The theoretical contributions of Olga I. Moskalskaya to the study of German complex sentences (CS) represent a foundational yet often overlooked area in Russian Germanistics. Understanding the structure and function of CS is paramount for achieving clarity and precision in professional discourse, yet a comprehensive historical account of Moskalskaya’s pioneering work and its subsequent influence has been lacking. This article provides the first systematic analysis of Moskalskaya’s theory of CS, particularly her novel perception of CS as holistic linguistic units and their textual arrangement. It further aims to trace the development of her ideas in contemporary Russian German studies, filling a gap in the discipline’s history. The research draws upon Moskalskaya’s theoretical publications, seminal works by preceding and subsequent Germanists, and illustrative empirical data. Corpus data from the Digital Dictionary of the German Language (DWDS) were used to validate Moskalskaya’s CS-models and assess their frequency in modern German. Targeted samples from contemporary German novels (Walser, Schlink) illustrate CS functioning in text. Methodologically, the study combines an analysis of Moskalskaya’s CS-modeling with comparative, statistical, and transformational analyses of the illustrative material. The study first systematizes Moskalskaya’s theoretical positions on CS structure and textual function. It then demonstrates that the development of her ideas proceeded along two main trajectories: 1) enhanced understanding of CS wholeness, incorporating syntactic-pragmatic, metacognitive, and illocutionary perspectives; and 2) continued investigation into CS functions in numerous textual and discursive contexts, including their role in information structuring and conveying speaker stance. This research also underscores the lasting impact of Moskalskaya’s works. By demonstrating the theoretical grounding and developmental pathways of CS analysis, the findings offer perspectives for contemporary linguistic research. Understanding CS is crucial for enhancing the efficacy and precision of German-language professional communication, particularly in academic, technical, and diplomatic discourse.

The evolving field of linguistic personality studies exhibits significant terminological variation, particularly between Russian and German academic discourse. This heterogeneity can impede clear communication, systematic development, and comparative research within the discipline. The article aims to explore the diachronic evolution of key terms in the conceptual framework of linguistic personality studies in these two academic traditions, identify fundamental terms, their variability, and emerging trends. The study determines the proportional distribution of the most frequently used terms, enabling a quantitative characterization of their relevance and demand in the academic community. A qualitative and quantitative content analysis was applied to the theoretical literature. This was followed by a statistical analysis to quantify and visualize results using graphs and diagrams. It is necessary for illustrating the formation, development, and transformation of the terminological corpus of personality-oriented linguistics. The qualitative content analysis identified key terms, while the quantitative approach measured their frequency of use. The analysis was conducted on 4900 academic publications (4505 Russian, 395 German), selected via controlled keyword searches. The significant difference in the number of research papers can be explained by the different proportions of publications in the field of Russian and German linguistic personality studies. The results highlight the heterogeneity of the terminological framework in linguistic personality studies, shaped by a diversity of research approaches, methodological paradigms, and researchers’ inclination toward terminological innovation. Notably, distinct thematic focuses and varying degrees of interest in specific areas (e.g., bilingualism, language identity dynamics) were observed between Russian and German scholarship, contributing to different semantic interpretations and usage of key concepts. The conducted comparative analysis provides a deeper understanding of the current state of linguistic personality theory and may serve as a foundation for further improvement of classification criteria in the terminological system of the discipline.

Effective communication is critical in mental health care, as language shapes therapeutic outcomes and patient experiences. In Nigeria, where mental health care is under-resourced, the role of pragmatic strategies in medical encounters remains underexplored, despite their impact on patient outcomes. This research sought to characterize the key pragmatic acts employed as communication strategies during medical consultations with mental health patients in Nigeria and to elucidate their role in facilitating effective diagnosis and treatment. A qualitative design was employed at the Neuropsychiatric Hospital, Aro, Abeokuta. Seven medical encounters (average length 10 min 17s; range 2m 18s - 29m 26s) were audio-recorded between March and June 2022 with ethical approval and informed consent. Data were transcribed, translated, and analyzed using Mey’s (2001) Pragmatic Acts Theory. Findings show that mental health practitioners deployed six preponderant pragmatic acts as linguistic strategies to aid the diagnosis and treatment processes of mental health patients in Nigeria. The pragmatic acts are counselling, interjectory, suggesting, inquiring, re-assessing, and assuring. Respectively, these acts were used by doctors/psychiatrists to perform the pragmatic functions of encouraging, prompting responses, tracking mental health history, showing medical concern, confirming, and assuring. These functions were realized through pragmatic cues such as relevance (REL), shared situation knowledge (SSK), reference (REF), inference (INF), prosody, and indirect speech acts. This study highlights the essential role of pragmatic strategies in enriching the diagnosis and treatment of mental health patients in Nigeria, offering valuable insights into communication patterns that can enhance patient engagement and clinical outcomes in mental health care, particularly in under-resourced settings.

