The subject of the research is the prosodic interference that arises in Iranian students when mastering Russian syllabo-tonics. The focus is on persistent errors in meter analysis caused not by a lack of knowledge but by a systemic conflict between the quantitative principle of Persian aruz and the accentual nature of Russian syllabo-tonics. Persian versification is based on the alternation of long and short syllables, while Russian syllabo-tonics relies on the rhythmic alternation of stressed and unstressed syllables. This deep-seated conflict generates negative transfer, which is not eliminated by traditional methods. The empirical base consisted of a diagnostic experiment involving 40 students from Tehran University (levels B1 and B2). Seven psycholinguistic barriers were identified and classified: quantitative imitation, fixed stress, aruz analogy, intonational monotony, failure to recognize rhyme, tempo-rhythmic acceleration, and conceptual distance. They account for up to 73% of all interference errors. The methodology is based on an experimental scheme of "pre-test – training – post-test," utilizing an author's model that includes an eight-step analytical algorithm and 14 targeted exercises of four difficulty levels. The scientific novelty of the research lies in the identification and systematic classification of seven psycholinguistic barriers of prosodic interference that arise in Iranian students when mastering the Russian metric system. Based on the obtained data, a methodological model for developing metric competence was created, aimed at the targeted neutralization of each of the identified barriers. The key principle of the model is conscious comparison of the Russian and Persian metric systems, as well as purposeful inhibition of the automatism of the native language that hinders adequate perception and reproduction of the rhythmic structures of Russian poetry. Experimental verification of the model, conducted using the "pre-test – training – post-test" scheme, showed a significant reduction in the proportion of interference errors from 73% to 11% (effectiveness coefficient of 85%).
Radandish et al. (Mon,) studied this question.