Nikolaeva N.N.¹ (Moscow, Russian Federation) – nnn55n73@mail.ru; Gorbunova E.V.¹ Moscow, Russian Federation) – ev.svet@mail.ru

¹Bauman Moscow State Technical University

Abstract. Conceptualizing the information security through a metaphorical lens can contribute to a deeper understanding of digital forensics discourse and innovative approaches to cybersecurity. Metaphorical thinking is an inherent part of human cognition while metaphors pervade language making them familiar to native speakers. However, for students studying English as a foreign language, both identifying and interpreting metaphors in specialized texts can be challenging. This study aims to demonstrate the need for deliberate development of metaphorical competence (MC) as a part of students’ foreign language professional competence at a technical university. The goal is to create an algorithm for developing MC among these students. Research methods include theoretical-analytical and conceptual-interpretive analyses, as well as linguistic-didactic methods (contextual analysis, analytical and discursive reading, developing a set of tasks focused on metaphorical competence). Pedagogical observation, analysis of students’ oral and written statements, and free discussion are also used. The novelty of this work lies in the design and substantiation of an algorithm for developing MC among students at a technical university. Five conceptual metaphorical models are formulated: military-operational, fortress, medical, police and criminals, and environmental ones. These models have proven effective for interpreting metaphorical expressions in the specialized texts. Special exercises are created for drilling the cybersecurity metaphors in students’ speeches. The implementation of the MC formation algorithm at Bauman Moscow State Technical University based on authentic academic texts demonstrate that students have significantly improved their ability to identify and interpret metaphors correctly. Furthermore, group discussions promote various professional concepts aimed at facilitating cybersecurity and combating cybercrimes. In our opinion, this is extremely beneficial for shaping the specialists’ thinking.

Keywords: English for specific purposes, metaphorical competence, conceptual metaphor, information security discourse, conceptual and interpretative approach, content analysis, reading skills.

References:

1. Alexandrov Yu.I. Systemic complementarity of culture-specific types of cognition. St. Petersburg Seminar on Cognitive Research: proceedings of the conference. Saint Petersburg, Saint Petersburg State University Publ., 2022. pp. 175-217. (In Russian). URL: https://elibrary.ru/spraxr
2. Alekseeva L.M., Mishlanova S.L. Formation of metaphorical competence. Bulletin of Perm University. The series “Russian and Foreign Philology”, 2016, no. 4 (360), pp. 98-107. (In Russian). DOI: 10.17072/2037-6681-2016-4-98-107
3. Borisova V.A., Pigarkina E.A. Metaphor and mental image. How we understand metaphors. Bulletin of TvSU. The series “Philology”, 2023, no. 2 (77), pp. 94-99. (In Russian). DOI: 10.26456/vtfilol/2023.2.094
4. Bruskova R.Eh. Relevance of the formation of metaphorical competence among foreign cadets (experimental training review). World of Science. Pedagogy and psychology [online], 2019, vol. 7, no. 1. (In Russian). URL: https://elibrary.ru/ziwolb
5. Weinreich W. Language contacts. The state and problems of research. Kiev, Kiev State University Publ., 1979, 262 p. (In Russian).
6. Golovko N.V., Odekova F.R., Sheiko D.V. results of an empirical study of certain semantic aspects of metaphorical competences of foreign students of a Russian university. North-Caucasus Federal University Proceedings, 2023, no. 6 (99), pp. 160-168. (In Russian). DOI: 10.37493/2307-907X.2023.6.20
7. Davydova Y.G. A set of tasks for improving the metaphorical competence of language university students. Pedagogy. Theory & Practice, 2025, vol. 10, no. 5, рр. 553-561. (In Russian). DOI: 10.30853/ped20250068
8. Kondrat’eva O. N. Metaphorical modeling in pedagogical discourse. Pedagogical education in Russia, 2013, no. 1, pp. 116-121. URL: https://elibrary.ru/pxgdgb
9. Lakoff J., Johnson M. The Metaphors We Live by: translated from English. Moscow, Editorial URSS Publ., 2004. 252 p. (In Russian).
10. Logutenkova O.N. The development of metaphorical competence in the process of teaching natural bilinguals the Russian language. Science and School, 2024, no. 2, pp. 256-265. (In Russian). DOI: 10.31862/1819-463X-2024-2-256-265
11. Suvorova M.V. An analysis of the role of metaphor in language proficiency within the illustrative descriptors of ‘Common European framework of reference for languages: learning, teaching, assessment. Companion volume with new descriptors. Current problems of German studies, Roman studies and Russian studies, 2021, no. 2, pp. 112-114. (In Russian). URL: https://www.elibrary.ru/aqvdtv
12. Teliya V.N. Metaphor as a model of semantic production and its expressive and evaluative function. Moscow, Nauka Publ., 1988. 176 p. (In Russian).
13. Tikhonova I.B. Cognitive metaphor in scientific and professional discourse (by the example of the English oil refining terminology). Philological sciences. Questions of theory and practice, 2020, no. 13 (7), pp. 198-202. (In Russian). DOI: 10.30853/filnauki.2020.7.38
14. Utkina T.I., Mishlanova S.L., Studying metaphoric competence of students of economics in teaching english for specific purposes. Historical and Social Educational Ideas, 2016., no. 8, part 1, pp. 244-254. (In Russian).
15. Aleshtar M.T., Dowlatabadi H.R. Metaphoric Competence and Language Proficiency in the Same Boat. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2014, vol. 98, рp. 1895-1904. DOI: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.620
16. Badryzlova Y., Lyashevskaya O., Nikiforova A. Automated Metaphor Identification in Russian and Its Implications for Metaphor Studies. Distributed Computing and Artificial Intelligence, 2022, vol. 2, pp. 86-96. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-86887-1_8
17. Betz D., Stevens T. Analogical Reasoning and Cyber Security. Security Dialogue, 2013, no. 2, pp. 147-164. DOI: 10.1177/0967010613478323
18. Boyd D. Social network sites as networked publics: Affordances, dynamics, and implications. Z. Papacharissi (Ed.) A Networked Self: Identity, Community, and Culture on Social Network Sites. Routledge Publ., 2010, pp. 47-66. DOI: 10.4324/9780203876527-8
19. Branch J. What’s in a Name? Metaphors and Cybersecurity. International Organization, 2021, vol. 75 (1), pp. 39-70. DOI:10.1017/S002081832000051X
20. Brantly A.F. The decision to attack: Military and intelligence cyber decision-making.  Athens, University of Georgia Press Publ., 2016. 248 p. DOI: 10.1353/book45365
21. Chown E., Nascimento F. Meaningful Technologies: How Digital Metaphors Change the Way We Think and Live. Lever Press Publ., 2023, 275 p. DOI: 10.3998/mpub.12668201
