employee from 01.01.2024 until now
Kemerovo, Russian Federation
The academic communication of the question – response type in multilingual environment requires a proper linguistic approach that considers cognitive specifics, pragmatics, and cultural codes. The research featured communication strategies that optimize the interaction between university professors and medical students in a multilingual academic environment. The study involved recorded in-class dialogues (1,440 min) between an anatomy professor and multilingual students. The methods of logical classification, linguacognitive modeling, and comparative analysis provided evidence that the response largely depended on the type of stimulus. Visual support served as an auxiliary material or an independent stimulus for the response, which, when combined with a corresponding auditory stimulus, generated more effective reactions. The analysis of factors leading to communicative failures in multilinguals depended on the question (stimulus) and its link to the previous reaction. In this case, visual support was a fundamental stimulus or part of a stimulus for the response. Multilingual students perceived information much faster and more efficiently when asked direct questions with visual stimulus (≥50% correct answers). Stimulus material had a significant impact on the learning process. Therefore, multilingual students need adapted teaching methods in medical and pedagogical discourse.
multilingual, stimulus, response, communication failure, visual support
1. Antoniou M. The advantages of bilingualism debate. Annual Review of Linguistics, 2019, 5(1): 395–415. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-linguistics-011718-011820
2. Grosjean F. Bilingual: Life and reality. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2010, 276.
3. Loginova E., Varanasi S., Neumann G. Towards end-to-end multilingual question answering. Information Systems Frontiers, 2021, 23(1): 227–241. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-020-09996-1
4. Quirk R., Greenbaum S., Leech G., Svartvik J. A comprehensive grammar of the English language. 2nd ed. London: Longman, 1985, 1779.
5. Sperl L., Nicanço Tomé M. S., Kühn H., Kreysa H. Context matters: How experimental language and language environment affect mental representations in multilingualism. Languages, 2024, 9(3). https://doi.org/10.3390/languages9030106
6. Walton D. N. Question-reply argumentation. NY: Praeger, 1989, 424.
7. Bugrova S. E. Phenomenon of communicative failure within the framework of the communicative-pragmatic paradigm. Bulletin of Chelyabinsk State University, 2012, (21): 22–26. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/pkfuvn
8. Sadock J. M. Toward a linguistic theory of speech acts. NY: Academic Press, 1974, 168.
9. Liu Y. The impact of bi/multilingualism on brain activity in dual language education based on smart technologies: Neurolinguistic aspect. Education and Information Technologies, 2024, 29(4): 18299–18321. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12571-9
10. Questions and answers, ed. Kiefer F. Dordrecht: Springer, 1983, 300. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-7016-8
11. Behera S. R., Injeti K. M., Patibandla J. S. K., Pokala P. K., Reddy P. B. AQUALLM: Audio question answering data generation using large language models. ArXiv, 2023. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2312.17343
12. Jakonen T. The integration of content and language in students’ task answer production in the bilingual classroom. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 2019, 22(4): 428–444. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2016.1267694
13. Dick A. S., Garcia N. L., Pruden S. M., Thompson W. K., Hawes S. W., Sutherland M. T., Gonzalez R. No evidence for a bilingual executive function advantage in the nationally representative ABCD study. Nature Human Behaviour, 2019, 3(7): 692–701. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-019-0609-3
14. Hládek D., Staš J., Juhár J., Koctúr T. Slovak dataset for multilingual question answering. IEEE Access, 2023, 11: 32869–32881. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3262308
15. Hoogland D., White L., Knight S. Speech rate and turn-transition pause duration in Dutch and English spontaneous question-answer sequences. Languages, 2023, 8(2). https://doi.org/10.3390/languages8020115
16. Nijmeijer S. E., Keijzer M., Wucher A., Martens S., Van Tol M.-J. Attending multiple languages: The relation between individual multilingual language use and attentional control. OSF, 2022. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/kuv7f
17. Paschoal A. F. A., Pirozelli P., Freire V., Delgado K. V., Peres S. M., José M. M., Nakasato F., Oliveira A. S., Brandão A. A. F., Costa A. H. R., Cozman F. G. Pirá: A bilingual Portuguese-English dataset for question-answering about the ocean. 30th ACM International Conference on Information & Knowledge Management: Proc. Conf., Australia, 1–5 Nov 2021. 2021, 4544–4553. https://doi.org/10.1145/3459637.3482012
18. Lu S., Liu M., Yin L., Yin Z., Liu X., Zheng W. The multi-modal fusion in visual question answering: A review of attention mechanisms. PeerJ Computer Science, 2023, 9. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj-cs.1400
19. Stenström A.-B. Questions in conversation. Questions and questioning, ed. Mayer M. Berlin-Boston: De Gruyter, 1988, 304–326.
