9Doctor of pedagogical Sciences, Associate Professor, Professor of the Department of Humanities Moscow International University Moscow, Russia.
10Candidate of philological Sciences, Associate Professor State Agrarian University of the Northern TRANS-Urals Tyumen, Russia.
11Candidate of philological Sciences, Associate Professor, head of the Department of folklore and culture, head of the educational and methodological service of the Institute of languages and culture of the peoples of the North-East of the Russian Federation North-Eastern Federal University named after M.K. Ammosov Yakutsk, Russia.


According to the definition of the UNESCO Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity, “culture should be considered as a set of distinctive features inherent in a society or a social group — spiritual and material, intellectual and emotional — and that, in addition to art and literature, it embraces a way of life”, the ability to live together “value systems, traditions and beliefs” (UNESCO Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity, 2001).

Modern transculture has arisen as self-aware integrity of multidisciplinary components (religious and ideological, artistic and philological, folk-mythological, socio-political, economic, etc.). An analysis of current trends emerging in the theory and practice of modern humanities shows that modern humanitarian knowledge is a conglomeration of political, economic, social, and cultural interconnections (Ebzeyeva, Tutova, 2012).

The integral character of self-consciousness of a modern person is a distinctive and necessary feature of culture, which is an increasingly polyvariant and diverse aggregation of sciences and professions, arts and faiths, traditions and innovations (Karabulatova, 2013; Ebzeeva, Karabulatova, Nakisbaev, 2018). Transculture occurs on the periphery of various cultures, where their potential capabilities are identified, new semantic and symbolic lacunae are designated.

The cultural range of the XXI century contains a variable set of different cultures, and their oppositeness to each other creates a new field of cross-cultural and comparative research. In the twenty-first century. Socio-political communications have undergone dramatic changes. In the middle of the second decade of the 21st century, communication in educational and social policies evolved from a mostly slow one-way process, more likely of an informational nature, to polyvariant communication, which resulted in various kinds of social deviations and conflicts in the conditions of multipolarity of education. At the same time, the nature of communication has also changed in political discourse, and the economic discourse has undergone a certain transformation under the influence of new social realities (Kamal, Almulla, Karabulatova, Karabulatova, 2016; Akhmetova, Karabulatova, Dudin, Dorzhiev, 2016; Luchinskaya, Karabulatova, Tkhorik, Zelenskaya, Golubtsov, 2018).

The relevance of the topic of our study stems from the theoretical and applied significance of the conceptual rethinking of the discursive-communicative aspect of the functioning of the global EL as an essential component of the world language process, driven by language contacts, in particular, presented in the B. Kachru and U. Labov models, which served as the basis for contact variantology EL.

The result of the contacts of the EL with national languages was not so much the appearance of new elements and structural relations in them, as the emergence of new variants of English, used as a second, additional language. The sociolinguistic approach to modern dissemination of El is based on the principle of social conditioning of the language, which characterizes both new language variants and the collective discursive-communicative competence of the communities using them. The social interaction of members of the linguistic community supports its unity as a social group and is a prerequisite for its linguocultural conceptualization. The functional and pragmatic status of new variants of contact EL, functioning in individual regions, in particular, within Scandinavia, is determined by the relationship between the dominant national languages and EL, the established collective language identification and the discursive-communicative competence of users.

Materials and methods

The relevance of the topic of this article is determined by the theoretical and methodological foundations on which the study is based. Among them, it should be indicated, firstly, the contact variantology of global EL, the development of which was prompted by the model B. Qachru World Englishes, symbolizing the diversification of EL in a wide range of functional and pragmatic variability.

Secondly, this is the concept of sociolinguistic variables by U. Labov, who created an innovative technique for studying language differentiation and substantiated a conceptual apparatus for describing language variations. Thirdly, it is developed in the works of W. Weinreich, C. Ferguson, J. Fishman, E. Haugen, J. Gamperts, S. Erwin-Tripp and other founders of sociolinguistics, the theory of language contacts, covering the areas of mutual influence and convergent development of contacting languages, bilingualism, interference, interlanguage identification of elements of contacting languages (Borodina, 2018). Fourthly, this is the theory of the linguistic community as a social group proposed by J. Gamperts, which was further developed in the concept of the community of practices of J. Leiva and E. Wanger and in the concept of the discursive community of J. Swales. The theory of the linguistic community of J. Gamperts implies ideas about the linguistic planning necessary for such a community, theorist of which was the Norwegian sociolinguist E. Haugen, who originally studied the implementation of language policy in Norway and the concept of communicative competence put forward by D. Heims only within the language community.

