Verbalization of the concept language policy

Online research


  • Alla I. Anisimova Oles Honchar Dnipro National University, Dnipro, Ukraine
  • Nataliia A. Safonova Oles Honchar Dnipro National University, Dnipro, Ukraine
  • Mariia Yu. Dobrushyna Oles Honchar Dnipro National University, Dnipro, Ukraine
  • Nataliia O. Lysenko Oles Honchar Dnipro National University, Dnipro, Ukraine
  • Iryna H. Bezrodnykh Oles Honchar Dnipro National University, Dnipro, Ukraine


associative experiment, field structure, language policy, multilingualism, online research, verbalization


The article deals with the issues of revealing the semantic structure of the concept Language Policy based on the online experiment. Most participants of the experiment represent Ukraine and European countries such as France and Germany, Poland and a few respondents from the USA and Turkey. The analysis of the similarities and differences of the concept Language Policy established via an associative experiment done with the help of respondents from different countries helps to outline their national specific features, which contribute to a deeper understanding of both foreign and native languages and cultures through the analyses of the semantic structure of the concept in question. It is emphasized that Language Policy has become a widespread phenomenon in modern Ukrainian and European societies from the social point of view. The study of a linguistic situation in a society can be considered to be an important means of forming the ability to conduct intercultural dialogues. As for the methods and linguistic tools they can vary depending on the applicable target. The article identifies common and different aspects in of the field structures of the concept Language Policy done in multilingual sociolinguistic surroundings.


Download data is not yet available.


Anderson, A. C. (2003). The process of structure-based drug design. Chemistry & biology, 10(9), 787-797.

Bajdak, A. V. (2010). Experimental studies of the concepts “life” and “death”. Bulletin of the Tomsk Polytechnic University, 6(3), 228–232.

Blommaert, J., Collins, J., & Slembrouck, S. (2005). Spaces of multilingualism. Language & Communication, 25(3), 197-216.

Boldyrev, N. N. (2008). Principles and methods of cognitive language studies. Principles and methods of cognitive language studies. Tambov, 11-29.

Cargile, A. C., Giles, H., Ryan, E. B., & Bradac, J. J. (1994). Language attitudes as a social process: A conceptual model and new directions. Language & Communication, 14(3), 211-236.

Dzyuba, E. V. (2018). Kognitivnaya lingvistika [Cognitive linguistics].

Fagerberg, J., & Verspagen, B. (2009). Innovation studies—The emerging structure of a new scientific field. Research policy, 38(2), 218-233.

Faye, P., Brémaud, D., Daubin, M. D., Courcoux, P., Giboreau, A., & Nicod, H. (2004). Perceptive free sorting and verbalization tasks with naive subjects: an alternative to descriptive mappings. Food quality and preference, 15(7-8), 781-791.

Fedoryuk, L. (2016). The Metodology of Concept Structure Analysis: Cognitive and Linguoculturological Aspects. Linguistic studies, 70-76.

Frumkina, R. M. (1995). Does modern linguistics have its own epistemology. Language and science of the end of the twentieth century:[sat. articles]. M.: Russian State Humanitarian University, 74-117.

Henry, A., & Apelgren, B. M. (2008). Young learners and multilingualism: A study of learner attitudes before and after the introduction of a second foreign language to the curriculum. System, 36(4), 607-623.

Hudcovi?ová, M., Jan?ovi?ová, ?udmila, Petrášová, B., & Baghana, J. (2021). The English grammatical collocations of the verb and the preposition for and their collocational equivalents in the Slovak language. Linguistics and Culture Review, 5(S1), 1183-1194.

Intiana, S. R. H., & Sapiin, .-. (2017). The affix me-/-kan and me(n)-/-kan in the presidential candidates’ debate texts in 2014 – 2019: morphology observation on derivation and inflection. International Journal of Linguistics, Literature and Culture, 3(2), 66-77. Retrieved from

Johnson, C. M. (2001). A survey of current research on online communities of practice. The internet and higher education, 4(1), 45-60.

Kopp, F. O., & Ramsauer, U. (2003). Verwaltungsverfahrensgesetz. Beck.

Latupeirissa, D. S., & Sayd, A. I. (2019). Grammatical errors of writing in EFL class: A case in Indonesia. International Journal of Linguistics, Literature and Culture, 5(2), 1-12.

Malyuga, E. N. (Ed.). (2020). Functional approach to professional discourse exploration in linguistics. Springer.

Maslova, V. A. (2004). Cognitive linguistics. Minsk: TetraSystems.

McMillan, B. A., & Rivers, D. J. (2011). The practice of policy: Teacher attitudes toward “English only”. System, 39(2), 251-263.

Mustajoki, A. O. (2000). Functional syntax theory. Moscow: Yazyki Slavyanskoy Kultury.

Nikitina, S. E. (1987). Semantic analysis of the scientific language: the case of linguistics.

Paleeva, E. V. (2015). Conceptual Analysis as a Method of Linguistic Research. ?????? ????? ? ????????????? ????????????, (1), 56-59.

Pautova, L. A. (2007). Associative experiment: the experience of sociological application. Sociology: methodology, methods, mathematical models, 24, 149-168.

Rozvod, E. V. (2015). Methods of research of linguistic and cultural concepts. Scientific Bulletin of the Lesia Ukrainka East European National University. Series: Philological Sciences (Linguistics), 4(305), 90-95.

Ryzhkina, I. B. (2014). Educational Opportunities of Collage as a Didactic Means: Inter-Disciplinary Approach. Education and Sci-ence, (6), 113-134.

Schunk, D. H. (1986). Verbalization and children's self-regulated learning. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 11(4), 347-369.

Stepanov, Y. S. (1997). Constants. Dictionary of Russian culture. Research experience. M.: Shkola" Languages of Russian culture.

Sternin, I. A. (1985). Lexical meaning of the word in speech. Voronezh: Voronezh University.

Suwija, N., Suarta, M., Suparsa, N., Alit Geria, A.A.G., Suryasa, W. (2019). Balinese speech system towards speaker social behavior. Humanities & Social Sciences Reviews, 7(5), 32-40.

Tagnin, S. E. (Ed.). (2014). New language technologies and linguistic research: a two-way road. Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

Tetty, M. (2020). Theory of origin of languages. Macrolinguistics and Microlinguistics, 1(1), 13–22. Retrieved from

Tokarev, G. V. (2003). A concept as an object of cultural linguistics (on material of representations of a concept ‘Trud’in Russian).

Ufimtseva, N. V. (2014). The associative dictionary as a model of the linguistic picture of the world. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 154, 36-43.

Vander Klok, J., & Conners, T. J. (2019). Using questionnaires as a tool for comparative linguistic field research: Two case studies on Javanese.

Yenikeyeva, S., & Klymenko, O. (2021). Synergy of modern English word-formation system. Linguistics and Culture Review, 5(S1), 1110-1122.



How to Cite

Anisimova, A. I., Safonova, N. A., Dobrushyna, M. Y., Lysenko, N. O., & Bezrodnykh, I. H. (2021). Verbalization of the concept language policy: Online research. Linguistics and Culture Review, 5(S4), 1301-1311.



Research Articles