vi dual or group of people of several languages, each of whi ch i s chosen i n accordance wi th a speci fi c communi cati ve si tuati on [6].

There are two types of multi li nguali sm: domi nant, when one of the languages i s the mai n, source; equal, when none of the languages i s gi ven an advantage. Defi ne the followi ng typi cal cases of formati on of multi li nguali sm: a) the chi ld i s brought up to “swi tch” from one language to another; b) chi ld i n the fami ly speaks thei r nati ve language, and i t i s possessed by other languages; c) the students learn second forei gn language i n the process of purposeful learni ng.

Multi li nguali sm i s closely related to the psychologi cal aspects of communi cati on. Knowledge of several languages contri butes to the development of such mental functi ons as thi nki ng, memory, i magi nati on, percepti on.

Accordi ng to E.M. Vereshchagi n, i n the psychologi cal aspect bi li nguali sm/polyli ngui sm i s characteri zed by i ts own speci fi cs. Degree of profi ci ency i n the second (thi rd) the language i s evaluated by the number of acti ons that are performed duri ng the i mplementati on of the communi cati on. In accordance wi th the poi nt of vi ew of E.M. Vereshchagi n, recepti ve bi li nguali sm/polyli ngui sm allows a bi li ngual to understand the language structures i nherent i n the secondary language system, but no more; reproducti ve bi li nguali sm/polyli ngui sm allows a bi li ngual to reproduce what i s read or heard; producti ve bi li nguali sm/polyli ngui sm allows not only to understand and reproduce the language formati ons i nherent i n the secondary language system, but also to create them [7].

B.V. Belyaev di sti ngui shes two types of bi li nguali sm/polyli ngui sm: di rect, when pri mary and secondary language ski lls are di rectly related to thi nki ng; i ndi rect, when a bi li ngual refers to a secondary language as a code system i n order to i ndi cate the capabi li ti es of the pri mary language [1].

In the modern methodologi cal li terature a large number of works on the problems of teachi ng a forei gn language i n the nati onal school can be found (R.Yu. Barsuk, G.M. Vi shnevskaya, Yu.D. Desheri ev, A.S. Markosyan, Z.G. Muratova, L.S. Khalatyan, A.I. Yatsi kevi chus, etc.).

Despi te the general patterns of learni ng a forei gn language i n the context of multi li nguali sm, each speci fi c case requi res i ndi vi dual consi derati on. Some authors study certai n aspects of teachi ng a forei gn language i n a nati onal audi ence, based only on the study of the nati ve (nati onal) language of students (Kh.Z. Bagi rokov, L.M. Bayramova, A.E. Karli nsky, R.N. Kremer, etc.). Other authors emphasi ze the need to take i nto account the Russi an language i n the process of masteri ng a forei gn language (I.O. Ilyasov, A.M. Mi khai lov, L.V. Kobakhi dze, V.F. Rumyantsev, N.N. Fomi n, etc.). The analysi s of research shows that learni ng Russi an contri butes to masteri ng the thi rd and fourth languages, i .e., i n condi ti ons of bi li nguali sm or polyli ngui sm, there i s a psychologi cal readi ness to learn subsequent languages (B.V. Belyaev, I.A. Zi mnyaya). It should be concluded that the knowledge of the nati ve language and Russi an i n the nati onal school si gni fi cantly faci li tates the process of learni ng a forei gn language.

Despi te the fact that the nati ve language (Kazakh) i n the terri tory of the Republi c of Kazakhstan prevai ls i n publi c li fe, i n cultural outreach, i n li ve communi cati on, i t i s used i n the educati on system, i n the medi a, Russi an conti nues to be a means of broad i nternati onal communi cati on throughout the terri tory of the Republi c of Kazakhstan, the language of educati on and sci ence.

The multi li ngual envi ronment i n whi ch the younger generati on of the Republi c of Kazakhstan grows and communi cates becomes a favorable ground for learni ng a forei gn language (i n thi s case, Engli sh).

The problem of multi li nguali sm i s consi dered i n modern research from di fferent perspecti ves. Thi s problem i s consi dered from the li ngui sti c poi nt of vi ew i n the research of such sci enti sts as V.D. Araki n, Zh.L. Vi tli n, R.N. Kremer, L.N. Kovyli na, I.I. Khaleeva, and L.V. Shcherba. From a psychologi cal poi nt of vi ew thi s problem i s presented i n the research of V.B. Belyaev, Z.U. Blyagos, L.S. Vygotsky, L.B. Itelson, and others. Soci ocultural aspects of the problem of multi li nguali sm are reflected i n the research of Y.L. Vorotni kov, M.N. Guboglo, V.V. Safonova, P.V. Sysoev, and S.G. Ter-Mi nasova. Methodologi cal aspects of the study of multi li nguali sm were studi ed by I.L. Bim, N.D. Galskova, P.B. Gurvi ch, B.A. Lapi dus, R.P. Mi lrud, E.I. Passov, and others.

