I have chosen an article dedicated to the connection between language and culture. This topic seems to be quite interesting for me as a future specialist in intercultural communication. D.S.Israfilova in her work “Correlations of language and culture as the main object of linguistics and cultural studies” https://vk.cc/8ynccn  speculates on the problem of definition of culturology as the science. In spite of the fact that such brunch of linguistics as culturology has recently appeared there have been a lot of debates about its definition as language learning being inseparable with a culture. When interpreting culturology, the terms “language” and “culture” take on special significance. F.de Saussure distinguished “language”, “speech” and “speech activity.” Speech activity is a system of expressive possibilities. Language is a grammatical system and a dictionary. Language is a social product, a means of mutual understanding of people; it does not depend on the individual who speaks it. The relationship between language and culture can be defined as follows: the symbols with the help of which people communicate are language, and culture is a historically transmitted model of meanings embodied in language. According to V.V.Vorobyov, the main object of culturology is “the interrelation and interaction of culture and language in the course of its functioning and the study of the interpretation of this interaction in a single systemic integrity. According to B.Whorf, language is a social contract, or a social agreement on the systematisation of the world. Professor Z.K.Tarlanov defines the inextricable link between language and ethnicity: “Language in the ethnic boundaries of its speakers is not only a means of communication as the memory and history of people, their culture ...”
After reading this article I have three questions:
1.      What appeared first: language or ethnicity?
2.      Why such brunch of linguistics as culturology has recently appeared?3.      Is it possible to have language without society?