DEVELOPMENT AND INNOVATIONS IN SCIENCE
International scientific-online conference
29
LINGUISTIC APPROACH TO IMPLICATION
Komilova Dilnoza Muhammad qizi
Teacher of Department of “Methodology of Teaching
General Professional Subjects”, Fergana State University
+998998305880
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15673612
Annotation
This article focuses on the term implication and its functions in current
world linguistics. It also discusses its role in the structure of the text.
Keywords:
Implication, information, hidden meaning, explicit meaning,
underlying meaning, presupposition, artistic detail
The term “implication” came from the science of logic, and in this regard,
O.I. Prosyannikova says that “it means that linguists are not just interested in
logical constructions, but also turn to a special aspect of the semantics of
language - inferential relations” [1,36], in addition to these thoughts, she
explains implication with the following formula: “The linguistic concept of
implication, unlike logic, implies the non-representation of one of the two
components of a logical operation - the result. Linguistic implication derives the
following relations from a logical operation, but the content of the components
in this chain is significantly different and is expressed by a different formula,
which includes three components:
A -
►
B -» C.
Here B is a specific statement based on A (implied by the speaker's meaning
or assumption), and B itself simultaneously expresses a certain conclusion of the
recipient - C is the implication itself. is based on the speaker's practical
experience, general knowledge about the world. By extracting additional
information from the message, the participant in the dialogue uses the
capabilities of language and knowledge that has a pragmatic nature. In addition,
extralinguistic means, namely gesture, mimicry, artistic details, also serve as the
basis for implication”[1,35]. The presence of explicit (factual) and implicit
information in the text indicates the existence of two types of text structure, in
which case implicit information plays a key role in revealing the content of the
text.[1,35] It should also be noted that in oral speech, explicitness prevails over
implicitness. Traditionally, implicitness is considered within the framework of
philosophical and linguistic approaches. According to philosophical approaches,
ambiguity is explained as an indirectly presented judgment, conclusion. In the
linguistic approach, the discrepancy between the plane of form and content and
DEVELOPMENT AND INNOVATIONS IN SCIENCE
International scientific-online conference
30
the conclusions arising from this are studied. As for the use of implicitness in a
work of art, here we are talking about its special role in revealing the author's
artistic intention. Often, ambiguity is a special technique used by the author to
express and create a more expressive work of art works as. In this case, hidden
information becomes a separate load, deepening the semantic structure of the
text and giving the work a unique aesthetic load. In some literature, this
phenomenon is called implicit meaning. A number of linguists believe that
implicit meaning is a meaning that arises from the text, that the speaker, using
implicit meaning, is able to change the semantic and even emotional-
psychological content of the text without expanding its volume, that implicit
meaning secretly complements the content of the text and partially or
completely changes the content semantically.
In our opinion, implicitness is not the exact meaning of the message, but a
method chosen by the writer or speaker to increase expressiveness.
According to I.A. Sternin, usually in texts of any type, information can be
expressed in several ways:
1) in an explicit verbal form, an expression or a chain of expressions is
openly stated, there is a clear logical predicate of the sentence.
2) in an implicit verbal form, information is expressed verbally, but the
information expected from it is not immediately understood, logicality usually
refers to the possessive group.
3) in the form of presupposition, although direct information about some
aspects of the event in the text is not given, both the speaker and the listener can
guess this content.
The intended meaning is expressed in the text in completely different
linguistic units, but the recipient can “extract” the necessary semantic meanings
from the text [2,20]. In this case, the writer does not state his thoughts explicitly,
but rather refers to other means. At the same time, he must be able to evoke
certain associations in the addressee so that the implicit thought is understood.
M.V. Nikitin in his works calls implication “a type of conceptual connection”.
A.V. Bondarko dwells on the problem of implicitness in detail. He emphasizes
that its content components “arise from the relationship and influence of
explicitly expressed semantic elements, not directly expressed by specific
linguistic means”,[3, 175].
Indeed, hidden content structures and speech acts arise due to the
representations existing in the minds of people. That is, initially the explicit
meaning is embodied before our eyes, and through it other hidden, mysterious
DEVELOPMENT AND INNOVATIONS IN SCIENCE
International scientific-online conference
31
meanings can manifest themselves differently in the thinking of each speaker
and perceiver. The set or generalization of such different representations is
formed in the language as a single semantic paradigm, generalized within the
framework of a single common content.
