Volume 04 Issue 10-2024
97
American Journal Of Philological Sciences
(ISSN
–
2771-2273)
VOLUME
04
ISSUE
10
P
AGES
:
97-104
OCLC
–
1121105677
Publisher:
Oscar Publishing Services
Servi
ABSTRACT
This article explores the use of implicitness in English and Uzbek business discourse, focusing on metaphors,
euphemisms, and implicatures. It highlights how cultural and linguistic factors influence indirect communication
strategies in both languages. While English favors metaphor and euphemism for subtle expression, Uzbek places
greater emphasis on euphemism and implicature, often linked to cultural values of respect and politeness. The analysis
provides insights into how these strategies enhance business interactions, facilitating polite and effective
communication across different cultural contexts.
KEYWORDS
Implicitness, business discourse, metaphor, euphemism, implicature, cultural communication.
INTRODUCTION
In modern linguistics, discourse analysis became one of
the broad scientific directions, and implicitness
—
the
hidden, indirectly expressed meanings
—
especially
became an object of research in business discourse.
The word “implicit” comes from the Latin word
implicite, which is an adverb meaning “including within
itself” [1] or “involving”. This term is referred to as
something that obtains within, which is indirectly
expressed, not manifested outside, not explicitly
expressed, concealed, and vague. This meaning is
Research Article
THE METHODS OF STUDYING IMPLICITNESS IN BUSINESS DISCOURSE
(BASED ON THE ANALYSIS OF THE UZBEK AND ENGLISH LANGUAGES)
Submission Date:
October 03, 2024,
Accepted Date:
October 08, 2024,
Published Date:
October 13, 2024
Crossref doi
https://doi.org/10.37547/ajps/Volume04Issue10-14
Qodirova Mukaddas Tog‘ayevna
Associate professor at Termez state university, PhD in philology, Termez, Uzbekistan
Journal
Website:
https://theusajournals.
com/index.php/ajps
Copyright:
Original
content from this work
may be used under the
terms of the creative
commons
attributes
4.0 licence.
Volume 04 Issue 10-2024
98
American Journal Of Philological Sciences
(ISSN
–
2771-2273)
VOLUME
04
ISSUE
10
P
AGES
:
97-104
OCLC
–
1121105677
Publisher:
Oscar Publishing Services
Servi
contrary to the word explicit. Implicitness is a linguistic
phenomenon whereby, through an indirect way, some
idea or meaning is expressed in a hidden manner. That
is, even though something is not overtly mentioned in
a certain context or situation, the listener or reader
grasps the information conveyed by the speaker or
writer through the proper context. The understanding
of implicitness bears great importance in the
interaction
of
language
with
culture.
This
phenomenon
—
characteristic of the pragmatic aspects
of language
—
in specific institutional contexts, such as
business communication, efficiently helps to shape the
multi-layered meanings via hidden communicative
intentions, social positions, and cultural codes by
participants in the discourse.
In Uzbek and English, various forms of implicitness in
business discourse depend on the lexical, syntactic,
and pragmatic features typical of these languages. The
article discusses the issue of implicit meaning creation
in the English and Uzbek business discourses, their
semantic and axiological features, cognitive and
pragmatic methods of analysis within its framework.
LITERATURE REVIEW
The study of implicitness in business discourse is of
utter importance from both the linguistic and
pragmatic viewpoints, pointing to the necessity of
researching the hidden and indirectly expressed
meaning in language. Many scholars in linguistics have
conducted research regarding implicitness and hidden
meaning within business discourse. Such scholars
include John Searle (1969) [7], Herbert Paul Grice
(1981) [6], Deborah Tannen (1982) [9], Van Dijk Teun
(1985) [10], M. Hakimov (2001) [2], Dan Sperber and
Deirdre Wilson (2004) [4], T.A. Shiryaeva (2008) [3] and
A. Shamaxmudova (2017) [8] have dedicated their
works to discourse, pragmatic meanings and
implicitness.
By its very nature, implicitness conceals the
communicative goals and makes them clear only for
participants in the interaction who know the proper
context. It finds strategic usage especially in
intercultural business communication. Theories of
implicature and speech acts by P. Grice and J.R.Searle
provide deep analysis of this. Grice’s “conversational
implicature” [5:166] explains how hidden meanings
form in conversation, while Searle analyzes how
indirect meanings are conveyed through speech acts.
