CROSS-CULTURAL RESEARCH AS A METHODOLOGICAL RESOURCE OF MODERN LINGUODIDACTICS

Cross-cultural linguodidactics is considered a modern methodological tool that allows learning a foreign language not only in the context of immersion in the culture of the people – the native speaker of that language, but also to take into account the effects resulting from the interactive exchange of linguocultural information between all parties of multicultural communication. Based on the above positions, most linguistic facts acquire the status of units with a linguocultural and linguodidactic resource. Moreover, the acquisition and subsequent mastery of these foreign language units contribute to the formation of the secondary linguistic personality fragment of the worldview, which, in turn, allows for building and improving the competence base of an international student in the field of intercultural and multilingual interaction. Material and Methods. The study was conducted on the basis of the material contained in lexicographic sources to investigate the didactic resources of lexical borrowings – Russianisms and Chineseisms. The main method is a comprehensive cross-cultural analysis combining a number of methodological procedures: Observation, etymological, componential and lexical-semantic analysis, associative linguistic experiment, elements of linguoculturological, linguo-conceptual and discursive analysis. Results and Discussion. The cross-cultural study was conducted in several steps. First, based on the analysis of available lexicographic information, the presence of borrowed units belonging to various thematic groups (socio-political, scientific, and technical vocabulary, words denoting natural and geographical objects, realities of national life, economy, historical and cultural phenomena) was established in Russian and Chinese as actively contacting recipient languages. Second, it was found that Russianisms quantitatively predominate and most of the borrowings are internationalisms. Third, an association experiment conducted in groups of Russian and Chinese speakers was used to determine similarities and differences in the interpretation of borrowings. The results of the comparative analysis are mainly determined by the factors of the informant’s belonging to a certain linguistic culture and the level of foreign language proficiency. Finally, recommendations are formulated on how crosscultural analysis can be used for linguodidactic purposes. Conclusion. The didactic tool of cross-cultural analysis makes it possible to learn a foreign language thoroughly and comprehensively and to use it effectively as a means of intercultural communication. At the same time, the borrowed lexical units serve as valuable empirical material for the implementation of the methodological guidelines of a cross-cultural orientation.