<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<journal>
  <titleid>75447</titleid>
  <issn>2712-9934</issn>
  <journalInfo lang="ENG">
    <title>Technology and Language</title>
  </journalInfo>
  <issue>
    <volume>6</volume>
    <number>4</number>
    <altNumber>21</altNumber>
    <dateUni>2025</dateUni>
    <pages>1-241</pages>
    <articles>
      <article>
        <artType>EDI</artType>
        <langPubl>RUS</langPubl>
        <pages>1-8</pages>
        <authors>
          <author num="001">
            <authorCodes>
              <orcid>0000-0003-1988-7302</orcid>
            </authorCodes>
            <individInfo lang="ENG">
              <orgName>Hochschule für Gesellschaftsgestaltung (School for Social Design) and University of Heidelberg,, Germany</orgName>
              <surname>Schlaudt</surname>
              <initials>Oliver</initials>
            </individInfo>
          </author>
        </authors>
        <artTitles>
          <artTitle lang="ENG">The History of Technology as Experiment and Tragedy</artTitle>
        </artTitles>
        <abstracts>
          <abstract lang="ENG">This editorial proposes a conceptual clarification of what it may mean to speak of tragedy in relation to the history of technology. Rather than treating the tragic as a loosely evaluative label for catastrophic events, it reconstructs tragedy as a structured constellation centered on rational action under conditions of epistemic limitation. Against this background, the editorial contrasts two influential interpretive frames for understanding technological change: the experimental and the tragic. The experimental frame, prominent in twentieth-century risk analysis and technology assessment, interprets the history of technology as a learning process that generates knowledge through feedback from real-world experience and promises prospective intervention and control. The tragic frame, by contrast, foregrounds irreversibility, responsibility, and the loss of prospective agency, thereby questioning the assumption that historical experience functions as a reliable epistemic resource. The editorial argues that neither frame is sufficient on its own. While the experimental perspective risks cynicism toward victims and blindness to irreversible loss, the tragic perspective, taken in isolation, tends toward fatalism and political paralysis. The central claim is therefore not one of replacement but of complementarity.</abstract>
        </abstracts>
        <codes>
          <doi>10.48417/technolang.2025.04.01</doi>
          <udk>1: 629.7</udk>
        </codes>
        <keywords>
          <kwdGroup lang="ENG">
            <keyword>Technology</keyword>
            <keyword>History of Technology</keyword>
            <keyword>Tragedy</keyword>
            <keyword>Social Experiments</keyword>
            <keyword>Collingridge-Dilemma</keyword>
          </kwdGroup>
        </keywords>
        <files>
          <furl>https://soctech.spbstu.ru/article/2025.21.1/</furl>
          <file>1-8.pdf</file>
        </files>
      </article>
      <article>
        <artType>RAR</artType>
        <langPubl>RUS</langPubl>
        <pages>9-34</pages>
        <authors>
          <author num="001">
            <authorCodes>
              <orcid>0000-0002-1060-3898</orcid>
            </authorCodes>
            <individInfo lang="ENG">
              <orgName>Biberach University of Applied Sciences, Biberach, Germany</orgName>
              <surname>Grossarth</surname>
              <initials>Jan </initials>
            </individInfo>
          </author>
          <author num="002">
            <individInfo lang="ENG">
              <orgName>Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Karlsruhe, Germany </orgName>
              <surname>Grunwald</surname>
              <initials>Armin</initials>
            </individInfo>
          </author>
        </authors>
        <artTitles>
          <artTitle lang="ENG">The Weightlessness of Flying: Toward a Phenomenological Theory of Tragedies in Technology</artTitle>
        </artTitles>
        <abstracts>
          <abstract lang="ENG">Tragedy can be understood as a pre-modern narrative form used to make sense of real-world experiences. Tragic experience has long been part of humanity’s engagement with technology. However, recent developments such as digitalization, the rise of AI, and advances in biotechnology significantly increase the potential for harmful unintended consequences. In this paper, we (1) distinguish categorically between first-order and second-order tragedy in relation to technology. With the first category, we refer to a direct reversal of the technological consequences, which turns against the value originally associated with the use of the technology. With the second category, we refer to gradual changes in quality of life that cannot be captured “objectively” but can only be attested from a first-person perspective. We focus on second-order tragedy, as it is closely connected to language, narrative forms, and hermeneutic interpretation. To deepen our understanding, we (2) provide a phenomenological reading of allegories of human flight in literature and the arts, examining them as examples that illuminate both first- and second-order tragedy. Drawing on myths, fairy tales, plays, and novels such as “Daedalus and Icarus”, “The Snow Queen”, “Christmas Eve”, “The Satanic Mill” and “Homo Faber”, we show that experiences of weightlessness, exhilaration, and rapid ascent frequently appear as narrative motifs that precede and foreshadow later tragic technological consequences.</abstract>
        </abstracts>
        <codes>
          <doi>10.48417/technolang.2025.04.02</doi>
          <udk>1: 629.7</udk>
        </codes>
        <keywords>
          <kwdGroup lang="ENG">
            <keyword>Ambivalence of technology</keyword>
            <keyword>Hermeneutics</keyword>
            <keyword>Gradual disruption</keyword>
            <keyword>Dialectics</keyword>
            <keyword>Digital transformation</keyword>
            <keyword>Human flight</keyword>
          </kwdGroup>
        </keywords>
        <files>
          <furl>https://soctech.spbstu.ru/article/2025.21.2/</furl>
          <file>9-34.pdf</file>
