Page 94
CENTRAL ASIAN JOURNAL OF EDUCATION
AND INNOVATION
IF = 5.281
Volume 4, Issue 05,May 2025
www.in-academy.uz
SPEECH ETHICS FORMULAS AND ETHICS OF SPEECH
COMMUNICATION
Yugay Milana Gennadevna
Teacher of the department of russian language and literature,
Namangan state university
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15396107
ARTICLE INFO
ABSTRACT
Qabul qilindi: 05-May 2025 yil
Ma’qullandi: 10-May 2025 yil
Nashr qilindi: 13-May 2025 yil
The article reveals speech etiquette - a set of rules of
speech behavior accepted by society in relevant areas
and situations of communication. Speech etiquette is
regulated by social hierarchy, national culture and
rules of etiquette, rituals, education of the language
personality and constant practice guided by
consciousness.
KEY WORDS
word, speech, etiquette, language,
rule,
practice,
consciousness,
phrase, expression.
In social contacts, to maintain communication in the right tone, etiquette formulas are
used - multi-level linguistic units (full-meaning word forms, words of parts of speech that are
not full-meaning - (particles, interjections), phrases and whole phrases accepted in certain
situations, in different social groups. The social symbolism of etiquette formulas was
emphasized by the French stylist Ch. Bally. He wrote: “The matter is as if speech phenomena
absorb the smell inherent in the environment and circumstances in which they are usually
used in this way, they manage to symbolize, to evoke in the mind an idea of this group with its
way of life or forms of activity”. Units of speech etiquette reflect the constant social
characteristics of the participants in communication: their age, level of education, upbringing,
place of birth, upbringing and residence, gender, as well as variable social roles (comrade,
patient, client, policeman, etc. [1]). Usually, more than ten major etiquette positions
(situations) are named, clearly differing and having their own etiquette vocabulary, which is
characterized by a variety of options: addressing and attracting attention, acquaintance,
greeting, farewell, apology, gratitude, congratulations, wishes, compliments, sympathy,
invitation, request, consent, refusal. In the scientific, business, socio-political, and everyday
spheres, not only are typical situations of repeated, but new ones are also created [2]. For
example, in the scientific sphere of communication, the area of speech etiquette includes the
rules of self-manifestation of the author of a scientific work, and in the business sphere, in
particular, in judicial communication - the rules of expressing attitudes towards defendants
and victims. Thus, a number of situations of R. e. are not closed, but, on the contrary, are open
to a wide area of socially and nationally specific stereotypes of communication.
While maintaining the “etiquette frame” of texts of different functional styles, the author
must consciously select from the synonymous series only those means that are conditioned
extralinguistically, by the goals, objectives, and conditions of communication. Indeed,
humorous, friendly addresses, appropriate in private correspondence, are completely
inconsistent with the style of official business letters. In the scientific sphere, in order to
Page 95
CENTRAL ASIAN JOURNAL OF EDUCATION
AND INNOVATION
IF = 5.281
Volume 4, Issue 05,May 2025
www.in-academy.uz
maintain the necessary objectivity of presentation, it is not customary to categorically express
disagreement with the opponent's point of view. In the socio-political sphere, neutralization
of assessment in speech is impossible in principle, because communication here presupposes
an open expression of one’s position.
In the use of etiquette phrases, the role of intonation (it must be friendly) and non-
verbal means of communication (truthful facial expression, especially eyes, as well as
gestures, facial expressions, posture, div movements) is enormous [3].
Speech etiquette is an integral element of the culture of the people, an important part of
the culture of behavior and communication, a product of human cultural activity. The main
features of national Russian etiquette can be formulated as maxims of etiquette speech
behavior. The speaker should: show only a kind attitude towards the interlocutor through
appropriate politeness (taking into account the age, gender, official or social status of the
addressee); not impose his own opinions and assessments on the interlocutor, be able to take
the point of view of the partner; select linguistic means in accordance with the chosen tonality
of the text, focusing not only on the communication situation as a whole, but also on the
formality or informality of the situation; do not interrupt the interlocutor; adequately respond
to the appeal and the question posed by the interlocutor; use the possibilities of non-verbal
means of communication.
All these rules are based on the principles of cooperation (with a partner in achieving
communication goals) and the principle of politeness (respect for a partner), i.e. tolerance,
harmony of speech communication. The study of Russian speech etiquette was initiated by
V.Kostomarov’s article “Russian Speech Etiquette” (1967) [4]. In recent decades, thanks
primarily to the works of N.I. Formanovskaya has become the subject of linguistic research.