According to the researcher A.V. Starkova, who is engaged in structural
grammar, “implicitity can only be realized through sentences, it cannot be
expressed by morphemes, words or word combinations”[3]. Supporting these
views of the scientist, we can say that in order to form structurally implicit
meanings, a certain situation, context, is certainly required. This, in turn, is
achieved with the help of sentences. However, in the process of analyzing artistic
details in our study, we became convinced that a single detail, appropriately
selected and included by the writer to reveal the character of the image in
psychological prose texts, can form implicit meanings in itself. We will dwell on
this in the following chapters.
S.S. Karsevsky, in his research, describes implicitness as a specific, separate
phenomenon: “Implicitness is an asymmetric dualism of a linguistic sign, the
essence of which is that in this case the sign and the essence do not completely
encompass each other”[4]. According to the above ideas, in addition to the
meaning expressed by the sign itself, there is also an implied meaning. This is a
hidden meaning, which is manifested in harmony with the context. Continuing
S.S. Karsevsky’s analysis of implicitness in structural linguistics, E.I. Shendels
defines it as follows: “Implicitness is a general objective property of the language
system, which is revealed in speech in the form of an implication in relation to
the subject”[6,175]. It should be noted that in linguistics, the term “implication”
is also used together with the term “implicitness”. There are different views on
the use of these terms in linguistics. In O.S. Akhmanova’s “Dictionary of
Linguistic Terms”, the term “implication” is considered as “implied”
(“podrazumevanie”)[10, 607]. Implied, hinted at indicates the essence of
implication. Yakubova N. writes in her study: “implication is a specific form of
implicitness, which means that hidden meanings are assumed, accepted, and
concluded differently by different recipients. In general, although there is no
sharp difference between these two terms, in terms of content and structure,
implicitness (hidden meaning) is taken as a broader concept than implication.
That is why linguists try to supplement the term implication in their studies.”
Based on the works of the Russian linguist O.I. Moskalskaya, it can be said
that the phenomenon of implication is based on “situational connections or the
relationship between the whole and the part”[11, 183]. Because this
DEVELOPMENT AND INNOVATIONS IN SCIENCE
International scientific-online conference
32
phenomenon is based on the author-text-reader chain, when the implication
phenomenon is reflected in the text as a result of the author’s communicative
intention, it is perceived by the reader, the reader, relying on his knowledge,
thinking, and worldview. V.A. Kukharenko, a contemporary of the author of this
concept, emphasizes in his studies that “the basis of implication is the perception
of additional semantic or emotional content that is not directly reflected in the
syntagmatically realized meanings of text units,”[12,327]. Based on this, it can be
said that the linguistic units that make up the implicit structure partially lose
their semantic meaning and serve to form the character of the image or the idea
of the work. E.N. Starikova defines implicitness as “the lack of exact expression
of structural elements that convey deep meaning in a sentence”[7,142], while
I.V. Arnold, a researcher who pays special attention to the concept of textual
implication, defines it as: “An implied, additional meaning based on the
syntagmatic connections of antecedent elements”[7].
Reference:
1.
Просянникова О.И Актуализация имплицитности художественной
детали в текстах психологической прозы 2004.-36 c
2.
Стернин И.А. Анализ скрытых смыслов в тексте. Учебное пособие.
Воронеж, 2011, стр.20
3.
Пирогова Ю. К. Проблемы прикладной лингвистики. М., 2001.
4.
Бондарко А.В. Грамматическое значение и смысл. Л.: Наука, 1978. С.
175.
5.
Карцевский
С.С.
Статья.
Об
асимметричном
дуализме
лингвистического знака
6.
Старкова Алевтина Павловна. Имплицитность как семантическое
явление и ее функции в художественном тексте : дисс.на соиск.уч.степ.
кандидата филологических наук : 10.02.05. - Москва, 1983. - 175 с.
7.
Арнольд И. В. Семантика. Стилистика. Интертекстуальность / научн.
ред. П. Е. Бухаркин. М.: Книжный дом «Либроком», 2010
8.
Старикова Е. Н. Имплицитная предикативность в современном
английском языке. Киев, 1976. С. 142.
9.
Ахманова О. С. Словарь лингвистических терминов. Изд. 5-е. М.:
Книжный дом «Либроком», 2010. С.607.
10.
Москальская О. И. Грамматика текста. М.: Высшая школа, 1981. С. 183.
11.
Кухаренко В. А. Интерпретация текста. М.: Наука, 1988. С. 327
