CC BY
4SCIENTIFIC PROGRESS VOLUME 4 I ISSUE 4 I 2023 _ISSN: 2181-1601
Scientific Journal Impact Factor (SJIF 2022=5.016) Passport: http://sjifactor.com/passport.php?id=22257
INTERROGATIVE SITUATION IN A DIALOGIC SPEECH
Zumradxon Qudratali qizi Xakimova
Farg'ona Davlat universiteti, lingvistika (ingliz tili) yo'nalishi bo'yicha 1-kurs
magistranti zmirzatillayeva1998@mail.ru
ABSTRACT
The implementation of the interrogative situation in the dialogic space is considered: the role of communicants in the process of dialogization, the basic concepts of dialogic speech are analyzed, such as an interrogative sentence, addressing, addresser, addressee, verbal and non-verbal means of communication. The relevance of the study is due to the increased interest in the problems linguistic and extralinguistic communication, to those structural units that form our speech, presenting it as a dialogical unity. The main component of the dialogue is an interrogative sentence, which is a striking means of addressing.
Key words: dialogue; interrogative situation; interrogative sentence; addressing; addressee; destination
The main form of implementation of the interrogative situation is a dialogue that serves to transfer knowledge, convince, educate and encourage people to act. Dialogue permeates all human life, in it and with its help the individual realizes important social contacts, represented by the speech interaction of communicants. Speech contact is understood as a process of direct interaction people, and dialogue as a generalized product of this interaction. And even with the development of new communication technologies, our everyday communication for the most part consists of "face-to-face dialogical interaction" - the so-called. conversations" [1, p. 207].
Interrogativity is one of the main features of dialogism not only as a phenomenon of communication between two communicants, but also as a phenomenon of cognition, culture, human being in the world of texts and communications. It is difficult to imagine a dialogue that does not contain at least one interrogative remark, since its success, its very implementation, depends on the presence of questions in the structure of the dialogue. Questions reveal problematic situations that are such not only for the addresser, but also for the addressee. This causes the presence in the question of sentences based on some initial data (known, unknown, desired, indications of the direction of the thought process).
For the implementation of dialogue as a primary, natural form of linguistic communication and speech interaction, at least three conditions must be met:
SCIENTIFIC PROGRESS VOLUME 4 I ISSUE 4 I 2023 _ISSN: 2181-1601
Scientific Journal Impact Factor (SJIF 2022=5.016) Passport: http://sjifactor.com/passport.php?id=22257
- at least two participants communication - the addressee and the addresser, who exchange remarks in the process of speech contact, i.e., change roles and each alternately plays the role of the speaker and the role of the listener;
- the interlocutors have a common "apperceptive base / apperceptive masses" (R. Yakubinsky) and an intention or reason (topic) for communication;
- knowledge of the rules of communication adopted in a given language space, possession of a repertoire of language and speech means that form a specific statement [2, p. 96].
The greatest importance in the dialogic text acquires its communicative orientation, addressing, i.e. "the purpose of the statement of a particular speaker to a particular listener (or listeners) in specific circumstances" [3, p. 26].
Addressing is achieved by a whole system of specialized tools. Such means primarily include interrogative (interrogative) sentences, which, from the point of view of a generalized communicative task, S.G. Ilyenko attributes a strong degree of communicative significance on the grounds that they have "not only an open focus on the interlocutor", but also provoke "the interlocutor's participation in communication: the question (I) requires an answer (YOU)" [3, p. 27]. Interrogative utterance performs the following functions:
1) models the situation of dialogue, an analogue of speech communication;
2) explicates different levels and directions of addressing;
3) characterizes the types of relationships established between communicants;
4) characterizes the intended addressee by the volume of his apperceptive base [4, p. 69-77].
When assigning a leading role in the organization of an addressed message to a statement containing a question about an unknown or known fact of reality, it should be remembered that in the structure of an interrogative sentence, a significant role is played by special means of forming an interrogative meaning (intonation, interrogative particles and interrogative words), which in such statements acquire to this addressing and perform the function of addressees.
