This article provides rationale for making strategic changes to the content of the scientific report. The necessity to put in the discourse of the scientific report two formations of strategic preferences at once is justified: on the one hand, the description of the scientific results as a product of conceptualization of scientific experience, and on the other hand, - alignment of marketing strategies as a tool for its commercialization.The paper shows the basic tool conceptualization of scientific experience when describing the results of the study - The system of verb concepts in type of event. The semantic volume of verb concept allows to describe the content of the event, which is in mind represented by propositional structure of scenario. The results of the semantic analysis of the reports’ texts showed that out of the four types of scenarios used in the texts of the reports, only one describes the result of the research itself. With this description of extrapolation of research results from the reporting documentation to the marketing communication field becomes difficult enough.To resolve this problem, it is proposed to extent the context of scientific discourse through classification of scientific results, as well as through the inclusion of information of marketing type. The implementation of the strategy of extending the context will increase the pragmatic constituent of the discourse: it will provide the influence to the potential consumer of system of explicit and hidden meanings, revealing scientific and market value of the scientific product derived from the research.

Lyudmila V Ekshembeeva

Principal contact for editorial correspondence.
Kazakh National University of Al-Farabi 050040, 79 Al-Farabi Prospect, Almaty, Kazakhstan

Doctor of Philology, Professor of Al-Farabi Kazakh National University, Almaty, Kazakhstan

Manat Sh Musataeva

Abay Kazakh National Pedagogical University 050010, 13 Dostyk Prospect, Almaty, Kazakhstan

Doctor of Philology, Professor of Abay Kazakh National Pedagogical University, Almaty, Kazakhstan

  • Kornienko A.A., Ardashkin I.B., Chmykhalo A.Yu. Philosophy of science [Философия науки]. Tomsk: Ed. of TPU, 2007, p. 164.
  • Fodor J.A. The modularity of mind. Cambridge (Mass.), 1983, p. 145.
  • Givon T. Visual information processing system as a step in the evolution of human language [Система обработки визуальной информации как ступень в эволюции человеческого языка]. Vestnik Moskovskogo Universiteta. Ep. 9. Philology. 2004. No. 3. P. 117-145.
  • Foucault M. Formations of Strategies [Формации стратегий]. The Archaeology of Knowledge. Transl. from French / Gen. ed. Levchenko Bros. К.: Nika-Center, 1996, p. 208.
  • Babenko L.G. Spehere of concepts of processual-eventive world: universal, nation-wide and individual conceptual spaces [Концептосфера процессуально-событийного мира: универсальное, общенациональное и индивидуальное концептуальное пространства]. Russian word in world culture. Materials of X MAPRYAL Congress. Plenary meetings. Volume I. St. Petersburg, 2003. P. 216-220.
  • Katsnelson S.D. Categories of language and thinking: From scientific heritage [Категории языка и мышления: Из научного наследия]. Мoscow, 2001, p. 864.
  • Karasik V.I. Language keys [Языковые ключи]. Мoscow: Gnosis, 2009, p. 406.
  • Popova Z.D., Sternin I.A. Cognitive linguistics [Когнитивная лингвистика]. М.: East-West, 2007, p. 314.


Abstract - 149

PDF (English) - 79

Copyright (c) 2017 Ekshembeeva L.V., Musataeva M.S.

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