NONE20260607044719808Immanuel Kant Baltic Federal Universityno-reply@journals.kantiana.ruImmanuel Kant Baltic Federal UniversitySlovo.ru: Baltic accent2225-53462686-8989060720261330607202666A.V.KravchenkoThe article invites the reader to contemplate what impedes further development of lan­guage science which is currently in a state of stagnation. This crisis is caused by the inade­quate meth­odology used in linguistic research. It defines the paradigm of so-called ‘normal’ science, which suppresses innovation. The dualistic philosophy of external realism continues to be the epistemo­logical foundation of ‘normal’ linguistics, and neither mainstream cognitive science nor cogni­tive linguistics has been able to break away from it. The author argues that a new, constructivist epistemology is capable of overcoming the crisis and could give a new impetus to further devel­opment of language science. This calls for abandoning the traditional view of language as a tool used for the expression and transfer of thoughts. Instead, research­ers should use a systems ap­proach to linguistic semiosis as a biological adaptation, which is the organizational basis of hu­mans as living systems at both individual and social levels. Lin­guistic semiosis is an evolution­ary stage in the development of Homo sapiens. Establishing the functional role of linguistic semiosis in systemic cognition as a socially organized living system whose unity is ensured and sustained by its circular (self-referential) organization in the relational domain of language, calls for a radical revision of the extant views on the rela­tionship between language and mind, lan­guage and cognition, and language and conscious­ness. An ecological approach to language as­sumes that the cognitive dynamics of humans as living systems consists in the adaptive interac­tional behaviour in the relational domain of linguistic interactions. This domain constitutes the ecological niche of humans as organism-environment systems. It is in this continuously self-constructed human niche that the uniquely human power to reasoning (intelligence) emerges and develops. Humanness rests in language as the creative beginning of the world in which we exist as organisms capable of speech.0607202611Bunnell, P., 2020. Reflections on languaging. Constructivist Foundations, 15 (2), pp. 152—155.Button, T., 2013. The Limits of Realism. Oxford.Cariani, P., 2020. In defense of biosemiotics. Constructivist Foundations, 15 (2), pp. 155—158.Cooke, M., 2016. The elephant in the room: Communication, chaos and the translation of truth. In: J. Richter, C. Zwischenberger, S. Kremmel and K.-H. Spitzl, eds. (Neu-)Kompositionen. Aspekte transkultureller Wissenschaft. Berlin, pp. 59—76.Cowley, S. J. and Markoš, A., 2019. Evolution, lineages and human language. Language Sciences, 71, pp. 8—18.Curtiss, S., 1977. Genie: A psycholinguistic study of a modern-day “wild child”. New York.Di Paolo, E. A., Cuffari, E. C. and De Jaegher, H., 2018. Linguistic Bodies: The continuity between life and language. Cambridge, MA.Evans, V., 2015. The Crucible of Language: How language and mind create meaning. Cambridge.Finch, G., 2003. How to Study Linguistics: A guide to understanding language. 2nd ed. Basingstoke.Foerster, H. von, 1972. Notes on an epistemology for living things. BCL Report No. 9.3 (BCL Fiche No. 104/1). Biological Computer Laboratory, Department of Electrical Engineering, University of Illinois, Urbana.Fry, D., 1977. Homo loquens: Man as a talking animal. Cambridge.Gibson, J., 1979. The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Boston, MA.Givón, T., 2009. The Genesis of Syntactic Complexity: Diachrony, ontogeny, neuro-cognition, evolution. Amsterdam; Philadelphia.Glasersfeld, E. von, 1995. Radical Constructivism: A way of knowing and learning. London.Glazkov, A. V., 2018. Mode of Reality: Definition, Taxonomy, Features. Prepodavatel XXI vek [The Teacher ХХI century], 3—2, pp. 315—332 (in Russ.).Jennings, R. E. and Thompson, J. J., 2012. The biological centrality of talk. In: A. V. Kravchenko, ed. Cognitive Dynamics in Linguistic Interactions. Newcastle upon Tyne, pp. 33—63.Kenny, V., 1997. Constructivism — everybody has won and all must have prizes! Transactional Analysis Journal, 27 (2), pp. 110—117.Kibrik, A. E., 2005. Konstanty i peremennye yazyka [Constants and Variables in Language]. St. Petersburg (in Russ.).Koshelev, A. D., 2013. Modern linguistic theory as the Tower of Babel (Can numerous antagonistic linguistic theories peacefully coexist). Izvestiya RAN. Seriya literatury i yazyka [The Bulletin of the Russian Academy of Sciences: Studies in Literature and Language], 72(6), pp. 3—22 (in Russ.).Kravchenko, A. V. and Payunena, M. V., 2017. Education: a value lost? In: A. Dudziak and J. Orzechowska, ed. Język i tekst w ujęciu strukturalnym i funkcjonalnym. Olsztyn, pp. 239—246.Kravchenko, A. V., 2001. Cognitive linguistics and the new epistemology (On the ideal project of linguistics) Izvestiya RAN. Seriya literatury i yazyka [The Bulletin of the Russian Academy of Sciences: Studies in Literature and Language], 60 (5), pp. 3—13 (in Russ.).Kravchenko, A. V., 2006. Cognitive linguistics, biology of cognition and biosemiotics: Bridging the gaps. Language Sciences, 28 (1), pp. 51—75.Kravchenko, A. V., 2007. Essential properties of language, or, why language is not a code. Language Sciences, 29 (5), pp. 650—671.Kravchenko, A. V., 2007. The problem of method in cognitive science. Voprosy Kognitivnoy Lingvistiki [Issues of Cognitive Linguistics], 4, pp. 28—35 (in Russ.).Kravchenko, A. V., 2008. Biology of Cognition and Linguistic Analysis: From non-realist linguistics to a realistic language science. Frankfurt а/M; Berlin; Bern; Bruxelles; New York; Oxford; Wien.Kravchenko, A. V., 2009. On tradition, linguistics, and the cognitive approach. In: N. K. Riabtseva, ed. Gorizonty sovremennoi lingvistiki: traditsii i novatorstvo [The Horizons of Modern Linguistics: Tradition and innovation]. Moscow, pp. 51—65 (in Russ.).Kravchenko, A. V., 2009a. Reassessing the project of linguistics. In: J. Zlatev, M. Andrén, M. J. Falck and C. Lundmark, eds. Studies in Language and