Volume 15 Issue 06, June 2025
Impact factor: 2019: 4.679 2020: 5.015 2021: 5.436, 2022: 5.242, 2023:
6.995, 2024 7.75
http://www.internationaljournal.co.in/index.php/jasass
280
PRINCIPLES OF PRAGMATIC ANALYSIS
Makhmudova Nigoraxon Boykozi kizi
Basic doctoral student in Namangan state university
Annotation:
This article focuses on pragmatic analysis and its principles. It also presents some
opinions on the history of the formation of pragmatic linguistics and its role in linguistics. These
two polar interpretations of pragmatics are constantly striving towards each other, and the
descriptions given to the concept of pragmatics in various studies seem to complement and
clarify each other. As noted in various works, pragmalinguistics is the science of the language
system that deals with the use of language, activated in a speech situation (context), the science
that studies language from the perspective of the intended purpose, the theory that describes
speech acts, the theory of conversational (oral) speech analysis, the field that studies linguistic
means that express interpersonal relationships, etc.
Key words:
Pragmatic analysis, pragmatic linguistics, linguistics, principles, development,
Russian linguists, significance.
Pragmalinguistics as an independent direction of linguistics was formed in the 60s-70s of the last
century. In 1970, an international conference on the topic "Pragmatics of Natural Languages"
was held in Dordrecht. As the editor of the collection of lectures delivered at this conference,
Professor of Tel Aviv University M. Bar-Hillel, noted in his "Foreword", the participants of the
conference unanimously concluded that "the pragmatic features of communication carried out
through natural language should be studied within the framework of linguistic theory, just like
the syntactic and semantic features of this communication." From this very moment, which is
recognized as the "period of rebirth" of pragmatics, a real pragmatic upsurge has occurred in
foreign linguistics.
A number of conferences and meetings on this topic have been held, collections have been
published, scientific research has no limits, the Journal of Pragmatics has literally become an
international publication. In order for such a rapidly developing field of science to fully develop
and develop its own identity, it is inevitable that it will be necessary to define its subject, basic
concepts, and principles. Unfortunately, despite the efforts of a number of researchers, this
problem has not yet been solved, and there is still no end in sight to the opinions expressed about
the place of pragmatics among other areas of linguistics and its inter-disciplinary relationship.
On the one hand, this is good evidence that the importance of the field, the abundance of issues
raised, and the relevance of the chosen direction are attracting everyone's attention. Secondly, it
should not be forgotten that the lack of clarity of the subject matter of the field, the confusion of
principles, the chaotic application of the principles and concepts referred to, and the uncertainty
of conclusions can lead to.
It is no exaggeration to say that in recent years there has been almost no linguist who does not
use the term "pragmatics". As a result, a kind of pragmatic "fetishism" has emerged, and it is
becoming increasingly difficult to find any information about the content of the term in the
research carried out, except for its use. Whether it is necessary or not, the term is used, and the
concept underlying it is brought to a narrowing. Therefore, before talking about the pragmatic
Volume 15 Issue 06, June 2025
Impact factor: 2019: 4.679 2020: 5.015 2021: 5.436, 2022: 5.242, 2023:
6.995, 2024 7.75
http://www.internationaljournal.co.in/index.php/jasass
281
properties of linguistic units and their pragmalinguistic analysis, we are forced to seek answers to
such questions as "What does pragmalinguistics deal with?", "What is its object and subject of
research?", "What are the main concepts and principles of pragmatics?" J. Lyons at the 12th
International Congress of Linguists (Vienna, 1977) tried to define the subject of
pragmalinguistics and give its definition. “Pragmatics describes the use of linguistic units in
communication in order to induce the listener to perceive the transmitted information in the same
way as the speaker intended. This means that pragmatics deals with determining the role of
linguistic means in interpersonal communication.” The basis of this definition is the relationship
between the intended goal in linguistic action and the means of achieving it. The chain “reason-
motive-objective” forms the plan of speech activity and ensures its realization. The same thing
prompted A. Kasher to describe the main goal of pragmalinguistic analysis as “the clarification
and explanation of the rules of human abilities that ensure the use of linguistic means to achieve
the set goal.” When we compare the definitions given to pragmalinguistics, we notice that all of
them lack completeness in covering the subject of this field, and in some cases, one definition
casts a kind of "shadow" on the content expressed in the other. Perhaps, by taking a multifaceted
approach to this issue, it is possible to describe the general situation, the complete picture of the
phenomenon under study, by "attacking along all borders". In order to find evidence of this, I
would like to recall and partially explain some definitions given in the pragmalinguistic literature.
