International Journal Of Literature And Languages
23
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ijll
VOLUME
Vol.05 Issue04 2025
PAGE NO.
23-25
10.37547/ijll/Volume05Issue04-07
Pragmatic Level of Reflection of Linguistic Personality in
Artistic Dialogue
Kuchkarova Shakhodat Ruziyevna
Bukhara State Medical Institute, ESP Teacher, Bukhara State Medical Institute, named after Abu Ali ibn Sina, Bukhara, Uzbekistan
Abdisharipov Abdulaziz Asliddin o'g'li
3rd year student, Faculty of Humanities, Chirchik State Pedagogical University, Uzbekistan
Received:
17 February 2025;
Accepted:
15 March 2025;
Published:
16 April 2025
Abstract:
The article examines the pragmatic level of the linguistic personality in artistic dialogue. The article also
analyzes the problems of the linguistic system of personality in artistic dialogue. The article specifies the pragmatic
properties of this system.
Keywords:
Linguistics, personality, properties, language process.
Introduction:
The development of linguistics at the
present stage is taking place in line with the
anthropological paradigm, i.e. “the study of language
processes takes place in an inextricable connection
with the needs of communicative activity and
presupposes taking into account the human factor,
when the subject of speech and its recipient are
included in the description of language mechanisms”
[Aznaurova, 1988.p]. Thus, the linguistic personality
becomes the most important component of the
communicative act, and its study acquires primary
significance in the study of discourse.
The linguistic personality is understood as a set of
human abilities and characteristics that determine the
creation and perception of speech works (texts), which
differ in a) the degree of structural and linguistic
complexity, b) the depth and accuracy of the reflection
of reality, c) a certain target orientation. [Караулов
Ю.Н., 1989. С. 13]. The structure of the linguistic
personality consists of three levels:
- verbal-semantic or personality lexicon; the lexicon,
understood in a broad sense, includes, according to our
ideas, the fund of grammatical knowledge of the
personality;
-linguo-cognitive, represented by the personality
thesaurus, which captures the “image of the world” or
the system of knowledge about the world;
-pragmatic, or the level of activity-communicative
needs, reflecting the pragmaticon of the personality,
i.e. the system of its goals, motives, attitudes and
intentionalities.
Our study examines the pragmatic level of the linguistic
personality in artistic dialogue. As is known, pragmatics
is understood as a section of linguistics that studies the
relationship between signs and their users in a specific
speech situation. We can say that pragmatics is the
semantics of language in action and the totality of
conditions accompanying the use of a linguistic sign.
The functioning of natural human language occurs in a
specific communication situation, which has received a
terminological designation in the concept of
“communicative
-
pragmatic situation” and includes the
entire
complex
of
external
conditions
of
communication present in the consciousness of the
speaker. [Азнау¬рова, 1988, 57]. The most established
parameters of the communicative-pragmatic situation
are:
• The setting and place of the communicative act;
• The su
bject and purpose of communication;
International Journal Of Literature And Languages
24
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ijll
International Journal Of Literature And Languages (ISSN: 2771-2834)
• Social, ethnic, individual characteristics of the
participants in speech communication (social status,
profession, age, nationality, cultural affiliation);
• Role and personal relationships between
communicants;
Role relations are considered in the work as one of the
leading factors of the communicative-pragmatic
situation, they include such concepts as speech
behavior, role expectations, the factor of mutual
understanding. Let us consider the pragmatic factor of
mutual understanding and role expectations using the
material of an artistic dialogue. As an example, we will
analyze the system of role relations of characters in the
play "Pygmalion" by Bernard Shaw, which carry the
necessary information about status and positional
roles. Status roles are those that a person receives at
birth and which, as a rule, do not change during life
(ethnic role, gender, etc.). Positional role denotes the
place of an individual in the system of social relations.
The plot line of the work is based on a bet made
between the professor of phonetics Mr. Higgins and
Colonel Pickering. Higgins claims that thanks to her
knowledge and teaching skills she can turn a simple
flower girl Eliza Doolittle into a socialite. Eliza's status
role is obvious, her positional role changes during the
plot. Her status role is determined by her birth and
upbringing. However, she strives to establish herself in
the position of a socialite. A classic example of these
roles is the well-known situation described in the
drama. The social status and profession of the speakers
is explicit in this dialogue.
Submit a review
Sidebars
History
SavedThe addressee in this communication situation is
Mr. Higgins, the addressee is a simple flower girl. The
indication of a sharp asymmetry of social roles begins
with the description of the characters' appearance (the
English that will keep her in the gutter to the end of her
days; a little sailor hat of black straw that has long been
exposed to the dust and 'soot of London and seldom if
ever brushed, her hair needs washing rather badly, -
her boots are much the worse for wear, she is no doubt
as clean as she can afford to be, but compared to the
ladies she is very dirty).
This example shows a violation of normative and
generally accepted role relations at the level of the
positional roles of "teacher" and "student". The teacher
(Mr. Higgins) rudely forces Eliza to repeat the alphabet,
words, without taking into account her position and the
circumstances in which she grew up. A factor of
misunderstanding between the characters is revealed.
Higgins: Say your alphabet.