The peculiarity of the modern language situation in the Republic of Kazakhstan also implies the need to address the concept of “dominant language” as one of the key sociolinguistic concepts used in the course of the study. The dominant language is most often the language of interethnic communication.

As U. Weinreich points out, “the psychological dominance of one language over another can be established by tests of varying degrees of complexity. One might wonder, for example, which of the two languages is the more convenient means of communicating orders that must be executed quickly and accurately. It is even possible to pose the question: in what language does a bilingual speaker “think”; to do this, you need to check in which language he is more willing to give associations to stimuli presented to him at random in both languages. On the other hand, one can hold the view that the “dominance” of language is a complex combination of factors of approximately the following type. By comparative language proficiency, the dominant language is the one that the native speaker has a better command of at a given time in their life. According to the method of use, visual reactions are so important for strengthening the oral use of a language that for a bilingual native speaker who is literate in only one of the languages, this language will be the main one, regardless of the ratio in the level of oral proficiency in these languages”. In this work, which has become a classic for the typology of bi- and polylinguism, we also present the provisions that have not lost their relevance on the allocation of the dominant language by the order of study and age, by the role in communication. Weinreich emphasizes that while a bilingual speaker may be equally proficient in both languages, it may be that they are more likely to have to resort to one rather than the other; at the same time, more frequent use of the language can, all other things being equal, raise it to the rank of “dominant” language, which often took place in the situation of Kazakh-Russian bilingualism, as well as the following principle of typologization — the dominance of the language, depending on its role in the social promotion of the speaker). In the cited work W. Weinreich also notes the pronounced need to overcome the potential interference in the latter case, which is especially important for the study we have undertaken. [8]

Results and Discussion

Multi li nguali sm i s a common li ngui sti c phenomenon that has been observed at di fferent ti mes among di fferent peoples of the world. Multi li nguali sm occurs where there are close soci o-economi c ti es between members of di fferent ethni c groups who speak di fferent languages. The phenomenon of multi li nguali sm i s i nherent i n multi nati onal countri es.

The study of multi li nguali sm i s related to the study of bi li nguali sm. It should be noted that there are di fferent i nterpretati ons of the content of the concept of “bi li nguali sm”.

.A. Avrori n notes that “bi li nguali sm occurs when the team, i n addi ti on to the nati ve language, has another language that can perform the same functi ons as the nati ve language. Most often, these functi ons are di stri buted between languages, but i t i s i mportant that they are both able to perform the same functi ons i n a certai n team, and thi s i s possi ble i f there i s no si gni fi cant di fference i n the degree of profi ci ency and acti vi ty of usi ng both languages. Therefore, bi li nguali sm begi ns when the degree of profi ci ency i n the second language i s as close as possi ble to the degree of profi ci ency i n the fi rst” [5].

Investi gati ng the problem of bi li nguali sm, V.A. Itskovi ch and V.S. Schwarzkopf note that bi li nguali sm i s “usually an acti ve possessi on of two language systems. However, i n modern soci ety, wi th a mass desi re to master a second language (or languages) and the acti ve spread of forei gn-language li terature, there i s a si tuati on when the second language, wi th bi li nguali sm, does not perform all i ts functi ons” [8].

Under the nature of the relati onshi p between languages, L.V. Shcherba di sti ngui shes between pure and mi xed bi li nguali sm/polyli ngui sm. The sci enti st consi dered pure bi li nguali sm to be the case when i n the mi nd of a nati ve speaker two languages exi st i n i solati on from each other, wi thout any compari sons and parallels. Thi s i s confi rmed by the Russi an ari stocrats, who were fluent i n Russi an and French, but translati on from one language to another was di ffi cult. Such bi li nguali sm occurs as a result of masteri ng languages i n the so-called “natural” way, when the second language i s studi ed i n i solati on from the fi rst [9].

Mi xed bi li nguali sm/polyli ngui sm allows parallel communi cati on of equi valent means of two or more languages wi th thei r correspondi ng concepts, and through them between the languages themselves. Accordi ng to L.V. Shcherba, mi xed bi li nguali sm should be consi dered normal because pure bi li nguali sm occurs only under speci al condi ti ons [9].

The formati on of bi li nguali sm/polyli ngui sm i s a long process because the acqui si ti on of a second language i s gradual.

