The Use of English, Russian and Tatar Etiquette Words and Expressions in Speech Situations of Greeting and Farewell

Dinara Khairullina


In the epoch of intercultural communication, professional foreign language proficiency and a high level of communicants’ competence are of great significance. One of the aspects of communicative competence is the possession of skills of speech etiquette formulae application. In the present paper, the author compares some etiquette forms in English, Russian, and Tatar and discusses the use of etiquette formulae expressed in words and phrases corresponding to different communicative situations. The author came to the conclusion that despite the fact that communicative situations are universal, people’s verbal behavior is characterized by national and cultural peculiarities. The choice of etiquette formulae may be conditioned by factors of demographic nature, contextual details, exact words of the actual conversations, habits, traditions, etc. The main communicative and relevant features of the Russian and Tatar languages are special attention and interest in the interlocutor, broad awareness, sincerity, and excessive curiosity. Relevant property of the English communication is individualism, non-interference to others’ affairs, observance of privacy, positiveness, and phatic communication. British verbosity is merely a politeness strategy, that is, a demonstration of respect and attention to others, sincerity is not a necessary condition there. The choice of Tatar etiquette words and expressions in speech situations depends on the influence of religion and religious beliefs.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Speech etiquette, Verbal behavior, Greetings, Farewell, English, Russian, Tatar

Tam Metin:

PDF (English)


Ammer, Ch. (1997) The American heritage dictionary of idioms. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.

Bagryanskaya, N. V. (2004). Features of the communicative behavior of servicemen. In I.A. Sternin (Ed.), Language and national consciousness. Vol. 5. (pp. 173-180). Voronezh.

Belyaeva, A. Yu. (2002). Features of speech behavior of men and women: On the material of Russian spoken language. Ph.D. dissertation (10.02.01). Saratov.

Brosnahan, L. (1998). Russian and English non-verbal communication. Moscow: Belingva.

Brown, P. (1987). Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: CUP.

Chernyshova, E. B, & Sternin, I. A. (2004). Communicative behavior of a preschooler. Voronezh.

Communicative behavior. Age communicative behavior (2003). I.A. Sternin, & K.F. Sedov (Eds). Issue 1. Voronezh.

Deutschmann, M. (2003). Apologising in British English. Umeå: Umeå University.

Dobrynina, L. A. (2000). On the national specifics of American gender communicative behavior. In I.A. Sternin (Ed.), Culture of communication and its formation. Vol. 7. (pp. 32-34). Voronezh.

Dorofeeva, I. V. (2005). Appeal in conversational discourse. In Communication studies (pp. 39-50). Voronezh.

Fedorov, V. A. (2005). How close are we: Russians and French? (from the experience of everyday communication). In Communication studies (pp. 204-209). Voronezh.

Firsova, E. V. (2003). National-cultural specificity of speech behavior of Russian and German authors: a syntactic-pragmatic aspect. Ph.D. dissertation (02.10.19). Rostov-on-Don.

Formanovskaya, N. I. (1987). Russian speech etiquette: linguistic and methodological aspects. (2nd ed.). Moscow: Russian language.

Gette, E. Yu. (2004). Gender specificity of communication (experimental study). In I.A. Sternin (Ed.), Culture of communication and its formation. Vol. 12. (pp. 57-64). Voronezh.

Goldin, V. Ye. (1983). Speech and Etiquette. Moscow: Enlightenment, 1983.

Gorodetskaya, L. A. (2009) Linguoculture and liguocultural competence. Moscow: University.

Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J.L. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and Semantics. Vol. 3. Speech acts. (pp. 88-115). New York: Academic Press.

Grischuk, E. I. (2003). The meaning of the word in the linguistic consciousness of the student and the practice of communication. In Man in the Information Space (pp. 127-128). Voronezh.

Kugotava, M. S. (2013). Features of the representation of speech behavior in the paremiological picture of the world: on the material of the Karachay- Balkarian and Russian languages. Ph.D. dissertation (02.10.19). Nalchik.

Leech, G. (1983). Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longman.

Liu, W. J. (2002). Category of politeness in Russian and Chinese communicative behavior. In I.A. Sternin (Ed.), Russian and Chinese communicative behavior (pp. 25-26). Voronezh.

Mruts, N. A. (1997). Features of the communicative behavior of the Russian teacher. In Study and teaching of language as a national-cultural value. (pp. 45-46). Voronezh.

Ovchinnikov, V. V. (2002). Sakura and oak. Moscow: AST, Astrel.

Prokhorov, Yu. E., & Sternin, I. A. (2002). Russian communicative behavior. M., 2002.

Richmond, Y. (1995). From Da to Yes: Understanding the East Europeans. Yarmouth, Me: Intercultural Press.

Russian and Chinese communicative behavior (2002). I.A. Sternin (Ed.). Issue 1. Voronezh.

Russian and Finnish communicative behavior (2001). I.A. Sternin, N. Turunen, & I.P. Lysakova (Eds.). Vol. 2. St. Petersburg.

Russian and French communicative behavior (2002). I.A. Sternin & R.A. Ermakova (Eds.). Issue 1. Voronezh.

Russian and German communicative behavior (2002). I.A. Sternin & H. Eckert (Eds.). Vol . 1. Voronezh.

Salomatina, M. S. (2002). The linguistic personality of the modern student philologist. In Language and national consciousness (pp. 84-88). Voronezh.

Scinner, B. F. (1957). Verbal Behavior. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc.

Sternin, I. A., Larina, T. V., & Sternina, M. A. (2003). Essay on English communicative behavior. Voronezh.

Sviridov, E. V. (2004). Representation of the communicative behavior of the person in the author's frame of direct speech in the German art text. Ph.D. dissertation (10.02.04). Voronezh.

Terekhov, I. V. (2011). Studying of speech behavior of native speakers on a material of modern British cinema. Ph.D. dissertation (13.00.02). Tambov.



  • Şu halde refbacks yoktur.

Telif Hakkı (c) 2020 Journal of History Culture and Art Research

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.