SPEECH ACTS IN UZBEK NEWS DISCOURSE: A PRAGMATIC AND LINGUA-CULTURAL ANALYSIS
Keywords:
Speech acts; pragmatics; performativity; declaratives; assertives; expressives; commissives; Uzbek discourse; institutional language; cross-cultural pragmatics.Abstract
This study investigates the realization of speech acts in Uzbek institutional and media discourse through the theoretical lens of Austin’s performatives and Searle’s taxonomy of illocutionary acts. Drawing on recent samples from Uzbek news reports, the research examines how declaratives, assertives, expressives, and commissives function in political, legal, economic, and diplomatic contexts. The analysis reveals that declaratives dominate official communication, transforming language into institutional action by enacting resolutions, legal judgments, and criminal case initiations. Assertives ensure credibility and simultaneously function as warnings, while expressives reinforce diplomatic solidarity and cultural norms of consensus. Findings demonstrate that Uzbek discourse is strongly state-centered, where speech acts serve not only to inform but also to perform authority, legitimize power, and embody cultural values. The study highlights the significance of cross-cultural pragmatics in understanding how universal speech act theories are localized within Uzbek socio-political realities.
References
Austin, J. L. (1962). How to do things with words. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Blum-Kulka, S., House, J., & Kasper, G. (1989). Cross-cultural pragmatics: Requests and apologies. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kasper, G. (1997). Can pragmatic competence be taught? (NetWork #6). Honolulu: University of Hawai'i, Second Language Teaching & Curriculum Center.
Levinson, S. C. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Searle, J. R. (1969). Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Searle, J. R. (1979). Expression and meaning: Studies in the theory of speech acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Thomas, J. (1983). Cross-cultural pragmatic failure. Applied Linguistics, 4(2), 91–112. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/4.2.91
Wierzbicka, A. (2003). Cross-cultural pragmatics: The semantics of human interaction (2nd ed.). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Yule, G. (1996). Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Trosborg, A. (1995). Interlanguage pragmatics: Requests, complaints, and apologies. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Kecskes, I. (2014). Intercultural pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Mey, J. L. (2001). Pragmatics: An introduction (2nd ed.). Oxford: Blackwell.
Fraser, B. (2010). Pragmatic competence: The case of hedging. In G. Kaltenböck, W. Mihatsch, & S. Schneider (Eds.), New approaches to hedging (pp. 15–34). Bingley: Emerald.
Uzbek Research Institute of Language and Literature. (2020). Pragmatik tilshunoslik asoslari [Foundations of Pragmatic Linguistics]. Tashkent: Fan.
Saidov, S. (2021). Speech acts in Uzbek political discourse: A pragmalinguistic study. Philology Issues, 45(2), 78–95.
