Authors

  • Zulfiya Fizulievna Alikhasanova
    Lecturer, Gulistan State Pedagogical Institute, Uzbekistan

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.37547/ajps/Volume05Issue02-34

Keywords:

linguopragmatics human factor communicative unit

Abstract

This article is dedicated to a comprehensive analysis of linguopragmatics as a branch of linguistics, exploring the historical development of this field since the 1970s. Various approaches to defining linguopragmatics are systematized, and its relationship with other established linguistic disciplines is examined. Special attention is given to the study of fundamental terminological frameworks and key concepts. As a result, the primacy of the human factor in linguopragmatics and its role in understanding language as a means of communicative interaction is emphasized.


background image

American Journal Of Philological Sciences

120

https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajps

VOLUME

Vol.05 Issue02 2025

PAGE NO.

120-124

DOI

10.37547/ajps/Volume05Issue02-34



Linguopragmatics in the system of linguistic sciences:
conceptual analysis

Zulfiya Fizulievna Alikhasanova

Lecturer, Gulistan State Pedagogical Institute, Uzbekistan

Received:

24 December 2024;

Accepted:

26 January 2025;

Published:

28 February 2025

Abstract:

This article is dedicated to a comprehensive analysis of linguopragmatics as a branch of linguistics,

exploring the historical development of this field since the 1970s. Various approaches to defining
linguopragmatics are systematized, and its relationship with other established linguistic disciplines is examined.
Special attention is given to the study of fundamental terminological frameworks and key concepts. As a result,
the primacy of the human factor in linguopragmatics and its role in understanding language as a means of
communicative interaction is emphasized.

Keywords:

linguopragmatics, human factor, communicative unit, means of communicative interaction, pragmatic

aspect.

Introduction:

Research in the field of linguopragmatics

has

recently

gained

increasing

relevance.

Linguopragmatics as a discipline emerged in the 1970s,
influenced by the ideas of J. Austin, J. Searle, H. Grice,
Z. Vendler, and others. The formation of
linguopragmatics as a linguistic direction is associated
with shifts in the general orientation of Western
linguistics in the early 1970s, characterized by a
transition from viewing language as a formal system
detached from its conditions of use to considering
language as a means of communicative interaction
within a social context. This shift was significantly
i

nfluenced by Wittgenstein’s philosophy of language,

marking an essential feature of integrative processes in
the humanities.

Literature Review

Key definitions and concepts of linguopragmatics are
analyzed through the lens of foundational works by J.
Austin, J. Searle, H. Grice, and Z. Vendler, as well as
modern perspectives from scholars such as B. Yu.
Norman, G. Klaus, Yu. D. Apresyan, E. N. Malyuga, N. D.
Arutyunova, and Yu. S. Stepanov.

METHODS

The study employs various methods, including the
comparative-analytical

method,

systematization

method, tabular data representation method, and
descriptive method.

The late 1970s and early 1980s were marked by an
increased focus on the human factor in language,
characterized by a sharp rise in interest in the
communicative-pragmatic aspects of language use

the structure of communicative acts, the revision and
expansion of communicative unit functions, and the
adequacy of speech productions in relation to
communicative and activity-based needs and
intentions of the speaker.

The shift towards the pragmatic aspects of
communication

required,

alongside

traditional

linguistic semantics, the inclusion of a vast and
somewhat undefined area of human knowledge into
linguistic science

linguopragmatics, which studies

how language is used to achieve communicative goals.

Definitions of Linguopragmatics

A number of scholars have defined linguopragmatics in
different ways:

B. Yu. Norman states that linguopragmatics

studies language use, considering age, gender, social
status, and professional characteristics of the
communicators, as well as the specific conditions and
goals of a speech act.

G. Klaus, in his monograph The Power of

Words,

describes

linguopragmatics

(or

pragmalinguistics) as a branch of linguistics that


background image

American Journal Of Philological Sciences

121

https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajps

American Journal Of Philological Sciences (ISSN

2771-2273)

examines how linguistic signs function in speech,
focusing on the "sign-user" relationship.

Yu. D. Apresyan offers a broad definition:

"Pragmatics refers to the meaning encoded in linguistic
units (lexemes, affixes, grammatical forms, syntactic
constructions) that reflect the speaker's relationship
to:

1.

Reality,

2.

The content of the message,

3.

The addressee."