Cognition. Newcastle upon Tyne, pp. 27—42.Kravchenko, A. V., 2009b. Language and mind: A bio-cognitive view. In: H. Götzsche, ed. Memory, Mind and Language. Newcastle upon Tyne, pp. 103—124.Kravchenko, A. V., 2009c. The experiential basis of speech and writing as different cognitive domains. Pragmatics & Cognition, 17 (3), pp. 527—548.Kravchenko, A. V., 2011. How Humberto Maturana’s Biology of Cognition Can Revive the Language Sciences. Constructivist Foundations, 6 (3), pp. 352—362.Kravchenko, A. V., 2013a. On grounding the ideal project of linguistics: integrating language, semiotics, and biology. In: E. I. Pivovar, ed. Gumanitarnye chteniya RGGU — 2012 [The RGGU readings in the humanities — 2012]. Moscow, pp. 285—294 (in Russ.).Kravchenko, A. V., 2013b. The biological reality of language. Voprosy Kognitivnoy Lingvistiki [Issues of Cognitive Linguistics], 1, pp. 55—63 (in Russ.).Kravchenko, A. V., 2013c. From the Language Myth to Biological Reality: Reassessing the epistemological assumptions of linguistics. Moscow (in Russ.).Kravchenko, A. V., 2014. Human autopoiesis? Constructivist Foundations, 9 (2), pp. 177—179.Kravchenko, A. V., 2015a. External realism and biology of cognition: the epistemological turn. In: E. I. Pivovar, ed. Gumanitarnye chteniya RGGU — 2014 [The RGGU readings in the humanities — 2014]. Moscow, pp. 697—709 (in Russ.).Kravchenko, A. V., 2015b. On the subject matter of linguistics. In: Language and thought: Contemporary cognitive linguistics. Moscow, pp. 155—172 (in Russ.).Kravchenko, A. V., 2016. Language as human ecology: A new agenda for linguistic education. New Ideas in Psychology, 42, pp. 14—20.Kravchenko, A. V., 2016. The epistemological trap of language. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Filologiya [Tomsk State University Journal of Philology], 3 (41), pp. 14—26 (in Russ.).Kravchenko, A. V., 2019. Language and human ecology: from Cartesian linguistics to ecolinguistics. Ekologiya yazyka i kommunikativnaya praktika [Ecology of Language and Communicative Practice], 4 (1), pp. 20—31 (in Russ.).Kravchenko, A. V., 2020b. On elephants in linguistics. In: M. En, ed. Truths, Trust and Translation: A festschrift, love letter and thank you to Michèle Cooke. Frankfurt а/M, pp. 11—16.Kravchenko, A. V., 2021. Approaching linguistic semiosis biologically: implications for human evolution. Rivista Italiana di Filosofia del Linguaggio, 15 (2), pp. 139—158.Kravchenko, A. V., 2021. Otkryvaya yazyk zanovo. Ot nerealistichnoi lingvistiki k real'noi nauke o yazyke. Ot strukturalizma i kognitivizma k ekologicheskomu realizmu: novaya povestka dnya v yazykoznanii [Rediscovering Language: From non-realist linguistics to a realistic language science. From structuralism and cognitivism to ecological realism. (A new agenda in linguistics)]. Мoscow (in Russ.).Kravchenko, A. V., 2020a. Author’s response: Codes, interpretation, meaning: Why language matters. Constructivist Foundations, 15 (2), pp. 159—163.Kuhn, T., 1962. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago.Kull, K., 2007. Biosemiotics and biophysics: The fundamental approaches to the study of life. In: M. Barbieri, ed. Introduction to Biosemiotics. Dordrecht, pp. 167—177.Love, N., 2007. Are languages digital codes? Language Sciences, 29 (5), pp. 690—709.Maturana, H. R., 1970. Biology of cognition. Biological Computer Laboratory (BCL) Research Report BCL 9.0. University of Illinois, Urbana, IL.Maturana, H. R., 1978. Biology of language: The epistemology of reality. In: G. Miller, and E. Lenneberg, eds. Psychology and Biology of Language and Thought: Essays in honor of Eric Lenneberg. New York, pp. 27—63.Maturana, H. R., 1985. Comment by Humberto R. Maturana: The mind is not in the head. Journal of Social and Biological Structures, 8 (4), pp. 308—311.Maturana, H. R., Mpodozis, J. and Letelier, J. C., 1995. Brain, language and the origin of human mental functions. Biological Research, 28 (1), pp. 15—26.Maturana, H. R., 2000. The nature of the laws of nature. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 17 (5), pp. 459—468.Menary, R., 2007. Writing as thinking. Language Sciences, 29 (5), pp. 621—632.Mitchell, K., 2017. What are “the laws of biology”? The Biologist, 64 (6), p. 6.Morris, C. W., 1938. Foundations of the theory of signs. In: O. Neurath, R. Carnap and C. W. Morris, eds. International Encyclopedia of Unified Science. Vol. 1, Part 2. Chicago, pp. 1—59.Nickerson, R. S., Perkins, D. N. and Smith, E. E., 1985. The Teaching of Thinking. Hillsdale, NJ.Pepperberg, I. M., 2002. Cognitive and communicative abilities of grey parrots. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11 (3), pp. 83—87.Pilley, J. W. and Hinzmann, H., 2013. Chaser: Unlocking the genius of the dog who knows a thousand words. Boston.Pinker, S., 1995. The Language Instinct: How the mind creates language. New York, NY.Putnam, H., 1981. Reason, Truth and History. Cambridge.Raimondi, V., 2019. The bio-logic of languaging and its epistemological background. Language Sciences, 71, pp. 19—26.Ross, D., 2007. H. sapiens as ecologically special: What does language contribute? Language Sciences, 29 (5), pp. 710—731.Saussure, F. de, 1916. Cours de linguistique générale. Paris.Savage-Rumbaugh, S. and Lewin, R., 1994. Kanzi: The ape at the brink of the human mind. New York.Schilhab, T., 2015. Words as cultivators of other minds. Frontiers in Psychology, 6. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01690.Sinha, C., 2015. Language and other artifacts: socio-cultural dynamics of niche construction. Frontiers in Psychology, 6. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01601.Soames, S., 2003. The Dawn of Analysis. Princeton, NJ.Stewart, J., Gapenne, O. and Di Paolo, E. A., eds., 2011. Enaction: Toward a new paradigm for cognitive science. Cambridge, MA.Varela, F. J., Thompson, E. and Rosch, E., 1991. The Embodied Mind: Cognitive science and human experience. Cambridge, MA.Vernadsky, V. I., 1989. Biosfera i noosfera [Biosphere and Noosphere]. Moscow (in Russ.).S.V.ChebanovThe article is devoted to the polemic with Alexander Kravchenko regarding his thesis that the way out of the protracted crisis in linguistics is to use a systemic approach to linguistic semiosis as biological adaptation. The author argues that linguistics is not in a state of crisis but rather in a state of stagnation. Overcoming it presupposes an intensive methodological search that infinitely expands the horizons of permissible views rather than the use of a sys­tem approach that is inadequate to the task. At the same time, it is necessary to take into ac­count the marginal manifestations of language as fully as possible to obtain truly universal results, which is impossible without clarifying the nature of man as the user of language. Human nature is in a very complex relationship with human biology in its anthropological understanding and the biology of Homo sapiens as an object of zoology as one of its compo­nents. The doctrines of different epochs and schools of thought, from the Book of the Prophet Ezra through Thomas Aquinas, from Palamas to Austin, from Searle to Shchedrovitsky and Father Georgy Kochetkov, are examples of works claiming to solve this problem.0607202611Alashari, M. and Torakawa, J., 1995. True tail in a newborn. Pediatr. Dermatol, 12(3), pp. 263—266.Andronikov, I. L., 1980—1981. Sobranie sochinenii v 3-kh tomakh [Collected works in 3 volumes]. Moscow (in Russ.).Arapov, M. V., Efimova, E. N. and Shreider, Yu. A., 1975. On the meaning of rank distributions. Nauchno-tekhnicheskaya informatsiya [Scientific and technical information], 2(1), pp. 9—20 (in Russ.).Bogdanova-Beglarian, N. V., Blinova, O. V., Martynenko, G. Ya. and Sherstinova, T. Yu., 2019. Russian everyday speech corpus “One day of speech”: Current state and perspectives. Trudy Instituta Russkogo Yazyka imeni V. V. Vinogradova [Proceedings of the V. V. Vinogradov Russian Language Institute], 21, pp. 101—110 (in Russ.).Bogin, G. I., 1984. Model' yazykovoi lichnosti v ee otnoshenii k raznovidnostyam tekstov [The model of a linguistic personality in its relation to the varieties of texts]. PhD thesis. Leningrad (in Russ.).Chaikovskii, Yu. V., 2008. Aktivnyi svyaznyi mir. Opyt teorii evolyutsii zhizni [Active connected world. Experience of the theory of evolution of life]. Moscow (in Russ.).Chebanov, S. V. and Martynenko, G. Ya., 1990a. The main types of ideas about the nature of language. Acta et commentationes universitatis tartuensis, 911. Tartu, pp. 112—136 (in Russ.).Chebanov, S. V. and Martynenko, G. Ya., 1990b. Ideas of hermeneutics in applied linguistics. Acta et commentationes universitatis tartuensis, 912. Tartu, pp. 92—111 (in Russ.).Chebanov, S. V. and Martynenko, G. Ya., 2004. Synergetics and holistic images of language. In: S. V. Chebanov, ed. Peterburg. Rossiya. Sotsium [Petersburg. Russia. Society]. Vilnius, pp. 650—656 (in Russ.).Chebanov, S. V. and Martynenko, G. Ya., 2007. On the hermeneuticization of applied linguistics. Vestnik Tverskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriya: Filologiya [Vestnik TvGU Series: Philology], 11 (207), pp. 273—291 (in Russ.).Chebanov, S. V., 1986. Complexity in biostratigraphy. In: Sistemnyi podkhod v geologii (Teoreticheskie i prikladnye aspekty) [System approach in geology (Theoretical and applied aspects)], part 1. Moscow, pp. 84—86 (in Russ.).Chebanov, S. V., 1994. Man as participant to natural creation. Enlogue and ideas of hermeneutics in biology. Biology Forum, 87(1), pp. 39—48.Chebanov, S. V., 1996. Speculative human biology. In: Spekulyativnaya biologiya cheloveka: tez. dokl. Shkoly po teoreticheskoi biologii (Molodezhnoe, 1—5 fevralya 1993 g.) [Speculative human biology. Abstracts of the School of Theoretical Biology]. Vilnius, pp. 4—5 (in Russ.).Chebanov, S. V., 2010. Dish as a cultural and normative way of eating food: the role of ritual and environmental consequences. Stranitsy: bogoslovie, kul'tura, obrazovanie [Pages: theology, culture, education], 14 (3), pp. 421—448 (in Russ.).Chebanov, S. V., 2013. Human ecology or ecology of Homo sapiens? In: Nauka. Filosofiya. Religiya: sb. mater. XV konf. “Nauka. Filosofiya. Religiya”. Problemy ekologii i krizis tsennostei sovremennoi tekhnogennoi tsivilizatsii (Dubna, 25—26 oktyabrya 2012 g.) [Science. Philosophy. Religion. Collection of materials of the XV conference “Science. Philosophy. Religion”. Problems of ecology and the crisis of values of modern technogenic civilization]. Moscow, рр. 265—294 (in Russ.).Frumkina, R. M., 1999. The evergreen tree of theory [in memory of Yu. A. Schreider]. Chelovek [A Man], 4, pp. 145—158 (in Russ.).Galilei, G., n. d. De Motu Antiquiora. Availiable at: http://echo.mpiwg-berlin. mpg.de/MPIWG:NXG5M3KD [Accessed 13 December 2021].Gapon, A. G., 2012. A typical human being in the perspective of zoological nomenclature. Chelovek [A Man], 4, pp. 100—114 (in Russ.).Glazkov, A. V., 2018. Mode of reality: definition, taxonomy, features. Prepodavatel' XXI vek [The Teacher ХХI century], 3—2, pp. 315—332 (in Russ.).Gornon, A., 2014. 25-i kadr, ili Stikhi ne o tom (polifonosemantika) [25th frame, or Poems not about that (polyphonosemantics)]. St. Petersburg (in Russ.).Grigoriy Palama. 150 glav [150 chapters]. 2006. Translated and notes by A. I. Sidorov. Krasnodar (in Russ.).Grof, S. and Grof, K., eds., 2000. Dukhovnyi krizis: Kogda preobrazovanie lichnosti stanovitsya krizisom [Spiritual Crisis: When Personal Transformation Becomes a Crisis]. Moscow (in Russ.).Kochetkov, Georgiy, Fr., 2020. Tainy i tainstva cheloveka i Tserkvi: Opyt sovremennoi mistagogii vtoroi stupeni: v 3 ch. Ch. 2: Novaya khristianskaya (pravoslavnaya) antropologiya: Ob ustroenii i spasenii cheloveka i chelovechestva. Osnovy khristianskoi asketiki i mistiki [Secrets and sacraments of man and the Church: Experience of modern mystagogue of the second stage: in 3 parts. Part 2: New Christian (Orthodox) anthropology: On the dispensation and salvation of man and mankind. Fundamentals of Christian asceticism and mysticism]. Moscow (in Russ.).Kordonskii, S. G., 2001. Tsikly deyatel'nosti i ideal'nye ob"ekty [Cycles of activity and ideal objects]. Moscow (in Russ.).Krenke, N. P., 1933—1935. Fenogeneticheskaya izmenchivost' [Phenogenetic variability]. Vol. 1. Moscow (in Russ.).Kudrin, B. I., 2002. Mathematics of cenoses: