EIJP ISSN: 2751-000X
VOLUME04 ISSUE12
88
LINGUISTIC FEATURES OF ARTISTIC DISCOURSE
A’zamova Dilfuza Shafoevna
Lecturer, Termez state university, Uzbekistan
AB O U T ART I CL E
Key words:
Discourse, artistic text, artistic
discourse, author, reader, image.
Received:
08.12.2024
Accepted
: 13.12.2024
Published
: 18.12.2024
Abstract:
The study of discourse and discursive
analysis are relatively new disciplines, especially
in linguistics, which arouse great scientific interest
and attract the attention of researchers to various
aspects of discourse. In the last decade, many
scientific works have been devoted in particular to
artistic discourse. This article examines the
specifics of artistic discourse and the solution of
the question regarding the correct understanding
and interpretation of key artistic images in works.
INTRODUCTION
“Discourse” (from fr. Discours
speech) is a coherent text in combination with
extralinguistic - pragmatic, socio-cultural, psychological, and other factors; a text taken in the event
aspect; speech considered as a purposeful social action, as a component involved in the interaction of
people and the mechanisms of their consciousness (cognitive processes) [Маслова 1997: 136
-137]. The
basis of the discourse is the text, and the discourse itself is associated with a pragmatic situation and at
the same time is addressed to the thought processes of communication participants. N.D. Arutyunova
believes that discourse as a speech “immersed in life” is a coherent text taken together with
extralinguistic conditions and the situation of communication
–
pragmatic, socio-cultural and other
factors [Арутюнова 1990: 136
-137]. The typology of discourse partially coincides with the
classification of functional speech styles, determined primarily by the set and specifics of the speech
genres present in them [Бахтин 1986: 250
-255]. According to the functional orientation and spheres
of consciousness served, political, pedagogical, scientific, religious, legal are distinguished and other
types of discourse marked by varying degrees of institutionalization [Карасик 2000a]. A look at the text
from the condition
s of its production allows us to put forward the concept of “discourse”. The concepts
of “artistic text” and “artistic discourse” have a number of features. We know that a work of art (an
artistic text) is a work of art, the result of creativity. This is a special system that models a person's ideas
about reality and is a means of communication between people. An artistic text is created as a result of
aesthetic cognition of the surrounding world, therefore, such a text contains information of a special
kind -
aesthetic. Therefore, it is necessary to agree with I.Y. Chernukhina's definition: “An artistic text is
an aesthetic means of mediated communication, the purpose of which is a figuratively expressive
VOLUME04 ISSUE12
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.55640/eijp-04-12-18
Pages:88-90
EUROPEAN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PEDAGOGICS
ISSN: 2751-000X
VOLUME04 ISSUE12
89
disclosure of the topic, presented in unity of form and content and consisting of speech units performing
a communicative function” [Чернухина 1984: 11]. This definition specifies the features of the literary
text that need attention. At the same time, it should be taken into account that the specificity of a literary
text follows from extralinguistic factors, conditions for the creation of a text, that is, consideration of
artistic discourse is required. The writer, creating a work of art, learns about the world around him and
reflects it, expressing his attitude to reality, his understanding. The result of the writer's activity
becomes a literary text. G.V. Stepanov writes: “A specific artistic text conveys a meaning that, in our
opinion, cannot be expressed by synonymous statements. Artistic meaning cannot
be “semantically
represented” regardless of the given language design. Changing the language design entails either the
destruction of a specific artistic meaning or the creation of a new one” [Степанов 1976: 144]. We
emphasize that man in all his manifestations is the most important part of the world created by the
artist, in other words, anthropocentrism is inherent in artistic discourse. On the other hand, artistic
discourse can be viewed in the light of communication theory. Thus, G.V. Stepanov pointed
out “a well
-
known parallelism between a speech act in general and a literary text [Степанов 1988: 108]. At the
same time, Yu.B. Borev remarks: “Strictly speaking, in the process of transmitting artistic information,
there is not communication, but artistic communication, because it goes not only from the author
through the work to the recipient; but also in the opposite direction (feedback). The recipient acts not
only as a consumer of artistic products, but also as, in a certain sense, a participant in its
creation”
[Борев 1988: 160]. In fact, the reader is not at all a passive participant in artistic communication, since
he is immersed in reality and learns it first of all independently, and then through an artistic text.
According to I.V. Arnold, “the soc
ial existence of a text consists in its spiritual appropriation by the
reader and in feedback, which plays an important role in this process” [Арнольд 1999: 375]. In the
process of artistic communication, complex relations are carried out between the participants of
communication - the addressee (author), the addressee (recipient, reader), as well as their relations
with the text (work) and reality.
In addition to the writer as a speaking person, another speaking person is created in the literary text -
the
“image of the author”, which, according to I.I. Vinogradov, combines all the elements of the artistic
system [Виноградов, 1971: 151
-
152], and the author's point of view and the “image of the author” on
the depicted world may not coincide. Similarly, in a
work of fiction, an “image of the reader” can be
created (although this does not always happen), which is not identical to the real reader. The reader
perceives an artistic text, and this is another feature of artistic discourse: since there are no two
identical people, there cannot be two identical understandings of a literary text. Each reader brings
something of his own to the understanding of a literary text, conditioned by life experience, age, social
status, emotional state, etc. However, the variety of understandings of a literary text has its limits. Here
is what Yu.B. Borev writes about this: “Although the perception of a literary text is variable, it contains
an invariant of these discrepancies and gives a stable program of artistic perception due to its objective
content, the artistic concept and value orientations fixed in it” [Борев, 1988: 211]. The artistic text is
intended for communication of a special kind. It is designed for a special type of communicants and a
special distribution of roles between them. Therefore, the question of artistic discourse sometimes
acquires a debatable character, moreover, even time aims at the idea that an artistic text as a specific
formation does not have a discourse, because the creation of an artistic text and its perception cannot
be imagined as direct components of one communicative act. In addition, in artistic communication
there is a special code for transmitting information and means of influencing the listener or reader. The
creation of the text is not spontaneous and spontaneous. The author is also guided by certain attitudes,
EUROPEAN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PEDAGOGICS
ISSN: 2751-000X
VOLUME04 ISSUE12
90
as well as communicative intentions and techniques of aesthetic influence on the addressee known to
him.
REFERENCES
1.
Арнольд И.В. Семантика. Стилистика. Интертекстуальность: Сб. статей / Науч. ред. П.Е.
Бухаркин. –
СПб. 1999. –
456 с.
2.
Арутюнова Н.Д. Дискурс // Лингвистический энциклопедический словарь. –
М., 1990. –
С.
136
–
137.
3.
Бахтин М.М. Эстетика словесного творчества. –
М., 1986.
4.
Борев Ю.Б. Эстетика.
4-
е изд., доп. –
М., 1988.
5.
Виноградов В.В. О теории художественной речи. –
М., 1971.
6.
Карасик В.И. О типах дискурса // Языковая личность: институциональный и персональный
дискурс. –
Волгоград, 2000а. –
С. 5–
20.
7.
Лингвистический энциклопедический словарь /
Гл. ред. В.Н. Ярцева. –
М., 1990.
