ОБРАЗОВАНИЕ НАУКА И ИННОВАЦИОННЫЕ ИДЕИ В МИРЕ
https://scientific-jl.org/obr
Выпуск журнала №-70
Часть–5_ июня–2025
102
2181-
3187
UNITY: A PRAGMATIC AND GRAMMATICAL ANALYSIS OF
MORAL CONTRAST IN NARRATIVE DISCOURSE
Nazarova Lobar Shuxratovna
O’qituvchi, O’zbekiston Milliy Universiteti
+998977579594
Abstract
This paper presents a sentence-by-sentence linguistic analysis of the short
narrative “Unity” from the book by Utkir Hoshimov “Daftar hoshiyasidagi bitiklar”
translated by F. Bekmurodova. Drawing on key theories in pragmatics and syntax, it
explores how language use—through tense, clause structure, deixis, implicature, and
speech acts—constructs moral and ideological meaning. The study contrasts two
scenes: one depicting human silence during the Stalinist repressions of 1937, and
another portraying a group of monkeys defending one of their own. The analysis shows
how grammatical precision and pragmatic nuance converge to convey themes of
complicity, courage, and collective action. Ultimately, the narrative offers a powerful
commentary on the human condition by suggesting that animals, not people, emdiv
true unity.
Keywords
Pragmatics, grammatical analysis, speech act theory, deixis, implicature, narrative
discourse, political repression, animal solidarity
Introduction
The relationship between language and ideology is one of the most compelling
concerns in discourse analysis. Narrative texts, in particular, provide a unique window
into how grammatical structures and pragmatic cues encode emotion, social behavior,
and moral judgment. The short narrative “Unity” presents an especially fertile ground
for such an analysis. By contrasting a scene of human inaction during a historical
moment of terror with one of animal cooperation in nature, the text becomes more than
ОБРАЗОВАНИЕ НАУКА И ИННОВАЦИОННЫЕ ИДЕИ В МИРЕ
https://scientific-jl.org/obr
Выпуск журнала №-70
Часть–5_ июня–2025
103
2181-
3187
a story; it acts as a moral fable about societal responsibility and courage. This study
aims to uncover how the narrative achieves this effect linguistically by conducting a
detailed, sentence-by-sentence analysis of its grammatical constructions and pragmatic
functions.
Materials
The primary material analyzed is a narrative prose text titled “Unity,” from the
book by Utkir Hoshimov “Daftar hoshiyasidagi bitiklar” translated by F. Bekmurodova
and in English titled “Notes for a rainy day”, consisting of twenty sentences divided
into two thematically distinct but structurally parallel parts. The first part represents
human society under Stalinist repression, while the second part depicts a group of
monkeys uniting to resist a tiger’s attack. Both parts are narrated in a simple,
descriptive style that allows for close textual analysis.
Methods
This study employs a qualitative, sentence-level approach that integrates
grammatical and pragmatic analysis. Each sentence is analyzed for syntactic features
such as tense, clause complexity, verb choice, and coordination, as well as for
pragmatic features including speech acts (Austin; Searle), implicature (Grice), deixis
(Levinson), and politeness or facework strategies (Brown and Levinson).
The pragmatic analysis classifies each sentence according to its speech act
function (assertive, expressive, directive, etc.) and explores the implicit meanings and
ideological stances conveyed through linguistic cues. Irony, stance markers, and
evaluative language are examined in relation to broader social and moral contexts.
These frameworks collectively allow for a comprehensive understanding of how
linguistic form shapes communicative function and ideological message.
Results and Discussion
The narrative opens with the sentence “There was a movie on TV.”
Grammatically, this is a simple past-tense declarative sentence featuring an existential
construction. Pragmatically, it introduces a seemingly neutral, observational tone.
However, this calm tone is immediately disrupted by the next sentence: “It was about
ОБРАЗОВАНИЕ НАУКА И ИННОВАЦИОННЫЕ ИДЕИ В МИРЕ
https://scientific-jl.org/obr
Выпуск журнала №-70
Часть–5_ июня–2025
104
2181-
3187
the repressions of 1937.” This reference to Stalinist terror, though stated matter-of-
factly, presupposes a shared historical context and signals the ideological weight of the
narrative.
The text then shifts to present-tense narration: “People in black cloaks take a poor
man by the armpits and drag him towards a black car...” The use of present tense lends
immediacy, while visual and somatic imagery heighten emotional intensity. This is
followed by “At the door, his wife is crying silently...” The adverb “silently”
pragmatically encodes emotional repression and social fear, consistent with a regime
where speech may invite punishment.