Interrogative sentences have a different degree of severity of the category of addressing: depending on the structure and language means of implementing interrogativity in speech communication, affirmative, imperative, evaluative meanings are actualized in such statements. But one thing is clear: they are all emphatically addressed, and this communicative the setting speaks of their purpose for realizing the meaning of addressability. Thus, the greatest degree of addressing is realized in proper interrogative sentences, in the structure of which there are pronouns or verbs of the 2nd person or address, and in most cases there is the use of at least two possibilities for expressing this addressing:
SCIENTIFIC PROGRESS VOLUME 4 I ISSUE 4 I 2023 _ISSN: 2181-1601
Scientific Journal Impact Factor (SJIF 2022=5.016) Passport: http://sjifactor.com/passport.php?id=222ff7
1) Are you healthy? Volkov asked.
- What is your health? - yawning, said Oblomov. - Badly! The tides are tormented. How are you?
- I? Nothing: great and fun - very fun! - a young man added with feeling (I.A. Goncharov. Oblomov, 1, II).
The highest degree of addressing in the text fragment is also emphasized by the whole state of affairs: the communicants are in direct verbal contact, and there are no factors, primarily other communicants, that could make it difficult to understand the addressing of the statement. The average degree of addressing is expressed in interrogative constructions, the communicative content of which is determined by the dominant role of the incentive seme:
"The weather got better in the evening," he said. - Where are we going now? Shouldn't we go somewhere? She did not answer (A.P. Chekhov. Lady with a dog).
Some "weakness" of addressing is explained by the fact that it is, as it were, distributed to all participants in the speech action, including the speaker. However, the very fact of the question indicates that the possibility of carrying out the action will take place only when a response is received from the addressee.
In a rhetorical question, the meaning of addressing is presented to the least extent, because in its communicative function it is close to a narrative construction, the very structure of which does not carry an expression of an explicit focus on the interlocutor. In a dialogue, a rhetorical question most often acts as a reaction to the question itself, that is, as a reverse address:
Unable to stand it, I grabbed one of the students by the scruff of the neck.
"What are you," I said, "a scoundrel, are you running around with a broom and raising dust?"
- What should I do? - trying to escape, he yelled tearfully. - I'm in the chest of drawers
I am in a hurry, and there are ten minutes left before classes (V. Voinovich. Moscow 2042).
As can be seen from the example, in which the question itself and the rhetorical question are present, the strong degree of addressing of the first is beyond doubt. To this end, three components are involved in the interrogative construction, marking the communicative orientation of the interrogative statement: the personal pronoun of the 2nd person ("you"), which primarily determines the presence of the addressee, the 2nd person form of the verbs ("run" and "lift") and the appeal ( "villain"). Entering into syntagmatic relations, they further strengthen the addressing of the statement.
SCIENTIFIC PROGRESS VOLUME 4 I ISSUE 4 I 2023 _ISSN: 2181-1601
Scientific Journal Impact Factor (SJIF 2022=5.016) Passport: http://sjifactor.com/passport.php?id=222ff7
The fact that each of them "addresses" the statement is also confirmed by the fact that the "withdrawal" of any component from the structure of the interrogative sentence does not weaken its communicative orientation:
"Why are you running around here and raising dust?", Or "What are you doing here with a broom?", Or "What, scoundrel, are you running around here with a broom and raising dust?
In addition, linguistic means of addressing are supported by non-linguistic ones -gestures directed towards the addressee. In this case, such a non-verbal means is "grasping" the addressee by the scruff of the neck. The structure of the question that opens the student's remark does not contain any marking component, and in this communicative situation it is close to the narrative statement "I have nothing else to do". Only the introduction of an appeal into it can somehow mark the addressee: "Uncle, what should I do?".
Compared with other types of speech organization, dialogue is more subordinate to the goal of influencing the addressee. The communicative orientation of the dialogue allows the addressee to focus not on an abstract addressee, but on a very specific communication partner, which facilitates the planning and construction of dialogue replicas depending on the perception and response of the recipient. The usual dialogue represents the equality of communicants, which is manifested in the fact that the addresser and the addressee "personify parity principles with a variable (and, therefore, equally active) role in both speech activity and speech perception" [5, p. 85], suggests a symmetrical distribution of responsibility for the success of communication. The story of A.P. Chekhov "Thick and Thin" The meeting of two friends who had not seen each other for a long time created the prerequisites for the emergence of a communicative situation that both characters would like to implement:
- Porfiry! exclaimed the fat one, seeing the thin one. - Is that you? My dove! How many winters, how many years!
