On the subject areas of cognitive ethnolinguistics and linguoculturology against the background of modern linguistic research in Russia and in Poland

The article presents a number of basic provisions of Polish linguistic trends – ethnolinguistic and linguacultural, working within the framework of ‘language and culture’. Nowadays, the issue is extremely popular all over the world, it is actively developing and giving rise to new areas and aspects of research. The material is presented against the background of the problematics of Russian linguistic trends of the relevant profile. The similarities and differences within Polish national schools and between them and the profile of Russian studies are established, and the common character of the theoretical basis of Polish and Russian studies is emphasized. The specific features of trends focused on the topic of ‘language and culture’ are considered in the light of both relevant theoretical and lexicographical works. The sources of a number of nuclear concepts and terms used by representatives of the described areas are given. The achievements of the considered directions are briefly characterized. The specifics of national schools and traditions are emphasized, and the features of research approaches and styles are highlighted. Attention is drawn to the fundamental nature and scientific reliability of the works produced by scientists working in the framework of the presented areas; the effectiveness of work and the reliability of its results are also ensured by a common parentage and a unified theoretical basis.

1. Alpatov, V.M. (2014), “What is it worldview and how to reach it”, in Yazyk. Konstanty. Peremennye: Pamyati Aleksandra Evgen’evicha Kibrika [Language. Constants. Variables. In memory of Alexander Kibrik], Aleteiya, Saint Petersburg, Russia, pp, 11–21.

2. Alpatov, V.M. (2017), “Description of language and mother language of linguist”, Izvestiya Yuzhnogo federal’nogo universiteta. Filologicheskie nauki, no. 4, pp. 24–35.

3. Anusiewicz, J. (1994), Lingwistyka kulturowa: Zarys probvlematyki [Linguistic of culture. Feature-story of problems], Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Wroławskiego, Wrocław, Poland.

4. Bartmiński, J. (1988), ”Definicja kognitywna jako narzędzie opisu konotacji”, in Bartmiński, J., ed., Konotacja, Uniwersytet Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej, Lublin, Poland, pp. 169–183.

5. Bartmiński, J. (2006), Językowe podstawy obrazu świata, Wydawnictwo Universytetu Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej, Lublin, Poland.

6. Bartmiński, J. (2009), Aspects of cognitive ethnolonguistics, Equinox, London, UK. (Advances in cognitive linguistics)

7. Bartmiński, J. (2018), “O założeniach i postulatach lingwistyki kulturowej (na przykładzie definicji PRACY)”, Półrocznik Językoznawczy Tertium. Tertium Linguistic Journal, t. 3, no. 1, pp. 26–55. http://dx.doi.org/10.7592/Tertium.3.1.Bartmiński.

8. Bartmiński, E. (2021), “To what extent ethnolinguistics as a discipline achieves a certain scientific paradigm?”, in Krasnykh, V.V. and Izotov, A.I., eds., Yazyk, soznanie, kommunikatsiya: Sbornik statei, iss. 63, MAKS Press, Moscow, Russia, pp. 4–39.

9. Fedorova, L.L. (2018), “The role of the ‘Axiological Lexicon of Slaves’ and their neighbours on the background of modern dictionaries. Exemplified by volume ‘Dom’ ”, in Niebrzegowska-Bartmińska, S., Szadura, J. and Żywicka, B., eds., Wartości w językowo-kulturowym obrazie świata Słowian i ich sąsiadów, t. 4, Słownik językowy – leksykon – encyklopedia w programie badań porównawczych, Wydawnictwo Universytetu Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej, Lublin, Poland, pp. 25–43.

10. Karasik, V.I., ed., (2005), Aksiologicheskaya lingvistika: lingvokul’turnye tipazhi: Sbornik nauchnykh trudov [Axiological linguistics. Linguocultutal types. Collected articles], Paradigma, Volgograd, Russia.

11. Karasik, V.I. (2022), Yazykovaya lestnitsa poznaniya [Linguistic stairs of cognition], Gosudarstvennyi institut russkogo yazyka imtni A.S. Pushkina, Moscow, Russia.

12. Karasik, V.I. (2025), Yazykovye mosty ponimaniya [Linguistic bridges of comprehension], Gnozis, Moscow, Russia.

13. Kibrik, A.E. (2005), Konstanty i peremennye yazyka [Constants and variables in language], Aleteiya, Saint Petersburg, Russia.

14. Kulpina, V.G. and Tatarinov, V.A. (2012), “About comparative aspects of Polish cognitive ethnolinguitics” Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Seriya 22. Teoriya perevoda, no. 1, pp. 82–88.

15. Kulpina, V. and Tatarinov, V. (2018), “[Review] ‘Dictionary of linguoculturology terms’ as a solution to the current research issue”, Open Journal for Studies in Linguistics, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 15–20.

16. Pajdzińska, A. (2025), “Juri Derenikowicz Apresjan, czyli Jak sprostać swoim czasom”, Etnolingwistyka. Problemy języka i kultury. T. 37, pp. 11–28.

17. Sobotka, P. (2025), “Pojęcie i miejsce pragmatyki w koncepcji integralnego opisu języka Jurija Derenikowicza Apresjana”, Etnolingwistyka. Problemy języka i kultury, T. 37, pp. 29–44.

18. Zinken, J. (2009), “The ethnolinguistic school of Lublin and Anglo-American cognitive linguistics”, in Bartmiński, J. ed., Aspects of cognitive ethnolonguistics, Equinox Publishing, London, UK, pp. 1–5.