Заявка на публикацию

Срочная публикация научной статьи

+7 995 770 98 40
+7 995 202 54 42


Поделитесь статьей с друзьями:
Автор(ы): Хаитова Дилафруз Бекпулатовна
Рубрика: Филологические науки
Журнал: «Евразийский Научный Журнал №4 2020»  (апрель, 2020)
Количество просмотров статьи: 1978

Шодиева Гулноза Нематиллоевна
магистрантка первого курса
Самаркандского государственного института иностранных языков,

Abstract: the article describes the pragmatic aspects of the analysis of a literary text. The main concepts of pragmatic linguistics in general and text pragmatics in particular are revealed. In the context of a literary text, a pragmatically determined participant in speech interaction is the narrator, who acts as the “Manager” of the entire system of egocentric elements of language.

Keywords: pragmatics, subject of speech, speech act, context, pragmatic potential of the text, anthropocentrism, implicit and explicit author.

The term “pragmatics” (from the Greek. Πρ’αγμα — “business”, “action”) was introduced into scientific use by one of the founders of semiotics — the general theory of signs — Ch.W.Morris. Following the ideas of Ch.Pierce, Morris divided semiotics into semantics — the doctrine of the relationship of signs to objects of reality, syntactics — the doctrine of the relationship between signs and pragmatics — the doctrine of the relationship of signs to their interpreters, i.e. to those who use language systems. Pragmatics, therefore, studies the behavior of signs in real communication processes. “Since most (and perhaps all) signs are interpreted by living organisms,” wrote Ch. Morris — “a sufficient characteristic of pragmatics would be to indicate that it deals with the biotic aspects of semiosis, in other words, with all the psychological, biological, and sociological phenomena that are observed in the functioning of signs.” [1, с. 3]. Pragmatics is focused on the study of “semantics of language in action” [2, p. 231] — language in the aspect of the conditions of its use, language in relation to the speaker and the listener, the speech situation uniting them, their background knowledge, etc. “Linguistic meanings are pragmatic in principle: with a person, with a speech situation in the language are associated not some specially distinguished expressive elements, but generally the meanings of the vast majority of words and grammatical units” [3, p. 222].

Starting from the middle of the 20th century, the man with all his psychological complexes became the organizing center of the “semantic space”. Therefore, they began to believe that words connecting the meaning of the sentence with the speaker possessed a subtle contextual sensitivity. The concept of the subject of speech combined perhaps the largest complex of pragmatically relevant issues. It was the appeal to the author of the statement that marked the transition from analysis of the stable meaning of the word to the consideration of the variable content of the statement. The focus on a particular material affected the concept of meaning itself: meaning linked itself to use. Owing to this, the meaning of the utterance began to be considered inseparable from the pragmatic situation, and the meaning of many words began to be determined through an indication of the communicative goals of the speech act: “Pragmatics is precisely that section of linguistic theory that broadly, persistently, and consistently explicates the communicative side of linguistic functioning and use. This is the human factor in language” [4, p. 19].

Speaking about the connection of the pragmatic component of linguistic meanings with the human factor, we can give a fairly simple example, which R.S.Stolnaker uses in his article: "The hero of L. Carroll’s book “Alice through the Looking Glass” Humpty Dumpty told the main character: “When I use the word, it means exactly what I want to say, so that it does not mean — neither more nor less.” — “The question is, Alice objected, ‘can you make a word mean so many different things.’” “The question is,” Humpty Dumpty answered, “who is the master is all.” This very expressive example graphically illustrates that aspect of the language that is closely related to the human factor, namely the dependence of the use of language units on the goals of the senders of the text: “Pragmatics is a science that studies the language in its relation to those who use it, it studies speech acts and the contexts in which they are realized”. Pragmatics considers language primarily in the communicative aspect, i.e. in connection with the speaker, the subject, his addressee, goals and conditions of communication.

Currently, there are many definitions of the term “pragmatics”, but they all boil down to the fact that pragmatics is an aspect of language learning that identifies and examines language units in relation to the person who create, accept and understand them. Pragmatics is associated with the study of the category of utility, value, clarity of a sign, as well as with the study of semantic information, where the question of evaluating the information extracted by a given addressee from a text plays a significant role. Such an interpretation of the object of pragmatics is confirmed in its basic definitions in linguistic literature.

Many scientists believe that pragmatics occupies a place above linguistics. Language exists as a system, and pragmatics studies how this system is used. Semantic meanings are considered from the point of view of a certain speech situation and necessarily consider the participants in the communication process. Thus, J. Leach defines pragmatics as “the study of meaning in relation to the situation of speech”. This author also emphasizes the idea that the subject of pragmatic research is both the process of generating a speech act, and the process of perception and understanding of this act.

G.G.Matveeva believes that the pragmatics of the text should be understood as “the aspect of the functioning of language units, the choice of which is determined by the intentional influencing tasks of the sender of the text, taking into account the situational conditions of the act of communication and the normative ways of using the language adopted in this functional style”.

Despite the fact that initially pragmatist and its component — the theory of speech acts by J.Austin and R.Serl — were intended to study the “everyday language”, the principles of oral communication and lively conversational communication, the belief has recently been formed that the pragmatic aspect highly fruitful in the study of literary text. Many scientists write about the infinity of possibilities and prospects inherent in the word, noting, in particular, the possibility of incrementing new elements to the meaning of the word in the text: “In the minds of native speakers, different variants of one word are connected by many associations, in fiction this wealth of associations gives particular expressiveness and suggestiveness”.

Summing up the above, we can conclude that the study of a literary text from the point of view of pragmatics is one of the urgent areas of modern linguistics, because opens up inexhaustible opportunities for comprehending the totality of linguistic tools that operate at the text level and aimed to the reader.


  1. Новое в зарубежной лингвистике. Вып. 16: Лингвистическая прагматика: сб. ст. / под ред. Е.В. Падучевой. М.: Прогресс, 1985.
  2. Руднев В.П. Словарь культуры ХХ века: ключевые понятия и тексты. М.: Аграф, 1997.
  3. Падучева Е.В. Семантические исследования (семантика времени и вида в русском языке; семантика нарратива). М.: Яз. рус. культуры", 1996.
  4. Говорова В.Ф. Прагматическая функция научного текста // Актуальные проблемы прагмалингвистики в контексте межкультурной коммуникации: материалы Всерос. науч. конф., 7 — 8 дек. 2006 г. Тольятти: ТГУ, 2006. С. 124 — 127.