CC BY
25UDC 82
PRAGMATIC FEATURES OF DISCOURSE IN LINGUISTICS
D.A. Madjidova1
Abstract
The article deals with the controversial points of bilateral correlation of a) "speech (text) - discourse" and b) "speech genre - pragmatics". There is an attempt to combine linguistic, linguopragmatic and discursive aspects of a text generation in the developed theory of the speech genre.
Keywords: speech genre, speech act, discourse, pragmatics.
The scientific intrigue of this topic is contradictory nature of the two problem units: a) "speech (text) - discourse" and b) "speech genre (SG) - pragmatics." The discourse in its broadest sense - it is a subjective display in our mind a picture of the world. The most important is objectification of the reflection means is a verbal text. No less difficult is the relationship of the second pair of concepts, which are not revealed until the end of the essential properties of any speech genre or pragmatics. Let's start with the latter concept. The linguistic understanding pragmatics can distinguish three approaches. Two of them - the "continental" and "Anglo-American " - were identified more Van Dick. The first of them lined up on the semiotics of Charles Morris, according to which the pragmatist - a part of semiotics, in charge of the problem of the relation of signs to their interpreters. And since the majority of characters are the interpreters of media language code, the pragmatist objective is "responsible" for all components of the discourse of human activity - the cognitive and ethnocultural. In addition, such an understanding Linguopragmatics opens up new possibilities for understanding the speech act, and, as suggested by G.G Khazagerov, to build a bridge from the speech act to the same text. Pragmatics implementing discourse, displays the energy impact on the character of the author or the recipient (who sent the message). In any act of communication is one of its entities uses such language means that are able to convey his thoughts, feelings and experiences.
"Anglo-American" approach to understanding the pragmatics puts forward as its intellectual vanguard implicature problems, presuppositions, speech acts and discourse. In this perspective, his linguopragmatics significantly expanding its problems, including the problems that had previously been in charge of style, communicative syntax, rhetoric, psycholinguistics, discourse theory and other sciences. However, this extension does not in itself solve the problem of the relationship SG and pragmatics of discourse. For its solution is developed a third approach: find a common ground of these phenomena through linguopragmatics. In such a paradigm of discourse - this speech act and utterance, and text. Moreover, such a speech act is usually accompanied by facial expressions, gestures, spatial behavior of the interlocutors and other extralinguistic factors.
However, in order to integrate all the components of discursive activity, focus on their originality. You can say that in terms of linguopragmatics speech acts - it is primarily the individual expression, suggestive aimed at destination, and SG - means of discursive interaction. By virtue of these twists and turns between speech acts and discourse, there is no direct correlation as discourse includes not only statements but also the broader category - communication strategies and tactics of verbal communicators, modeling discursive situation. The last category is directly related to the GC. Therefore, for an adequate understanding of the nature and essence of discourse is a category, which would be able to integrate itself into the most common intention of the participants' conversation. Communicative speech genres - pragmatic research strategy best contribute to overcoming the "abstract objectivism" Ferdinand de Saussure and implementation of ideas of Bakhtin language-speech as actual reality. Recall
1Madjidova Diyora Alisherovna - a candidate for a masters degree of Samarkand State Institute of Foreign Languages,Uzbekistan.
YneHbiH XXI BeKa • 2016 • № 3-1 (16)
methodologically meaningful judgment of the scientist: "The actual reality of language-speech is not an abstract system of linguistic forms and the isolated monologic utterance or psychophysiological act of its existence, and the social event of verbal interaction implemented by the statement and the statements. Voice interaction is so basic reality of language. " Presumably, there is a voice interaction refers to the functional-semantic relationship of language-speech with event and pragmatic factors in oral and written communication. Bakhtin's ideas were quite fruitful development of sociolinguistic research and linguopragmatic-speech language. The first direction is studying the functional properties of language: the language used in concrete speech situations, the impact of the communicative competence of a team of ethnolinguistic classification. In this case we are talking about language as a norm of semantic fields, typical of different cultures, of language behavior, and so on.. In the second direction of the focus is pragmatic potential of speech-language and communication situations and ways of understanding the language. For internal stimuli and interaction discourse speech genres important to find hidden discursive thread connecting the historical, cultural, and pragmatic aspects of the language itself SG. Such an integrative approach is based on the fact that the fabric is woven from discursive language. However, the discourse - "is not just a language for a micro-text level". Its nonlinear organization is built on a set of concepts such as discourse formation, interdiscourse, intradiscourse, pre-construct. The latter are associated with paraphrases and presuppositions that display the discourse in the cultural sphere.