specific, rank-specific, rank-by-parameter hyperbolic H-distributions and the laws of Lotka, Zipf, Pareto, Mandelbrot. Filosofskie osnovaniya tekhnetiki. Matematicheskii apparat strukturnogo opisaniya tsenozov i giperbolicheskie N-ogranicheniya. Tsenologicheskie issledovaniya [Philosophical Foundations of Technology. Mathematical apparatus of the structural description of cenoses and hyperbolic H-limits. Tsenological research], 19, pp. 357—412 (in Russ.).Labov, W., 1978. Denotational structure. Papers from the Parasession on the Lexicon. Chicago, pp. 220—260.Lakoff, G. and Joohnson, M., 1999. Philosophy in the Flesh: The Embodied Mind and its Challenge to Western Thought. New York.Lakoff, G., 1986. Classifiers as a Reflection of Mind: The Experiential, Imaginative, and Ecological Aspects. In: Noun Classes and Categorization. Amsterdam, pp. 13—52.Lyubishchev, A. A., 1971. On the Criteria of Reality in Taxonomy. In: Informatsionnye voprosy semiotiki, lingvistiki i avtomaticheskogo perevoda [Informational Issues of Semiotics, Linguistics and Automatic Translation], 1, pp. 67—81 (in Russ.).Makh, E., 2012. Mekhanika. Istoriko-kriticheskii ocherk ee razvitiya [Mechanics. Historical-critical sketch of its development]. Moscow (in Russ.).Maslov, V. P. and Maslova, T. V., 2006. On Zipf’s law and rank distributions in linguistics and semiotics. Mathematical Notes, 80 (5), pp. 718—732 (in Russ.).Meyen, S. V. and Nalimov, V. V., 1979. Probabilistic world and probabilistic language. Khimiya i zhizn' [Chemistry and life], 6, pp. 22—27 (in Russ.).Meyen, S. V., 1973. Plant morphology in its nomothetical aspects. Botanical Review, 39 (3), pp. 205—260.Meyen, S. V., 2007. Morphology of plants in the nomothetic aspect. In: In memoriam. S. V. Meyen: paleobotanik, evolyutsionist, myslitel' [In memoriam. S. V. Meyen: paleobotanist, evolutionist, thinker]. Moscow, pp. 162—222 (in Russ.).Moon, C., 2017. Prenatal experience with the maternal voice. In: M. Filippa, P. Kuhn and B. Westrup, eds. Early vocal contact and preterm infant brain development. Cham, Switzerland, pp. 25—37.Moudi, R., 2020. Zhizn' posle zhizni: Issledovanie fenomena prodolzheniya zhizni posle smerti tela [Life after life: The investigation of a phenomenon survival of bodily death]. Moscow (in Russ.).Nalimov, B. V. and Meyen, S. V., 2007. Probabilistic world — an exit to another culture? (Is a second Mediterranean possible in European culture?). In: In memoriam. S. V. Meyen: paleobotanik, evolyutsionist, myslitel' [In memoriam. S. V. Meyen: paleobotanist, evolutionist, thinker]. Moscow, pp. 87—100 (in Russ.).Pik, A. and Khesht, A., 1910. Klinicheskaya semiotika s obrashcheniem osobogo vnimaniya na ugrozhayushchie simptomy i ikh lechenie [Clinical semiotics with a focus on threatening symptoms and their treatment]. St. Petersburg (in Russ.).Podgornaya, E. A. and Demidenko, K. A., 2014. Linguistic characteristics of Internet chats as a type of communication. Koncept [Concept], 9(September), pp. 136—140. Avaliable at: http://e-kon-cept.ru/2014/14254.htm [Accessed 13 December 2021] (in Russ.).Polani, M., 1985. Lichnostnoe znanie: na puti k postkriticheskoi filosofii [Personal knowledge: on the way to post-critical philosophy]. Moscow (in Russ.).Romanova, N., 2019. Zanyatiya po korrektsii disgrafii mladshikh shkol'nikov [Classes for the correction of dysgraphia of younger schoolchildren]. No Place (in Russ.).Rybinskii, V., comp., Minskii, D., ed., 2000. Antologiya russkogo palindroma XX veka [Anthology of the Russian palindrome of the twentieth century]. Moscow (in Russ.).Ryko, A. I., 2018. Detstvo Khomy: Dnevnik nauchnykh nablyudenii [Khoma's Childhood: A Diary of Scientific Observations]. St. Petersburg (in Russ.).Shcherba, L. V., 1974. About the triple aspect of linguistic phenomena and about the experiment in linguistics. In: Yazykovaya sistema i rechevaya deyatel'nost' [Language system and speech activity]. Leningrad, pp. 24—39 (in Russ.).Shreider, Yu. A. and Sharov, A. A., 1982. Sistemy i modeli [Systems and models]. Moscow (in Russ.).Shreider, Yu. A., 1984. Multi-level and system nature of the reality studied by science. Sistemnost' i evolyutsiya [System and evolution]. Moscow, pp. 69—82 (in Russ.).Sineokova, T. N., 2008. Lingvistika izmenennykh sostoyanii soznaniya: ucheb. posobie [Linguistics of Altered States of Consciousness: Textbook]. Nizhny Novgorod (in Russ.).Sopikov, A. P., 2002. Interdisciplinarity as a type of complexity. In: Problemy i perspektivy mezhdistsiplinarnykh fundamental'nykh issledovanii [Problems and prospects of interdisciplinary fundamental research]. St. Petersburg, pp. 78—79 (in Russ.).Spivak, D. L., 2000. Izmenennye sostoyaniya soznaniya: psikhologiya i lingvistika [Altered States of Consciousness: Psychology and Linguistics]. St. Petersburg (in Russ.).Stepanov, Yu. S., 1975. Osnovy obshchego yazykoznaniya [Fundamentals of general linguistics]. Moscow (in Russ.).Teilhard de Chardin, P., 1987. Fenomen cheloveka [Le Phénomène humain]. Translated by N. A. Sadovsky. Moscow (in Russ.).Zhuravlev, A. P., 1991. Zvuk i smysl [Sound and meaning]. Moscow (in Russ.).Zubova, L. V., 2010. Yazyki sovremennoi poezii [Languages of modern poetry]. Moscow (in Russ.).A.D.KoshelevThe article suggests a way to overcome two well-known problems of embodied/grounded theory of cognition: the impossibility of strict differentiating modal and amodal symbols, and the difficulty in defining abstract concepts/simulators (abstract lexical meanings). The pro­posed functional approach is based on the dichotomy 'perceptual (external) vs. functional (internal)' that goes back to Ivan Sechenov. These cognitive units are shown to play funda­mentally different roles. The function — the embodied human response to the perceived object and the typical interaction with it — strictly defines the concept and the category set by it. The percept — the appearance of the object — allows one to quickly hypothesize which catego­ry this object belongs to. Based on the function of the concept and the division of this function into parts (private functions), it becomes possible to construct, instead of one generic concept (and one lexical meaning associated