Kh. Z. Bagi rokov, i nvesti gati ng the problem of language acqui si ti on i n multi nati onal republi cs, i denti fi ed the followi ng types of bi li nguali sm/polyli ngui sm:

  • the fi rst degree i nvolves the possessi on of a second language, i n whi ch there i s i nterference of the maxi mum type at all levels of forei gn (other) speech;
  • the second degree i nvolves profi ci ency i n a second language, i n whi ch there i s i nterference of the maxi mum type at the grammati cal and lexi cal-semanti c level and phoneti c level;
  • the thi rd degree i nvolves knowledge of a second language, i n whi ch there i s i nterference only at the lexi cal and semanti c level;
  • the fourth degree i nvolves the possessi on of a second language, i n whi ch there i s mi ni mal i nterference at all levels;
  • the fi fth degree i nvolves the possessi on of a second language, i n whi ch there i s mi ni mal type of i nterference at the grammati cal and lexi cal-grammati cal level;
  • the si xth degree i nvolves the possessi on of a second language, i n whi ch there i s mi ni mal i nterference only at the lexi cosemanti c level;
  • the seventh degree i nvolves the possessi on of a second language, i n whi ch there i s only styli sti c i nterference;
  • the ei ghth degree i mpli es second language profi ci ency, when an i ndi vi dual i s profi ci ent i n li terary and wri tten language i n all functi onal styles, wi thout allowi ng any devi ati ons.
  • The li ngui sti c aspect of the study of bi li nguali sm and polyli ngui sm i s to analyze the relati onshi p between the structures and structural elements of several languages, thei r mutual i nfluence, i nteracti on and i nterpenetrati on at di fferent levels of languages, and to i denti fy i nterference at di fferent levels of language structure. Polyli ngui sm i s a great cultural asset. Its development i s i n no way an obstacle to the development of nati onal languages, on the contrary, as an extrali ngui sti c factor, i t can be one of the i mportant sources of subsequent development of nati onal languages [10].
  • .V. Shcherba di sti ngui shes two types of coexi stence of language systems i n the consci ousness of an i ndi vi dual wi th respect to bi li nguali sm. For L.V. Shcherba under pure bi li nguali sm we should understand parallel, but i ndependent study of two languages. By mi xed bi li nguali sm, he means bi li nguali sm formed as a result of the comparati ve study of two languages, when the second language i s studi ed on the basi s of the fi rst [9].

Accordi ng to the method of compari ng two languages i n the mi nd of a bi li ngual, V.Y. Rosenzwei g di sti ngui shes between coordi nate bi li nguali sm (a bi li ngual speaks both languages equally and swi tches from one to the other dependi ng on the communi cati on si tuati on) and subordi nate bi li nguali sm (a bi li ngual i s fluent i n only one, nati ve language, whi ch subordi nates another, non-nati ve language i n hi s mi nd) [11].


In the li ngui sti c aspect multi li nguali sm i s defi ned, on the one hand, as perfect knowledge of the nati ve and other languages studi ed, the use of two (three) languages as full-fledged, and, on the other hand, as the abi li ty to use the second (thi rd) language i n certai n areas of communi cati on.

The problem of bi li nguali sm/polyli ngui sm i n the psychologi cal aspect i s consi dered as a problem of profi ci ency i n vari ous language codes and as a problem of i nteracti on of these codes. Masteri ng the second (thi rd) language theoreti cally cannot be evaluated as a process of masteri ng a new system of thi nki ng, but i t i s masteri ng a new code that i s i mposed on the code of the nati ve language [12].

  • i gni fi cant attenti on i s pai d to the study of the i nfluence of multi li nguali sm on thi nki ng and i ntellectual development of the chi ld. L.S. Vygotsky concluded that the soluti on of thi s i ssue depends on the age of the chi ld, the nature of the i nteracti on of languages and, most i mportantly, on the pedagogi cal i nfluence on the development of speech ski lls of the nati ve and forei gn languages.

The analysi s of the process of i nteracti on of languages i s undoubtedly i mportant when developi ng a methodology for teachi ng a forei gn language to students i n a multi li ngual envi ronment.

Many authors beli eve that chi ldren i n the context of bi li nguali sm/multi li nguali sm the i nterferi ng occurs resulting in the fusi on of language systems.

At preschool age chi ldren are already able to understand the bi li nguali sm that mani fests i tself:

  1. i n the general vi ew of the presence of two di fferent li ngui sti c systems of Russi an and forei gn languages;
  2. awareness of di fferences i n the grammati cal structure of the language, whi ch i s mani fested i n self- correcti on and i n correcti ng errors i n the speech of other chi ldren;
  3. i n the awareness of si mi lar and di fferent phoneti c systems;
  4. awareness of the synonymy of two words i n di fferent li ngui sti c systems;
  5. the word becomes an object of awareness [13].

The problem of multi li nguali sm i s relevant, si nce the current stage of human ci vi li zati on development i s i mpossi ble wi thout the i nteracti on of di fferent languages and cultures.