22. Deignan A. Metaphor and Corpus Linguistics. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, John Benjamins Publ., 2005, 236 p. DOI: 10.1075/celcr.6
23. Goatly А.Р. The language of metaphors. London, Routledge Publ., 1997, 360 p.
24. Gutiérrez Pérez R. The Development of a Metaphoric Competence. A Didactic Proposal of Educational Innovation. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 2018, no. 13, рp. 331-357. DOI: 10.1080/17501229.2018.146689
25. Hilliard A. Using Cognitive Linguistics to Teach Metaphor and Metonymy in an EFL and an ESL Context. University of Birmingham. Ph.D.  Thesis Publ., 2017, 279 p. URL: http://etheses.bham.ac.uk/id/eprint/7830
26. Hilton K., Siami N.A., Jones K.S. Metaphor identification in cybersecurity texts: a lightweight linguistic approach. SN Applied Sciences, 2022, no. 4 (2). DOI: 10.1007/s42452-022-04939-8
27. Hoang H., Boers F. Gauging the Association of EFL Learners’ Writing Proficiency and Their Use of Metaphorical Language. System, 2018, no. 74, pр. 1-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.system.2018.02.004
28. Ikuta M., Miwa K. Why is Metaphor Difficult for Language Learners? Metaphor Processing in a Second Language.Proc. “Words in the World 2020 International Conference”,2020. DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.21998.23363
29. Karas T.H., Moore J. H., Parrott L.K. Metaphors for Cyber Security. Sandia Report, US Department of Energy Publ., 2008, 42 p.
30. Khan A.A., Shaikh A.A., Laghari A.A., Dootio M.A., Rind M.M. Awan S.A. Digital forensics and cyber forensics investigation: security challenges, limitations, open issues, and future direction. Electronic Security and Digital Forensics, 2022, vol, 14. no. 2, pp. 124–150. DOI: 10.1504/ijesdf.2022.10037882
31. Kövecses Z. Metaphor in Culture. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press Publ., 2005, 221 р. DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190224868.003.0005
32. Littlemore J., Low G. Metaphoric Competence, Second Language Learning, and Communicative Language Ability. Applied Linguistics, 2006, vol. 27, pp. 268-294. DOI:  10.1093/applin/aml004
33. Littlemore J., Krennmayr T., Turner J., Turner S. An Investigation into Metaphor Use at Different Levels of Second Language Writing. Applied Linguistics, 2014, vol. 35, pp. 117-144. DOI: 10.1093/applin/amt004
34. MacArthur F., Alejo-González R. Beyond Idioms, the Use of Metaphor in ELF Academic Settings: A Comprehensive Review. Journal of Pragmatics, 2024, no. 219, pp. 48-57. DOI: 10.1016/j.pragma.2023.11.002
35. Narimanishvili T. The Role of L2 Proficiency in Metaphorical Language Production. Argumentum, 2024, vol. 20, pp. 1-18. DOI: 10.34103/ARGUMENTUM/2024/1
36. Niu B., Ganapathy M. Revisiting the Assessment of Metaphor Learning Performance through English Language Learners’ English Writings: A Systematic Review. Open Journal of Modern Linguistics, 2025, vol. 15, pp. 1-21. DOI: 10.4236/ojml.2025.151001
37. O’Reilly D., Marsden E. Elicited Metaphoric Competence in a Second Language: A Construct Associated with Vocabulary Knowledge and General Proficiency? International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 2023, vol. 61, pp. 287-327. DOI: 10.1515/iral-2020-0054
38. Ricoeur P. The Rule of Metaphor: The Creation of Meaning in Language. London, Psychology Press Publ., 2003. 392 p. DOI: 10.4324/9780203426616
39. Saneie M.M., Ghafar S.R. Metaphor in Second Language Academic Writing. Language Awareness, 2020, vol. 29, pp. 255-271. DOI: 10.1080/09658416.2020.1786577
40. Skrynnikova I.V. Analogical reasoning in uncovering the meaning of digital-technology terms: the case of backdoor. Journal of Computer-Assisted Linguistic Research, 2020, vol. 4 (1), pp. 23-46. DOI: 10.4995/jclr.2020.12921
41. Slupska J. War, Health, & Ecosystem: Generative Metaphors in Cybersecurity Governance. Philosophy & Technology, 2021, vol. 34 (3), pp. 463-482. DOI: 10.1007/s13347-020-00397-5
42. Steen G.J., Dorst A.G., Herrmann J.B. A Method for Linguistic Metaphor Identification: From MIP to MIPVU. Amsterdam- Philadelphia, John Benjamins Publ., 2010, 238 p. DOI: 10.1075/celcr.14
43. Wolff J. Cybersecurity as Metaphor: Policy and Defense Implications of Computer Security Metaphors. SSRN Electronic Journal, 2014, vol. 1, pp. 1-16. DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.2418638

For citation: Nikolaeva N.N., Gorbunova E.V. Development of metaphorical competence among technical university students based on English-language texts in information security discourse. CITISE, 2025, no. 3, pp. 650-669.