CURRENT APPROACHES AND NEW RESEARCH IN
MODERN SCIENCES
International scientific-online conference
115
THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE ANTHROPOCENTRIC PARADIGM IN
LINGUISTIC STUDIES
Bobojonova Shahnoza
University of Tashkent for Applied Sciences,
Gavhar Str. 1, Tashkent 100149, Uzbekistan
E-mail: shakhnozabobojonova@gmail.com
ORCID ID: 0009-0000-3204-345X
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14279763
Abstract:
The anthropocentric paradigm, which places humans at the
center of linguistic studies, has become a significant approach in contemporary
linguistics. This article deduced the development of this paradigm in Uzbek
linguistics, examining key research areas such as sociolinguistics, cognitive
linguistics, psycholinguistics, and discourse analysis. By focusing on discourse,
semantics, and the study of language as a communicative tool, the article
presents a comprehensive view of the role of the human factor in linguistic
theory and practice.
Keywords:
Anthropocentric paradigm, Uzbek linguistics, sociolinguistics,
cognitive linguistics, discourse analysis, psycholinguistics, human-centered
approach, language and culture, semantic perception, communication.
Introduction
In today’s rapidly developing world, various branches of linguistics, such as
linguopragmatics, linguoculturology, cognitive linguistics, sociolinguistics,
psycholinguistics, ethnolinguistics, neurolinguistics, paralinguistics, and gender
linguistics, all center around the human factor as the object of study. The
emergence of these fields is closely linked to efforts to study linguistic activity in
direct connection with its human subject.
Within the anthropocentric paradigm, humans are placed at the center, and
language is seen as a fundamental component that forms the essence of the
human being. Since the early years of the 21st century, research in Uzbek
linguistics based on the anthropocentric paradigm has begun to emerge. These
works are mainly conducted in the fields of sociolinguistics, cognitive linguistics,
linguistic pragmatics, and psycholinguistics. Although these studies do not
explicitly refer to the anthropocentric paradigm, they are recognized as the first
works reflecting the principles of this paradigm.
Research in Sociolinguistics and Psycholinguistics
For example, S.M. Mo‘minov’s doctoral dissertation on the “Social-linguistic
Characteristics of Uzbek Communication Behavior” explores the unique
CURRENT APPROACHES AND NEW RESEARCH IN
MODERN SCIENCES
International scientific-online conference
116
communication behavior of Uzbeks from a social-linguistic perspective. This
research not only highlights the importance of the human factor in linguistic
activity but also focuses on studying the linguistic peculiarities of
communication processes.
One of the first works in Uzbek linguistics to analyze text from an
anthropocentric perspective is I.A. Azimova’s dissertation on “The
Psycholinguistic Study of the Semantic Perception of Newspaper Texts in
Uzbek.” The research focuses on identifying linguistic and extralinguistic factors
affecting text comprehension through psycholinguistic experiments. This
dissertation also analyzes the semantic perception units in a text and their
formal-semantic characteristics.
According to I.A. Azimova, words, word forms, phrases, and syntagmas are
considered the basic units of semantic perception in texts. Moreover, the
dissertation presents an in-depth analysis of the “stimulus linguistic factors in
the text” and “the primary processes in text perception.”
The Anthropocentric Paradigm and Linguistics
In his article on the study of language through paradigms, the linguist A.
Rahimov discusses the anthropocentric paradigm, also known as the
communicative or nominative-pragmatic paradigm, in the history of linguistics.
According to A. Rahimov, this paradigm views language not as a mere structure
but as an open system based on communication and interaction.
A. Rahimov argues that in linguistics, language and various aspects of social
life are interconnected, and humans serve as the "golden bridge" between these
areas. Therefore, cognitive, sociolinguistic, ethnolinguistic, psycholinguistic,
neurolinguistic, pragmatic, and linguoculturological paradigms are seen as sub-
paradigms within the broader anthropocentric framework.
In contemporary linguistics, studying language systems from an
anthropocentric perspective is primarily found in research on linguistic
semantics,
cognitive
linguistics,
psycholinguistics,
pragmatics,
and
linguoculturology. Renowned Uzbek linguist Prof. N. Mahmudov emphasizes the
significance of the anthropocentric paradigm in linguistics: "According to the
objective nature of language, the anthropocentric paradigm places humans at
the center, with language being a key element in shaping the human
personality."
Anthropocentric Paradigm and Discourse
The essence of the anthropocentric paradigm is explained by the shift from
the question "how is language structured?" to "how is language used?" To
CURRENT APPROACHES AND NEW RESEARCH IN
MODERN SCIENCES
International scientific-online conference
117
understand how language is used, it is necessary to study the speech-cognitive
processes of the human being who is its owner. This shift demands a new
approach in linguoculturology, particularly in linking language with culture. In
anthropocentric linguistics, studying discourse allows for the investigation of
human speech from a communicative aspect.
In the 1920s, linguistics began to acknowledge discourse as being related to
spoken language, with certain expressions, such as interjections and
introductory phrases, marking discourse features. In foreign linguistics,
syntactic issues related to discourse were raised by Z. Harris in the 1950s. By the
1970s, discourse and syntax were recognized as separate areas in linguistics.
Discourse and Its Analysis
There are various definitions of discourse. According to J.R. Geary,
discourse is the integration of linguistic and extralinguistic factors such as
actions, interactions, thinking methods, beliefs, and evaluations necessary for
the implementation of specific social roles. V.V. Krasnix views discourse as a
linguistic and extralinguistic phenomenon that includes speech activity
processes and their outcomes.
