UDC

008:13

DOI

10.37482/2687-1505-V426

Authors

Svetlana. V. Popkova
Postgraduate Student, Department of Cultural and Religious Studies, Northern (Arctic) Federal University named after M.V. Lomonosov (address: ul. Smol’nyy Buyan 1, Arkhangelsk, 163002, Russia).
e-mail: s.popkova@narfu.ru, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6576-1711

Abstract

The article aims to demonstrate the role of creative activity in the process of adaptation of foreign students to a different culture. The analysis is based on Immanuel Kant’s concept of the productive power of imagination. It has been established that creativity serves as a basis for communication, while the productive power of imagination is an integral part of the communication process. Creativity is understood here as a collective process of communication contributing to the formation of shared experiences among representatives of different cultures. The author emphasizes the importance of using modern cognitive theories, including the concept of situated cognition and cognitive linguistics, which provide effective models for explaining the process of forming intercultural experience in the context of creative communication. As an example of how joint creative practices of students from different countries lead to successful intercultural interaction and adaptation, the article presents the experience of Kenozero National Park (Arkhangelsk Region) and Etnomir Ethnographic Park (Kaluga Region). A conclusion is made that the productive power of imagination generates shared narratives that facilitate intercultural dialogue. Additionally, the paper outlines prospects for further development of intercultural interaction. The theoretical significance of the research lies in demonstrating the heuristic potential of Kant’s theory of creativity and imagination for studying the cultural adaptation of foreign students. When it comes to the practical importance, the study outlines prospects for further elaboration of the project “Development of New Cooperation Practices for the Sociocultural Adaptation of Migrants in the Arkhangelsk Region”, which was implemented as part of the Arkhangelsk Region Governor’s Grant Competition in 2023–2024.

Keywords

modern cognitive theories, creative activity, dialogue of cultures, intercultural experience, adaptation of foreign students, productive imagination, I. Kant

References

1. Popkova S.V. Tvorchestvo kak fundamental’naya osnova kommunikatsii i kross-kul’turnogo vzaimodeystviya [Creativity as a Fundamental Basis for Communication and Cross-Cultural Interaction]. Znanie. Ponimanie. Umenie, 2023, no. 4, pp. 218–224. https://doi.org/10.17805/zpu.2023.4.19
2. Kant I. Kritika chistogo razuma [ The Critique of Pure Reason]. St. Petersburg, 1993. 478 p.
3. Lukmanova R.Kh., Stoletov A.I. O transformatsii ponimaniya tvorchestva v filosofii [On Transformation of Understanding of Creativity in Philosophy]. Vestnik Bashkirskogo universiteta, 2013, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 1237–1243. Available at: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/o-transformatsii-ponimaniya-tvorchestva-v-filosofii (accessed: 21 February 2025).
4. Andreeva I.S. Filosofskie problemy tvorchestva: Kant i Shopengauer [Philosophical Problems of Creativity: Kant and Schopenhauer]. Chelovek: obraz i sushchnost’. Gumanitarnye aspekty, 2001, no. 1, pp. 21–47.
5. Kampylis P.G., Valtanen J. Redefining Creativity – Analyzing Definitions, Collocations, and Consequences. J. Creat. Behav., 2010, vol. 44, no. 3, pp. 191–214. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.2010.tb01333.x
6. Knyazeva E.N. Konstruirovanie v kommunikativnykh sistemakh [Construction in Communicative Systems]. Filosofiya nauki i tekhniki, 2012, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 84–97. Available at: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/konstruiro-vanie-v-kommunikativnyh-sistemah (accessed: 21 February 2025).
7. Berry J.W. A Psychology of Immigration. J. Soc. Iss., 2003, vol. 57, no. 3, pp. 615–631. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00231
8. Pishchal’nikova V.A. Kognitivnaya lingvistika i mezhkul’turnaya kommunikatsiya [Cognitive Linguistics and Intercultural Communication]. Reality, Language and Mind. Tambov, 2002, pp. 122–140.
9. McPherson M., Smith-Lovin L., Cook J.M. Birds of a Feather: Homophily in Social Networks. Annu. Rev. Sociol., 2001, vol. 27, pp. 415–444. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.27.1.415
10. Berger R., Brenick A., Lawrence S.E., Coco L., Abu-Raiya H. Comparing the Effectiveness and Durability of Contact- and Skills-Based Prejudice Reduction Approaches. J. Appl. Dev. Psychol., 2018, vol. 59, pp. 46–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2018.04.002
11. Smith K., Berg D. Cross-Cultural Groups at Work. Eur. Manag. J., 1997, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 8–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0263-2373 (96)00069-2
12. Mikheev N.N. Kontseptsiya dialoga kul’tur v mezhkul’turnoy kommunikatsii (na primere etnograficheskogo parka-muzeya “Etnomir”) [The Concept of Dialogue of Cultures in Intercultural Communication (Exemplified by the Ethnographic Museum Park “Etnomir”)]. Savelova E.V. (ed.). Nauchno-prakticheskaya realizatsiya tvorcheskogo potentsiala molodezhi [Scientific and Practical Realization of the Creative Potential of Young People]. Khabarovsk, 2020, pp. 226–235.
13. Alekseeva L.L. Etnopedagogicheskie aspekty kul’turno-obrazovatel’noy deyatel’nosti sovremennykh muzeev [Ethno-Pedagogical Aspects of Cultural and Educational Activities of Modern Museums]. Kazanskiy pedagogicheskiy zhurnal, 2022, no. 3, pp. 192–201.