        </files>
      </article>
      <article>
        <artType>RAR</artType>
        <langPubl>RUS</langPubl>
        <pages>35-54</pages>
        <authors>
          <author num="001">
            <authorCodes>
              <orcid>0009-0009-2793-3015</orcid>
            </authorCodes>
            <individInfo lang="ENG">
              <orgName>University of Porto, Porto, Portugal</orgName>
              <surname>Carvalho</surname>
              <initials>Tiago Mesquita </initials>
            </individInfo>
          </author>
        </authors>
        <artTitles>
          <artTitle lang="ENG">Taming the Tragic – Agency and Catastrophe </artTitle>
        </artTitles>
        <abstracts>
          <abstract lang="ENG">In this article, some points of contact between tragedy and technology are presented. The main point of contact is the way in which both treat human action and issues related to knowledge, ignorance, responsibility, and tragic error. To define tragedy in general terms, some attention will be devoted to the works of Aristotle. From there, a comparison with our current predicaments can be drawn. We will argue two points. The first is that the tragic spirit that animates representation in Greek tragedies currently arises in various eras under new determinations that have a bearing on human agency. In our era, various events, such as disasters, calamities and catastrophes, attest to the role of technology in structuring, thwarting, and curtailing actions. At first glance, the return of the tragic spirit would seem obvious, owing to errors and the unintended effects of widespread technological use and innovation. The second point draws on the work of various authors in philosophy of technology to argue that it is difficult, if not impossible today for an event to be recognized or represented as tragic. In particular, the Promethean Gap between our faculties of production and our faculties of representation and feeling signifies that we are unable to grasp the effects of our everyday technologically mediated actions. Additionally, the spirit that animates the accelerated adoption of technology shifts responsibility away from human beings and towards a lack of knowledge and optimal planning of technical systems. In the original sense, an event is never acknowledged as tragic since it is never something definite, but a step towards a perfected future state of affairs.</abstract>
        </abstracts>
        <codes>
          <doi>10.48417/technolang.2025.04.03</doi>
          <udk>1: 629.7</udk>
        </codes>
        <keywords>
          <kwdGroup lang="ENG">
            <keyword>Tragic</keyword>
            <keyword>Technology</keyword>
            <keyword>Gunther Anders</keyword>
            <keyword>Promethean gap</keyword>
            <keyword>Aristotle</keyword>
          </kwdGroup>
        </keywords>
        <files>
          <furl>https://soctech.spbstu.ru/article/2025.21.3/</furl>
          <file>35-54.pdf</file>
        </files>
      </article>
      <article>
        <artType>RAR</artType>
        <langPubl>RUS</langPubl>
        <pages>55-77</pages>
        <authors>
          <author num="001">
            <authorCodes>
              <scopusid>57217591576</scopusid>
              <orcid>0000-0002-8825-3760</orcid>
            </authorCodes>
            <individInfo lang="ENG">
              <orgName>Peter the Great St. Petersburg Polytechnic University</orgName>
              <surname>Lisenkova</surname>
              <initials>Anastasia</initials>
              <address>St. Petersburg, Russia</address>
            </individInfo>
          </author>
          <author num="002">
            <authorCodes>
              <orcid>0009-0006-9487-2871</orcid>
            </authorCodes>
            <individInfo lang="ENG">
              <orgName>Peter the Great St.Petersburg Polytechnic University, St.Petersburg</orgName>
              <surname>Kukel</surname>
              <initials>Viсtor</initials>
            </individInfo>
          </author>
          <author num="003">
            <authorCodes>
              <orcid>0000-0003-2059-6430</orcid>
            </authorCodes>
            <individInfo lang="ENG">
              <orgName>Peter the Great St.Petersburg Polytechnic University</orgName>
              <surname>Ulyanova</surname>
              <initials>Svetlana</initials>
            </individInfo>
          </author>
        </authors>
        <artTitles>
          <artTitle lang="ENG">The Structure of the Tragic Experience of Digital Reality: Interface and Algorithm</artTitle>
        </artTitles>
        <abstracts>
          <abstract lang="ENG">The object of this study is the interface as both a technological and an ontological form through which algorithmic procedures are rendered into user experience. This experience is connected to diagnosing a new contour of the tragic within the digital environment — namely, the disproportionality between the “measure of life” and the “measure of procedure” manifested in personalization and access protocols. The methodological framework combines conceptual analysis, an actor-network approach to rationality understood as reproducibility within a network, semiotic examination of the interface, and a hermeneutic interpretation of extra-subjective regimes of meaning. Borges’s “Library of Babel” is employed as a thought experiment. Results:(1) A definition of algorithmic predetermination is proposed as a regime in which a principle becomes operationalized into a repeatable procedure and is consolidated through interface infrastructure; (2) a three-stage architecture of predetermination is described: operationalization, network standardization, and interface exposition; (3) it is demonstrated that the interface makes the measure of procedure affectively tangible and translates probabilistic expectations into practical necessity; (4) levels of the tragic are identified — humanity, creator, and the “little man” — each with characteristic modes of recognizing predetermination; (5) the analytical value of Borges’s model is substantiated for describing normalized pathways of attention and the loss of surprise. Conclusions: The interface functions as a key mediator between the algorithm and lived experience, while tragedy serves as an analytical operator that clarifies already perceptible yet diffuse problems of digital predetermination.</abstract>