Both works are crucial for understanding hidden
meanings in business discourse.
P. Grice explained “implicitness as the idea that words
in conversation carry not only literal meanings but also
additional ones, depending on context and rules”
[6:187]. These meanings are understood implicitly.
Grice’s “maxims” for effective communication include
quantity, quality, relation, and manner. Implicit
meanings often appear when these maxims are
violated. For instance, when asked “Is Ali coming?” and
Volume 04 Issue 10-2024
99
American Journal Of Philological Sciences
(ISSN
–
2771-2273)
VOLUME
04
ISSUE
10
P
AGES
:
97-104
OCLC
–
1121105677
Publisher:
Oscar Publishing Services
Servi
the reply is “His car broke down”, it implies that Al
i is
not coming without saying it directly, adhering to the
maxim of relation.
Further, the works of Teun A. van Dijk have focused on
cognitive and social aspects of discourse analysis [10];
the hidden intentions of communication participants
can be comprehensible. He has analyzed how
differently the participants in different contexts hide
their social positions and goals, and how these can be
revealed.
Among them, the works of A. Shamaxmudova have a
special meaning from a pragmatic and sociolinguistic
point of view in the Uzbek language. She disclosed in
her scientific works the features of indirectly
expressed pragmatic meanings peculiar to the Uzbek
language. The research by Abdurazzoqov considers
cultural characteristics that help to understand the
hidden meanings in Uzbek business discourse.
METHODOLOGY
Considering the above-mentioned, research on
implicitness
in
Uzbek
and
English
business
communication uses the following method:
1.
Discourse analysis: This method examines
contextual, linguistic, and pragmatic aspects to
explore how hidden information is conveyed between
the speaker and listener. Discourse analysis is applied
to business documents, letters, and negotiation texts
in Uzbek and English to reveal indirectly expressed
meanings.
2.
Cognitive Approach: This approach examines
how the speaker's and listener's knowledge helps
interpret implicit meanings. By using concepts from
cognitive semantics and frame semantics, it explores
how hidden meanings in business interactions are
understood through context and shared knowledge.
3.
Pragmatic Analysis: Implicitness often appears
as a pragmatic phenomenon. Using Grice's
"conversational implicature" and Searle's "speech act
theory," hidden meanings in business discourse are
identified. Pragmatic analysis focuses on meanings
that are not directly stated but are interpreted through
context or culture.
4.
Comparative Analysis: The article compares
implicit meanings in Uzbek and English business
discourse, focusing on differences in linguistic
features, pragmatic processes, and cultural contexts. It
analyzes and contrasts how hidden meanings are
formed and the linguistic strategies used in both
languages.
Research Materials: The study uses business
documents,
commercial
correspondence,
advertisement texts, contracts, and business letters in
Uzbek and English. These texts are analyzed to explore
the language's ability to convey indirect meanings, and
comparative conclusions are made.
Volume 04 Issue 10-2024
100
American Journal Of Philological Sciences
(ISSN
–
2771-2273)
VOLUME
04
ISSUE
10
P
AGES
:
97-104
OCLC
–
1121105677
Publisher:
Oscar Publishing Services
Servi
RESULTS
To reveal the characteristics of implicitness in business
discourse, let's analyze a few examples provided
below:
Example
1:
Hidden
meaning
in
business
correspondence (English language)
Text: “We believe your proposal has potential, but
further evaluation is needed before we can move
forward”. Here, the implicit meaning suggests
that the
company is not prepared to accept the proposal in its
current form. The phrase “further evaluation is
needed” subtly indicates hesitation or possible
rejection, as the company has not yet made a decision.
While not directly stated, the underlying message is
that the proposal is unlikely to be accepted at this time.
Example 2:
Hidden meaning in an advertisement
(Uzbek language)
Text: “Bizning yangi mahsulotlarimiz muvaffaqiyatli
hayotning kalitidir”. In this case, the advertisement
does not explicitly state that the product is of high
quality or effective. However, by using the metaphor
“muvaffaqiyatli hayotning kaliti”, it implicitly suggests
that the product is essential for achieving success. This
indirect communication appeals to the audience by
implying the product's importance without directly
claiming its superiority.