It is noticeable that American linguists often try to rely on the teachings of N. Chomsky in the
analysis of each phenomenon related to linguistic activity. Pragmalinguistic research is no
exception. J. Katz, who studied the relationship between the content of the proposition and the
manifestation of the communicative purpose (illocution) based on the performance of speech
acts, sees the subject of pragmatics in the opposition of linguistic ability and speech performance,
activity, in Chomsky's doctrine.
In his opinion, pragmatic theory makes it possible to limit the meaning of sentences according to
their pronunciation in a certain environment (context). "Grammar is the doctrine of the structure
of sentence types, while pragmatics, on the contrary, does not deal with the construction of
linguistic structures, their grammatical properties and relationships. Pragmatic theories study the
rational provision of the correspondence of the sentence sign and proposition in the text by the
speaker and the listener. Accordingly, pragmatic theory is a certain part of the theory of speech
activity (performance)." Narrowing the scope of pragmalinguistic research to such an extent,
limiting it only to speech performance, would be nothing more than leading the theory into a
narrow street. In such a case, linguistic analysis becomes separated from its foundation -
language. Undoubtedly, the social environment, the situation of communication play an
important role in the emergence of linguistic activity, and the content of the unit being formed is
revealed and determined in the text or context. The examples given by J. Katz: the second words
of the pairs "rabbit" and "bunny" and "dog" and "puppy" ("rabbit", "puppy") are used in relation
to children or by them. However, the meanings of petting and belittling in their content are also
known to the text. It is evident that these meanings have a linguistic character and have a lexical
or morphological means of expression. German scientists prefer to interpret the field of
pragmatics in a broad sense, recognizing it as a generalizing field of linguistics. For example, Z.
Schmidt, one of the authors of the "German Linguistic Dictionary", a major expert in text
linguistics, states that the concepts of "pragmalinguistics" and "text linguistics" have a single
meaning and that together they form a general theory of linguistic communication, and that this
Volume 15 Issue 06, June 2025
Impact factor: 2019: 4.679 2020: 5.015 2021: 5.436, 2022: 5.242, 2023:
6.995, 2024 7.75
http://www.internationaljournal.co.in/index.php/jasass
282
theory, as a branch of communicative linguistics, also covers text grammar and traditional
grammar.
As the number of authors increases, we are witnessing a growing diversity of definitions and
conflicting opinions. Over the past 60-70 years, the scope and scope of pragmatics have
expanded so much that it is becoming increasingly difficult to come to any conclusion about a
single theory and its boundaries. In addition, the development of pragmalinguistics is also being
contributed by such fields as cognitology, cultural anthropology, philosophy, logic, sociology,
activity theory, and other fields of linguistics as sociolinguistics, cognitive linguistics,
psycholinguistics, and text theory. The question of what should constitute the subject of
pragmalinguistic research still remains relevant. Some definitions that interpret pragmatics in a
narrow sense have been given above. The same narrowing of the scope of pragmatic research
can be observed in the thoughts of some philosophers. W. Montague, P. Strawson and others
consider pragmatics as a subject of research that consists in describing the content of deictic
expressions ("I", "you", "here", "there", "now", "at that time", etc.). It is known that it is difficult
to determine the referent of these units without a text. The smallest text (minimum context) that
clarifies their meaning takes into account the speaker, listener, time, space, register, style, type of
speech act, etc. The broad interpretation of pragmatics is manifested in the inclusion of types of
purposeful human actions in its scope of research. These two polar interpretations of pragmatics
are constantly striving towards each other, and the descriptions given to the concept of
pragmatics in various studies seem to complement and clarify each other. As noted in various
works, pragmalinguistics is the science of the language system that deals with the use of
language, activated in a speech situation (context), the science that studies language from the
perspective of the intended purpose, the theory that describes speech acts, the theory of
conversational (oral) speech analysis, the field that studies linguistic means that express
interpersonal relationships, etc.