Moreover, scientific research is conducted in various aspects: linguocultural (Akishina,
Formanovskaya, 1975), pragmatic (Formanovskaya, 1982, 1989), sociolinguistic (Goldin,
1978), methodological (Lazutkina, 1998; Smelkova, 1997). As a result, multi-level linguistic
means used in communication as etiquette formulas were identified, the semantics of the
specified units and their social meanings were determined (Formanovskaya).
For the correct use of words in speech, it is not enough to know their exact meaning; it is
also necessary to take into account the features of lexical compatibility of words, their ability
to combine with each other. For the development of the theory of lexical compatibility,
Vinogradov’s identification of phraseological combinations and the establishment of the main
types of lexical meanings of words in the Russian language were of great importance [5].
Phraseological combinations are studied by phraseology, the subject of lexical stylistics is the
study of the combination of words in speech that have free meanings, and the determination
of the restrictions imposed by language on their lexical compatibility.
Many linguists emphasize that the lexical compatibility of a word is inseparable from its
meaning. Some scientists, studying the problems of lexical compatibility, come to the
conclusion that absolutely free combinations of lexemes do not exist in the language, there are
only groups of words with different compatibility capabilities. When the question is put this
way, the distinction between free combinations and phraseologically related ones is
destroyed.
Aesthetic understanding of the world is directly related to the sphere of artistic
creativity. The result of the cognitive, evaluative, transformative, playful activity of the artist
Page 96
CENTRAL ASIAN JOURNAL OF EDUCATION
AND INNOVATION
IF = 5.281
Volume 4, Issue 05,May 2025
www.in-academy.uz
are works of art possessing aesthetic significance, including the art of words [6]. The
perception of a work of art presupposes an aesthetic evaluation of the latter. A triad is
formed: creative activity - the result of creative activity - the evaluative perception of the
"product" created in the process of creative activity. Both the creative activity itself and the
perception of its materialized results can be accompanied by the author’s aesthetic task,
aesthetic goal setting. It is impossible not to notice that in the same terminological row there
are synonyms creative, creative, constructive and the adjective aesthetic. Such semantic
convergence is not accidental. Aesthetics is a science about the laws of existence and forms of
artistic creativity. Modern aesthetics also studies the value attitude of a person (social group,
nation) to the world, the nature of aesthetic activity and aesthetic activity, the system and
subsystem of values. Aesthetics reveals the value guidelines of the multi-aspect creative
reflection of the world, the principles and attitudes of perception of the “products” of aesthetic
(not only strictly artistic) activity[7].
The fundamental categories of aesthetics are the beautiful and the ugly, the sublime and
the base, the tragic and the comic. The problem of taste, understood as "the ability to perceive
and evaluate the fruits of artistic creativity and, more broadly, various creative activities, one
of the types of which is creative speech activity, is analyzed through the prism of these
categories. If the latter is carried out on the basis of a goal-setting associated with the
comprehension of the high and the low, the tragic and the comic, the beautiful and the ugly,
then such activity acquires an aesthetic character. The concept of creative speech activity is
broader than the concept of aesthetic speech activity. Aesthetic speech activity covers the
process of speech production and the process of its perception. The “product” of aesthetic
speech activity is a work of speech that has aesthetic value. The aesthetic function is certainly
characteristic of works of literary fiction, but it can also manifest itself within the framework
of other functional styles.
What is the aesthetics of language? Is language a special aesthetic object? To answer this
question, let us turn to the vocabulary that reflects the nature of the perception of language as
a national aesthetic value. Russian vocabulary contains many nominations that highlight
beauty as an aesthetic quality of language and speech. It is no coincidence that rhetoric is
called Russian eloquence, and a person who speaks well is called eloquent. Beauty in Russian
traditional culture is associated with the depth of thought and naturalness of speech behavior.
Meaningless prettiness is ridiculed. A contemptuous and ironic assessment invariably
accompanies the perception of eloquence [8].
Orators - empty talkers, posers - are despised and ridiculed. In recent years, a new
meaning of the adjective pathos has emerged, which is used to express a disapproving attitude
towards speech characterized by ostentatious enthusiasm. The dictionary of epithets notes
stable attributive accompaniments that highlight the facets of language and speech that are
aesthetically significant in Russian communicative culture. Let us highlight those that contain
a positive emotional and aesthetic assessment of the object being characterized. The beauty of
language is consistently perceived as an intrinsic quality: the language is magnificent,
beautiful, wonderful, marvelous, marvelous. Euphony is aesthetically positively assessed: the
language is sonorous, euphonious, melodic, musical, melodious, sweet-sounding [9].