Example 3
: Indirect expressions during negotiations
(English language)
Text: “I see what you're suggesting, but we have to
think about the long-
term effects”. In this sentence, i
t
is indirectly implied that the proposal is not being
accepted. Without giving a direct rejection, the
reference to “long
-
term effects” suggests that the
proposal will not be accepted at this time. Here, the
company avoids giving a clear answer while subtly
indicating that they are not ready to make a decision,
implying a possible rejection.
Example 4
: Hidden Phrase in a Commercial Contract
(Uzbek Language)
Text: “Mijozga xizmat ko‘rsatish sifatini oshirish
maqsadida, qo‘shimcha xizmat haqi belgilanishi
mu
mkin”. Here, the phrase “qo‘shimcha xizmat haqi
belgilanishi mumkin” implicitly suggests that the
customer might have to pay more in the future. While
it doesn't directly state that extra payment is required,
it hints at the possibility of introducing an additional
fee later on.
Example
5
:
Indirect
Expressions
Regarding
Collaboration (English Language)
Text: “We are excited about the potential
collaboration, but we need to align our priorities first”.
Although this sentence does not explicitly reject the
co
llaboration, the phrase “align our priorities”
Volume 04 Issue 10-2024
101
American Journal Of Philological Sciences
(ISSN
–
2771-2273)
VOLUME
04
ISSUE
10
P
AGES
:
97-104
OCLC
–
1121105677
Publisher:
Oscar Publishing Services
Servi
implicitly suggests that the collaboration is not
possible at the moment. This indirect expression hints
that the collaboration cannot proceed under the
current circumstances, without directly saying so.
Sources: Currently, the above examples are based on
real-life situations commonly encountered in general
business discourse.
DISCUSSION
Implicitness in correspondence (emails, business
letters, commercial proposals) is a key business tool. It
allows professionals to stay formal and polite while
indirectly
conveying
information,
enhancing
communication effectiveness. Let's explore examples
of how these methods are used in correspondence:
1. Metaphor:
Situation: Presenting a new product to customers.
Text: “Bizning yangi dasturiy ta’minotimiz sizning
biznesingiz uchun ishonchli kemaday
—
sizni
muvaffaqiyatli manzillarga olib boradi”. In this
example, the metaphor implicitly highlights the
product's strengths. Instead of directly listing features,
it uses imagery to convey the benefits, evoking positive
emotions in the customer and making the message
more engaging.
2. Euphemism:
Situation: Informing a customer about a price increase.
Text: “Xizmatlarimizning yuqori sifatini saqlab qolish
maqsadida,
biz
xizmatlar
ro‘yxatidagi
ayrim
yangilanishlarni amalga oshirdik”. Here, a euphemism
is used to soften the message about a price increase.
Words lik
e “yangilanishlar” and “yuqori sifatni saqlab
qolish” are employed to indirectly communicate the
change, making it sound more gentle and customer-
friendly.
3. Indirect Offers:
Situation: Proposing a new partnership.
Text: “If you join our new project, we a
re confident
that our partnership will be successful”. In this
example, the offer is suggested indirectly rather than
stated outright. This approach implies a willingness to
collaborate while giving the recipient space to consider
the proposal without feeling pressured.
4. Implicature:
Situation: Informing a customer about a delay.
Text: “Due to the special attention we are giving to
your order, there may be a slight delay”. Rather than
directly stating “the order is delayed”, this sentence
uses implicature to convey the delay indirectly. By
emphasizing the special care given to the order, the
company softens the message, making the delay more
acceptable to the customer.
5. Politeness Strategies:
Volume 04 Issue 10-2024
102
American Journal Of Philological Sciences
(ISSN
–
2771-2273)
VOLUME
04
ISSUE
10
P
AGES
:
97-104
OCLC
–
1121105677
Publisher:
Oscar Publishing Services
Servi
Situation: Delivering criticism or uncomfortable truth
to a customer.
Text: “We greatly appreciate your initiative, and your
ideas are valuable to us. However, we have a few
suggestions for improvement”. Here, politeness
strategies are employed to cushion criticism. By first
praising the customer’s idea and then gent
ly
introducing suggestions, the message is delivered with
respect, helping to maintain a positive relationship and
minimize discomfort.
The following are represented in the above chart:
1. Metaphor:
English (30%): Metaphors are a key tool for expressing
implicitness in English business discourse, commonly
used to indirectly praise products or services in
corporate communications and advertising.