The Russian linguists N.D. Arutyunova and Yu.S. Stepanov proposed to consider pragmatics as
a theory that studies the subjective characteristics of artistic communication, the ways of
expressing the “I” of its creators in the text. There are also those who consider pragmatics as a
science (theory of speech influence) that determines the power of influence contained in the
linguistic unity of the speaker’s attitude to reality, the content of information and the addressee
(listener, reader). The Dutch scientist T.A. van Dijk and his followers believe that the goal of
pragmatics is to theoretically illuminate the issue of the “suitability” of linguistic speech devices
for a communicative situation. The main task of this theory is to study the problems of creating
the cognitive content of speech acts, preserving them in memory, and using the language system
in a given socio-cultural environment, and at the same time forming a communication model.
Thus, attempts to define the subject of pragmalinguistics continue, and there are many
definitions given to this field, but none of the above definitions can claim to be general enough
to reflect the content of the basic concepts related to this field of linguistics.
In order to distinguish pragmatics as an independent branch of linguistics and to determine its
object, subject, it is necessary to search for factors that ensure the manifestation of the pragmatic
value, "value", and content of linguistic units in various communicative environments. The signs
of linguistic units that appear in any conditions are an example of their ontological and
functional (functional) properties. The methodology of pragmatics research, firstly, must have its
own philosophical basis, and secondly, it must create the possibility of determining these same
Volume 15 Issue 06, June 2025
Impact factor: 2019: 4.679 2020: 5.015 2021: 5.436, 2022: 5.242, 2023:
6.995, 2024 7.75
http://www.internationaljournal.co.in/index.php/jasass
283
properties (ontological and functional). The basis of such a methodology can, of course, be the
principle of activity or the philosophy of activity in general. The acceptance of the category of
activity as the main methodological principle in linguistic research makes it possible to obtain
more detailed knowledge about the components of the communicative system, their structure,
linguistic and non-linguistic essence. The illumination of the communication process from the
point of view of the principle of activity, along with the theoretical clothing of pragmalinguistics,
paves the way for finding evidence proving the connection between knowledge of the world and
linguistic activity. Speech communication, which requires the exchange of information, is the
result of the interaction of emotional and rational (rational) cognitive actions.
REFERENCES
1. Kipchakova, Y. (2021). Methodological And Didactic Aspects Of Information And
Intellectual Culture In The Education Of A Developed Generation. Economy and Society, (6-1),
156-159.
2. Kipchakova, Y. X., & Kodirova, G. A. (2020). Innovative Technologies In Modern Education.
Theory and Practice of Modern Science, (5), 29-31.
3. Kipchakova, Y., Makhmudova, M., & Umarova, Z. (2021). Maktabgacha Yoshdagi Bolalar
Mekhnatining Yoziga Khos Khususiyati. Student Bulletin, (22-7), 9-10.
4. Kipchakova, Y., Soibjonova, Sh., & Abdukayumova, S. (2021). The Educational Potential of
Testing Technologies. Student Bulletin, (22-7), 11-12.
5. Botirova, N. (2020). The Educational Potential of Testing Technologies. Professional
Education and Society, (3), 68-71.
6. Botirova, N. D. (2019). The Development of Productive Thinking in Younger Students.
Humanitarian Treatise, (61), 4-6.
