Beijing, China
Kazan, Russian Federation
Fiction dialogues offer an effective tool for developing the pragmatic and sociocultural components of communicative skills in learners of Russian as a foreign language (RFL). Dialogues from Russian literature may be used to teach RFL students to interpret implicit meanings, recognize communicative strategies, and select appropriate linguistic resources in contemporary intercultural communication, including digitally mediated and virtual contexts. The method was tested on Y. V. Trifonov’s novella The Exchange, which is rich in authentic cultural patterns of interpersonal interaction. By analyzing the communicative strategies realized in these dialogues, the authors substantiated the use of fiction dialogue as a reliable model for developing pragmatic competence in RFL learners. The stylistic, pragmatic, and discourse methods included elements of comparative analysis and situational modeling. Evasion, rational persuasion, and emotional pressure proved to be the dominant strategies of interpersonal interaction in the novella. Their specific linguistic and pragmatic markers correlated with the social roles and psychological orientations of the characters. The text analysis served as material for developing communicative skills of interpreting implicit meanings and making strategic choices of linguistic means. These skills are relevant for face-to-face and virtual communication with its asynchronicity and reduced non-verbal cues. The article introduces a stage-based methodological model for working with fiction dialogue aimed at developing pragmatic and sociocultural competence in B2–C1 RFL learners. The dialogues are not meant for reciting: they show RFL learners how to make strategic choices in dialogical communication, where each utterance is interpreted in relation to both speech norms and communicative intention. In addition, the model prepares RFL learners for digital intercultural communication.
literary dialogue, communicative strategies, speech portrait, pragmatic competence, Russian as a foreign language (RFL), RFL methodology, implicit meaning, literary discourse, virtual communication
1. Arutyunova N. D. The addressee factor. Izvestiya AN SSSR. Seriya literatury i yazyka, 1981, 40(4): 356–367. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/ykcoep
2. Bolotnova N. S. Philological analysis of the text. Moscow: Flinta, 2009, 520. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/utyecp
3. Bulygina T. V., Shmelev A. D. Linguistic conceptualization of the world in Russian grammar. Moscow: YaRK, 1997, 576. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/rbbsfh
4. Vishnyakova S. A. Developing pragmatic competence of non-native speakers in the process of teaching speech communication. Mir russkogo slova, 2023, (1): 98–105. (In Russ.)
5. Demyankov V. Z. Interpretation, understanding and linguistic aspects of their computer modeling. Moscow: MSU, 1989, 172. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/sfhrlv
6. Issers O. S. Communicative strategies and tactics of Russian speech, 8th ed. Moscow: LENAND, 2017, 308. (In Russ.)
7. Karasik V. I. Language circle: Personality, concepts, and discourse. Volgograd: Peremena, 2002, 477. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/ugqamp
8. Kolesnikov A. A. Teaching foreign languages in the light of new competence realities. Foreign languages at school, 2019, (5): 2–11. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/fbtiqe
9. Kolesova D. V., Shkurina N. V., Rebrova I. V., Popova T. I., Voznesenskaya I. M., Khorokhordina O. V. Text: Theoretical foundations and principles of analysis. St. Petersburg: Zlatoust, 2011, 464. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/qwsfzn
10. Kulibina N. V. Why, what and how to read in the lesson. St. Petersburg: Zlatoust, 2001, 264. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/nojlac
11. Larina T. V. Pragmatics of emotions in intercultural context. Russian Journal of Linguistics, 2015, (1): 144–163. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/tmcpab
12. Li M. Typical mistakes of Chinese students studying the Russian language, ways to correction: Interrogative questions. Pedagogical Education in Russia, 2010, (4): 98–105. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/mviyjz
13. Lotman Yu. M. Structure of the artistic text. Moscow: Iskusstvo, 1970, 384. (In Russ.)
14. Miller L. V. Cultural-linguistic anthropology and national worldview (linguistic and methodic aspects). The Russian language in modern China: Proc. V Intern. Sci.-Prac. Conf., Chita, 15–17 Apr 2017. Chita: TbSU, 2017, 77–80. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/zjaefl
15. Passov E. I. Communicative method of teaching speaking. Moscow: Prosveshchenie, 2006, 223. (In Russ.)
16. Prokhorov Yu. E., Sternin I. A. Russians: Communicative behavior. Moscow: Flinta, 2006, 326. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/qofsal
17. Safonova V. V. A sociocultural approach to teaching foreign languages. Moscow: Vyssh. shk., 1991, 311. (In Russ.)
18. Tareva E. G., Tivyaeva I. V. Transformation of Linguodidactics: How Artificial Intelligence shapes language education priorities. In: Barannikov K. A., Bosenko T. M., Voronkov A. A. et al. Modern {digital} didactics. Moscow: Intelligence Center, 2024, 37–44. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/oaxfem
19. Shchukin A. N. Methods of teaching Russian as a foreign language. Moscow: Flinta, 2017, 512. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/ndhldn
20. Austin J. L. How to do things with words. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1962, 192.
21. Bachman L. Fundamental considerations in language testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990, 408.
22. Bardovi-Harlig K. Learning and teaching pragmatics. The routledge handbook of second language acquisition and pragmatics, ed. Taguchi N. London: Routledge, 2019, 45–60.
23. Barón J., Celaya M. L., Watkins S. Pragmatics in language teaching: From research to practice. London: Routledge, 2023, 248.
24. Bloemert J., Paran A., Jansen E. P. W. A., Van de Grift W. Students' perspective on the benefits of EFL literature education. The Language Learning Journal, 2019, 47(3): 371–384. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2017.1298149
25. Canale M., Swain M. Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1980, 1(1): 1–47. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/I.1.1
26. Hall G. Literature in language education. 2nd ed. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2020, 278.
27. Hymes D. On communicative competence. Sociolinguistics. Selected readings, eds. Pride J. B., Holmes J. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1972, 269–293. URL: http://wwwhomes.uni-bielefeld.de/sgramley/Hymes-1.pdf (accessed 1 Jan 2026).
28. Ifantidou E. Pragmatic competence and relevance. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2014, 228.
29. Kecskes I. English as a lingua Franca: The pragmatic perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2019, 264. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316217832
30. Mao T., He S. An integrated approach to pragmatic competence: Its framework and properties. SAGE Open, 2021, 11(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211011472
31. Searle J. R. Speech acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1969, 203. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139173438
32. Spencer-Oatey H., Kádár D. Intercultural politeness: Managing relations across cultures. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2021, 262.
33. The handbook of discourse analysis, eds. Tannen D., Hamilton H., Schiffrin D. 2nd ed. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell, 2021, 928.
34. Timpe Laughlin V., Wain J., Schmidgall J. Defining and operationalizing the construct of pragmatic competence: Review and Recommendations. ETS Research Report Series, 2015, 2015(1): 1–43. https://doi.org/10.1002/ets2.12053
35. Tsang A., Paran A., Lau W. W. F. The language and non-language benefits of literature in foreign language education: An exploratory study of learners' views. Language Teaching Research, 2023, 27(5): 1120–1141. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168820972345
