employee from 01.01.2014 until now
Moscow, Russian Federation
UDC 81
The article addresses the factors that contributed to high paces of the English language evolution nowadays. The relevance of the study is conditioned by the development of digital discourse, contributing to the modification of English and the emergence of its socio-cultural and functional variation. The purpose of the article is to identify the consequences of the change of the educational paradigm and the introduction of the plurilinguistic approach to teaching foreign languages. The article elaborates on the negative consequences of the increasing application of multimodal communicative competence and the practical approach to English language learning, which resulted in linking the level of language competence to the achievement of certain practical goals. The author concludes that the blurring of grammatical norms, acceptance of language informality as a new norm and the replacement of the linguocultural component of the language by its sociocultural variation and practical functionality may have a number of negative consequences for Standard English, ranging from increasing illiteracy rate to the blurring of the national cultural component of English.
intercultural communication, language education, plurilingualism, translingualism, digital discourse, Netspeak, language variation.
1. Berdichevskiy A. L. Sovremennoe mezhkul'turnoe inojazychnoe obrazovanie [Modern Intercultural Foreign Language Education] // Nauchnye issledovanija i razrabotki. Sovremennaja kommunikativistika.. 2024. №. 6. pp. 58-62. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12737/2587-9103-2024-13-6-58-62 EDN: https://elibrary.ru/PJOHPN
2. Barcelona European Council (2002). Presidency conclusions. Available at: http://aei.pitt.edu/43345/1/Barcelona_2002_1.pdf. (Accessed 28 April 2025)
3. Canagarajah S. (2011). Codemeshing in academic writing: Identifying teachable strategies of translanguaging. Modern Language Journal, 95(3), 401–417. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540- 4781.2011.01207.x
4. Cenoz J. Defining Multilingualism. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics. 2013;33:3-18. doihttps://doi.org/10.1017/S026719051300007X
5. Cingel D. P. & Sundar S. S. (2012). Texting, techspeak, and tweens: The relationship between text messaging and English grammar skills. New Media & Society, 14(8), 1304–1320. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444812442927
6. Cope B., & Kalantzis M. (2009). Multiliteracies”: New Literacies, New Learning. Pedagogies: An International Journal, 4(3), 164–195. https://doi.org/10.1080/15544800903076044
7. Cope B., & Kalantzis M. (2015). The Things You Do to Know: An introduction to the Pedagogy of Multiliteracies. In B. Cope & M. Kalntzis (Eds.), A Pedagogy of Multiliteracies: Learning by Design (1st ed., pp. 1–36). Palgrave Macmilan. ttps://doi.org/10.1057/9781137539724 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137539724_1
8. Council of Europe. (2021) Common European Framework Reference for languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment. Available at: https://rm.coe.int/common-european-framework-of-reference-for-languages-learning-teaching/16809ea0d4#page=30. (Accessed 28 April 2025).
9. Crystal D. (2011). Internet Linguistics: A student guide. New York: Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203830901
10. Edwards V. (2004). Multilingualism in the English-speaking world. Oxford, UK: Blackwell. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470755723
11. European Commission (2023). Statistics on migration to Europe. Available at: https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/priorities-2019-2024/promoting-our-european-way-life/statistics-migration-europe_en#people-living-in-the-eu. (Accessed 28 April 2025).
12. European Parliament (2022). Multilingualism: the language of the European Union. Available at: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2019/642207/EPRS_BRI(2019)642207_EN.pdf. (Accessed 28 April 2025)
13. Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2004). An introduction to functional grammar (3rd ed.). London, UK: Edward Arnold.
14. Lu M.-Zh., Horner B. (2013). Translingual literacy, language difference, and matters of agency. College English, Volume 75, Number 6, 582-607.
15. Mills K. (2010). A Review of the “Digital Turn” in the New Literacy Studies. Review of Educational Research, 80(2), 246–271. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654310364401
16. Prihantoro P., Suherdi D., & Muslim A. B. (2022). Developing Students’ Multimodal Communicative Competence Through Multiliteracies Pedagogy. ENGLISH FRANCA: Academic Journal of English Language and Education, 6(2). https://doi.org/10.29240/ef.v6i2.5242
17. Rameen T., Fiza H. (2021). Impact of Netspeak on the Writing Skills of Generation X and Generation Y. Journal of Communication and Cultural Trends. 3(1):31-53. DOIhttps://doi.org/10.32350/jcct.31.03 EDN: https://elibrary.ru/DUDBSZ
18. Sonn W. (2006). Paradigms lost: The life and deaths of the printed word. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press
19. Sultan, A.A. (2023) The influence of online communication in the English language in real life. International Journal of English Learning and Teaching Skills; Vol. 5, No 2; January 2023, ISSN: 2639-7412 (Print) ISSN: 2638-5546 (Online). Available at: https://www.ijeltsjournal.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/Paper-5_Adnan-Ahmed-Sultan.pdf (Assessed 30 April 2025)
20. Taylor F. (2009). Authentic Internet in the EFL class. Modern English Teacher, 18(1), 5–9.
21. Thangaraj S. R., & Maniam M. (2015). The Influence of Netspeak on students' writing. Journal of Education and Learning, 9(1), 45-52 Accessed at: https://media.neliti.com/media/publications/70615-EN-the-influence-of-netspeak-on-students-wr.pdf DOI: https://doi.org/10.11591/edulearn.v9i1.963
22. Trimbur J. (2016). Translingualism and close reading. College English, 78(3), 219–227. DOI: https://doi.org/10.58680/ce201627652
23. Watt, H. J. (2010). How does the use of modern communication technology influence language and literacy development? A review. Contemporary Issues in Communication Science and Disorders, 37(Fall), 141-148. https://pubs.asha.org/doi/pdf/10.1044/cicsd_36_F_141
24. Zinkhan G. M., Kwak H., Morrison M., & Peters C. O. (2003). Web-based chatting: Consumer communication in cyberspace. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 13(1-2), 17 -27. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327663JCP13-1&2_02
