Introduction. Ethno-cultural issues occupy an important place in modern intercultural communication as a scientific discipline, especially at the present time, when the problems of interethnic interaction in the world are strongly aggravated and, at first glance, it is difficult to find a solution to such conflicts and ways to get rid of national prejudices and distorted stereotypes, which draw negative images of representatives of “foreign” cultures.

In this regard, the process of teaching intercultural communication and developing intercultural knowledge, skills and abilities cannot ignore the inclusion in the content of education of extensive phraseological and paremiological material that reflects the evolution of a particular ethnic group, the rich historical experience passed on from generation to generation, the peculiarities of the national mentality and world outlook.

Materials and methods. The main research methods applied in this article are the analysis of theoretical sources on topical issues of modern pedagogy and didactics, as well as reflection and generalization of the authors' experience as teachers of a higher pedagogical school. Pedagogical methods of research are complemented by procedures of linguoculturological analysis of phraseological and paremiological units, reflecting ethno-cultural stereotypes, based on the principle of connection between language and culture.

Results. The result of the study is the presentation of the didactic potential of the phraseological system of native and studied linguocultures in the process of teaching intercultural communication. The development of students’ skills and abilities of decoding ethno-cultural stereotypes reflected in the phraseological system of the language, and their correct use in the practice of intercultural interactions requires special training, the main stages of which are described in the article.

Discussion. In teaching intercultural communication to future teachers of a foreign language, it is necessary to take into account the principle of the unity of language and culture, one of the manifestations of which is the reflection in the phraseological system of the language of cultural values and the mentality of its speakers. Phraseological units, representing the most traditional layer of the vocabulary of the language, reflect the specific archetypes of the consciousness of the people, the prevailing ethno-cultural stereotypes and models of interaction with other cultures.

Conclusion. The authors believe that in the course of the educational process, when studying topics devoted to the formation of stereotypes of perception and behavior, sources of prejudice, etc., it is necessary to use relevant phraseological material that reflects the emergence and functioning of ethno-cultural stereotypes. The analysis of the content of ethno-culturally marked phraseological units makes it possible to understand the essence of these stereotypes, assess their relevance to reality and, if possible, subject them to correction.

Teaching intercultural communication is a significant area of educational activity in higher education, the requirements for which are reflected in federal state educational standards;

Training future teachers of a foreign language in intercultural communication is based on the concept of the unity of teaching languages and cultures, which involves the use of specially selected language material in the study of this discipline;

The phraseological fund of the native, national and foreign languages, which reflects the traditional ideas of ethnic groups and peoples, the peculiarities of their mentality, ethno-cultural stereotypes of perception and behavior, has a powerful didactic potential in teaching intercultural communication to future teachers of a foreign language;

The process of teaching intercultural communication based on the use of phraseology presents a set of stages in both teacher and students’ activities.

1. Chesnokova O.S. (2020), Frazeologizmy kak otrazhenie etnicheskih stereotipov v kul'ture i professional'noj deyatel'nosti ispancev [Phraseologisms as a reflection of ethnic stereotypes in the culture and professional activities of the Spanish], Diskurs professional'noj kommunikacii, 2 (2), 71–82. DOI 10.24833/2687-0126-2020-2-2-71-82. (In Russian).

2. Afanasjeva O.Yu., Nikitina E.Yu. & Bulanov P.G. (2022), Formirovanie global'nyh kompetencij v processe professional'noj podgotovki perevodchikov [Formation of global competencies in the process of professional training of translators], Vestnik Yuzhno-Ural'skogo gosudarstvennogo gumanitarno-pedagogicheskogo universiteta, 1 (167), 20–31. (In Russian).

3. Kovshova M.L. (2019), Lingvokul'turologicheskij analiz idiom, zagadok, poslovic i pogovorok: antropologicheskij kod kul'tury [Linguistic and cultural analysis of idioms, riddles, proverbs and sayings: an anthropological code of culture], Lenand, Moscow, 400 p. (In Russian).