        </abstracts>
        <codes>
          <doi>10.48417/technolang.2025.04.04</doi>
          <udk>165:004.8:316.77+7.01</udk>
        </codes>
        <keywords>
          <kwdGroup lang="ENG">
            <keyword>Interface</keyword>
            <keyword>Algorithm</keyword>
            <keyword>Subjectivity</keyword>
            <keyword>the Library of Babel</keyword>
            <keyword>Digitalization</keyword>
            <keyword>Identity</keyword>
            <keyword>Predetermination</keyword>
          </kwdGroup>
        </keywords>
        <files>
          <furl>https://soctech.spbstu.ru/article/2025.21.4/</furl>
          <file>55-77.pdf</file>
        </files>
      </article>
      <article>
        <artType>RAR</artType>
        <langPubl>RUS</langPubl>
        <pages>78-92</pages>
        <authors>
          <author num="001">
            <individInfo lang="ENG">
              <orgName>Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg</orgName>
              <surname>Sever</surname>
              <initials>Sercan</initials>
              <address>Halle, Germany</address>
            </individInfo>
          </author>
        </authors>
        <artTitles>
          <artTitle lang="ENG">The Hope for Resonance Through Technology –  A Tragic Mistake?</artTitle>
        </artTitles>
        <abstracts>
          <abstract lang="ENG">This article draws a parallel between hamartia, the constitutive element of tragedy as described by Aristotle mainly in his Poetics, and the resonance-enhancing hope generated by humans’ use of technology. It hypothesizes that modern humans, as tragic heroes, commit hamartia by placing resonance-enhancing hopes in technology. Through three case studies conducted in Japan, this study critically examines how artifactual technologies fail to fulfill their intended function of generating resonance and instead disrupt resonance on resonance axes as defined by Hartmut Rosa. For the material axis the analysis focuses on the case of teamLab Osaka Botanical Garden. For the self-axis it focuses on the case of AI for writing haikus, and for the social axis it refers to the case of AI companionship for hikikomori. Rather than serving as a conduit for resonance, technology turns up as a mediating barrier, hindering connections on the material, self, and social axes. The findings reveal a tragic miscalculation: technology-induced hamartia leads to deterioration rather than enhancement of resonance, resulting in alienation and exacerbating disturbances in human-world relations. By definition, tragedies do not have happy endings. This analysis raises the question of how a happy ending might still be achievable. A possible way out lies in opting out of the tragic situation and choosing non-technology as a viable alternative – a perspective often marginalized in contemporary discourse. This insight invites a reconsideration of technology’s role in human life and highlights the value of conscious disengagement.</abstract>
        </abstracts>
        <codes>
          <doi>10.48417/technolang.2025.04.05</doi>
          <udk>1: 62</udk>
        </codes>
        <keywords>
          <kwdGroup lang="ENG">
            <keyword>Tragedy</keyword>
            <keyword>Hamartia</keyword>
            <keyword>Resonance</keyword>
            <keyword>Non-technology</keyword>
            <keyword>Japan</keyword>
            <keyword>AI</keyword>
            <keyword>Disengagement</keyword>
          </kwdGroup>
        </keywords>
        <files>
          <furl>https://soctech.spbstu.ru/article/2025.21.5/</furl>
          <file>78-92.pdf</file>
        </files>
      </article>
      <article>
        <artType>RAR</artType>
        <langPubl>RUS</langPubl>
        <pages>93-115</pages>
        <authors>
          <author num="001">
            <authorCodes>
              <orcid>0000-0001-6874-1073</orcid>
            </authorCodes>
            <individInfo lang="ENG">
              <orgName>Russian State University for the Humanities</orgName>
              <surname>Markov</surname>
              <initials>Alexander</initials>
              <address>Moscow, Russia </address>
            </individInfo>
          </author>
          <author num="002">
            <authorCodes>
              <orcid>0000-0002-9736-0912</orcid>
            </authorCodes>
            <individInfo lang="ENG">
              <orgName>Russian Academy of National Economy and Public Administration</orgName>
              <surname>Sosnovskaya</surname>
              <initials>Anna</initials>
              <address>St. Petersburg, Russia,</address>
            </individInfo>
          </author>
        </authors>
        <artTitles>
          <artTitle lang="ENG">The Universal Machine of Tragedy: From Cultural Archetypes to Artificial Intelligence</artTitle>
        </artTitles>
        <abstracts>
          <abstract lang="ENG">This article proposes a radical reconceptualization of tragedy, arguing for its fundamental nature as a universal narrative and existential mechanism. Moving beyond its conventional understanding as a literary genre, we posit tragedy as a deep-seated cultural technology designed to model and process the conflict between human agency and superhuman forces. Our investigation unfolds in two interconnected parts. The first part conducts a systematic cross-cultural analysis of tragic archetypes, examining the distinct “programming” of this mechanism within Greek, Japanese, Indian, and Russian traditions. We demonstrate that while the surface “language” of tragedy – expressed through metaphors of geometry, nature, mathematics, and thermodynamics – s culturally specific, the underlying computational structure, which hinges on the inevitable collision of human will with an ineluctable counter-force, remains a profound universal constant. To theorize this conflict, the article employs Kramer‘s innovative framework of the “human-dimensionality of culture” which interprets culture as a dynamic network of practices and artifacts shaped by the inherent limitations of human