The process of teachi ng a forei gn language i n a multi li ngual envi ronment should be ai med at creati ng a si ngle cogni ti ve base for several languages used and studi ed. Students should be gi ven the opportuni ty to follow the already developed strategy for masteri ng thei r nati ve language (Kazakh) and Russi an, as well as bui ld a new strategy that i s adequate to the process of masteri ng a forei gn language (Engli sh). Taki ng i nto account known and new strategi es for language acqui si ti on i n a multi li ngual envi ronment allows for more effecti ve i nterpretati on and appli cati on of complex i nteracti ons between the nati ve language (Kazakh), Russi an, and a forei gn language (Engli sh).

The process of learni ng a forei gn language i n a multi li ngual envi ronment should be ai med at taki ng i nto account the di fferent and shared features of the grammati cal systems of the languages bei ng studi ed, whi ch wi ll be the ori entati on basi s for learni ng a forei gn language and masteri ng the necessary cogni ti ve base for learni ng Engli sh i n terms of i ts i nteracti on wi th the nati ve language (Kazakh) and Russi an.

Possessi on of a si ngle cogni ti ve base leads to the creati on of a polyli ngual state of students, whi ch allows for the transi ti on from the lower stage of multi li nguali sm to a hi gher one.

The process of learni ng a forei gn language i n a multi li ngual envi ronment should be based on the laws of real communi cati on.



  1. Deshiriev, Yu.D. (2006). Predislovie k sborniku «Problemy dvuiazychiia i mnohoiazychiia» [Preface to the collection Problems of Bilingualism and Multilingualism]. Moscow [in Russian].
  2. Avrorin, V.A. (2018). Dvuiazychie i shkola. Tezisy nauchnoi konferentsii, posviashchennoi probleme dvuiazychiia i mnohoiazychiia [Bilingualism and the school. Abstracts of the scientific conference devoted to the problem of bilingualism and multilingualism]. Moscow [in Russian].
  3. Beliaev, B.V. (2015). Primenenie printsipa soznatelnosti v obuchenii inostrannomu yazyku. V sbornike «Psikholoiia obucheniia inostrannomu yazyku» [Application of the principle of consciousness in teaching a foreign language. In the collection: psychology of teaching a foreign language]. Moscow [in Russian].
  4. Bertagaev, T.A. (2008). Bilingvizm i ego raznovidnosti v sisteme upotrebleniia [Bilingualism and its varieties in the system of use]. Problemy dvuiazychiia i mnogoiazychiia — Problems of bilingualism and multilingualism, 86. Moscow [in Russian].
  5. Avrorin, V.A. (2010). Dvuiazychie i shkola. Problemy dvuiazychiia i mnohoiazychiia [Bilingualism and the school. Problems of bilingualism and multilingualism]. Moscow: Nauka [in Russian].
  6. Vereshchagin, E.M. (2016). Psikhologicheskaia i metodicheskaia kharakteristika dvuiazychiia (bilingvizma) [Pedagogical and psychological characteristics of bilingualism]. Moscow [in Russian].
  7. Mirzoeva, L.Yu., & Akhmetzhanova, Z.K. (2019). K voprosu ob interferentnykh oshibkakh kak elemente yazykovogo landshafta v usloviiakh subordinativnogo poliiazychiia [On the issue of interference errors as an element of the language landscape in the context of subordinative multilingualism]. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudastvennogo universiteta. Filologiia, No. 60, 45–65. DOI: 10.17233/19986645/60/4 [in Russian].
  8. Itskovich, V.A., & Shvartskopf, V.S. (2017). Passivnoe dvuiazychie i kultura rodnoi rechi. Problemy dvuiazychiia i mnogoiazychiia [Passive bilingualism and the culture of native speech. Problems of bilingualism and multilingualism]. Moscow [in Russian].
  9. Shcherba, L.V. (2009). Izbrannye raboty po yazykoznaniiu i fonetike [Selected works on linguistics and phonetics]. (Vol. 1). Saint-Petersburg [in Russian].
  10. Bagirokov Kh. Z. (2004). Bilingvalnoe obrazovanie: vyzov vremeni [Bilingual education: the challenge of time]. Russkii yazyk i literatura v kazakhskoi shkole — Russian language and literature in the Kazakh school. Moscow [in Russian].
  11. Rozentsveig, V.Iu. (2014). O yazykovykh kontaktakh kak stepeni dvuiazychiia [About language contacts as a degree of bilingualism]. Voposy yazykoznaniia — Questions of linguistics. Moscow [in Russian].
  12. Blokh, M.Ya. (2017). Teoreticheskaia grammatika anhliiskogo yazyka [Theoretical grammar of the English language]. Moscow [in Russian].
  13. Ter-Minasova, S.G. (2004). Yazyk i mezhkulturnaia kommunikatsiia [Language and intercultural communication]. Moscow [in Russian].
Year: 2021
City: Karaganda
Category: Pedagogy