17
PRAGMATIC POSSIBILITIES OF INTERROGATIVE
SENTENCES IN A STABLE FORM
PhD A.F. Shamaxmudova (SamSIFL)
Abstract: It is known that’ the units of the language from the phoneme composition to
the text are among the objects of pragmalinguistics. And with the study of the pragmatic
nature of the sentence, pragmatic syntax, which carries out a functional approach to the
analysis of syntactic phenomena, is involved.In other words, the tasks of pragmatic syntax
include the study of the Active features of the speech act of subordinate clauses in its focus,
as well as the interaction of the pragmatic and structural-semantic properties of the
sentence.
It is obvious that the research carried out in modern linguistics is of increasing
interest in studying the problems of speech communication. As O.G.Butyaeva,
V.A.Zvegintsev describe, “language as a means of communication is how and in what way
it communicates, participation in the course of communicative activity and knowledge of
the Coordination of language units in the process of this activity in terms of content”
[
Бутяева
, 2002:152-154;
Звегинцев
, 2007:133-134]. To determine the function of language
units in a specific communication situation, and in general the analysis of speech
communication from a linguistic point of view is associated with the projection of the
direction of pragmalinguistics.
In this approach, the linguist is interested, first of all, in the communicative–
functional function of speech in the process of speech communication [
Почепцов
, 1981,
2001: 269]. The study of phraseology is an important part of the knowledge of the language.
After all, language learning is not only limited to the acquisition of the ability to form
words, but also to know how to use words correctly in speech acts in order to achieve the
desired communicative goal. If the purpose of describing sentences in terms of their
structure is to illuminate the meaning of their formation’ in the definition of
communicative-functional approach, the legislations related to the activity of the sentence in
the situation of speech, which is an integral part of the communicative potential of the
speaker, are reflected. In addition, the purpose of this approach is an expression from the
definition of pragmatic-essence structures as well as the semantic properties of sentences
[
Почепцов
, 1981, 2001: 269].
Thus, the communicative-meaning of the sentence will be two-planned. On the one
hand, this is the interrogative, exclamation concepts in the general communicative meaning
of the sentence, they are manifested in accordance with the syntactic form of the sentence.
On the other hand, the peculiarity of the speech action of the communicative type of speech
to be performed is manifested. At the same time, the function of pragmatic syntax also
includes the identification of types of speech acts, the designation of their mutual
paradigmatic and syntagmatic relations. Also the pragmatic conditional cases in the
structure itself of the sentence also take place within the scope of the object of pragmatic
syntax.
As researchers study pragmalingvistics issues, they seek to determine the exact
boundary between semantics and pragmatics, but there is still no conflicting method of
determining this boundary. Even so‘ probably, is an integral part of semantics-pragmatics
that is, part of our private knowledge about the general world and how to use language in
particular [Levinson, 2013:77], it is not entirely possible to join the assertion. The
18
dependence of semantics on the referent situation and the participants of speech
communication is determined by the role of the linguistic sign in the formation of the
textual content. Accordingly, pragmatics can also be confused with semantics in some
cases. Semantics will be “dependent” on pragmatics when describing the model of the
Speech Act aimed at the listener and when the medium of speech activity of the linguistic
sign is taken into account [
Сафаров
, 2008:96]. It is proved that the conjectural basis of
linguistic pragmatics is in many respects the theory of speech acts. The emergence and
development of this theory J. Austin and C. Searlerelated to names [Austin 1962; Searle,
2012].
The ideas of the English philosopher Vitgenstein served as a methodological basis for
the theory of speech acts. The activity carried out by people in concrete social situations
Vitgenshteyn interprets the language it as a separate form of social being [
Витгенштейн
,
1985]. It is known that as a minimum unit of speech communication, a speech act is
recognized. Speech act is a means of performing targeted actions in the process of creating
speech with the help of language units.