The Linguistic Encyclopedic Dictionary defines

pragmatics as a field of research in semiotics and
linguistics that studies the functioning of linguistic signs
in speech.

E. N. Malyuga argues that linguopragmatics

views language as a tool used by individuals in their
activities, focusing on how signs behave in real
communication situations and emphasizing their
relationship with users.

In general, the various definitions of linguistic
pragmatics can be grouped into several categories (see
Table 1.1).

Table 1.1

Aspects of the definition of linguopragmatics

Author

The main aspect

1

Б.Ю. Норман

Study of Communication Features

– Examines

language use

considering various factors

such as age, gender, social status, and

professional characteristics.

2

Гeoрg Klaус

Relationship Between the Sign and the User

– Focuses on the

interaction between a linguistic sign and its user

.

3

Ю.D. Apрeсяn

Speaker's Relationship to Content and Addressee

– Emphasizes

the

meanings conveyed through linguistic units

in relation to

reality, message content, and the addressee

.

4

Linguistic encyclopedic
dictionary

Functional Aspect

– Analyzes the

pragmatic functions of

language in different contexts

.

5

Е.N. Malюga

Functioning of Linguistic Signs

– Studies

how linguistic signs

behave in speech

and how they

function in real communication

situations

.

The data in the table indicate that significant attention
in the interpretation of linguopragmatics is devoted to
the human factor. Some definitions focus on the study
of the effect of linguistic communication, emphasizing
the mutual influence of communicants in the
communication process.

In several definitions, the interpretative aspect of
pragmatic studies of speech productions is highlighted,
appearing in different communicative contexts.
According to N.D. Arutyunova, the object of
interpretation is what is referred to as the pragmatic
meaning of an utterance.

Thus, the human factor is the fundamental concept in
the interpretation of linguopragmatics. It is also
important to note the existence of different text
interpretations (both oral and written), which depend
on upbringing, education, mentality, worldview, and
perception of reality. Other definitions emphasize the
functional aspect of linguopragmatic studies, their

contextual dependence, and describe linguopragmatics
as the "science of language use" or the "science of
language in context".

Linguopragmatics studies language in its pragmatic
function, considering it as a means of influencing
human

behavior

and

consciousness

in

the

communication process. Particular importance is given
to factors that determine the choice of communicative
expression variants, as well as conditions that facilitate
the understanding of the communicative purpose of an
utterance. These aspects form the core research area
of linguopragmatics.

Linguopragmatics is closely connected with various
disciplines and fields of knowledge, enabling a
comprehensive understanding of language use for
communication and shaping the perception of the
world. Consequently, it helps to better understand the
nature of human communication (see Table 1.2).

Table 1.2

Connection of lingvopragmatics with other areas of knowledge


background image

American Journal Of Philological Sciences

122

https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajps

American Journal Of Philological Sciences (ISSN

2771-2273)

Napрavlеniе/Oblaсть

znaniy

Сvяzь с lingvopрagmaтikoy

1

Psycholinguistic

study of cognitive processes and their impact on understanding
and use of language in context

2

Social linguistics

analysis of social factors influencing language behavior and
communication.

3

Ethnolinguistika

Research into cultural aspects of language and their influence on
pragmatic norms and communication

4

Philosophy of language

consideration of philosophical aspects of meaning, truth and
context in language

5

Semiotika

study of signs and symbols, used in communications, and their
pragmatic meaning

6

Cognitive linguistics

study of mental processes associated with understanding and
production of speech

7

Communication sciences

analysis of processes of information transfer and interaction
between people.

8

Applied linguistics

development of methods and technology for practical application
of knowledge about language.

9

Information

development of algorithm and system for processing natural
language and analysis of pragmatic aspects

10

Pedagogika

application of lingvopragmatic knowledge to improve language
teaching methods.

Linguopragmatics studies the use of language in
specific communicative situations, as well as the
influence of context, sociocultural factors, and
communication goals on the interpretation and
understanding of linguistic expressions. It examines
how an individual uses language to achieve their goals,
express intentions, beliefs, emotions, and interact with
others through language.

The relationship between linguopragmatics and
cognitive linguistics lies in the fact that both disciplines
study the use of language for communication and the
cognitive mechanisms underlying this process. Within
cognitive linguistics, research focuses on how thinking,
perception, and understanding of the world shape the
structure of language. Meanwhile, linguopragmatics
explores how these cognitive processes manifest in
human speech behavior across different contexts.

