52
SOCIAL AND DISCOURSE DEICTIC EXPRESSIONS IN
PRAGMATICS
G.T.Zakhidova (SamTSAU)
Annotatsiya.Kundalik hayotda odamlar boshqa odamlar bilan muloqot qilish,
munosabatlar o‘rnatish, fikr va fikrlarni bo‘lishish uchun tilga muhtoj. Til odamlarga
boshqa odamlar bilan muloqot qilishda yordam berishi mumkin. Lekin, aslida, bu dunyoda
juda ko‘p tillar mavjud. Shuning uchun biz o‘z ona tilidan tashqari boshqa tillarni
tushunishimiz yoki o‘rganishimiz kerak.
Аннотация. В повседневной жизни людям необходим язык для общения с
другими людьми, чтобы строить отношения, делиться идеями и мыслями. Язык
может помочь людям взаимодействовать с другими людьми. Но на самом деле
языков в этом мире очень много. Следовательно, нам необходимо понимать или
изучать другие языки, помимо родного.
Every language has deictic term or deixis. Meanwhile, deixis is a branch of
Pragmatics which concerns the relationship between language and context. Pragmatics is a
subfield of linguistics which studies the ways in which context contributes to meaning.
Through Pragmatics, people can understand what the message actually means behind
utterances.
Deixis is an important field of language study for learners of second languages,
because it has some relevance to analysis on utterances both in spoken and written text.
Yule states that, some words in language cannot be interpreted at all unless the context like
here, there, this, that, now, then, yesterday
as well as most pronouns such as
I, you, him,
her, them
. According to Yule deictic expressions depend on the immediate physical context
in which they utter. To interpret those expressions, the speakers need to share the same
context with the listener.
Deixis is seen as the most direct and most obvious linguistic reflection of relationship
between language and context. One of deixis' characteristics is its preemptiveness, which
means people prefer to use deictic expression rather than non-deictic ones to refer to
persons, things and entities mentioned in their utterances. The preemptive usage of deixis
has its psychological basis. On the other hand, anti-pre-emptive usage of deixis means
nondeictic words or expressions enjoy a higher priority than deixis. The anti-pre-
emptiveness has its pragmatic functions. The use of deixis in courtroom discourse is
different from ordinary daily communication. Due to the particular social setting and
constitution of the courtroom and the linguistic feature of preciseness of legal language, the
use of anti-preemptiveness of deixis occurs more frequently in courtroom discourse than in
daily conversation. In view of this linguistic phenomenon, the purpose of this paper will
firstly apply Verschueren’s Adaptation Theory to develop a theoretical model for the study
of anti-pre-emptive usage of deixis that integrates the physical, social, mental and linguistic
factors functioning in the process of linguistic choice making. The purpose is to analyze the
theoretical foundation, and find out the existing forms of anti-preemptive usage of deixis in
courtroom discourse, and discuss the pragmatic functions of such phenomenon can bring to
courtroom discourse.
Deixis has place in pragmatics course, as is written in Thomas that expressions such
as
this
and
that
are called deictic expressions. She further explained that deictic expressions
are those which derive part of their meaning from their context of utterance. The
phenomenon of deixis raises a number of puzzles about the proper way to think about the
relationship of semantics and pragmatics. Deixis abounds in language use and marks one of
53
the boundaries of semantics and pragmatics. In pragmatics, deixis describes words or
expressions the references of which rely absolutely on concept. Deixis is a technical term
for one of the most basic things we do with utterance. When we ask to someone “come
here!” we are using a context in the utterance, such as who is speaking to whom, what
relation they have, the time or place of speaking, the gesture of the speaker and what status
the interaction participants have. In the sentence “I miss you,” the word “I” and “you” are
deictic words which do not have permanent reference. They are different from the words
“house”, “bag”, “table” and “chair”, which still have permanent reference even though
different speakers, places, and situations express them. When someone says the word house,
people will be able to imagine its physical performance even if he is not in the place of that
house. Deictic expressions have their most basic uses in face to face spoken interaction
where utterances are easily understood by the people present, but they may need a
translation for someone not right there. Their interpretation depends on the context, the
speaker, and the hearer.
To conclude, by studying language through pragmatics, one can only talk about people’s
intended meanings, their assumptions, their purposes, or their goal, and kind of actions (such as:
request) that they are performing when they speak. Looking at this problem, the writer tries to
find out a good way to help the readers in getting the exact meaning of a text. It becomes a
background, why the writer chooses that topic. The writer thinks that deixis can help the readers
to solve that problem. By knowing deixis, the readers will be easier to get the target meaning
which contains in a sentence or text. Furthermore, the writer argues that a good step to identify
deixis is by analyzing them that exist in the book and essays. Here, the writer made an analysis
of more than twenty essays to find out what types of deixis is dominantly being used. This
study gave us an understanding about deixis and their usages. This study analyzes deixis in the
text book according to pragmatics field.
REFERENCES:
1.
Anderson, Stephen R. & Edward L. Keenan 1985. Deixis. In: T. Shopen (ed.).
Language Typology and Syntactic Description
,
vol. 3
. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, –P.259–308.
2.
Barsalou, Lawrence W. 1999. Perceptual symbol systems.
Behavioral and Brain
Sciences
22, –P.577–609.
3.
Boroditsky, Lera 2002. Metaphorical structuring: Understanding time through
spatial metaphors.
Cognition
75, –P.1–28.
4.
Carpenter, Malinda, Katherine Nagell & Michael Tomasello 1998.
Social
Cognition, Joint Attention, and Communicative Competence from 9 to 15 Months of Age
.
Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press. –P.577–609.
5.
Clark, Andy 1997.
Being there: Putting Brain, Body, and World together again
.
Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. –P.87–117.
6.
Clark, Eve V. 1978. From gesture to word: On the natural history of deixis in
language acquisition. In: J. S. Bruner & A. Garton (eds.).
Human Growth and Development
.
Oxford: Oxford University Press, –P.85–120.
7.
Clark, Herbert H. 1996.
Using Language
. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press. Comrie, Bernard 1998. Reference-tracking: Description and explanation.
Sprachtyplogie und Universalienforschung
51, – P.335–346.
8.
Ruzikulov F. Intonation as the changeable factor insyntactic utterances //Language
and Speech in Synchrony and Diachrony: Papers from an International Linguistics
Conference. – Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2017. –
С
. 105.
