CHALLENGES AND PROSPECTS FOR IMPLEMENTING COGNITIVE-DISCOURSIVE AND INTERCULTURAL APPROACHES IN TEACHING CHINESE (ON THE EXAMPLE OF THE TSUOS CURRICULUM)
Abstract
The article presents a critical analysis of the curriculum for the discipline “Foreign Oriental Language (Chinese Language)” designed for the bachelor’s degree program No. 60230100 — Philology and Language Teaching (Oriental Languages), implemented at the Tashkent State University of Oriental Studies (2024). The relevance of the study is determined by the growing need to rethink the content of Chinese language education in the context of expanding intercultural contacts and the increasing role of the language as a means of professional, academic, and intercultural interaction. The author aims to determine the extent to which the principles of the cognitive-discursive approach and components of intercultural communication are implemented in the analyzed curriculum, as well as to identify priority areas for its further methodological and content-related improvement. The study employs methods of analysis of normative and methodological documentation, content analysis of instructional materials, and comparison of educational objectives with the declared learning outcomes. The curriculum is generally oriented toward the step-by-step formation of language competencies at levels A1–C1 and includes lexical-grammatical, analytical, and research elements that ensure the development of the main types of speech activity. At the same time, the article demonstrates that these elements are predominantly aimed at developing formal linguistic skills and do not sufficiently contribute to the development of discursive competence, cognitive strategies of meaning comprehension, and cognitive-analytical and interpretative strategies of working with texts. According to the author, the intercultural component of the curriculum is presented fragmentarily and is not formulated as an independent learning objective: there is no systematic work with culturally marked discourses, and skills of comparing communicative norms, reflection, and adaptation to intercultural differences are not developed. In conclusion, the necessity of transitioning from a predominantly language-centered model of instruction to a cognitive-discursive and intercultural paradigm is substantiated, aimed at forming foreign-language consciousness and preparing students for effective communication in a multilingual and multicultural environment.
Full text article
References
Andryukhina T. V. (2016). Vestnik MGIMO-Universiteta, No. 1 (46), 63–69. (In Rus.)
Demidova T. V., Solovyova T. A., & Barov S. V. (2020). Vestnik RUDN. Seriya Lingvistika. Semiotika i semantika, vol. 11, No. 1, 48–63. https://doi.org/10.22363/2313-2299-2020-11-1-48-63 (In Rus.)
Dorofeeva A. S. (2023). Vestnik Mininskogo universiteta, vol. 11, No. 4, 4–15. https://doi.org/10.26795/2307-1281-2023-11-4-4 (In Rus.)
Kondrateva I. A. (2020). Kazan Linguistic Journal, vol. 3, No. 3, 254–264. https://doi.org/10.26907/2658-3321.2020.3.3.254-264
Koroleva T. M., & Popova O. V. (2019). Psycholinguistics, vol. 25, No. 2, 92–116. https://doi.org/10.31470/2309-1797-2019-25-2-92-116
Mirzieva L. Kh., Kulikova E. N., & Li Siyuan (2020). Kazan Linguistic Journal, vol. 3, No. 3, 265–288. https://doi.org/10.26907/2658-3321.2020.3.3.265-288
Nazarova S. (2019). Sovremennye vostokovedcheskie issledovaniya. Mezhdunarodnyi nauchnyi zhurnal, No. 1, 21–24. (In Rus.)
Obdalova O. A. (2018). Yazyk i kultura, No. 44, 279–295. https://doi.org/10.17223/19996195/44/18 (In Rus.)
Obdalova O. A., Minakova L. Yu., & Soboleva A. V. (2016). Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta, No. 413, 38–45. https://doi.org/10.17223/15617793/413/6 (In Rus.)
Romanov Yu. V., & Snegurova T. A. (2017). Integratsiya obrazovaniya, vol. 21, No. 3, 371–384. https://doi.org/10.15507/1991-9468.088.021.201703.371-384 (In Rus.)
Furmanova V. P., & Ferstyaev A. I. (2018). Yazyk i kultura, No. 42, 226–239. https://doi.org/10.17223/19996195/42/14 (In Rus.)
Khasanova R. Sh. (2024). Filologiya i kultura, No. 1, 178–184. https://doi.org/10.26907/2782-4756-2024-75-1-178-184 (In Rus.)
Chepinskaya M. A. (2023). Filologiya i kultura, No. 2, 246–253. https://doi.org/10.26907/2782-4756-2023-72-2-246-253 (In Rus.)
Seitova G. K., Kunakova K. S., Dzheldybaeva R. A., & Tursynali Z. (2021). Revista EntreLinguas, special issue. https://doi.org/10.29051/el.v7iesp.2.15136
Baslyk K. P., Pechnikov V. P., & Tukhtarova N. A. (2019). Open Education, vol. 23, No. 1, 64–75. https://doi.org/10.21686/1818-4243-2019-1-64-75
Chen F., Cheng J., Huang X., Zhao W., Zhuo X., & Zhao Y. (2025). English Language Teaching, vol. 18, No. 3, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v18n3p1
Daulet F., Zeinolla S., Omarova M., Smagulova K., Orazakynkyzy F., & Anuar S. (2019). Humanities & Social Sciences Reviews, vol. 7, No. 4, 703–710. https://doi.org/10.18510/hssr.2019.7490
Ling W. P., Fei Z. Y., & Wensi L. (2020). Proceedings of the 5th International Seminar on Education, Management and Social Sciences, 126–131. https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.200826.126
Yang X., & Jansem A. (2025). Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, vol. 10, No. 1. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40862-025-00323-2
Peng Z. A. (2006). Journal of Yunnan Normal University, vol. 6, No. 4, 55–60. (In Chin.)
Authors
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Licensed under the Creative
Commons Attribution International License
(CC BY 4.0).
Copyright © by author(s).