Through discourse analysis, the broader linguistic dimensions of speech
units, such as sentences, are revealed. The way a person understands and
interprets a specific concept within their national-cultural context plays a
significant role in the speech process. Pragmatic information and precedent
phenomena used in literary texts or communication are always understood by
members of a particular society but may be challenging for others outside that
cultural context. Sh. Safarov, in his analysis of the nuances of communication
processes, acknowledges the existence of a cultural framework specific to each
nation. This cultural framework, formed by ethnic-ethical norms, serves as the
foundation of communication strategies and tactics. In this regard, the
anthropocentric paradigm in linguistics is used to study the role of humans in
communication and their social, psychological, and cultural aspects. In the 21st
century, new approaches to semantics and syntax are emerging in linguistics.
Linguists are examining how humans perceive the real world through language
and how they convey their thoughts. The questions of how language employs
communicative strategies and how it presents specific information to people
have become key concerns in linguistic studies.
Conclusion
The anthropocentric paradigm has significantly influenced the development
of linguistic studies in Uzbekistan, shaping various fields such as sociolinguistics,
CURRENT APPROACHES AND NEW RESEARCH IN
MODERN SCIENCES
International scientific-online conference
118
cognitive linguistics, and discourse analysis. This paradigm emphasizes the
central role of the human being in language, recognizing the interconnection
between linguistic activity, social behavior, cultural norms, and cognitive
processes. By focusing on the ways humans understand, interpret, and use
language, scholars have been able to develop more nuanced and comprehensive
models of communication. As the study of language continues to evolve, the
anthropocentric paradigm remains a crucial framework for understanding the
complexities of human communication. Its emphasis on the human factor allows
for a deeper exploration of language not just as a system of rules, but as a tool
for social interaction, cultural expression, and cognitive processing. Therefore,
integrating the anthropocentric perspective into contemporary linguistic
research promises to yield new discoveries and a more holistic understanding of
language as a fundamental aspect of human life. Thus, the anthropocentric
paradigm has become one of the key approaches in Uzbek linguistics for
studying the relationship between language and the human being. Considering
social, psychological, and cognitive factors is crucial for creating new theoretical
and practical frameworks in linguistics. The study of language and human
interaction, along with the integration of linguistic, cultural, and cognitive
contexts, provides a deeper understanding of the role of language in human
society.
References:
1.
Xudoyberganova D. Lingvokulturologiya terminlarining qisqacha izohli
lug‘ati. – Toshkent: Turon zamin ziyo, 2015. –5 b.
2.
Mo‘minov S.M. O‘zbek muloqot xulqining ijtimoiy-lisoniy xususiyatlari:
Filol. fan. d-ri ... dis. avtoref. – Toshkent: O‘zR FA TAI, 2000. – 47 b.
3.
Mahmudov N. Tilning mukammal tadqiqi yo‘llarini izlab...// O‘zbek tili va
adabiyoti. –Toshkent, 2012. -№ 5. – 6-7 b.
4.
Маслова В. А. Лингвокультурология. Учебное пособие для студентов
высших учебных заведений. –М.,2001.– 6 c.
5.
Дорофеев Ю. Антропосентризм в лингвистике и предмет
когнитивной грамматики. 2008.–60 c.
6.
Щерба Л. В. Языковая система и речевая деятельность. – Л.: Наука,
1974. – 428 с; 2-е изд. – М.: УРСС, 2004.
7.
Harris Z.S. Analyse du discours // Languages, 1969. – №13. – 8-45 p.
8.
Гиндин С.И. Советская лингвистика текста. Некоторые проблемы и
результаты (1968-1975) // Известия АН СССР, серия ЛЯ, 1977. – № 4. – 348-
361 c.
CURRENT APPROACHES AND NEW RESEARCH IN
MODERN SCIENCES
International scientific-online conference
119
9.
Колшанский
Г.В.
Коммуникативная
дискретность
языка//
Лингвистика текста, сб. науч. трудов. Вып. 103. – М: МГПИИЯ, 1976. – 15-22
c.
10.
Слюсарев Н.А. Проблемы функционального синтаксиса современного
английского языка. – М.: Наука, 1981. – 206 с.
11.
Benveniste E. Problèmes de linguistique général. – Paris: Gallimard, 1966.
–. 356
12.
Safarov Sh. Pragmalingvistika. – Toshkent. 2008. –.267 b.
13.
Стародумова Ye. А.Синтаксис современного русского языка.
Владивосток, Изд. Дальневосточного университета, 2005 г. 33 с. .
14.
Nurmonov A. Tanlangan asarlar. 3-jild, Tilshunoslikning nazariy va amaliy
muammolari bo‘yicha tanlangan maqolalar.T., 2012 y. – 76 b
15.
Gee J. P. An introduction to discourse analysis. Theory and practice. –
Routledge, 2005. – 209 p.
16.
Красных В. В. Этнопсихолингвистика и лингвокультурология: Курс
лекций. М.: Гнозис, 2002. – 200 c.
17.
Карасик В.И. Языковой круг: личность, концепты, дискурс.
Волгоград: Перемена, 2002. – 280 c.
18.
Kizi, S. B. Y. (2022). Linguo-cultural characteristics of speech etiquette
occurring in discourse. Current Research Journal of Philological Sciences, 3(11),
59-63.
19.
Bobojonova, S. (2022). Pragmatic interpretation of educational discourse
and expression of dialogic discourse in the communication process.
20.
Арутюнова Н.Д. Лингвистический энsiklопедический словарь. 1990 г.
136-137 с.
