T.B. Mikheeva, M.V. Ereshchenko without saying that individual strategies be of the utmost interest for re-
searchers, but for methodical purposes it is necessary in the first turn to per-
form comprehensive consideration of the strategical content of communica-
tion roles, which can be set by students in their exercises, which universaliz-
es and individualizes the training process at the same time.
I.I. Vasilyeva defines 3 main type of dialogical interaction complexity.
The first type is monological communication, which consists in the
unilateral influence of one of the partners over the other partner. The de-
scriptive unit of such type communicative interaction is a separate pseudo-
monological utterance. The next more complex level of communicative in-
teraction is unilateral dialogical communication, which consists in the fact
that a partner not only conveys a message to the other partner, but also in-
volve him / her in the communication process: such a partner conveys a mes-
sage too. A dialogical structure such as a cycle corresponds to this type
communicative interaction. This type is called unilateral dialogical commu-
nication, because communicative initiative belongs only to one of the part-
ners. If such dialogical communication initiative is transferred by one partner
to the other partner and a subject acting as a respondent in one cycle of inter-
action subsequently initiates a new interaction cycle by himself / herself,
such a type can be conditionally called bilateral dialogical communication,
where the act of bilateral initiative is emphasized. In the opinion of psy-
chologists, such a type of communicative interaction has more complex
structure consisting of linked dialogical cycles [14].
The last subject-and-subject type dialogue is considered in this paper
as the main object of study. In this type of dialogue the two main roles (initi-
ator and respondent) are preserved and the domination of a leader is not
strongly-pronounced, recapturing the initiative is allowed in the process of
achieving a communication goal, for example, at the stage of preanswering
or postcentral strategic exchange.
As a communication leader and a respondent fulfilling different func-
tions use different sets of strategies, it is necessary to define and differentiate
the strategies of each role in the communicative structure of a dialogue and
their subsequent differentiated use in organizing the process of teaching and
creation of a system of exercises for learning dialogue grammar. Therefore,
any choice for performing strategic analysis of the interaction-and-role struc-
ture of a such type dialogue is conditioned by its relatively simple and spe-
cific aspects favourable for the initial stage of training, such as follows:
a) availability of only two communicative roles;
b) relative stability of roles, which allows defining relevant strategies
in provisions for performing exercises under condition of work in pairs [15].
Formally the main unit of a dialogue is a dialogical unity, i.e. a seman-
tic association of several utterances, representing the exchange of views and
utterances, each subsequent of which depends on the previous one. The vol-