- Fathers! - the thin one was amazed. - Misha! Childhood friend! Where did you come from?
The friends kissed each other three times and fixed their eyes full of tears on each other.Both were pleasantly surprised.
The dialogue develops successfully until the moment when the social position of the communicants is clarified:
- Well, how are you, friend? the fat man asked, looking enthusiastically at his friend. - Where do you serve? Reached the ranks?
- I serve, my dear! I have been a collegiate assessor for the second year and Stanislav has ...
Well, how are you? Probably already stately? A?
SCIENTIFIC PROGRESS VOLUME 4 I ISSUE 4 I 2023 _ISSN: 2181-1601
Scientific Journal Impact Factor (SJIF 2022=5.016) Passport: http://sjifactor.com/passport.php?id=22257
"No, my dear, lift it higher," said the fat one. - I have already risen to the secret ... I have two stars.
From this moment on, it is not possible for the subtle to carry on a conversation in the same vein as in which he had previously led him, due to status inequality. (The "Table of Ranks" introduced by Peter 1, which lasted until the end of 1917, provided for a hierarchy of ranks in the army, navy and state apparatus. In this hierarchy, the subtle was assigned the 8th class s, while to thick - the third: in military service, this is the captain and lieutenant general, respectively).
Tolstoy, as a superior on the social ladder, is still trying somehow not to look at the revealed state of affairs, but in the end, the behavior of the thin one forces him to interrupt the act of communication:
- I, Your Excellency ... Very pleased, sir! A friend, one might say, of childhood, and suddenly turned out to be such grandees, sir! Hee hee s.
- Well, it's full! the fat man grimaced. What is this tone for? You and I are childhood friends - and what is this veneration for!
"Excuse me... What are you..." the thin one giggled, cringing even more...
The fat man was about to object, but the thin man's face had so many
reverence, sweetness, and respectful acidity that made the Privy Councilor vomit.
He turned away from the thin one and gave him his hand in parting.
It is no coincidence that the change in the address of the thin to the thick: from "Misha", "my dear" to "your excellency", which also corresponds to the established general titles of that time.
A meaningful and constructive connection of replicas is typical for dialogue. The content is related to the composition of dialogic speech and is situationally and thematically conditioned: question / answer, addition / explanation, reduction / distribution and other formulas of speech etiquette. A constructive connection of predominantly adjacent replicas is required. Otherwise, there is a violation of the logic of communication and there is an effect that is often used to create
comic or satirical situation. For example:
Bolshov. Was it a stretcher?
Fominishna. And they cooked, father, cabbage soup with corned beef, fried goose, drachena.
Bolshov. Yes, you are henbane, or something, you overate, you old fool!
Fominishna. No, father! She punished the cook herself (A.N. Ostrovsky. Let's settle our people, II, 9).
The macrostructure of the dialogue includes phases, partial phases, sequences. At the core phase structure is a functional, activity approach. Each phase is characterized by a complex partial goal that is in clear relation to the fundamental goal. A partial goal
SCIENTIFIC PROGRESS VOLUME 4 I ISSUE 4 I 2023 _ISSN: 2181-1601
Scientific Journal Impact Factor (SJIF 2022=5.016) Passport: http://sjifactor.com/passport.php?id=22257
of the initial phase of the dialogue is to create the preconditions for the achievement of one or more fundamental goals. A partial goal of the middle of the dialogue is to achieve the fundamental goal of the communicative event. Part of the purpose of the final phase is completion, ensuring the development of the relationship.
On the example of a text fragment from Dead Souls, we can clearly distinguish all these phases with their corresponding goals. The fundamental goal of the dialogue is based on Chichikov's desire to acquire dead souls from Manilov. The entire target structure of the communicative segment is subordinated to this, and this determines the partial goals of each phase of the dialogue.