20. Asai A., Kasai J., Clark J. H., Lee K., Choi E., Hajishirzi H. XOR QA: Cross-lingual open-retrieval question answering. Proceedings of the 2021 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, 2021, 547–564. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2021.naacl-main.46
21. Bach K., Harnish R. M. Linguistic communication and speech acts. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1979, 352.
22. Pfeiffer J., Geigle G., Kamath A., Steitz J.-M. O., Roth S., Vulić I., Gurevych I. xGQA: Cross-lingual visual question answering. ArXiv, 2021. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2109.06082
23. Zhang X., Wu C., Zhao Z., Lin W., Zhang Y., Wang Y., Xie W. PMC-VQA: Visual instruction tuning for medical visual question answering. ArXiv, 2023. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2305.10415
24. Goffman E. Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1974, 586.
25. Schoonen R. Are reading and writing building on the same skills? The relationship between reading and writing in L1 and EFL. Reading and Writing, 2019, 32(3): 511–535. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-018-9874-1
26. Code-switching in conversation: Language, interaction and identity, ed. Auer P. London, UK: Routledge, 1998, V+355.
27. Levinson S. C. Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983, 420.
28. Renjit S., Idicula S. M. A study of the state of the art approaches and datasets for multilingual natural language inference. Neural Processing Letters, 2024, 56(6). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11063-024-11673-2
29. Xue L., Constant N., Roberts A., Kale M., Al-Rfou R., Siddhant A., Barua A., Raffel C. mT5: A massively multilingual pre-trained text-to-text transformer. Proceedings of the 2021 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, 2021, 483–498. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2021.naacl-main.41
30. Rücklé A., Swarnkar K., Gurevych I. Improved cross-lingual question retrieval for community question answering. The World Wide Web Conference, ACM, 2019, 3179–3186. https://doi.org/10.1145/3308558.3313502
31. Yahya N. Q., Kareem M. Y. Developing EFL Students’ metacognition by using question–answer relationship (QAR) strategy. Journal of Tikrit University for Humanities, 2021, 28(11): 1–23. https://doi.org/10.25130/jtuh.28.11.2021.21
32. Yule G. Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996, 138.
33. Szymanski M. H. Producing text through talk: Question-answering activity in classroom peer groups. Linguistics and Education, 2002, 13(4): 533–563. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0898-5898(03)00003-2
34. Sperber D., Wilson D. Relevance: Communication and cognition. 2nd ed. Oxford: Blackwell, 1995, 338.
35. Brown P., Levinson S. C. Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987, 345.
36. De Varda A. G. Multilingual neural language models in cognitive science: How cross-lingual representation spaces can inform the study of language. IRIS, 2025. URL: https://boa.unimib.it/handle/10281/540581 (accessed 10 May 2025).
37. Grice H. P. Logic and conversation. Syntax and Semantics. Vol. 3. Speech Acts, eds. Cole P., Morgan J. L. NY: Academic Press, 1975, 41–58.
38. Hansen Edwards J. G., Zampini M. L. The impact of audio versus audiovisual stimuli with or without face masking on judgements about different varieties of Asian English. World Englishes, 2025. https://doi.org/10.1111/weng.12734
39. Lin Z., Zhang D., Tao Q., Shi D., Haffari G., Wu Q., He M., Ge Z. Medical visual question answering: A survey. Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, 2023, 143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.artmed.2023.102611