This article investigates the distinctive linguistic means employed to realize polarization tactics in American electoral discourse, a phenomenon intensified by its manipulative potential and the agonal nature of U.S. political communication. The primary aim is to identify the specific linguistic toolkit that political actors, exemplified by Donald Trump and Joseph Biden, use to differentiate their worldviews and rally support. The empirical material comprises transcripts from the 2020 and 2024 presidential debates between these candidates. A comprehensive linguistic analysis, incorporating discourse, contextual-semantic, functional-linguistic, linguapragmatic, and quantitative approaches, was employed to examine the data. The findings reveal that polarization tactics are primarily actualized through the “us vs. them” dichotomy and are integral to various communicative strategies, including discreditation, accusation, persuasion, self-defense, positive self-representation, and justification. Key linguistic markers include deictic constructions (personal, demonstrative, and possessive pronouns; pronominal adverbs), which speakers use to emphasize unity with their supporters while contrasting themselves with opponents. Furthermore, words with strong axiological and thymiological components are deployed to modify voter perception by correlating the actions of “ingroup” politicians with positive significance and “outgroup” figures with negative outcomes, thereby extolling their own achievements and disparaging those of adversaries. Lexemes denoting “togetherness” or “joint action” (including specific idioms, nominations of social/ethnic groups, generalizations, and figurative language) also play a crucial role in constructing ingroup cohesion. This study underscores the increasing reliance on manipulative polarization in contemporary political rhetoric. Its relevance lies in providing a detailed understanding of how specific linguistic choices construct electoral realities, offering valuable data for discourse analysts, political strategists, diplomats, and those examining persuasive communication in high-stakes political situations.

Given the growth of intercultural professional communication, a profound understanding of culture-specific connotations embedded in language, particularly in paremiological units that encapsulate folk wisdom and cultural attitudes, becomes crucial. Misinterpretation of such units, especially those involving color symbolism, can lead to significant communicative breakdowns in professional situations. This study investigates the polysemy of the coloratives “white” and “black” in Russian and German proverbs and sayings, highlighting its scientific novelty in its comparative aspect and in identifying potential areas of divergence in cultural perception. The aim is to determine and compare the meanings of these color lexemes at semantic and morphological levels. The empirical material comprises proverbs and sayings selected through continuous sampling from internet resources and lexicographical sources. Methods employed include semantic analysis, interpretation via synonym selection, grammatical analysis, and comparative analysis. The findings establish that the coloratives “white” and “black” are highly polysemous in the paremiological funds of both languages, constituting a total of 33 lexical-semantic variants (LSVs). Of these, only 7 LSVs show complete or partial coincidence (e.g., “white” as a synonym for the best, pleasant, light; or signifying distinctiveness). Conversely, 26 LSVs are unique to one language, reflecting ethnocultural specificity. For instance, Russian proverbs attribute meanings to “white” such as ‘difficult, overwhelming,’ ‘beautiful,’ or ‘outwardly beautiful but inwardly bad,’ which are not characteristic of German paremias. Morphologically, these coloratives are most frequently expressed as adjectives. The results, detailing convergences and divergences in the semantics of these color terms across the two linguacultures, hold direct relevance for professional communication. Understanding these differences is vital for preventing intercultural misunderstandings, enhancing the effectiveness of business negotiations, stimulating successful international collaborations, and optimizing foreign language training for professionals engaged in intercultural interaction.