The following are recognized as aesthetically significant: simplicity of linguistic
expression (epithets artless, ingenuous, accessible, natural, lively, genuine, understandable,
Page 97
CENTRAL ASIAN JOURNAL OF EDUCATION
AND INNOVATION
IF = 5.281
Volume 4, Issue 05,May 2025
www.in-academy.uz
simple); correctness (impeccable, flawless, exemplary, correct, pure); laconism (short, laconic,
lapidary, laconic). A positive aesthetic assessment covers the figurative potential of language
(expressive, picturesque, pictorial, figurative, relief, bright), as well as manifestations of
linguistic originality (individual, colorful, unique, distinctive, original, free, fresh). Accuracy
and sharpness of thought are assessed as aesthetically significant (catchy, sparkling, apt,
witty, sharp, polished, juicy).
The beautiful in the national linguistic consciousness is associated with the emotionality
of language and the expression of positive, including strong, emotions (high, sublime, solemn,
excited, emotional, heartfelt, affectionate, jubilant, fiery, ardent, impetuous, cordial). Thus, in
traditional Russian culture in general and communicative culture in particular, language is
perceived as an aesthetic value. However, “all linguistic quantities in direct experience
(neither psychological nor physiological) are not given to us at all, but can be deduced by us
only from the processes of speaking and understanding”. Everything that is written, spoken
and understood constitutes linguistic material. The aesthetic impact of language and language
tools is established by its speakers on the basis of the linguistic material given in experience.
The immediate object of aesthetic evaluation is speech behavior and its features, individual
lingvemes and speeches that fall into the focus of perception; certain qualities of statements
and texts [10].
An aesthetic attitude to language is formed on the basis of certain oppositions. The
universal opposition beautiful (beautiful) - ugly (unattractive) is reflected in a number of
specific oppositions: euphonious - cacophonous; meaningful - meaningless; correct -
abnormal; clean - clogged; simple - complex; laconic - verbose; new - famous; marked by
individuality - standard; emotional - emotionless; expressive - inexpressive.
Speech reality reveals the lack of fixation of a specific aesthetic assessment exclusively
for the left member of each of the noted oppositions. For example, one cannot but agree with
A. Pushkin, who casually noted: I do not like Russian speech as ruddy lips without a smile,
without a grammatical error. At the same time, a grammatical error in the oral speech of a
school teacher is unlikely to evoke a positive aesthetic response in us. Linguistic innovation
always attracts attention, however, the phrases respect which migrated from youth slang into
the common language, have no obvious prospect of entering the literary language. It is
functionally unsuitable for sincere expression of respect, gratitude towards the addressee
(nouns with the suffix -uh- have acquired a negative meaning: show-off, black stuff,
pornography, custom-made).
The use of this combination is also excluded in the text of an official letter of
congratulations as violating cultural tradition, genre and stylistic norms. As we can see, the
aesthetic significance of a linguistic element and a speech work in each specific case is
established on a functional basis. Sh. Bally, G. Vinokur, B. Larin, A. Peshkovsky, L. Shcherba
and others wrote about the aesthetic function of language. It is known, however, that language
is a polyfunctional phenomenon [11]. Along with informational, communicative and
pragmatic functions, an utterance and a text in a specific communicative situation can have a
special - emotional, sensory-figurative - aesthetic impression on the recipient. L. Shcherba
associated the entire arsenal of expressive means with the aesthetic function of language, and
R. Jakobson and many of his followers attributed the entire stylistic area to those linguistic
spheres in which the aesthetic function predominates. Indeed, the basis of the aesthetic
Page 98
CENTRAL ASIAN JOURNAL OF EDUCATION
AND INNOVATION
IF = 5.281
Volume 4, Issue 05,May 2025
www.in-academy.uz
potential of a language is its stylistic resources, ordered paradigmatically. They provide the
native speaker with freedom of aesthetic choice of options, and the language system as a
whole ensures the implementation of the mechanisms of creative activity, which is carried out
with an orientation towards the expression of “a purely individual thought, affective and
aesthetic content”. The distinction between the aesthetics of language and the aesthetics of
speech is based on the fact that "the former relates to the resources and possibilities of
language themselves, the latter - to the implementation of such resources and possibilities in a
particular text, in a particular writer, scientist or simply a writer who understands well,
however, the peculiarities of his native or very close language.
The inextricable connection between language and speech is undeniable. Language is
learned, mastered through speech and created in speech. Language, its stylistic resources are
the source of aesthetically motivated creative speech activity. The richer the stylistic
resources, the wider the possibilities of speech creativity. In the process of creative activity,
not only the writer, but also the speaker, not only the writer and scientist, but also the
preacher, politician, publicist, school teacher, tour guide (the list can be continued) find
themselves in a situation of problematic choice of an aesthetically influential linguistic unit.
