Volume 04 Issue 08-2024
78
American Journal Of Philological Sciences
(ISSN
–
2771-2273)
VOLUME
04
ISSUE
08
P
AGES
:
78-81
OCLC
–
1121105677
Publisher:
Oscar Publishing Services
Servi
ABSTRACT
This article discusses the difference between the concepts of discourse and text, the typology of discourse, types of
person-oriented discourse, everyday discourse and its uniqueness.
KEYWORDS
Text, discourse, personal discourse, institutional discourse, domestic discourse, existential discourse, direct and
indirect discourse, semantic transfer, new meaning.
INTRODUCTION
Modern linguists struggle to distinguish the
differences between the terms of “text” and
“discourse” while studying language based on
anthropocentric
theory.
Contrasts
such
as
functionality-structuralism, dynamic-static, actuality-
virtuality are being used to distinguish the phenomena
based on these two concepts. In order for knowledge
to be transmitted and formed in a new, it is necessary
to create a text, so the text begins to be created at the
moment of discursive activity. It is better to study
these two phenomena, which are being compared, in
the relation of "hyperonym" - "hyponym". Discourse is
a certain type and series of human conscious activity,
and text is its manifestation. The interpretation of the
discourse category in such a broad sense, generalizing
content, is already recognized rule for communication
system, other fields of science interested in human
Research Article
TYPES OF DISCOURSE AND DOMESTIC DISCOURSE
Submission Date:
August 20, 2024,
Accepted Date:
August 25, 2024,
Published Date:
August 30, 2024
Crossref doi
https://doi.org/10.37547/ajps/Volume04Issue08-13
Khasanova Dilnoza Tajidinovna
Andijan State University Teacher Of The Interfaculty Faculty Of Foreign Languages, 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 08-2024
79
American Journal Of Philological Sciences
(ISSN
–
2771-2273)
VOLUME
04
ISSUE
08
P
AGES
:
78-81
OCLC
–
1121105677
Publisher:
Oscar Publishing Services
Servi
conscious activity - philosophy, sociology, psychology,
cybernetics, etc.
From the point of view of sociolinguistics, there are
two main types of discourse: personal (person-
oriented) and institutional. In the first case, the
speaker tries to show his inner world in all its richness
as an individual, in the second case - as a representative
of a certain social institution. According to V. I. Karasik,
the person-oriented discourse manifests itself in two
forms: domestic and life discourses. [p. 1, 27] A. V.
Olyanich analyzed the types of discourse in the USA
and Russia in the monograph "Prezentatsionnaya
teoriya discursa".
Personal discourse is characterized by an attempt to
minimize the time and reach a specific abbreviated
code of communication in order to convey information
that is considered relevant only in terms of highly
emotional modal-evaluative qualifications and divided
into 2 sub types: domestic discourse and existential
discourse
Institutional discourse represents communication
within the given framework of interpersonal social
relations in society. It can be seen that the following
types of institutional discourse can be distinguished:
political, diplomatic, administrative, legal, military,
pedagogical, religious, mystical, medical, business,
advertising, sports, scientific, theatrical and public
information.
Domestic discourse occurs between familiar people to
maintain contact and solve everyday problems. Its
peculiarity is that this communication is dialogic in its
essence, it continues in a pointed way, the participants
of the dialogue know each other well, and therefore
communicate at a reduced distance without telling in
detail what is being discussed. This is a conversation
about things that are clear and easy to understand. For
this type of speech, I.N. Gorelov says that verbal
communication only complements non-verbal things,
and the main information is conveyed through facial
expressions, gestures, speech-related actions, etc.
The specific features of domestic discourse are
reflected in detail in the study of oral speech. Everyday
communication is a natural initial type of speech that is
organically acquired from childhood. This type of
discourse is characterized by spontaneity, strong
situational dependence, clear subjectivity, violation of
logic and structural design of statements. Phonetically,
vague fluency is the norm here. In everyday speech,
people refer to abbreviated and slang vocabulary,
although statistically colloquial words do not make up
more than 10% of the lexical fund of statements in
colloquial
speech.