with it), an ontogenetic concept (ontoconcept) as three age-related variants of the concept (and, accordingly, three variants of the meaning of the word), arising in ontogeny — in preschoolers, early school and late school. As an example, the ontoconcept CHAIR and three variants of the meaning of the word chair are constructed. These constructions resonate with Vygotsky’s thought that the meaning of the word changes with the different modes of thinking. In other words, the ontoconcept supports the idea of het­erogeneous verbal thinking (Werner, Vygotsky, Luria, Tul’viste, and Pomanov), arguing that there are several types of verbal thinking associated with different types of human activity and the tasks solved within the framework of this activity (applied, theoretical, artistic, etc.).0607202611Apresyan, Yu. D., 2014. About the Active dictionary of the Russian language. In: Yu. D. Apresyan, ed. Aktivnyĭ slovar' sovremennogo russkogo yazyka [An Active dictionary of Modern Russian], Vol. 1, pp. 5—36. Moscow (in Russ.).Apresyan, Yu. D., ed., 2010. Prospekt aktivnogo slovarya russkogo yazyka [The prospectus of the active dictionary of the Russian language]. Moscow (in Russ.).Barsalou, L. W., 1999. Perceptual symbol systems. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, pp. 577—660.Barsalou, L. W., 2008. Grounded cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, pp. 617—645.Barsalou, L. W., 2016. On staying grounded and avoiding Quixotic dead ends. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 23 (4), pp. 1122—1142.Barsalou, L. W., 2020. Challenges and Opportunities for Grounding Cognition. Journal of Cognition, 3 (1): 31.Bernshtein, N. A., 1947. O postroenii dvizheniĭ [About the construction of movements]. Moscow (in Russ.).Borghi, A. M., 2020. A Future of Words: Language and the Challenge of Abstract Concepts. Journal of Cognition, 3(1): 42.Chuprikova, N. I., 2007. Umstvennoe razvitie. Printsip differentsiatsii [Mental development. The Principle of differentiation]. St. Petersburg (in Russ.).Dobzhansky, T., 1964. Biology, molecular and organismic. American Zoologist, 4 (4), pp. 443—452.Dove, G., 2011. On the need for embodied and dis-embodied cognition. Front. Psychology, 1, pp. 242—251.Dove, G., 2016. Three symbol ungrounding problems: Abstract concepts and the future of embodied cognition. Psychon Bull Rev, 23, pp. 1109—1121.Gallese, V. and Lakoff, G., 2005. The brain’s concepts: The role of the sensory-motor system in conceptual knowledge. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 22 (3), pp. 455—479.Glebkin, V. V., 2016. A Tetramerous Model of Cognitive Development and the Cultural-Historical Typology. Etnograficheskoe obozrenie [Ethnographic Review], 3, pp. 128—145 (in Russ.).Hesslow, G., 2012. The current status of the simulation theory of cognition. Brain research, 1428, pp. 71—79.Kasevich, V. B., 2000. Is linguistics a science? (About the article by Gilbert Lazar]. In: Materialy XXIX mezhvuzovskoi nauchno-metodicheskoi konferentsii prepodavateleĭ i aspirantov. Vyp. 14, Sektsiya obshchego yazykoznaniya [Materials of the XXIX interuniversity scientific and methodological conference of teachers and postgraduates. Vol. 14. General Linguistics Section]. St. Petersburg, pp. 16—22 (in Russ.).Kibrik, A. E., 1995. Modern linguistics: From where to where. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Seriya 9. Filologiya [Moscow University Philology Bulletin], 5, pp. 93—103 (in Russ.).Kiefer, M. and Harpaintner, M., 2020. Varieties of abstract concepts and their grounding in perception or action. Open Psychology, 2, pp. 119—137.Koshelev, A. D., 2021. On the genesis of the child’s concepts and lexical meanings. Journal of Psycholinguistics, 2 (48), pp. 156—170 (in Russ.).Koshelev, A. D., 2013. Modern linguistic theory as the Tower of Babel (Can numerous antagonistic linguistic theories peacefully coexist). Izvestiya RAN. Seriya literatury i yazyka [The Bulletin of the Russian Academy of Sciences: Studies in Literature and Language], 72 (6), pp. 3—22 (in Russ.).Koshelev, A. D., 2019. O genezise myshleniya i yazyka [On the Genesis of Thought and Language]. Moscow (in Russ.).Koshelev, A. D., 2020. On the cognitive foundation of lexical classification of the subject world. Journal of Psycholinguistics, 4 (46), pp. 59—75 (in Russ.).Koshelev, A. D., 2017. Ocherki evolyutsionno-sinteticheskoi teorii yazyka [Essays on the Evolutionary-Synthetic Theory of Language]. Moscow (in Russ.).Kravchenko, A. V., 2006. Cognitive linguistics, biology of cognition and biosemiotics: Bridging the gaps. Language Sciences, 28 (1), pp. 51—75.Kravchenko, A. V., 2021. What's wrong with linguistics as a science. In: K. S. Kardanova-Biryukova, ed. Metodologiya sovremennogo yazykoznaniya — 3: sb. st. v chest' yubileya V. A. Pishchal'nikovoi [Methodology of modern Linguistics — 3: collection of articles in honor of the anniversary of V. A. Pishchalnikova]. Мoscow, pp. 163—176 (in Russ.).Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M., 1999. Philosophy in the flesh: embodied mind and its challenge to Western thought. New York: Basic Books.Lakoff, G., 2004. Zhenshchiny, ogon' i opasnye veshchi: Chto kategorii yazyka govoryat nam o myshlenii [Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind]. Moscow (in Russ.).Leitan, N. D. and Chaffey, L., 2014. Embodied cognition and its applications: A brief review. Sensoria: A Journal of Mind, Brain & Culture, 10(1), pp. 3—10.Loginov, N. I. and Spiridonov, V. F., 2017. Embodied Cognition as a Current Trend in Cognitive Psychology. Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Psychology, 7 (1), pp. 25—42 (in Russ.)Luria, A. R., 1974. Ob istoricheskom razvitii poznavatel'nykh protsessov [On the historical development of cognitive processes]. Moscow (in Russ.).Mahon, B. Z. and Hickok, G., 2016. Arguments about the nature of concepts: symbols, embodiment, and beyond. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 23 (4), pp. 941—958.Michel, C., 2021. Overcoming the modal/amodal dichotomy of concepts. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 20 (4), pp. 655—677.Paivio, A., 2011. Dual coding theory and education. In: Kognitivnaya psikhologiya: istoriya i sovremennost' [Cognitive Psychology: History and modernity]. Moscow, pp. 110—117 (in Russ.).Pecher, D. and Zeelenberg, R., 2018. Boundaries to grounding abstract concepts. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 373: 20170132.Piaget, J., 1999. Rech' i myshlenie rebenka [Speech and thinking of a child]. Moscow (in Russ.).Pierce, Ch. S., 2000. Izbrannye filosofskie proizvedeniya [Selected philosophical works]. Moscow (in Russ.).Pulvermüller, F., Garagnani, M. and Wennekers, T., 2014. Thinking in circuits: Toward neurobiological explanation in cognitive neuroscience. Biological Cybernetics, 108, pp. 573—593.Raab, M. and Araújo, D., 2019. Embodied cognition with and without mental representations: The case of embodied choices in sports. Frontiers in Psychology, 10: 1825.Romanov, V. N., 2014. Kul'turno-istoricheskaya antropologiya [Cultural and historical anthropology]. Moscow; St. Petersburg (in Russ.).Rosch, E., 1978. Principles of categorization. In: E. Rosch and B. B. Lloyd, eds. Cognition and categorization, pp. 28—49.Sakreida, K., Scorolli, C., Menz, M., Heim, S., Borghi, A. and Binkofski, F., 2013. Are abstract action words embodied? An fMRI investigation at the interface between language and motor cognition. Front Hum Neurosci, 9(7): 125.Sanford, A. J., 2008. Defining embodiment in understanding. In: M. de. Vega, A. Glenberg and A. Graesser, eds. Symbold and embodiment: Debates on meaning and cognition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 181—194.Sechenov, I. M., 1952. Izbrannye proizvedeniya. T. 1. Fiziologiya i psikhologiya [Selected works. Vol. 1. Physiology and psychology]. Moscow (in Russ.).Tsien, J. Z., 2008. Neural coding of episodic memory. In: E. Dere, A. Easton, L. Nadel and J. P. Huston, eds. Handbook of Episodic Memory. Amsterdam etc., pp. 399—416.Tulviste, P., 1988. Kul'turno-istoricheskoe razvitie verbal'nogo myshleniya [Cultural and historical development of verbal thinking]. Tallinn (in Russ.).Vygotsky, L. S., 1986. Myshlenie i rech' [Thought and Language]. Moscow (in Russ.).Wajnerman, A., 2018. An efficient coding approach to the debate on grounded cognition. AW Paz — Synthese, 195 (12), pp. 5245—5269.Werner, H., 2004. Comparative psychology of mental development (with a new prologue by Margery B. Franklin). Clinton Corners (NY): Percheron Press.Zwaan, R. A., 2014. Embodiment and language comprehension: reframing the discussion. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 18 (5), pp. 229—234.S.G.ProskurinA.V.ProskurinaThe article explores linguistic phenomena as a form of manifestation of the magic func­tion. Systemic classifications, taxonomies, and linear phenomena such as euphemization and performativity reflect the beliefs and socio-spiritual functions of societies. This set of linguistic forms and means is determined by the existing religious beliefs. The article studies the foun­dation of beliefs in the form of elementary "primary performatives". They cannot be denied from the standpoint of logic but can be presented as felicitous and infelicitous. The entire set of cultural representations is based on elementary performatives. Another example of the con­tinuity of linguistic forms of religious beliefs is euphemization. Systemic classifications in the languages ​​of Australian aborigines and the animate/inanimate gender in Indo-European lan­guages ​​appear as dependent entities on religious choice in the form of preferences arising in the totem ideas of peoples. A we reconstruct the areas of intersection of beliefs and linguistic forms. The linguistic form is in harmony with certain stages of development of society, as well as its social organisation. Thus, we define the isomorphism of the linguistic and social struc­tures of the Australian aborigines. In Indo-European languages, taxonomies of gender go back to primary divisions into stems defined as active/animate and inactive/inanimate. The article shows that animate / inanimate is influenced by the stage of animism.0607202611Austin, J. L., 2006. Performative statements. In: Tri sposoba prolit' chernila [Three Ways of Spilling Ink]. St. Petersburg, pp. 262—281 (in Russ.).Bibliya [The Bible], 2008. Moscow (in Russ.).Curme, G. O., 1931. A Grammar of the English Language: Syntax. Vol. III. XV. New York.Durkheim, E., 2018. Elementarnye formy religioznoi zhizni: totemicheskaya sistema v Avstralii [Les Formes élémentaires de la vie religieuse: le système totémique en Australie]. Moscow (in Russ.).Eco, U., 1997. Kant e L’ornitorinco. Milano: Bompiani.Eliade, M., 2021a. Traktat po istorii religii [Traité d´histoire des religions]. Moscow (in Russ.).Eliade, M., 2021b. Mify, snovideniya, misterii [Myths, Dreams and Mysteries: The Encounter Between Contemporary Faiths and Archaic Realities]. Moscow (in Russ.).Jones, Ch. A., ed., 2012. Old English shorter poems. Harvard University Press.Klimov, G. A., 1987. Tipologiya yazykov aktivnogo stroya [Typology of languages of the active system]. Moscow (in Russ.).Lakoff, D., 1988. Classifiers as a reflection of mind. Novoe v zarubezhnoi lingvistike. Vyp. 23. Kognitivnye aspekty yazyka [New in foreign linguistics. Vol. 23. Cognitive aspects of language], pp. 12—51 (in Russ.).Meye, A., 1938. Vvedenie v sravnitel'noe izuchenie indoevropeiskikh yazykov [Introduction a l'etude comparative des langues indoeuropeennes]. Moscow; Leningrad (in Russ.).Osipova, O. A., 2007. Tipologiya drevnegermanskikh imennykh sklonenii v svete indoevropeiskikh i ural'skikh yazykov [Typology of Old Germanic noun declensions in the light of Indo-European and Uralic languages]. Tomsk (in Russ.).Specht, F., 1947. Der Ursprung der indogermanischen Deklination Göttingen.Stepanov, Yu. S., 1975. Osnovy obshchego yazykoznaniya [Fundamentals of general linguistics]. Moscow (in Russ.).Stepanov, Yu. S., 2004. Konstanty: Slovar' russkoi kul'tury [Dictionary of Russian culture]. 