Linguistic and cultural analysis of the concept “politeness”

Abstract

Abstract The need to study the concept of “politeness” from the point of view of its linguistic and cultural nature is caused by the desire to study the national identity of speech etiquette in different cultural spaces and conditions. The aim of the work was to form an idea about the specifics of the implementation and understanding of the concept of “politeness” in the Uzbek information field. In this study, the following methods were used: contextual, conceptual, communicative, linguocultural, analytical-synthetic, and comparative. This study is focused on the study of key lexical meanings (stylistically neutral and marked, basic and additional) that are within the functional-semantic field of the concept “politeness.” With the help of contextual study of different variants of the use of the lexeme, the meanings were distributed in the conceptual structure (core, near and far periphery). Also, the key etiquette formulas representing the originality and national-specific features of the Uzbek linguocultural tradition were considered. The importance of politeness in the information space of Uzbekistan is assessed, including with the help of both positive and negative associations, that is, from an axiological point of view. Speech etiquette and linguistic formulas were considered from the point of view of the influence of social, cultural, and political values of the Uzbek people. In the process of analyzing the lexical layer, the boundaries of the functional-semantic field of the concept “politeness” were determined: from the principles of communication and a set of rules of etiquette to the strategy of obtaining benefits from communication and insincere attitude. In the future, this work can be used for comparative analysis of the conceptual structure of politeness with models presented in other close and distant languages, comparison of speech etiquette and linguistic formulas in different national cultures.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 5 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.