4. Samohina T.S. (2019), Razlichiya v kommunikativnom povedenii predstavitelej raznyh kul'tur v odnotipnyh situaciyah delovogo i professional'nogo obshcheniya [Differences in the communicative behavior of representatives of different cultures in similar situations of business and professional communication], Diskurs professional'noy kommunikatsii, 1, 1, 99–110. DOI 10.24833/2687-0126-2019-1-1-99-110. (In Russian).

5. Bartmiński J. (2018), Yazyk v kontekste kul'tury ili chto segodnya oznachaet metafora Evropejskij dom? [Language in the context of culture, or what does the metaphor "European home" mean today?], Śląsk, Katowice, no. 25, 67 p. (In Polish).

6. Bartmin'ski Ye.L., Berezovich I.T., Vepreva M.L., Kovshova A.D. & Shmelev (2021), Vzaimodejstvie yazyka i kul'tury v issledovatel'skom pole: granicy i perspektivy [Interaction of language and culture in the research field: boundaries and perspectives], Quaestio Rossica, 9, 4, 1389–1408. (In Russian).

7. Teliya V.N. (2021), Kommunikativnaya funkciya yazyka i problema kul'turno-yazykovoj kompetencii (k postanovke problemy) [The communicative function of language and the problem of cultural and linguistic competence (to the formulation of the problem)], Sbornik nauchnykh trudov, posvyashchennyy pamyatnomu yubileyu Veroniki Nikolayevny Teliya “Znaki yazyka i smysly kul'tury”, “Seriya. Kognitivnye issledovaniya yazyka” [Collection of scientific papers dedicated to the memorable anniversary of Veronika Nikolaevna Telia “Signs of language and meanings of culture”], Izdatel'skiy Dom “Derzhavinskiy”, Tambov, 19–33. ISBN 978-5-00078-450-1. (In Russian).

8. Averchenko V.I. (2018), Etnokul'turnaya obuslovlennost' semantiki frazeologizmov s etnonimami [Ethnocultural conditioning of the semantics of phraseological units with ethnonyms], Sbornik statey po itogam III Mezhdunarodnoy nauchno-prakticheskoy konferentsii “Yazykovaya lichnost' i effektivnaya kommunikatsiya v sovremennom polikul'turnom mire”, 26–27 oktyabrya 2017 goda, v 2 chastyakh [A collection of articles on the results of the III International Scientific and Practical Conference “Linguistic personality and effective communication in the modern multicultural world”, in 2 parts], Belorusskiy gosudarstvennyy universitet, Minsk, October 26–27, 2017, 2, 18–25. (In Russian).

9. Taganova T.A. (2021), Etnonimy i etnicheskie prozvishcha v leksikograficheskom aspekte (na materiale anglijskogo i russkogo yazykov) [Ethnonyms and ethnic nicknames in the lexicographic aspect (on the material of English and Russian languages)], Vestnik Moskovskogo gosudarstvennogo oblastnogo universiteta, “Seriya. Lingvistika”, 3, 109–118. DOI 10.18384/2310-712X-2021-3-109-118. (In Russian).

10. Znamenskaya T.A. (2022), Geterostereotipy v angloyazychnoj frazeologii: sindrom etnocentrizma [Heterostereotypes in English phraseology: ethnocentrism syndrome], Mir nauki, kul'tury, obrazovaniya, 4 (95), pp. 204–207. (In Russian).

11. Afanasjeva O.Yu., Fedotova M.G. & Radyuk Yu.G, 2021, Refleksiya v obuchenii budushchih uchitelej inostrannogo yazyka mezhkul'turnoj kommunikacii [Reflection in teaching future teachers of a foreign language of intercultural communication], Vestnik Yuzhno-Ural'skogo gosudarstvennogo gumanitarno-pedagogicheskogo universiteta, 6 (166), 7–22. (In Russian).