The line “A five or six-year-old boy is running after his father, saying, 'Daddy,
Daddy.'” features direct speech as a dramatic and emotive device. It performs an
expressive speech act that embodies helplessness and emotional trauma. The shift of
focus to the reactions of bystanders—“There is fear in the eyes of one, regret in another,
and another looks on indifferently”—utilizes coordination to build contrast. Each noun
phrase contains a different emotional response, encapsulating a spectrum of social
reactions: fear, remorse, and apathy.
One of the most striking lines, “Someone turns his lips sneeringly and smiles
selfishly,” introduces evaluative adverbs that carry implicit judgment. This is followed
by a parenthetical metacommentary: (Someone ‘too patriotic’ who complains to
authorities about ‘enemies of the people’). The use of quotation marks around “too
patriotic” and “enemies of the people” is ironic, signaling the speaker's distance from
the language of authoritarian propaganda (Grice). The parenthesis functions
metapragmatically, providing ideological labeling and judgment without overt
condemnation.
The narrative then transitions: “A long time later, I saw another movie on TV.
Rather, not a movie but an ‘Animal World’ show.” The correction highlights a key
narrative strategy—the use of allegory. In this second story, the reader encounters a
new scene: a tiger attacks a baby monkey, but instead of silence, the monkey's scream
ОБРАЗОВАНИЕ НАУКА И ИННОВАЦИОННЫЕ ИДЕИ В МИРЕ
https://scientific-jl.org/obr
Выпуск журнала №-70
Часть–5_ июня–2025
105
2181-
3187
triggers collective action. The sentence “Dozens of monkeys rushed down... and threw
themselves at the tiger” uses dynamic verbs to show decisiveness and courage.
The structural repetition between scenes—first involving humans, then
monkeys—underscores the thematic reversal. Where humans remained passive,
animals resist. Sentences such as “One bites, one rolls” use parataxis to show
multiplicity and unity in action. The resolution—“A huge monkey grabbed a thick stick
and hit the tiger on the head so hard that the tiger gave up the prey and ran away”—
features causal subordination (“so... that”) to mark a clear consequence of collective
effort: survival.
The final sentence, “I envied the monkeys...”, is terse but laden with moral and
pragmatic force. Its elliptical form suggests emotional restraint and unspoken critique.
It functions as an expressive act of shame and admiration, encapsulating the text’s
moral stance.
In sum, the results of this analysis show that the power of the narrative lies in its
linguistic economy: short, syntactically simple sentences loaded with pragmatic
meaning. The use of tense, modality, and speech act types conveys an ideological
contrast that resonates with the reader on both emotional and intellectual levels.
Conclusion
The narrative “Unity” utilizes grammatical clarity and pragmatic depth to deliver
a striking ethical message. Through sentence-level analysis, this study has shown how
language functions as both structure and social action. The text moves from passive,
silent suffering in the human world to active, collective resistance in the animal world.
This contrast is encoded through tense shifts, direct speech, evaluative modifiers, and
implicatures that evoke irony and criticism.
By concluding with the quietly powerful line “I envied the monkeys...”, the
narrator suggests a moral failure on the part of human society—particularly its failure
to unite against oppression. The animals, depicted as less cognitively developed beings,
act with courage and solidarity that human bystanders lack. In doing so, the text
reverses traditional assumptions about civilization and savagery.
ОБРАЗОВАНИЕ НАУКА И ИННОВАЦИОННЫЕ ИДЕИ В МИРЕ
https://scientific-jl.org/obr
Выпуск журнала №-70
Часть–5_ июня–2025
106
2181-
3187
The analysis affirms that even short narratives can serve as rich sites for linguistic
inquiry. The strategic deployment of grammatical and pragmatic features not only
enhances narrative texture but also deepens ideological impact. “Unity” thus stands as
a testament to how language can articulate not just stories, but values, critiques, and
hopes for a more ethically conscious society.
Bibliography
Austin, J. L. “How to Do Things with Words”. Edited by J. O. Urmson and Marina
Sbisà, Harvard UP, 1962.
Brown, Penelope, and Stephen C. Levinson. “Politeness: Some Universals in Language
Usage”. Cambridge UP, 1987.
Grice, H. P. “Logic and Conversation. Syntax and Semantics: Speech Acts”, vol. 3,
edited by Peter Cole and Jerry L. Morgan, Academic Press, 1975, pp. 41–58.
Levinson, Stephen C. “Pragmatics”. Cambridge UP, 1983.
Searle, John R. “Expression and Meaning: Studies in the Theory of Speech Acts.
Cambridge UP, 1979.
Utkir, Hoshimov “Notes for a rainy day” translated by F. Bekmurodova, Muharrir
nashriyoti, 2023, P. 55.