3d ed. Moscow (in Russ.).Trubachev, O. N., 1987. Slavic commentary on the reconstruction of Indo-European linguistic and cultural antiquity. In: Teoriya lingvisticheskoi rekonstruktsii: materialy Vsesoyuznoi konferentsii [Theory of linguistic reconstruction: Materials of the All-Union Conference]. Moscow, pp. 58—64 (in Russ.).Tylor, E. B., 1989. Pervobytnaya kul'tura [Primitive Culture]. Moscow (in Russ.).E.V.VostrikovaP.S.KusliyThis paper discusses the semantics of so-called de re propositional attitudes. According to the standard Kaplanian analysis, the semantics of such dicta contains existential quantifica­tion over functions that map the attitude holder and the object of their de re attitude to an individual concept by which the attitude holder identifies the object. This existential quantifi­cation has a wider scope than the universal quantification over possible worlds that is general­ly associated with the semantics of attitude dicta. We explore examples of disjunctive de re attitudes and show that these dicta have truth conditions that cannot be grasped by the stand­ard analysis. To account for them, we propose a revision of the theory of concept generators and show how the revised theory makes correct predictions.0607202611Abusch, D., 1994. Sequence of tense revisited: Two semantic accounts of tense in intensional contexts. In: I. Heim and H. Kamp, eds. Ellipsis, Tense and Questions. Amsterdam, pp. 87—139.Carnie, A., 2007. Syntax: a generative introduction. 3d ed. London, 526 p.Charlow, S. and Sharvit, Y., 2014. Bound “de re” pronouns and the LFs of attitude reports. Semantics and Pragmatics, 7 (3), pp. 1—43.Cresswell, M. J. and Stechow, A. Von, 1982. “De Re” Belief Generalized. Linguistics and Philosophy, 5 (4), pp. 503—535.Heim, I., 1982. The Semantics of Definite and Indefinite Noun Phrases. Amherst: University of Massachusetts.Heim, I., 1992. Presupposition projection and the semantics of attitude verbs. Journal of semantics, 9 (3), pp. 183—221.Heim, I., 1994. Comments on Abusch’s theory of tense. In: I. Heim and H. Kamp, eds. Ellipsis, Tense and Questions. Amsterdam, pp. 143—170.Hintikka, J., 1969. Semantics for propositional attitudes. In: Models for modalities. Springer, Dordrecht, pp. 87—111.Kaplan, D., 1968. Quantifying In. Synthese, 19 (1-2), pp. 178—214.Kripke, S., 1972. Naming and necessity. In: Semantics of Natural Language. Springer, Dodrecth, pp. 253—355.Lewis, D., 1979. Attitudes De Dicto and De Se. Philosophical Review, 88 (4), pp. 513—543.Percus, O. and Sauerland, U., 2003. On the LFs of attitude reports. In: Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung, 7, pp. 228—242.Quine, W. V., 1956. Quantifiers and Propositional Attitudes. The Journal of Philosophy, 53 (5). pp. 177—187.Sosa, E., 1970. Propositional Attitudes De Dicto and De Re. The Journal of Philosophy, 67, pp. 883—896.I.OvchinnikovaThe objective of the present research is to discover and explain a variety of cultural pref­erences within the Russian-speaking community in Israel. We juxtapose veteran immigrants of the ‘1990 wave’ (including children and teenagers who came with their parents, so called 1.5ers) and representatives of the ‘Putin Exodus’ who arrived in the country in 2014—2018. The divergence in preferences and attitudes was revealed thanks to the discourse, semantic and comparative analysis. The research was conducted on the material of the free association test and blogs of the Russian Israelis. The association test revealed cultural stereotypes of the Russian Israelis who did not write blogs. The ‘1990s wave’ immigrants revealed their deep connection to the Soviet Jewishness and Israeli citizenship regardless of their religious confes­sion. For the 1.5ers, the Russian language lost its special function as the key to the cultural heritage. The ‘1990 wave’ immigrants and 1.5ers experience the Russian language attrition. The representatives of the 1.5 generation prefer to participate in the cultural events in He­brew; they are involved in the Hebrew cultural context. The representatives of the ‘Putin Ex­odus’ consider the State of Israel to be a Western democratic state. They ignore the peculiari­ties of the Middle East country, do not support ‘mestechkovy’ culture of the Russian street and disagree to prioritize the Jewish traditions. The cultural discrepancy does not match the divergence between elite and mass culture.0607202611Akhapkina, Ya. E., 2015. Peculiarities of the sentence structure in bilinguals’ texts. Acta Linguistica Petropolitana. Trudy Instituta lingvisticheskikh issledovanii [Acta Linguistica Petropolitana. Transactions of the Institute for Linguistic Studies], 11 (1), pp. 643—664. Available at: http://iling.spb.ru/pdf/alp/alp_XI_1.pdf [Accessed 20 March 2022] (in Russ.).Al‐Haj, M., 2002. Identity patterns among immigrants from the former Soviet Union in Israel: Assimilation vs. ethnic formation. International Migration, 40 (2), pp. 49—70.‏ doi: 10.1111/1468-2435.00190.Aronin, L. and Maccozet, L., 2021. Dominant Language Constellations towards online computer assisted modelling. International Journal of Multilingualism. doi: 10.1080/ 14790718.2021.1941975.Baladzhaeva, L. and Laufer, B., 2016. Is first language attrition possible without second language knowledge? International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 56 (2), pp. 103—136. doi: 10.1515/iral-2016-0066.Borisova-Linetskaya, A., 2019, December 10. Pryamoi efir 32-go vypuska programmy “Perekhod”. Ioav Prokof'ev, Viktoriya Roitman, interv'yu s redaktorom “ReLevant” [Live broadcast of the 32nd edition of the "Transition" program. Yoav Prokofiev, Victoria Roikhman, interview with the editor of ReLevant]. Open TV. Available at: https://www.opentv.tv/pryamoj-efir-32-vypuska-programmy-perehod/ [Accessed 20 March 2022] (in Russ.).CBS, Central Bureau of Statistics. 4.4., 2018. Immigrants, (1) by period of immigration, country of birth and last country of residence. Available at: https://www.cbs.gov.il/he/ publications/doclib/2018/4.