Uzbek (25%): Metaphors are also used in Uzbek
business discourse, often drawing on cultural values
and traditions, though more cautiously than in English.
2. Euphemism:
English (25%): Euphemisms are used in English business
discourse to soften uncomfortable situations, like
using “rightsizing” instead of “layoff.”
Uzbek (30%): Euphemisms are widely used in Uzbek
culture to maintain politeness and respect, especially in
delicate or difficult situations.
3. Indirect Offers:
English (20%): Indirect offers are frequently used in
English business negotiations, where parties express
their intentions indirectly without giving direct
Volume 04 Issue 10-2024
103
American Journal Of Philological Sciences
(ISSN
–
2771-2273)
VOLUME
04
ISSUE
10
P
AGES
:
97-104
OCLC
–
1121105677
Publisher:
Oscar Publishing Services
Servi
instructions. This is a common approach in diplomatic
communication.
Uzbek (15%): Indirect offers are less common in Uzbek.
The communication culture, which is based on
tradition, may prefer direct speech, although indirect
offers can still be found in certain situations.
4. Implicature:
English (15%): Implicature, as introduced by Grice, is
well-explored in English business discourse, making
conversations more diplomatic through indirect
meanings.
Uzbek (20%): Implicature plays a key role in Uzbek,
especially in maintaining respect and politeness in
business and interpersonal communication through
indirect expressions.
5. Politeness Strategies:
English (10%): Politeness strategies are used in English,
but less frequently compared to other methods like
indirectness or implicature. Direct communication is
more common.
Uzbek (10%): In Uzbek culture, politeness strategies
exist, but their frequency is lower compared to other
methods. Respect is often expressed through more
traditional forms of communication.
The chart shows that English favors metaphor and
euphemism, while Uzbek focuses more on euphemism
and implicature. In Uzbek, implicit expressions related
to cultural values and respect are used with greater
caution and politeness.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, both English and Uzbek business
discourses utilize implicitness through various
linguistic tools, reflecting their cultural and
communicative preferences. While metaphors and
euphemisms dominate in English, Uzbek relies more on
euphemisms and implicatures, emphasizing caution
and politeness. These differences highlight the
significance of cultural values and respect in shaping
indirect communication strategies in each language,
ensuring effective and nuanced business interactions.
REFERENCES
1.
Комлев Н.Г. Словарь иностранных слов. Москва:
Флинта,
2006.
Available
at:
http://enc
-
dic.com/fwords/JEkstralingvisticheskij-41678.html
2.
Ҳ
акимов
М
.
Ўзбектилида
матннинг
прагматик
тал
қ
ини
:
фил
.
фан
.
док
.
дисс
.
–
Тошкент
, 2001.
3.
Ширяева Т.А. Когнитивное моделирование
институционального делового дискурса: дис.
…д
-
ра филол. наук. –
Ставрополь, 2008. –
545 с.
4.
Deirdre Wilson & Dan Sperber (2004) Relevance
Theory. In L. R. Horn & G. Ward (eds.), The
Handbook of Pragmatics. (Blackwell), 607-632.
Volume 04 Issue 10-2024
104
American Journal Of Philological Sciences
(ISSN
–
2771-2273)
VOLUME
04
ISSUE
10
P
AGES
:
97-104
OCLC
–
1121105677
Publisher:
Oscar Publishing Services
Servi
5.
Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and Conversation. In
Martinich, A.P. (ed). Philosophy of Language. (pp.
165-175) New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
6.
Grice, P. (1981). Presupposition and Conversational
Implicature. In P. Cole (Ed.), Radical Pragmatics
(pp.183
–
98).
–
New York: Academic Press.
7.
Searle, J. R. (1969). Speech Acts: An Essay in the
Philosophy of Language.
–
Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
8.
Shamaxmudova A. Zamonaviy tilshunoslikda
bilvositalik va implitsitlik tushunchalari. Xorijiy
filologiya.
–
№ 1. 2017. –
B. 68-70.
9.
Tannen, Deborah (ed.). 1982. Analyzing discourse:
Text and talk. Georgetown University Round Table
on Languages and Linguistics 1981. Washington,
DC: Georgetown University Press.
10.
Van Dijk Teun. Discourse semantic analysis.
–
London: Academic Press London, 1985.