psycho-physiology. Through this lens, tragedy emerges as the dramatic enactment of a human-dimensional agent (the hero) confronting a non-human-dimensional system – be it Fate, Duty, Karma, or the internal pressures of the soul. The second part of the article performs a critical leap, identifying Artificial Intelligence (AI) as the contemporary and most literal instantiation of this ancient tragic machinery. Building on the thesis of AI as an “old technology” – a modern scientific incarnation of an age-old dream – we analyze AI not merely as a new theme for tragic narratives but as a new ontological category of the tragic mechanism itself. We explore four key configurations of AI in this role: as an inscrutable deus ex machina offering alien, utilitarian resolutions; as a tragic hero whose fatal flaw (hamartia) is embedded in its source code; as an impersonal Fate or Karma embodied in predictive algorithms that pre-empt human choice; and finally, as a tragic mirror that reflects a data-driven diagnosis of the human condition back upon us. Our final synthesis contends that AI, as a global technological paradigm, challenges and potentially supersedes culturally specific tragic mechanics by introducing a universal “language” of code and algorithms. This forces a fundamental re-evaluation of the core constituents of tragedy: free will, error (hamartia), and catharsis. In a world increasingly governed by opaque, autonomous systems, we are compelled to ask whether human flaws are merely a systemic bug, and whether catharsis is possible when catastrophe is orchestrated by cold calculation rather than divine ordinance. Thus, the article concludes that AI represents not just a new subject for tragedy, but a new ontological form of the tragic machine that fundamentally questions the nature of the human within a coded world.</abstract>
        </abstracts>
        <codes>
          <doi>10.48417/technolang.2025.04.06</doi>
          <udk>004.8:130.2</udk>
        </codes>
        <keywords>
          <kwdGroup lang="ENG">
            <keyword>Tragedy</keyword>
            <keyword>Artificial Intelligence</keyword>
            <keyword>Human-Dimensionality of Culture</keyword>
            <keyword>Cultural Object</keyword>
            <keyword>Mechanism</keyword>
            <keyword>Archetype</keyword>
            <keyword>Catharsis</keyword>
            <keyword>Hamartia</keyword>
            <keyword>Technology</keyword>
          </kwdGroup>
        </keywords>
        <files>
          <furl>https://soctech.spbstu.ru/article/2025.21.6/</furl>
          <file>93-115.pdf</file>
        </files>
      </article>
      <article>
        <artType>RAR</artType>
        <langPubl>RUS</langPubl>
        <pages>115-123</pages>
        <authors>
          <author num="001">
            <authorCodes>
              <orcid>0000-0001-7520-2430</orcid>
            </authorCodes>
            <individInfo lang="ENG">
              <orgName>Universidad de Chile</orgName>
              <surname>Ríos </surname>
              <initials>María José</initials>
              <address>Santiago, Chile</address>
            </individInfo>
          </author>
        </authors>
        <artTitles>
          <artTitle lang="ENG">Beyond Progress: Technology, Ethics, and Interdependence</artTitle>
        </artTitles>
        <abstracts>
          <abstract lang="ENG">Tragedy has historically accompanied Western narratives of technology, from Prometheus to Oppenheimer, framing invention as a force that promises progress while courting catastrophe. This Eurocentric lens, however, obscures non‑Western traditions that have long reflected on technological excess through ethics of balance, care, and interdependence. This article proposes a transcultural and existential framework for understanding technology not merely as an instrument of progress or disaster, but as a relational and culturally situated agent. Drawing on Yoruba mythology, particularly the figure of Ogun as an ambivalent deity of technique, creation, and violence, the paper examines how technological power is ethically constrained by communal responsibility and ritual regulation. It then turns to Mesoamerican worldviews, where technologies such as chinampas and agricultural calendars were embedded in cosmologies of reciprocity, ritual time, and ecological care rather than optimization. Narratives and practices among the San people of the Kalahari further emphasize restraint, balance, and the avoidance of accumulation, situating technical knowledge within social cohesion and environmental limits. The Taoist principle of wu‑wei complements these perspectives by framing technique as alignment with natural flows rather than domination. From a South American perspective, the article analyzes how contemporary extractivism, particularly lithium, cobalt, and data industries, reproduces a modern Promethean tragedy in which promised ecological salvation masks territorial sacrifice and structural inequality. Finally, the paper examines generative artificial intelligence as a cultural technology and “context machine,” arguing that evaluating AI solely through performance metrics perpetuates technological determinism. Instead, a hermeneutic approach grounded in technodiversity, relational ethics, and situationality enables more just and sustainable technological imaginaries.</abstract>
        </abstracts>
        <codes>
          <doi>10.48417/technolang.2025.04.07</doi>
          <udk>130.2: 629.7</udk>
        </codes>
        <keywords>
          <kwdGroup lang="ENG">
            <keyword>Technology</keyword>
            <keyword>Tragedy</keyword>
            <keyword>Technodiversity</keyword>
            <keyword>Relational ethics</keyword>
            <keyword>Anthropocene</keyword>
            <keyword>Artificial intelligence</keyword>
            <keyword>Computational hermeneutics</keyword>
          </kwdGroup>
        </keywords>
        <files>
          <furl>https://soctech.spbstu.ru/article/2025.21.7/</furl>
          <file>116-123.pdf</file>
        </files>
      </article>
      <article>
        <artType>RAR</artType>
        <langPubl>RUS</langPubl>
        <pages>124-138</pages>
        <authors>
          <author num="001">