Liza; Oh well, if you put it like that Ahyee, beуее, cеyee,
deyee
—
Higgins: [with the roar of a wounded lion]. Stop. Listen
to this, Pickering. This is what we pay
for as elementary education. This unfortunate ani¬mal
has been locked up for nine years in school at our
expense to teach her to speak and read the lan¬guage
of Shakespeare and Milton. And the result is Ahyee, be-
yee, ce-yee -
Liza: [almosi
in tears]. But I’m saying it. Ahyee, be
-
уее,
сe
-
уее —
Mr. Higgins's state (with the roar of a wounded lion,
thundering, disarmed) indicates an emotional state of
indignation, but the state of the insulted Eliza (rushes
out, weeping, almost in tears, still sobbing) shows the
full depth of her wounded pride. The psychological
state of Mr. Higgins and Eliza determines the choice of
linguistic means: the use of metaphor, metonymy,
comparison, - This unfortunate animal has been locked
up for nine years in school at our expense to teach her
to speak and read the language of Shakespeare and
Milton; emotionally charged phrases, exclamations,
slang - Ah - ow - oo- ooh! By Jupiter, she's done it at the
first shot, we shall make a duchess of her, if you ever
say be- yee, ce-yee -again you shall be dragged round
the room three times by the hair of your head; What
the devil are you crying for? Be off with you, keep your
tongue well forward in your mouth instead of trying to
roll it up and swallow it, away with you.
Eliza is not endowed with sufficient communicative
competence to understand the deep meaning of what
was said.
Higgins: It's almost irresistible. She’s so de¬liciously low
- so horribly dirty.
Liza: [protesting extremely] Ah-ah-ah-ah-ow- ow-oo-
oo!!! I aint duty: I washed my face and hands before I
come? I did.
Higgins: What is life but a series of inspired follies? I
shall make a duchess of this draggletailed gutter-snipe.
Liza: You are no gentleman? Yo ure not, to talk of such
things, I’m a good girl, I am; and
I know what the like of
you are, I do.
Eliza could not understand what Mr. Higgins meant, she
understood these words in their direct meaning -
She’s
so deliciously low - so horribly dirty, although the
professor meant only her social position, cultural and
educational level. The use of vulgar words
(draggletailed gutter-snipe) aggravated the situation,
Eliza was perplexed and the factor of misunderstanding
increased even more.
International Journal Of Literature And Languages
25
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ijll
International Journal Of Literature And Languages (ISSN: 2771-2834)
The motives and goals of communication do not
coincide. Speech communication did not take place,
the pragmatic function, which could have served to
establish contact, turned out to be unsuccessful and
unrealized. In addition, the speech behavior of each of
the linguistic personalities under consideration
contributes to the expression of their internal
psychological and emotional state.
The following artistic dialogue from this work takes
place between Eliza and Mrs. Higgins. Social status
becomes obvious in the conversational manner of each
character. The differences between the status and
symbolized positional roles of the heroine are
noticeable. Eliza has learned by heart what she should
say in high society, but her status role makes itself felt
and by this she violates the etiquette norms of society.
The conversation began with Mrs. Higgins's remark
about
the
weather.
Eliza's
answer
caused
bewilderment among those around her, since it sounds
scientific and inappropriate in a situation of high
society communication. Mrs Higgins: Will it rain, do you
think?
Liza: The shallow depression in the west of these
islands is likely to move slowly in an easterly direction.
There are no indications of any great change in the
barometric situation.
Freddy: Ha! Ha! How awfully funny!
The pragmatic effect was not achieved, since the goal
of communication does not correspond to the
communication situation. Then the addresser S3H0
violates the role expectation, which is manifested in the
violation of the etiquette norms of small talk.
Liza: [in the same tragic tone] But it’s my be
- lief they
did the old woman in.
Liza: Y-e-e-e-es. Lord love you. Why should she die of
influenza. She came through diphtheria right enough
the year before. I saw her with my own eyes. Fairly blue
with it, she was. They all thought she was dead: but my
father he kept ladling gin down her throat till she came
to so sudden that she bit the bowl off the spoon.
Liza: What call would a woman with that strength in her
have to die of influenza? What be¬come of her new
straw hat that should have come to me?
Somediv pinched it; and what I say is, them as
pinched it done her in.
As mentioned, the role expectation is violated because
Eliza uses slang, vulgar words, and incorrect word order
- all of which contradict the etiquette of high society.
The dialogue between the high society ladies and the
common girl shows what social class they belong to.
Slang (they did the old woman in; pinched it), obscure
words, colloquialisms (Fairly blue; Lord love you),
dialects (do I not), incorrect word order and phrases
(she lived with would have killed' for a hat-pin; let alone
a hat; Fairly blue with it, she was;), which Eliza uses,
indicate that her social role has been preserved and she
still belongs to the lower classes of society.
Thus, the conducted research confirmed our position
on the need for linguistic interpretation of certain
pragmatic factors for a) characterizing the linguistic
personality; b) identifying its status and positional
roles; c) establishing the definition of the pragmatic
effect
(understanding/misunderstanding,
appropriateness/inappropriateness); d) describing the
internal psychological and emotional state of the
linguistic personality.
REFERENCES
Азнаурова Э.С. Прагматика художественного текста.
-
Ташкент, 1988.
Телия В. Н. Человеческий фактор в языке.
-
М., 1982.
Караулов ЮЛ. Русский язык и языковая личность.
-
М., 1987.
Бернард Шоу. Пигмалион.
-
Высшая школа, 1972.
1.
Ashurova
D.U.
(2017)
New
Trends
in
Stylistics//Foreign languages in Uzbekistan //Scientific-
methodological journal.
–Тashkent,. –№3 (17)
www.fledu.uz 2. Ashurova D.U., Galieva M.R.(2014)
Stylistics of Literary Text.
–
Tashkent: Turon-Iqbol,.
–
27
.Normurodova N.Z. (2018) Linguistic personality in the
light of antropothentric paradigm: basic notion, best
practices, challenges and perspectives.
–
LangLIT,
INTERNATIONAL
PEER OPEN JOURNAL, India,.№2.
Verdonk P. (2002) Stylistics. Oxford Introductions to
Language Study Text. Series Editor