The initial phase includes a conversation between Manilov and Chichikov with the clerk. The conversation initiated by Chichikov should reveal the presence of dead souls. As long as the goal lies only in this.
- Listen, dear! How many peasants have died since the revision was filed?
- Yes, how much? Many have died since then," said the clerk...
In the second phase of Chichikov's dialogue with Manilov, the fundamental goal is determined: the possibility of acquiring dead souls. In terms of its structural organization, this phase is the longest, since it includes microphases that have their own microthemes: clarifying Manilov's attitude to Chichikov's proposal and the principal agreement on the transfer of dead souls:
- Why do you need it? Manilov asked after the clerk left...
"For what reason, you ask?" The reasons are as follows: I would like to buy the peasants ... - said Chichikov, stammered and did not finish his speech.
"But let me ask you," said Manilov, "how do you want to buy the peasants: with land or just for withdrawal, that is, without land?"
"No, I'm not exactly peasants," said Chichikov, "I want to have dead ones ...
The question of price and execution of the transaction, as it were, sums up the entire dialogue, and therefore
can be considered as its final phase, indicating the success
communicative intention of Chichikov:
- So, if there are no obstacles, then with God we could begin to commit
the merchant's fortress, - said Chichikov.
- How, on the dead souls of a bill of sale?
- Oh, no! Chichikov said. - We will write that they are alive, as it really is in the revision tale ... (N.V. Gogol. Dead Souls, 1, 2). It is quite natural that the boundaries of some phases are quite clearly marked (for example, the initial and middle), while the boundaries of others are vague (in our example, the middle and final).
In dialogue, the author of an interrogative remark proceeds from the presumption that his own statement is understandable, from the fact that the addressee owns the same
SCIENTIFIC PROGRESS VOLUME 4 I ISSUE 4 I 2023 _ISSN: 2181-1601
Scientific Journal Impact Factor (SJIF 2022=5.016) Passport: http://sjifactor.com/passport.php?id=22257
arsenal of speech units, has a semiotic code, so his own speech is often implicit, reduced. The addressee verbalizes, explicates the missing components of meaning based on his own presupposition, using his own language, using his own semiotic code. Therefore, the interrogative situation is characterized by some ellipticity, openness of the syntactic components, both the question and the response part. V.V. Vinogradov, emphasizing the role of context, situation and paralinguistic means in the occurrence of an incomplete sentence, writes: "In the speech social practice of conversational exchange of thoughts, in connection with a specific situation, in the presence of facial expressions and gestures as auxiliary means, with a great expressive power of intonation, such structural types of sentences are formed in which there is no verbal expression of any individual members that are clear from the context and situations" [6, p. 29].
The extralinguistic context itself determines the participants in the speech act, itself places them in a linguistic situation, and itself creates propositional conditions. Aesthetic processing of dialogue contributes to the growth of its pragmatic power and strengthening of addressing, which is the semantic essence of dialogicity. But not only this makes dialogic constructions so important in creating an interrogative situation, but the fact that this form of speech best serves the interpersonal nature of communication, expands both the circle of communicants and the number of information centers.
REFERENCES
1. Issers O.S. Communicative strategies and tactics of Russian speech. M., 2011.
2. Chaplygina I.D. Means of addressing: You-category in modern Russian. M., 2001.
3. Ilyenko S.G. The communicative aspect of considering a proposal and the question of its recognized and unrecognized components // Russian Studies: Selected Works. SPb., 2003.
4. Budaragina E.I. Means of creating the image of the addressee in a literary text: Ph.D. dis. ... cand. philol. Sciences. M., 2006.
5. Vinokur T.G. The speaker and the listener. Variants of speech behavior. M., 2009.
6. Vinogradov V.V. Some tasks of studying the syntax of a simple sentence (based on the Russian language) // Problems of Linguistics. 1954. No. 1. S. 3-29.
7. Schweitzer A.D. Modern sociolinguistics: Theory, problems, methods. M., 2012.
8. Gorelov I.N. Non-verbal components of communication. M., 1980.
9. Kolshansky G.V. Correlation of subjective and objective factors in language. M., 2005.
10. Kreidlin G.E. Non-verbal semiotics: Body language and natural language. M., 2004.