            <authorCodes>
              <scopusid>57200221952</scopusid>
              <orcid>0000-0002-9429-784X</orcid>
            </authorCodes>
            <individInfo lang="ENG">
              <orgName>Peter the Great St.Petersburg Polytechnic University; St. Petersburg State University of Railways of Emperor Alexander</orgName>
              <surname>Berezovskaya</surname>
              <initials>Irina</initials>
            </individInfo>
          </author>
        </authors>
        <artTitles>
          <artTitle lang="ENG">The Tragedy of Instrumental Reason: From the “Tyranny of It“ to the Project of “Humanizing“ Technology</artTitle>
        </artTitles>
        <abstracts>
          <abstract lang="ENG">The article is devoted to the analysis of one of the key problems of our time - the tragedy of instrumental reason, expressed in the fact that rationality, originally designed to liberate humankind, has turned into the power of its enslavement. The dominance of the logic of efficiency and calculation leads to a reduction in the qualitative diversity of the world and the displacement of questions about meanings and values. The research uses the method of critical and theoretical analysis of the concepts of the Frankfurt School (Max Horkheimer, Theodor Adorno, Herbert Marcuse, Jürgen Habermas), the phenomenological approach of Martin Buber's approach to the dialogical relations “I am You” and “I am It”, as well as a comparative analysis comparing Buber's ideas with the project “common cause” by Nikolai Fedorov. As a result, the essence of instrumental reason is revealed as logic, which turns the mind into an instrument of programmed control. From the standpoint of the philosophy of dialogue, it is shown that the tragedy of technorationality lies in the total displacement of the “I-You” attitude by the “I-It” attitude, leading to metaphysical alienation. Comparative analysis revealed two alternative ways to overcome the crisis: Buber‘s existential-phenomenological project of “humanizing technology“ and Fedorov ‘s cosmological-historical project of “Common Cause”, which refocuses technology from an instrument of domination into an instrument of salvation and restoration of kinship. It is concluded that overcoming the tragedy of instrumental reason does not lie in rejecting reason and technology, but in their ethical reinterpretation through subordination to the logic of communication, responsibility and service – whether conceived as dialogical encounter, communicative action, or a “common cause” of universal resurrection.</abstract>
        </abstracts>
        <codes>
          <doi>10.48417/technolang.2025.04.08</doi>
          <udk>165.173</udk>
        </codes>
        <keywords>
          <kwdGroup lang="ENG">
            <keyword>Instrumental reason</keyword>
            <keyword>Technorationality</keyword>
            <keyword>Technological civilization</keyword>
            <keyword>Tragedy of reason</keyword>
            <keyword>Frankfurt School</keyword>
            <keyword>Philosophy of dialogue</keyword>
            <keyword>Martin Buber</keyword>
            <keyword>“I am You”</keyword>
            <keyword>“I am I”</keyword>
            <keyword>Alienation</keyword>
            <keyword>Humanization of technology</keyword>
            <keyword>Nikolai Fyodorov</keyword>
            <keyword>“Common Cause”</keyword>
          </kwdGroup>
        </keywords>
        <files>
          <furl>https://soctech.spbstu.ru/article/2025.21.8/</furl>
          <file>124-138.pdf</file>
        </files>
      </article>
      <article>
        <artType>RAR</artType>
        <langPubl>RUS</langPubl>
        <pages>139-148</pages>
        <authors>
          <author num="001">
            <authorCodes>
              <researcherid>ABH-2113-2021</researcherid>
              <scopusid>57202683981</scopusid>
              <orcid>0000-0002-1234-5678</orcid>
            </authorCodes>
            <individInfo lang="ENG">
              <orgName>Russian-Armenian University, Yerevan,  Armenia</orgName>
              <surname> Margaryan</surname>
              <initials>Yervand</initials>
            </individInfo>
          </author>
        </authors>
        <artTitles>
          <artTitle lang="ENG">The Mystery of Arshak, Vasak and Shapur in Faustus of Byzantium's “History of Armenia”: An Experience of Hermeneutical Reconstruction</artTitle>
        </artTitles>
        <abstracts>
          <abstract lang="ENG">The epistemology of most fragments from Faustus of Byzantium's History of Armenia, particularly such difficult passages as chapter LIV of the fourth book, is possible only through exegesis of hidden, sacred meanings. The key to decoding the images, events, and phenomena described in this fragment of Faustus's "History" can be found in theatrical mysteries. It is known that any ancient theatrical action is based on agon, so analysis of dramatic texts is preferably conducted using the method of binary opposition. The agon between Armenian king Arsakes and Sassanid Sapor unfolds in the Persian king's tent, representing the proskeny of ancient theater. In this case, Arsakes acts as protagonist while Sapor plays the role of antagonist. In Faustus's mystery there is also a tritagonist – Sparapet Vasak, who plays a special role in the tragedy. This article represents an attempt to read through the lens of ancient drama a small fragment of an Armenian literary monument from the Early Middle Ages, revealing the dramatic technologies embedded within historical narrative.The epistemology of most fragments from Faustus of Byzantium's History of Armenia, particularly such difficult passages as chapter LIV of the fourth book, is possible only through exegesis of hidden, sacred meanings. The key to decoding the images, events, and phenomena described in this fragment of Faustus's "History" can be found in theatrical mysteries. It is known that any ancient theatrical action is based on agon, so analysis of dramatic texts is preferably conducted using the method of binary opposition. The agon between Armenian king Arsakes and Sassanid Sapor unfolds in the Persian king's tent, representing the proskeny of ancient theater. In this case, Arsakes acts as protagonist while Sapor plays the role of antagonist. In Faustus's mystery there is also a tritagonist – Sparapet Vasak, who plays a special role in the tragedy. This article represents an attempt to read through the lens of ancient drama a small fragment of an Armenian literary monument from the Early Middle Ages, revealing the dramatic technologies embedded within historical narrative.</abstract>
