Аңдатпа
This study addresses the issue of terminological pitfalls encountered by Russian bilingual scholars working in the field of linguoculturology and other humanities disciplines. The author examines the situation in which researchers proficient in at least two languages - their native tongue (the language of their ethnic culture) and Russian (the state and professional language of science) - analyze and describe linguocultural phenomena primarily in Russian. As a result, there is a risk of terminological substitution and a distortion in the understanding of cultural concepts, since the original categories are described using the resources of another language. This leads to negative linguistic interference and a loss of authenticity in the object under study. The article emphasizes that this problem is particularly relevant in Russian regions, where a significant proportion of the scientific community consists of bilinguals. The author analyzes the causes of terminological pitfalls, including the established practice of scientific communication predominantly in Russian, limited reflection on the linguistic and cognitive characteristics of bilingualism, and insufficient attention to sociocultural factors in the organization of science in regional contexts. The author also notes that such processes are observed not only in oral discussions but also in scientific publications, including articles, monographs, and dissertations. The article provides a review of scholarly literature on the problems of bilingualism, interference, and the specifics of Russian science, highlighting the need for a comprehensive approach to analyzing the situation. The historical dynamics of language policy in the USSR and Russia are considered, as well as changes in the role of national languages in scientific communication. Special attention is paid to the specifics of working as a humanities scholar in national research centers and the difficulties encountered when studying and describing one’s own culture in a professional language different from one’s native tongue. The problem of terminological pitfalls extends beyond a single scientific discipline and requires an interdisciplinary approach integrating linguoculturology, sociolinguistics, cognitive linguistics, sociology, and psychology. The article stresses the necessity of further research into the cognitive and sociocultural aspects of bilingualism in Russian science and calls for deeper reflection on the linguistic and terminological risks faced by bilingual scholars.