National Features of Discourse: A Systematic Review

2025

Full text Open access: Gold Metadata (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.5430/wjel.v16n2p44
Data confidence 70 medium
How this score is calculated

It is built from checkable properties of the record itself: whether the article has a DOI, how many independent sources confirmed its data, whether the required fields are filled in, and how recent the latest confirmation is. Disagreement between sources and a missing identifier lower it. A value of 80 or above means the record was published without further checking; 60 to 79 means it is published at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable. A record verified by an editor by hand is never pushed below 90 by a recalculation. This scores our data about the article, not the article itself.

Abstract

While linguacultural studies are increasingly present in modern linguistics, the field still lacks clarity regarding its scope and applicable methods. This systematic review synthesized 20 studies on national features of discourse in its various types, selected from the EBSCOhost databases. The general analysis showed that most studies were conducted in Kazakhstan, the Middle East, and Africa, with a marked increase in publications after 2020. The in-depth analysis revealed that proverbial discourse was the most frequently examined type (n = 9), often linked to gender issues, while other types such as familial, education, media, and political discourse received limited attention. The findings demonstrate that English culture dominates both monocultural and cross-cultural studies, whereas Kazakh and Russian cultures remain underexplored. Methodologically, critical discourse analysis and conceptual analysis were most widely used, confirming their relevance for identifying national features in discourse. The review concludes that future linguacultural research should expand beyond proverbial and gender-focused studies, strengthen comparative analyses involving Kazakh and Russian discourses, and diversify methodological approaches. These results contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of national discourse features and offer practical implications for culturally informed language education and cross-cultural communication.