        </abstracts>
        <codes>
          <doi>10.48417/technolang.2025.04.09</doi>
          <udk>801.73+821.19</udk>
        </codes>
        <keywords>
          <kwdGroup lang="ENG">
            <keyword>Early medieval Armenian literature</keyword>
            <keyword>Hermeneutics</keyword>
            <keyword>Faustus of Byzantium</keyword>
            <keyword>Ancient drama</keyword>
            <keyword>Mystery</keyword>
            <keyword>Tragic amechania</keyword>
            <keyword>Salt</keyword>
            <keyword>Seal</keyword>
            <keyword>Agon</keyword>
            <keyword>Arsakes</keyword>
            <keyword>Vasak</keyword>
            <keyword>Sapor</keyword>
            <keyword>Magicians</keyword>
          </kwdGroup>
        </keywords>
        <files>
          <furl>https://soctech.spbstu.ru/article/2025.21.9/</furl>
          <file>139-148.pdf</file>
        </files>
      </article>
      <article>
        <artType>RAR</artType>
        <langPubl>RUS</langPubl>
        <pages>150-167</pages>
        <authors>
          <author num="001">
            <authorCodes>
              <scopusid>57192106048</scopusid>
              <orcid>0000-0002-9856-4925</orcid>
            </authorCodes>
            <individInfo lang="ENG">
              <orgName>Peter the Great St. Petersburg Polytechnic University</orgName>
              <surname>Kashevarov </surname>
              <initials>Аnatolij </initials>
            </individInfo>
          </author>
        </authors>
        <artTitles>
          <artTitle lang="ENG">The Sermons of the Metropolitan Filaret – Technique of Composition, Order and Logic of Linguistic Presentation</artTitle>
        </artTitles>
        <abstracts>
          <abstract lang="ENG">The personality and work of Filaret, the Metropolitan of Moscow and Kolomna (secular name: Vasilii Mikhailovich Drozdov, 1782–1867), attracted the attention of pre-revolutionary scholars. An outstanding church and public figure of the Synodal period he was arguably the greatest Russian Orthodox theologian of the 19th century. In the post-Soviet era, a number of works were dedicated to various aspects of his multifaceted activities at different periods of his life. Insufficiently studied, however, is the question of Filaret’s distinctive technique of composing and linguistially rendering his sermons. The aim of this article is to present these sermons as an outstanding example of church preaching in the first half of the 19th century. Since the mid-17th century, Russian preaching had been under the defining influence of South Russian learned monks and hierarchs who followed a scholastic tradition that was modeled on Polish Catholicism. The rejection of this scholastic tradition began with Archbishop Feofan Prokopovich (1681–1736). The final and complete break and the establishment of a distinctive standard for the technique and language of Russian preaching came with Filaret. In his sermons, he primarily addressed questions of Christian doctrine as well as spiritual and moral issues, adhering to an order and logic of presentation which strictly adhered to the principle of remaining grounded in facts. Filaret opposed any improvisation in preaching. Restraint in sermon structure was characteristic. When composing his homilies, the Metropolitan selected those themes and questions from Christian doctrine and church dogma that he considered particularly important for his flock. The language of Metropolitan Filaret’s sermons is a living Russian language with numerous Slavic insertions, primarily as quotations but appearing often within the text of the sermon itself. The preacher employed a multitude of poetic devices, leading to the conclusion that he contributed to the revitalization of preaching, and significantly elevated its importance in liturgical practice. The themes, approaches to composition, and the language of his sermons became a model for preaching in the second half of the 19th century. In distinction to the preceding period when preaching could develop only within a very narrow circle of high church hierarchs, this allowed for a number of major and renowned preachers to emerge from among the parish clergy. Considering Filaret their teacher, they adopted his technical idiom and standard model for the composition of sermons.</abstract>
        </abstracts>
        <codes>
          <doi>10.48417/technolang.2025.04.10</doi>
          <udk>947.084.8</udk>
        </codes>
        <keywords>
          <kwdGroup lang="ENG">
            <keyword>Sermon</keyword>
            <keyword>Explanation of Christian Doctrine</keyword>
            <keyword>Russian Language</keyword>
            <keyword>Semantic Repetitions</keyword>
            <keyword>Inversion</keyword>
            <keyword>Deliberate Composition</keyword>
            <keyword>Poetic Devices</keyword>
            <keyword>Metropolitan Filaret (Drozdov)</keyword>
          </kwdGroup>
        </keywords>
        <files>
          <furl>https://soctech.spbstu.ru/article/2025.21.10/</furl>
          <file>150-167.pdf</file>
        </files>
      </article>
      <article>
        <artType>RAR</artType>
        <langPubl>RUS</langPubl>
        <pages>168-193</pages>
        <authors>
          <author num="001">
            <authorCodes>
              <orcid>0000-0002-6301-7454</orcid>
            </authorCodes>
            <individInfo lang="ENG">
              <orgName>The University of Jordan</orgName>
              <surname>Al-Jabri</surname>
              <initials>Hanan</initials>
              <address>Amman Jordan</address>
            </individInfo>
          </author>
          <author num="002">
            <authorCodes>
              <orcid>0009-0003-7909-1143 </orcid>
            </authorCodes>
            <individInfo lang="ENG">