Sh.Safarov noted that speech-based act is a linguistic appeal of the speaker to the
listener in a certain environment, for a specific purpose, – speech-based act is a “building
material” for communication, it does not reflect the logical continuity of the communicative
process [
Сафаров
, 2008:71; 211]. M. Hakimov gives the following definition to the
colloquial Act: – the concept of colloquial act-communication between people-is a
“description of the relationship” of the acts of mutual meaning that occur in the process of
interference. Also, the scientist notes that the following components are involved in the
speech act in general: speaker, listener, speech object material and speech situation
[
Ҳакимов,
2001: 94;108]. It turns out that the speech act is valid within the framework of
speech communication; it is formed in connection with the communicators with the
participation of the speaker and the listener, the conversational situation, the general
knowledge of the language owners about the object of speech, the linguistic knowledge and
skills of the participants in the speech. Also, the theory of speech act offers a specific and
appropriate model of the communicative situation. The model of speech-based act covers
both the purpose and result of communication among components such as the speaker,
listener, message, conditions, and in the theory of speech-based act is regarded as a three-
level structure, it is divided into three types of action, i.e. that is, inductive and perceptive
actions. Locative act is a simple pronunciation of a sentence with a certain meaning, the
purpose of influencing the listener is not considered. Locative act becomes an allocative act
due to the fulfillment of a number of conditions of the purpose of communication.
Finally, perceptive act is a phrase from certain influence (persuasion, calming, etc.)
on the speaker. J.Austin proposed [Austin 1962: 150] the main novelty of the three-level
scheme of Speech Movement is the concept of “undoubtedly” illusion. In fact, the
term“speech act”is attributed to the concept of allocative act,however, all speech acts-in
accordance with their allocative forces, are divided into those that ask for confirmation,
promise, and are named accordingly.
The theory of speech act, which determines the attitude of a person to
communication, which has emerged as a complex direction, has created an opportunity to
solve many problems of the system of speech activity, without doubt. It is desirable to look
at the speech act as a multi-stage structure and to distinguish the allocative level as the main
object of the study, the theory of Speech Act showed the need to take into account the
importance of the speaker's intention in explaining the process of mutual linguistic
communication. On the one hand, the relevance of the purpose of the speech act to other
19
extralinguistical pronouns, that is, the spiritual state of the speaker, his interests, social
status, along with the reflections on the state of communication, the link between the
information on the listener was revealed. On the other hand’ the basic forms of reflection of
the illusive purpose of the speaker in the structure of speech, which is the unit of the
language system, have been identified.
However, speaking about the fact that the theory of speech acts completely covers
different aspects of speech communication, too, does not fully correspond to reality.
Because the approach of this theory to the analysis of the communicative situation is a
linguistic approach aimed primarily at describing the characteristics of the components of
the situation of communication, necessary for the definition of speech texts. This theory
formulated a series of necessary concepts to describe the functioning of speech as an act of
speech in context. Also, this theory makes it possible to analyze the faultless features of
sentences in which they are used in the process of direct communication.
REFERENCES:
1.
Austin J.L. How to Do Things with Words. – Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard
University Press, 1962. – 166 p.
2.
Levinson S.C. Pragmatics. – Cambridge University Press, 2013. – 438 p.
3.
Searle J.R. Speech Acts. – London: Cambridge University Press, 2012. – 171p.
4.
Бутяева О.Г. Соотношение прагматического и семантического компонентов
в структуре значения слова // Традиции и новаторство в гуманитарных
исследованиях.
–
Саранск: Изд
-
во Морд. ун
-
та, 2002
–
С. 152
-154.
5.
Витгенштейн Л.
Философские исследования //
Новое в зарубежной
лингвистике
.
Вып. XVI.
–
М., 1985.
–
С. 79
-128.
6.
Звегинцев В.А. Предложение и его отношение к речи.
–
М.:
URSS, 2007. –
312 c.
7.
Почепцов
Г.Г. Фатическаяметакоммуникация
//
Семантика и прагматика
синтаксических единств
.
Межвуз. Тематич. Сб.
–
Калинин: Изд
-
во Калиненского
ун
-
та, 1981 а.
–
С. 52
-59.
8.
Почепцов Г.Г. Теория коммуникации.
–
М.: Рефл
-
бук; К.: Ваклер, 2001.
–
656 с.
9.
Ruzikulov F. Asyndetic conjunctive construction as an element of the dialogic
unity in english //Scientific enquiry in the contemporary world: theoretical basi
с
s and
innovative approach. – 2015. –
С
. 73
10.
Сафаров Ш. Прагмалингвистика.
–
Т.: “Ўзбекистон миллий
энциклопедияси”, 2008.
–
286 б.
11.
Ҳакимов
М. Ўзбек тилида матннинг прагматик талқини: Филол. фан. д
-
ри.
.
.. дис.
–
Тошкент: 2001.
–
Б
. 94-108.