The fifth theoretical and methodological basis on which the dissertation research is based should be considered the theory of linguocultural conceptualization of EL, the main provisions of which were developed by Russian and foreign scientists S.G. Ter-Minasova, V.V. Kabakchi, N.L. Gradina, V.V. Red, Z.G. Proshina, I.A. Sternin, M. Bayram, J. Condon, G. Hofstede, J. Chen, et al.  The procedure for the study of intercultural communication is characterized by the search for special sociolinguistic variables and discursive strategies that participants use in cross-national contexts.

Thus, in the study of EL as a tool for transnational and intranational communication carried out in the Scandinavian region, the system-functional approach is determined as the basic one, within the framework of which an integrated research methodology is developed. It includes a scientific-theoretical analysis of the works of domestic and foreign linguists on general and specific issues of the dissemination and development of new versions of EL; The method of historical analysis of the prerequisites of the modern language situation and the principle of “synchrony-in-diachrony” applied in this work allowed not only to show the origins of the modern variability of Scandinavian languages, to give a relatively complete list of the reasons for the main changes, but also to reflect the dynamics of the modern language situation (Karabulatova, Polivara, 2013; Ebzeeva, Karabulatova, 2017).

The method of included monitoring of live speech of Scandinavian users of EL and the procedure for analyzing social networks, necessary to study the processes of social exchange and the formation of target groups that simulate the socio-demographic structure of the Scandinavian community, precede a series of experiments of a complex nature. At the stage of selection of informants and systematization of the corpus of sounding texts, the methods of interviewing, questioning and interviewing are used in order to obtain sociolinguistic data in various communicative contexts. The methods of audit analysis and expert evaluation allow us to identify and systematize the collected factual material from the perspective of the interdependence of sociolinguistic variables, which is expressed in the mutual consistency of the observed changes. Content analysis of factual material (analysis of documents regulating the use of EL in the economy, science and higher education of Scandinavian countries, as well as in everyday communication of Danes, Swedes and Norwegians; qualitative analysis of the content of interview texts) reveals the evolution of language ideology and assessment of the status of EL. Perceptual-auditory analysis of interviews is aimed at identifying significant patterns in the use of certain sociolinguistic variables in the Scandinavian discourse in English, and pragmalinguistic analysis is used to study the linguistic aspects of this discourse as a means of achieving communicative goals.

The elements of the linguocultural component of the Scandinavian varieties of EL are revealed on the basis of an analysis of the socio-national conditionality of the use of sociolinguistic variables that are realized in the English-language communication of the inhabitants of Denmark, Sweden and Norway. The cognitive analysis of the English-language discourse of Danes, Swedes and Norwegians makes it possible to identify the specificity of the choice of structural-semantic means, reflecting the elements of the national picture of the world in their minds, and to give a linguistic interpretation of the mechanism of phonetic interference complicating the linguistic interaction of the participants of the English-language communication.


The American sociolinguist I. Keshkesh defines interculturality as a phenomenon that is not only interactively and socially constructed, but also relies on cultural models and norms adopted in discursive communities represented by participants of communication. Interculturality is realized both by normative, and so created ad hoc components, which are reproduced in the communicative process. The result is intercultural discourse, in which there is a mutual transformation, and not just the transfer of information and stereotypes of communicative behavior (Kecskes, 2011).

Contact EL serves as the main instrument of intercultural discourse in Europe and, in particular, in the Scandinavian region (Hellekjær, 2012; Rindal, 2015). The communities of these countries, in general, are open to the perception of EL, and the reasons for this are the following factors: 1) unconditionally high status of the EL; 2) the popularity of the Anglo-American media products; 3) intensive teaching of AA at all levels of education and for all age groups; 4) extensive international contacts - both personal and business (Gottlieb, 2004). The last two factors are interrelated with the process of internationalization of the Scandinavian community in science, education, business, etc. as an instrument of internationalization stimulates their development, and its distribution is stimulated by the results of their activity.