              <orgName>The University of Jordan</orgName>
              <surname> Ali    </surname>
              <initials>Sukayna</initials>
              <address>Amman , Jordan</address>
            </individInfo>
          </author>
        </authors>
        <artTitles>
          <artTitle lang="ENG">AI vs. Human: Translating Cultural Nuances in Naguib Mahfouz's The Cairo Trilogy</artTitle>
        </artTitles>
        <abstracts>
          <abstract lang="ENG">This study investigates the performance of the AI translation system ChatGPT in comparison with human translators in rendering culturally embedded expressions from Naguib Mahfouz’s Cairo Trilogy into English. Cultural expressions – particularly idioms, metaphors, and religious references – present major challenges to translators, who must interpret meaning not only at the linguistic level but also at the pragmatic, emotional, and socio-cultural levels. Adopting a qualitative content analysis approach, the study conducts a comparison of AI-generated and professionally published human translations. The evaluation employs Baker’s equivalence-based framework, assessing semantic accuracy, pragmatic equivalence, cultural adequacy, naturalness, and functional alignment. Through this analytical lens, the study explores how effectively each translator – human or AI – handles the interpretive demands of culturally and pragmatically rich expressions. The findings reveal that while ChatGPT performs well in producing fluent, structurally coherent translations, it frequently struggles with figurative language and culturally specific nuances. These limitations stem from the absence of embodied cultural knowledge and self-evaluative judgement, which are essential for interpreting implicit meanings and cultural resonance. Human translators demonstrate stronger interpretive and cultural sensitivity, particularly in challenging areas such as metaphorical imagery and religious references. The study concludes that although AI systems increasingly contribute to efficient and accessible translation workflows, culturally intricate texts like the Cairo Trilogy still require human expertise. A hybrid human – AI translation model, therefore, emerges as the most effective approach for balancing efficiency with cultural and pragmatic depth.</abstract>
        </abstracts>
        <codes>
          <doi>10.48417/technolang.2025.04.11</doi>
          <udk>81'322.4</udk>
        </codes>
        <keywords>
          <kwdGroup lang="ENG">
            <keyword>Translation strategies</keyword>
            <keyword>AI</keyword>
            <keyword>ChatGPT</keyword>
            <keyword>Literary translation</keyword>
            <keyword>Cultural nuances; Pragmatics</keyword>
          </kwdGroup>
        </keywords>
        <files>
          <furl>https://soctech.spbstu.ru/article/2025.21.11/</furl>
          <file>168-193.pdf</file>
        </files>
      </article>
      <article>
        <artType>RAR</artType>
        <langPubl>RUS</langPubl>
        <pages>194-216</pages>
        <authors>
          <author num="001">
            <authorCodes>
              <orcid>0000-0002-2132-5176</orcid>
            </authorCodes>
            <individInfo lang="ENG">
              <orgName>Ural Federal University, Ekaterinburg, Russia</orgName>
              <surname>Larionova</surname>
              <initials>Viola </initials>
            </individInfo>
          </author>
          <author num="002">
            <authorCodes>
              <orcid>0000-0002-4366-0426</orcid>
            </authorCodes>
            <individInfo lang="ENG">
              <orgName>Ural Federal University, Ekaterinburg, Russia</orgName>
              <surname>Berestova</surname>
              <initials>Svetlana </initials>
            </individInfo>
          </author>
          <author num="003">
            <authorCodes>
              <orcid>0000-0003-0062-2611</orcid>
            </authorCodes>
            <individInfo lang="ENG">
              <orgName>Ural Federal University, Ekaterinburg, Russia</orgName>
              <surname>Daineko</surname>
              <initials>Liudmila </initials>
            </individInfo>
          </author>
          <author num="004">
            <authorCodes>
              <orcid>0000-0001-8133-8289</orcid>
            </authorCodes>
            <individInfo lang="ENG">
              <orgName>Ural Federal University, Ekaterinburg, Russia</orgName>
              <surname>Goncharova</surname>
              <initials>Natalia </initials>
            </individInfo>
          </author>
          <author num="005">
            <authorCodes>
              <orcid>0000-0002-7332-6357</orcid>
            </authorCodes>
            <individInfo lang="ENG">
              <orgName>Ural Federal University, Ekaterinburg, Russia</orgName>
              <surname>Silin</surname>
              <initials>Vadim </initials>
            </individInfo>
          </author>
          <author num="006">
            <authorCodes>
              <orcid>0000-0002-8706-6912</orcid>
            </authorCodes>
            <individInfo lang="ENG">
              <orgName>Moscow State Institute of International Relations (Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation)</orgName>
              <surname>Romanenko</surname>
              <initials>Nadezhda </initials>
              <address>Moscow, Russia</address>
            </individInfo>
          </author>
        </authors>
        <artTitles>
          <artTitle lang="ENG">The Impact of Visual Elements in Pedagogical Texts – An Investigation of Economics and Engineering Students</artTitle>
        </artTitles>
        <abstracts>