Phonetically,
vague
fluent
pronunciation is the norm here. The most important
feature of colloquial speech units is the specific
denotative direction of words (so they are easily
replaced by non-verbal signs); in addition, a restrictive
(restrictive, password) function of communication is
Volume 04 Issue 08-2024
80
American Journal Of Philological Sciences
(ISSN
–
2771-2273)
VOLUME
04
ISSUE
08
P
AGES
:
78-81
OCLC
–
1121105677
Publisher:
Oscar Publishing Services
Servi
carried out within a narrow circle of famous people,
they use symbols that emphasize belonging to the
relevant group (family, group words) and are
incomprehensible to outsiders. The ambiguity of
pronunciation is related to the semantic ambiguity of
units: the meanings of words are very flexible, words
are easily replaced by approximate substitutes,
pronouns and particles dominate in this speech.
Domestic discourse differs in that the speaker must be
understood at a glance. The active role of the
addressee in this type of speech gives the addressee
great opportunities to quickly change topics, as well as
to easily translate information into subtext (irony,
language games, hints, etc.).
In contrast to domestic discourse, attempts are made
to reveal one's inner world in all its richness in
existential speech, communication is broad, extremely
rich in meaning, all forms of speech are used based on
literary language; existential communication is mainly
monologic and is represented by fiction and
philosophical and psychological introspective texts.
Peculiarities of domestic discourse are reflected in
colloquial discourse studies. Domestic discourse is
characterized by situational dependence, spontaneity,
breaking the structural expression of the statement. In
everyday discourse, people may use abbreviated and
slang vocabulary. The speaker easily moves from one
topic to another, sarcasm, advice, etc. uses the
addressee does not need much time to understand the
addressee. Domestic discourse can be direct or
indirect. V. I. Karasik directly distinguishes two types of
domestic discourse: semantic transfer and new
meaning. Transfer of meaning is the expression of
feelings and thoughts that help a person to define
things that are not clear, phenomena that belong to
the whole world are determined through verbal
reasoning. A new meaning is realized by suddenly
understanding the essence of the matter, clarifying the
situation. In indirect domestic discourse, the story is
depicted symbolically and the events are described in
sequence. That is, the description is based on the
principle of sequence, and the image develops the idea
figuratively by describing the static characteristics of
observable,
concrete
events.
Narration
and
description, unlike parables, use stable socially
embedded semantic connectors and do not require a
broad cultural context.
REFERENCES
1.
V. I. KARASIK Rechevaya kommunikatsiya:
diskursivnыy aspekt, Elektronnыy nauchno
-
obrazovatelnыy
jurnal
VGSPU
«Grani
poznaniya».№1(21). Fevral 2013
2.
Hamroyeva
N.N.
Shaxslararo
muloqot
jarayonida dialogik diskursning o‘rni va
kommunikativ strategiyalar, Buxoro davlat
universiteti ilmiy axbroti, 2023-3 (80-bet)
Volume 04 Issue 08-2024
81
American Journal Of Philological Sciences
(ISSN
–
2771-2273)
VOLUME
04
ISSUE
08
P
AGES
:
78-81
OCLC
–
1121105677
Publisher:
Oscar Publishing Services
Servi
3.
S.V.Lukyanova, K VOPROSU O TIPOLOGII
DISKURSA,
Vestnik
Pskovskogo
gosudarstvennogo universiteta
4.
Kupsova Yu.A. K voprosu opredeleniya i
tipologii
diskursa,L.JOURNAL.ru
IMG,
Belgorod,
Rossiya.
https://doicode.ru/doifile/lj/20/lj-30-11-2016-3-
10.pdf
5.
Karasik, V. I. Jazykovoj krug: lichnost',
koncepty, diskurs,
–
M. : Gnozis, 2004.