Italian researcher L. Lampariello, who studied the Scandinavian languages for many years, noted that the most influential of these factors is the impact of the English-speaking means of the entertainment industry - video and computer games, television programs and films. Therefore, the integration of teaching English with the practical development of receptive and reproductive skills during immersion in the EL, motivation and desire to learn the language, as well as a certain similarity of vocabulary and grammar are for residents of Scandinavian countries the main prerequisites for a high level of EL (Lampariello, 2014).

To the European language situation of the beginning of the XXI century. The applicable clause of I.S. Karabulatova on the formation of the linguistic personality of a new multilingual type, in the mind of which are combined individual bilingualism, knowledge and use of two languages by separate members of a particular ethnic group, and mass bilingualism, knowledge and use of two languages by the majority of ethnic groups; individual nascent bilingualism and collective existing bilingualism; regional bilingualism, knowledge and use of two languages by residents of a certain region of the country, and national bilingualism, knowledge of two languages by this ethnic group of the country (Karabulatova, 2011).

In the Scandinavian countries - Denmark, Sweden, Norway - there is a single continuum of transnational EL functioning in specific cultural and linguistic conditions for this region, in which there is a bilingual situation with simultaneous use of the national as the main language and English as a supra-ethnic language that is not native or one population groups.

The impact of global EL in the Scandinavian region is twofold:

  1. it affects the national languages, causing certain lexico-semantic and, on a much smaller scale, morphosyntactic changes that contribute to the adaptation of national languages to the conditions of globalization.
  2. EL is used by Scandinavians as the main tool of international communication and functions in the Scandinavian region as a second language of intranational communication. The status acquired by him is a consequence of similar and interrelated processes of internationalization occurring in the national communities of Denmark, Sweden and Norway, which indicates the emergence of a regional functional-pragmatic version of the EL.

By the middle of the second decade of the 21st century, thanks to the development of scientific and technological progress, the formation of a global communication space took place, which combines in its structure various state-of-the-art technical capabilities for disseminating information. Key trends in the development of modern society have a direct impact on the genesis and evolution of individual manifestations of social reality, thus determining the need to update the theoretical and methodological approaches of their socio-philosophical understanding. Among the trends shaping the fundamentally new characteristics of the modern world order, undoubtedly, is the development and widespread spread of communication conflicts (Ebzeeva, Sheipak, Gishkayeva, Nakisbaev, Karabulatova, Dubinina, 2017; Nakisbaev, Dubinina, Karabulatova, Levshits, Krivoshlykova, 2017; Karabulatova, Patieva, Seidina, Podkopaeva, Kushnirenko, Niyazova, 2017).

The loss of control over the flow of information can lead to a gradual loss of control over the state, and hence the shift of the center of political power. In the event of a crisis, a kind of war of interpretations of the controversial event proposed by the accusers of violations on the one hand and the accused on the other takes place. The increasing role of the Internet in the information process, as well as the active development of social networks that are practically not regulated today by the law, complicates the task of managing the information flow. Under these conditions, political rhetoric becomes the only possible way to remain the main interpreter of the event. Thus, the legitimacy of the existing political power largely depends on political communication and discursive strategies in crisis situations.


According to the observations of S. Gooskens and V. Heering, Norway has developed a kind of receptive multilingualism (rather, receptive multi-dialectic), since the speakers of a particular local dialect understand not only the Oslo dialect, which practically plays the role of a national oral standard based on the written Bokmål in the education system , but all the other local dialects. Moreover, the Norwegians, brought up in the context of linguistic variation, understand not only the national languages of their neighbors better than other Scandinavians, but also their territorial dialects (Gooskens, Heeringa, 2014; Görlach, 2002).