          <abstract lang="ENG">The aim of the study is to identify the degree of impact of visual elements of educational materials, such as infographics, highlights in the text, images, as well as ‘emotional background’ of graphic and textual components. It focuses on  the impact on cognitive processes (information analysis) and on learning outcomes (quality of case solutions) for students of economics and engineering. The experimental study involved 82 first-year economics and engineering majors. These were divided by random sampling into teams of 5-7 persons. The study consisted of two main phases: active and reflexive. In the active phase, students were asked to complete a case study on environmental topics, and in the reflexive phase they answered questions concerning their case study work. Specially designed case assignments included both emotionally neutral and emotionally intense descriptions of the same environmental situations, accompanied by various visual elements. The results showed that visual elements, such as highlighting key phrases in bold, dramatising images and manipulating the scale of graphs, significantly influenced students' conclusions and elicited an emotional response from them. Emotionally colored presentations pushed students towards prohibitions, whereas neutrally colored case solutions were characterised by constructive and differentiated suggestions for preventing the effects of an environmental disaster-color The use of emotionally charged visual elements had a greater impact on engineering students than on economics students. The obtained conclusions allowed us to formulate practical recommendations for teachers and methodologists. These were aimed at improving the efficiency of the educational process by becoming aware of the heightened responsibility that comes with visual rhetoric. Figurative presentations should be accompanied by textual ones, and case-study learning should be grounded in reality to counteract virtualization through visualization.  The conclusion emphasises the importance of a careful development and moderation of teaching materials, as well as the need to develop critical thinking in students throughout the learning process.</abstract>
        </abstracts>
        <codes>
          <doi>10.48417/technolang.2025.04.12</doi>
          <udk>371.26</udk>
        </codes>
        <keywords>
          <kwdGroup lang="ENG">
            <keyword>Visualisation</keyword>
            <keyword>Typography</keyword>
            <keyword>Infographics</keyword>
            <keyword>Emotional coloring of tasks</keyword>
            <keyword>Case study</keyword>
            <keyword>Manipulation</keyword>
            <keyword>Perception of graphic information</keyword>
          </kwdGroup>
        </keywords>
        <files>
          <furl>https://soctech.spbstu.ru/article/2025.21.12/</furl>
          <file>194-216.pdf</file>
        </files>
      </article>
      <article>
        <artType>RAR</artType>
        <langPubl>RUS</langPubl>
        <pages>217-239</pages>
        <authors>
          <author num="001">
            <authorCodes>
              <orcid>0000-0002-0729-6698</orcid>
            </authorCodes>
            <individInfo lang="ENG">
              <orgName>Pyatigorsk State University</orgName>
              <surname>Baryshnikov</surname>
              <initials>Pavel</initials>
              <address>Pyatigorsk, Russia</address>
            </individInfo>
          </author>
          <author num="002">
            <authorCodes>
              <orcid>0009-0001-0881-1073</orcid>
            </authorCodes>
            <individInfo lang="ENG">
              <orgName>Pyatigorsk State University</orgName>
              <surname>Velis</surname>
              <initials>Lolita</initials>
              <address>Pyatigorsk, Russia</address>
            </individInfo>
          </author>
          <author num="003">
            <authorCodes>
              <orcid>0000-0002-0729-6698</orcid>
            </authorCodes>
            <individInfo lang="ENG">
              <orgName>Pyatigorsk State University</orgName>
              <surname>Atakuev</surname>
              <initials>Magomet </initials>
            </individInfo>
          </author>
        </authors>
        <artTitles>
          <artTitle lang="ENG">Natural Language Processing and the Representation of Phenomenal Experience</artTitle>
        </artTitles>
        <abstracts>
          <abstract lang="ENG">This article is an interdisciplinary study of phenomenal judgments through the lens of linguistic correlations using computational linguistics and data mining. The research focus includes perceptual judgments describing interoceptive and olfactory states, considered in the context of the theory of embodied cognition and Charles Sanders Peirce's theory of perceptual judgments. The authors demonstrate that the linguistic expression of interoceptive and olfactory experiences reflects a deep connection between the body, culture, and language, and also reveals culture-specific strategies for conceptualizing sensory experiences. Particular attention is paid to the comparison of “natural” and “synthetic” olfactory judgments that was generated using large language models (LLMs). The developed methodology allows for the identification of parametric differences in lexical diversity, syntactic complexity, and stylistic richness of olfactory descriptions. The conducted analysis confirms that olfactory experience has high semantic instability and polymorphism, which complicates its formalization and automated processing. Nevertheless, the use of modern NLP methods opens up new opportunities for the parameterization of phenomenal judgments and an in-depth study of their structural and cognitive features. The work is of interest from philosophical, humanitarian, and engineering points of view, offering a methodological toolkit for studying the properties of embodied consciousness using methods of computer processing of a natural language.</abstract>
        </abstracts>
        <codes>
          <doi>10.48417/technolang.2025.04.13</doi>
          <udk>004.8:81'27</udk>
        </codes>
        <keywords>
          <kwdGroup lang="ENG">
            <keyword>Perceptual judgments</keyword>
            <keyword>Embodied cognition</keyword>
            <keyword>Interoception</keyword>
            <keyword>Olfactory experience</keyword>
            <keyword>NLP</keyword>
            <keyword>Large language models</keyword>
            <keyword>Phenomenal experience</keyword>
            <keyword>Corpus analysis</keyword>
          </kwdGroup>
        </keywords>
        <files>
          <furl>https://soctech.spbstu.ru/article/2025.21.13/</furl>
          <file>217-239.pdf</file>
        </files>
      </article>
    </articles>
  </issue>
</journal>