The aesthetic attitude to the linguistic fact itself demonstrates the selection by the
speaker/writer of one and not another linguistic means, which in a specific communicative
situation is recognized as influential. “The aesthetic function of language in its initial form
manifests itself as soon as the speaker begins to pay attention to the external form of his
speech, to somehow evaluate the possibilities of verbal expression”. The aesthetic significance
of a style in speech, as A.Peshkovsky pointed out, is revealed with the help of an experimental
method of substitution. Thus, in the segment of the statement The Dnieper is wonderful in
calm weather... (N. Gogol), the characterizer wonderful can be replaced by one of the linguistic
synonyms. The synonym beautiful reduces the hyperbolicity of the image; the synonym
beautiful preserves the hyperbolicity, but does not express a riddle or secret. The synonym
picturesque brings external, landscape beauty to the forefront of perception. The meaning of
each of the lexical variants contains the semantic component “distinguished by beauty”, and
beauty is actually an aesthetic category. However, the variant wonderful chosen by the writer
conveys a capacious hyperbolic idea of the incomprehensible mystery of beauty - inexplicable,
striking the imagination, unprecedented, attractive, enticing. The noted increments determine
the aesthetic function of the word, which was not invented by N. Gogol, but selected by him in
the process of creative activity.
The aesthetically motivated selection of the language variant allows us to assert that the
aesthetic potential of the language is not only realized in speech, but also improved. In the
process of aesthetically motivated creative speech activity, the facts of reality are assimilated
and evaluated with the help of language and on the basis of universal aesthetic categories. The
aesthetic function of speech is based on the communicative and pragmatic functions.
Thus, in Russian culture in general and communicative culture in particular, language is
perceived as a special aesthetic value. The aesthetics of language is predetermined by its
resources, primarily stylistic resources. The aesthetic potential of language is realized in
speech. The aesthetic function of individual language means used in speech and the aesthetic
function of individual speech works are associated with the process of empathy of the speech
producer in an aesthetically significant communicative situation or with the process of
Page 99
CENTRAL ASIAN JOURNAL OF EDUCATION
AND INNOVATION
IF = 5.281
Volume 4, Issue 05,May 2025
www.in-academy.uz
empathy in an aesthetic event. The aesthetics of speech is based on creative speech activity,
which presupposes a motivated selection, combination of linguistic means, their promotion,
transformation, as well as the creation of units marked by the novelty of the expression plan
and/or the content plan.
References:
1.
.Костомаров В.Г Русский речевой этикет. — РЯЗР — 1967 — №1; Арутюнова Н.Д.
Некоторые типы диалогических реакций и «почему» — реплики в русском языке. —
ФН. — 1970. — №3; Ее же: Человек и его мир. — М., 1998;
2.
.Акишина А.А., Формановская Н.И. Русский речевой этикет. — М., 1975; Их же: Этикет
русского письма. — М.. 1986; Гол ьд и н В.Е. Речь и этикет. — М., 1978;
3.
.Форман о вская Н.И. Русский речевой этикет: лингвистический и методический
аспекты. — М. 1982; Ее же: Употребление русского речевого этикета. — М. 1982; Ее же:
Речевой этикет и культура общения. — М. 1989;
4.
.Формановская Н.И., Сепеши Э. Русский речевой этикет в зеркале венгерского. — М.;
Будапешт, 1986; Форма-новская Н.И. Т учны П.Г. Русский речевой этикет в зеркале
чешского. — М.; Прага, 1986;
5.
.Акишина А.А. Этикет русского телефонного разговора. — М. 1990;
6.
.Верещаги н Е.М., Костомаров В.Г Языки культура. — 4-е изд. — М., 1990;
7.
.Смелкова 3.С. Деловой человек: культура речевого общения. — М., 1997;
8.
.Лазуткина Е.М. Этика речевого общения и этикетные формулы речи // Культура
русской речи. — М. 1998; Ту м и н а Л.Е. Речевой этикет // Педагогическое речеведение.
Словарь-справочник. — М. 1998;
9.
.Тарасен ко Т.В. Этикетные жанры русской речи: благодарность, извинение,
поздравление, соболезнование: Автореф. канд. филол. н. — Красноярск, 1999;
Колтунова М.В. Язык и деловое общение: Нормы, риторика, этикет. — М. 2000.
10.
.Стилистический энциклопедический словарь русского языка / под ред. М.Н.
Кожиной; члены редколлегии: Е.А. Баженова, М.П. Котюрова, А.П. Сковородников. — 2-е
изд., испр. и доп. — М. Флинта : Наука, 2006.
11.
.Голуб, И. Б. Стилистика русского языка / И. Б. Голуб. — 11-е изд. — М.: Айрис-
пресс, 2010. — 14-16 (448) с.