Norway has a long tradition of communication in English. A participant in the discussion that has developed on the pages of the Norwegian language blog, K.-O. from Bergen explains that the west coast, with the center of Bergen, and the southern region, where the capital of Oslo is located, is a traditional shipping and fishing area, and representatives of different nationalities employed in these industries should have found the language of communication: " He has been influenced by many countries. It’s the west coast of Norway. It was always under the great influence of fishing and shipping, many of the residents went abroad, to other countries. My grandfather worked on the ship as a driver or something like that, and the ship went abroad all the time with people of other nationalities on board, and they usually used English to communicate with each other and when they came to other countries). K.-O. also notes that, according to her mother, who works in the Bergen branch of the concern Cargotec, which manufactures and supplies specialized machines for servicing oil fields, English serves as the working language of all company employees (Norwegian language blog, 2011-2016).

Young people realize that they learn English more successfully than older people, including their teachers. We give two answers, preserving the grammatical structure and style of the respondents:

A.N.: I can see where you going with this, but hey, like you said, not all of the Norwegians are good at speaking English! Mostly people who were born earlier than the 70-ies actually suck (youth slang). It´s the newer generation that you´re might point to.

K.-O.: The younger generation today watches movies, TV-shows, use YouTube, travel, use English practically and do use the Internet a lot. It is not weird that the younger generations from mostly all over the world are getting better at English than their teachers when we use it so much in the media and computer games online, blogs and TV. We do also work harder in school to get what we want, if you want a really good job, you should know English.

Design artist and teacher W.H. also notes that teens speak better English than many adults, whose speech is often distinguished by a strong accent:

One thing you can hear is the heavy accent when even quite prominent persons speak, people who use English quite often, having lots of international contacts... An accent is natural but when it's so heavy that you can barely decipher what the person is saying, it might be problematic.

W.H. has in mind two famous compatriots, the “Norwegian” English pronunciation of which was the subject of ridicule and parodies. This is T. Jagland (Thorbjørn Jagland), born in 1950, former Prime Minister, Chairman of the Norwegian Nobel Committee (who awarded the Peace Prize to Barack Obama on his initiative), Secretary General of the Council of Europe, and Petr Solberg. In 1973, the world champion in auto racing.


Comparing the role of EL as an instrument of interculturality in the Scandinavian countries, the following points should be noted:

  • EL serves as a catalyst for changes in all Scandinavian languages as a result of the intensive use of anglicisms and a certain hybridization of discourse.
  • EL serves as the main language of transnational communication and in fact acquired the status of the second language of intranational communication (Vassilenko, Karabulatova, Vasilishina, Tukaeva, Barabash, 2018; Ebzeeva, Karabulatova, Nakisbaev, 2018).
  • The main difference lies in the fact that in the minds of the Danish and Swedish linguistic personalities an idea of the dichotomy was formed: first, the national language: second, English. Language identification of indigenous Norwegians, constituting 87% of the country's population, is structured according to the opposition of: a) a local dialect to a national variant (Bokmål or Nynorsk), b) one national variant to another, c) native, Norwegian to a foreign language, English.

On the scale of the whole Scandinavian community, the native language, with all dialects and variants, has the status of the first, and the foreign, English language of transnational communication, the second. In the process of interaction between the national and English languages, problems arise in the loss of the national language of domains, for example, in the sphere of international business, where knowledge of EL is a mandatory factor, since it serves as a universal language of communication and is often used as lingua franca in higher education, where much of the written materials and The lectures are given in English.

Summing up the views of the Scandinavians on the status of the EL and its role for the inhabitants of this country, we note the following points:

  • EL became the second language of Scandinavians, a part of their linguocultural identity, forming their regional secondary linguistic personality.
  • In the Scandinavian countries, the state policy of propagating the EL “from above” is a natural component of the pan-Scandinavian globalization process that meets the interests of the whole society.
  • The national language remains the first, primary language of intranational communication in the Scandinavian countries, and English is the second, additional language necessary in certain communicative contexts.
  • Most Scandinavians use English in transnational communication, in particular, while traveling abroad, and freedom to express English in everyday communication is perceived by people far from linguistics and language policy as a common high level of language.
  • The views of the ordinary Scandinavian on the status of the English language vary depending on the individual skills of English-speaking communication and personal experience in everyday transnational communication.