The connection between linguopragmatics and
sociolinguistics is determined by the influence of social
factors on language use in various contexts. This
includes the study of differences in communicative
strategies depending on social status, age, gender, and
other factors.

Linguopragmatics also investigates how psychological
processes affect the understanding and use of
language. This includes the study of cognitive
mechanisms underlying communication skills, such as
perception, memory, and attention. Additionally, it
examines differences in communicative styles and
norms across cultures, helping to distinguish universal

aspects of language and communication from those
that depend on cultural context.

Linguopragmatics encompasses a wide range of
questions concerning the speaker, the addressee, and
their interaction in the communication process, as well
as the conditions under which communication takes
place. The fundamental postulate of this discipline

aligns with J. Austin’s assertion that "A word is an

action."

One of the key directions in linguopragmatics is the
study of the process of acquiring and applying linguistic
material, which considers a specific type of semantic
relationships between linguistic units in language,
speech, and speech activity. Scholars define these
relationships in terms of:

1.

Paradigmatic (represented by the implicit

paradigm of the language system),

2.

Syntagmatic (explicit syntagmatic structure in

speech), and

3.

Pragmatic (purposefully organized speech act

of an individual, containing an evaluative-predicative
core of a judgment).

All of the above is directly related to pragmatics. The
semantic aspect, which is closely tied to epistemology
(the cognitive universe that has national-language
variations), is considered the leading aspect and
predetermines the content of other aspects.

Another direction of linguopragmatics is the study of
communication postulates, i.e., the principles or rules


background image

American Journal Of Philological Sciences

123

https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajps

American Journal Of Philological Sciences (ISSN

2771-2273)

of normal human communication.

The term "communicative postulates" was introduced
into scientific discourse by H.P. Grice. Communicative
postulates or maxims represent behavioral rules
concerning speech, based on the principle of
cooperation, collaboration, and specific regulations.

Currently, three different, partially traditional
approaches to the study of pragmatics exist, which are
not only related to linguistic philosophy but also to
formal logic and linguistic semantics. These approaches
differ based on their perspectives on the nature of
meaning.

However, the existing variety of directions in linguistic
pragmatics cannot be limited to a single or a few
traditions. They are united by several fundamental
ideas:

1.

The key concept for adequately describing

linguistic communication is the concept of activity.

2.

Language serves as a means of dynamic

interaction between communicators.

3.

The functioning of language is closely related to

the situational context of its use.

In discussing the object of pragmatics, two concepts
have emerged, as examined by Yu.S. Stepanov. On the
one hand, he acknowledges that linguopragmatics has
its own subject matter, focusing on "the selection of
linguistic means from the available repertoire for
optimal influence". On the other hand, pragmatics in its
"pure" form studies the same issues that semantics and
syntax explore in a "hidden" manner.

This discipline covers the analysis of explicit and implicit
goals of an utterance, the speaker's internal attitudes,
and the listener's readiness to contribute to achieving
the intended meaning. Additionally, it examines
various types of communicative behavior, including:

Speech strategies and tactics,

Rules for conducting dialogue to enhance

communication effectiveness,

The use of so-called "indirect" speech acts,

Various language play techniques.

"Pragmatics concerns both the interpretation of
utterances and the choice of their form in specific
conditions."

This definition encapsulates two perspectives on the
pragmatic aspect:

1.

The speaker’s position (choice of form).

2.

The listener’s position (interpretation of the

utterance).

The key concepts that form the basic terminological
framework are categorized as follows:

Participants in communication (addresser,

addressee).

Key components of communication (intention,

speech act, context, communicative situation, deixis,
implicature,

inference,

presupposition,

presuppositional triggers).

Communication strategies (communicative

strategy, communicative tactics, cooperative principle,

Grice’s maxims, implicit contract, scripts, frames,

felicity conditions).

Types of speech influence (politeness, irony,

metaphor, perlocution, empathy).

Competencies

(pragmatic

competence,

communicative competence, contextual adaptation).

Types of meaning (implicit, explicit).

Linguistic phenomena (discourse, polysemy,

connotation).

Contextual

elements

(context,

conventionality).

These concepts develop the basic terminological
framework for analyzing linguistic communication in a
pragmatic aspect.

Thus, linguopragmatics is a branch of linguistics that
studies linguistic phenomena from the perspective of
their use in specific communicative situations. Unlike
other branches of linguistics, which focus on language
structure, linguopragmatics investigates:

The use of linguistic means to achieve specific

goals in communication.