%20shnatonimmigration/st04_04.pdf [Accessed 20 March 2022].Chipka-ne, 2018. Nothing you get in Israel. Live journal, June 19. Available at: https://chipka-ne.livejournal.com/17857.html [Accessed 20 March 2022] (in Russ.).Countrymetrics, 2020, June 21. Available at: https://countrymeters.info/en/list/ List_of_countries_and_dependent_territories_of_the_World_by_population [Accessed 20 March 2022].Erofeev, S. and Herbst, J. E., 2019. “Putin Exodus”: The New Russian Brain Drain. Atlantic Council, Eurasia Center, February 21. Available at: https://www.atlanticcoun cil.org/in-depth-research-reports/report/the-putin-exodus-the-new-russian-brain- drain-3/ [Accessed 20 March 2022].Farkash, A., 2016. Immigratsiya kak kvest [Immigration as a quest]. Snob, February 16. Available at: https://snob.ru/selected/entry/104640/ [Accessed 20 March 2022] (in Russ.).Fialkova, L. and Yelenevskaya, M., 2007. ExSoviets in Israel: From Personal Narratives to a Group Portrait. Raffael Patai Series in Jewish Forklore and Anthropology. Detroit.Galili, L., 2020. The other tribe: Israel’s Russian-speaking community and how it is changing the country. Foreign Policy at Brookings. The Brookings Institution. Available at: https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/FP_20200921_ other_tribe_galili.pdf [Accessed 20 March 2022].Hanin, Z., 2016. The new qualitative Aliyah: who are they? Jerusalem Hronicles, October. Available at: https://gazeta. rjews. net/2016/hanin109.php [Accessed 20 March 2022] (in Russ.).Katsman, R., 2020. The Hebrew Poetry of the Younger Generation of Immigrants from the Former Soviet Union in Israel. Part 1: Alex Rif, Nadia-Adina Rose. Iudaica Russica, 4, pp. 18—39. doi: 10.31261/IR.2020.04.02.Lipshitz, G., 1997. Immigrants from the former Soviet Union in the Israeli housing market: spatial aspects of supply and demand. Urban Studies, 34 (3), pp. 471—488. doi: 10.1080/0042098976087.Lotman, Yu. M., 1993. Mass literature as a historical and cultural problem. In: Izbrannye stat'i: v 3 t. T. 3. Semiotika i tipologiya kultury [Selected works: 3 vol. Vol. 3. Semiotics and Typology of Culture], pp. 380—388. Tallinn (in Russ.).Milgram, M., 2016. Nothing will happen. Shakahuka. ru, September 9. Available at: http://www.shakshuka.org.il/author/milgram [Accessed 20 March 2022] (in Russ.).Moshkin, A., 2019. Post-Soviet Nostalgia in Israel? Historical Revisionism and Artists of the 1.5 Generation. East European Jewish Affairs, 49 (3), pp. 179—199‏. doi: 10.1080/13501674.2019.1715723.Mustajoki, A., Protassova, E. and Yelenevskaya, M, eds. 2019. The Soft Power of the Russian Language: Pluricentricity, politics and policies. Studies in Contemporary Russia. Abingdon.‏Niznik, M., 2011. Cultural practices and preferences of “Russian” youth in Israel. Israel affairs, 17 (1), pp. 89—107. doi: 10.1080/13537121.2011.522072.Ovchinnikova, I. and Yelenevskaya, M., 2019. Evidence of intercultural communication within Russian-speaking community of Israelis. In: A. S. Borisova, A. V. Ignatenko, T. V. Larina and O. V. Lomakina, eds. IV Firsovskie chteniya. Yazyk v sovremennykh diskursivnykh praktikakh: materialy dokladov i soobshchenii Mezhdunarodnoi nauchno-prakticheskoi konferentsii [IV Firsov readings. Language in modern discursive practices: materials of reports and reports of the International Scientific and Practical Conference]. Moscow, pp. 414—422.Prashizky, A. and Remennick, L., 2016. Ethnic awakening among Russian Israelis of 1.5 generation: Physical and symbolic dimensions of their belonging and protest. In: L. Remennick and A. Prashizky, eds. Sociological papers: The Russian 1,5 Generation in Israel: Between Protest and Belonging. Sociological Institute for Community Studies, Bar-Ilan University, Israel, pp. 1—17. Available at: https://sociology.biu. ac.il/sites/ sociology/files/shared/sp_18_merged_file_with_pics_july_7.compressed.pdf [Accessed 20 March 2022].Rebel, A., 2016. New Russian Life in the Jewish Country. 9tv, May 21. Available at: http://archive.9tv.co.il/news/2016/05/21/225933.html [Accessed 20 March 2022] (in Russ.).Remennick, L., 2018. Silent Mothers, Articulate Daughters: Two Generations of Russian Israeli Women Doing Jewishness and Gender. Nashim: A Journal of Jewish Women’s Studies & Gender Issues, 32, pp. 58—76. doi: 10.2979/nashim.32.1.06.Shustikova, Ye., 2016. We do live our life. Shakahuka. ru, February 21. Available at: https://www.shakshuka.ru/osim-haim/1600 [Accessed 20 March 2022] (in Russ).Sokol, S. and Staff, T., 2019. Amended figures refute claim that 6 of 7 immigrants since 2012 aren’t Jewish. The Times of Israel, December 24. Available at: https://www. timesofisrael.com/amended-figures-refute-claim-that-6-of-7-immigrants-since-2012- arent-jewish/ [Accessed 20 March 2022].Tartakovsky, E., Patrakov, E. and Nikulina, M., 2017. The emigration intentions of Russian Jews: the role of socio-demographic variables, social networks, and satisfaction with life. East European Jewish Affairs, 47 (2-3), pp. 242—254. doi: 10.1080/ 13501674.2017.1396175.The Winners of the Tarbut. ru competition: Israeli Landscapes in Russian colors, 2009. Strana [The Country], December 7. Available at: http://www.strana.co.il/ news/?ID=47723&cat=5 [Accessed 20 March 2022] (in Russ.).Tolchin Immergluck, I., 2019. Russians are coming… to the polls. Israeli politicians are finally waking up. The Times of Israel, July 26. Available at: https://www. timesofisrael.com/russians-are-coming-to-the-polls-israeli-politicians-are-finally-wa king-up/ [Accessed 20 March 2022].Tolz, M., 2016. Demography of the Contemporary Russian-Speaking Jewish Diaspora. In: Z. Gitelman, ed. The New Jewish Diaspora: Russian-Speaking Immigrants in the United States, Israel, and Germany. New Brunswick, New Jersey, pp. 23—40.Uspensky, B., 1999. Russian intelligentsia as the peculiar phenomenon in Russian Culture. In: B. Uspensky, ed. Rossiya: Russkaya intelligentsiya i zapadnyi intellektualizm: Istoriya i tipologiya [Russia. Russian intelligentsia and Western intellectualism: History and typology]. Moscow, 2(10), pp. 5—22. Available at: https://www.gumer. info/bibliotek_Buks/History/uspen/01.php [Accessed 20 March 2022] (in Russ.).Yelenevskaya, M. and Protassova, E., 2015. Global Russian: between decline and revitalization. Russian Journal of Communication, 7(2), pp. 139—149.‏ doi: 10.1080/1940 9419.2015.1044599.Yelenevskaya, M., 2015. An immigrant language in a multilingual state: Status and group competition (Russian in Israel). Russian Journal of Communication, 7 (2), pp. 193—207. doi: 10.1080/19409419.2015.1044598.