The subject of discursive activity originally associated with language, which is why in linguistics, it was named the language of a person. Thus, the subject of discursive activity is both the subject of language, culture and the subject, between which there is a symptomatic treatment. Their essence is indetermination: linguistic consciousness is a specific embodiment of the discourse, or rather discursive ideologies; and discourse, in turn, serves as a specific embodiment of the material culture. It should be remembered that the consciousness of the language person is immersed in a large part of the subconscious mind. And since language consciousness - a specific embodiment of the discourse, the discourse and not less important are the unconscious mechanisms speech management processes of generation of text (a product of discursive activity). However, although discursive notional formation and suggest a language, implicated in the culture and to the subconscious, the discourse cannot and should not substitute them. In our understanding, internal communication and discourse speech genres through the text, which, in fact, is the object of discourse analysis. Discourse analysis - rather, it is not so much analysis as the method used to adjust the distribution approach to the study of super-phrasal units in or other text. The term analysis with all its ambiguity does not seem redundant, since, firstly, indeed it involves decomposition of discourse into pieces and, secondly, to a means of studying the product (poetry, for example) in the linguistic, and the actual text discursive aspect. Experience of using such linguistic analysis L. Althusser directed to the isolation and functional-semantic description of language units that constitute the text. Text analysis is subject to the explication of the hidden, the implied, layers of meaning content of the text, micro text or context. In this part of the analysis under the researchers lens are primarily text categories such as the theme, topics in the spotlight get all sorts of intertextual connections of the test text. Since the text is a product of discursive human activity in its historic cultural conditioning, proper discourse analysis is intended to reveal the "innocence by speaking and hearing the hidden depths of the unconscious discourse".However, despite the discursive terminology Althusser's approach still applies more to the text than to discourse: it allows you to identify and interpret especially the "hidden forces" of the text. With all the textuality he still gave the necessary impetus to Foucault (1966) for the development of discourse analysis, based on the description of discourse "as a statement of the mechanism and how the institutional mechanism". That link text with the speech situation allows us to consider discourse as one of the most important conditions linguocultural identification of a GC. Value SG and pragmatics of discourse is determined by the fact that the discourse on one of his interpretations, - this statement, text, understood as a discursive event, or speech acts, accompanied by facial expressions, gestures, spatial behavior of the
interlocutors and other extralinguistic factors. So, as well as text, SG is primarily a product of the discourse of human activity.
References:
1.T. A. van Dijk The study of discourse // Discourse as structure and process / ed. by A. Teun. London, 1997. Vol. l. Van Dijk. Discourse studies: a multidisci-plinary introduction. P. 1-34.
2.Dijk T. A. van. Text and context. Exploration in the Semantics and Pragmatics of Discourse / T. A. van Dijk. - L.: Longman, 1977. 3
3.HeislerT. Evaluative metadiscursive comments and face-work in conversational discourse /T. Heisler, D. Vincent, A. Bergeron // Journal of Pragmatics. - 2003. - V. 35 - P. 1613-1631
4.Arutyunova N. D. Discourse // Linguistic encyclopedic dictionary., 1990. S. 136-137.
5.Dijk van T. A., Kinch V. Strategy for understanding coherent text // New in foreign linguistics. M.: Progress, 1988. Vol. XXIII. P. 153-211.
6.Kubryakova E. S., Aleksandrov O. V. the space, of text and discourse // Categorization of the world: space and time: proceedings of the conference. Moscow: Dialog-MGU, 1997. S. 19-20.
7.Kubryakova E. S. On the concept of discourse and discourse analysis in modern linguistics: an overview // the Discourse, speech, speech activity. Functional and structural aspects: a collection of reviews. M.: INION ran, 2000. P. 7-25.
8.Makarov M. L. Osnovy of the theory of discourse / M.: IDGC "Gnosis", 2003
9.Pocheptsov G. G. communication Theory / G. G. Pocheptsov. - M.: Refl-Buk; K.: Wakler, 2001. - 656 p.
10. Alexei Popov forms of economic texts and discourses // Text and discourse. Problems of economic discourse:collection of scientific articles. SPb.: Izd-vo Spbguef, 2001. Pp. 130-137.
© D.A. Madjidova, 2016
УДК 82
ПРАГМАТИЧЕСКИЕ ХАРАКТЕРИСТИКИ ДИСКУРСА В ЛИНГВИСТИКЕ
Д.А. Маджидова
Аннотация. Рассматриваются дискуссионные вопросы двухвекторного соотношения а) «речь (текст) - дискурс» и б) «речевой жанр - прагматика». Предпринимается попытка в разрабатываемой теории речевого жанра объединить языковые, лингвопраг-матические и дискурсивные аспекты порождения текста.
Ключевые слова: речевой жанр, речевой акт, дискурс, прагматика.
© Д.А. Маджидова, 2016