Differences in language usage across various

cultures and contexts.

For example, in one culture, certain forms of politeness
may be obligatory, whereas, in another culture, they
may be considered excessive.

REFERENCES

Апресян Ю.Д. Прагматическая информатсия для
толкового словаря // Прагматика и проблемы
интенсиональности. –

М. 1988.

Арутюнова Н.Д. Истоки, проблемы и категории
прагматики. / Н.Д. Арутюнова, Е.В. Падучева //
Новое в зарубежной лингвистике. –

М. 1985. Вып.16:

Лингвистическая прагматика. –

C.357.

Гак В.Г. Язык как форма самовыражения народа //
Язык как средство трансляции культуры / Отв. ред.
М.Б. Ешич. –

М. 2000. –

С. 54

-68.

Грайс Г.П. Логика и речевое общение / Перевод с
англ. Туровского В.В // Новое в зарубежной
лингвистике. Вып. ХВИ. –

М.: Прогресс, 1985. –

С.

217-237.


background image

American Journal Of Philological Sciences

124

https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajps

American Journal Of Philological Sciences (ISSN

2771-2273)

Клаус Г. Сила слова. –

М.: Прогресс, 1967. –

209 с.

Колшанский Г.В. Функции паралингвистических
средств в языковой коммуникатсии // Вопросы
языкознания. –

№1

.

1973.

С. 16

-25.

Лингвистический энциклопедический словарь / Гл.
ред. В.Н. Ярцева. –

М.: Сов. Энциклопедия, 1990. –

685 с.

Малюга Е.Н. Англоязычный профессиональный
жаргон в деловом дискурсе // Научный вестник
Воронежского

государственного

архитектурно

-

строительного университета. Серия: Современные
лингвистические

и

методико

-

дидактические

исследования. 2010. –

№ 2 (14). –

С. 11

-17.

Норман Б.Ю. Лингвистическая прагматика (на
материале русского и других славянских языков):
курс лекций / Б.Ю. Норман. –

Минск. 2009. –

183 с.

Остин Дж. Слово как действие // Новое в
зарубежной лингвистике. Вып. 17: Теория речевых
актов. –

М., 1986. –

С. 22 129.

Степанов Ю.С. В поисках прагматики: Проблема
субъекта // Изв. АН СССР. Сер. лит. и яз. Т. 40. –

4.

1981.

С. 340

-355.

References

Апресян Ю.Д. Прагматическая информатсия для толкового словаря // Прагматика и проблемы интенсиональности. – М. 1988.

Арутюнова Н.Д. Истоки, проблемы и категории прагматики. / Н.Д. Арутюнова, Е.В. Падучева // Новое в зарубежной лингвистике. – М. 1985. Вып.16: Лингвистическая прагматика. – C.357.

Гак В.Г. Язык как форма самовыражения народа // Язык как средство трансляции культуры / Отв. ред. М.Б. Ешич. – М. 2000. – С. 54-68.

Грайс Г.П. Логика и речевое общение / Перевод с англ. Туровского В.В // Новое в зарубежной лингвистике. Вып. ХВИ. – М.: Прогресс, 1985. – С. 217-237.

Клаус Г. Сила слова. – М.: Прогресс, 1967. – 209 с.

Колшанский Г.В. Функции паралингвистических средств в языковой коммуникатсии // Вопросы языкознания. – №1. – 1973. – С. 16-25.

Лингвистический энциклопедический словарь / Гл. ред. В.Н. Ярцева. – М.: Сов. Энциклопедия, 1990. – 685 с.

Малюга Е.Н. Англоязычный профессиональный жаргон в деловом дискурсе // Научный вестник Воронежского государственного архитектурно-строительного университета. Серия: Современные лингвистические и методико-дидактические исследования. 2010. – № 2 (14). – С. 11-17.

Норман Б.Ю. Лингвистическая прагматика (на материале русского и других славянских языков): курс лекций / Б.Ю. Норман. – Минск. 2009. – 183 с.

Остин Дж. Слово как действие // Новое в зарубежной лингвистике. Вып. 17: Теория речевых актов. – М., 1986. – С. 22 129.

Степанов Ю.С. В поисках прагматики: Проблема субъекта // Изв. АН СССР. Сер. лит. и яз. Т. 40. – № 4. –1981. – С. 340-355.