Text and Discourse in Linguistics: Concepts, Distinctions, And Theoretical Perspectives
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.37547/ajps/Volume05Issue05-51Keywords:
Discourse, Discourse Analysis, PragmaticsAbstract
This article examines the interrelated concepts of text and discourse in linguistics, highlighting their distinctive features, theoretical foundations, and methodological approaches. Drawing on definitions from leading scholars—T. A. van Dijk, V. E. Chernyavskaya, A. A. Kibrik, V. Maas, and N. D. Arutyunova—it delineates discourse as a dynamic, context-bound communicative event encompassing extra-linguistic factors (intonation, gestures, cultural knowledge) that extend beyond the static product that is text. The discussion outlines key parameters of discourse—coherence, extra-linguistic context, and communicative purpose—and contrasts two principal research orientations: text analysis (structural units) and discourse analysis (participants, goals, context). It surveys major analytical frameworks including systemic-functional grammar, pragmatic macro- and micro-structures, conversation analysis, cognitive models, and critical discourse analysis. The article also reviews contributions from Uzbek linguistics, illustrating how scholars integrate these global theories within local research on dialogic interaction, corpus methods, and socio-pragmatic dimensions. By synthesizing diverse perspectives, the study underscores discourse as a multifaceted phenomenon essential for understanding language as both process and product, and for exploring how linguistic activity reflects and shapes cognition, society, and culture.
References
Дейк ван Т.А. К определению дискурса // http://www.nsu.ru/psych/internet/bits/vandijk2.html;
Чернявская В. Е. Дискурс как объект лингвистических исследований //Текст и дискурс. Проблемы экономического дискурса. – 2001. – С. 11-22.
Хегай В. О понятии дискурс //Филология масалалари, 2006, Н 2 (11), 66-б.
Кибрик, А.А. Язык средств массовой информации как объект междисциплинарного исследования / .А. Кибрик -М., 2008., 117-c.
Maatz U. Als der Geist der Gemeinschaft eine Sprache fand. Sprache im National-sozialismus. Opladen. 1984.
M. A. K. Halliday. An Introduction to Functional Grammar.- 1985 .12–25 p.
Арутюнова, Н.Д. Понятие пресуппозиции в лингвистике [Текст] / Н.Д. Арутюнова -М.: Изд-во АН СССР, 1973. –С. 84-92.
Teun van Dijk, T. A.. Macrostructures: An Interdisciplinary Study of Global Structures in Discourse, Interaction, and Cognition. 1980.-45-60p.
Менглиев Б.Р. Тилда имконият ва воқелик муштараклиги // “Маърифат”, 2013 йил 8 май.
Раупова Л. Диалогик дискурсдаги полипредикатив бирликларнинг социопрагматик тадқиқи. Филол. фан. д-ри. дисс. автореф. – Тошкент, 2012. – 49 б.
Safarov Sh. Matn va diskurs muammolari // Raqamli texnologiyalar davrida tillarni intensiv o‘qitishning psixologik-pedagogik jihatlari. Respublika ilmiy-amaliy anjumani. – 2023. – B. 180.
Prokhorov Yu.E. Reality. Text. Discourse. Moscow: Flinta; Nauka, 2004, p. 222.
Haberland H. “Text, Discourse, Discourse: The Latest Report from the Terminology Vice Squad,” Journal of Pragmatics, no. 31, 1999, p. 914.
ПРОХОРОВ Ю.Е. ДЕЙСТВИТЕЛЬНОСТЬ. ТЕКСТ. ДИСКУРС. – М.: Флинта; Наука, 2004. – 222 с.
Дейк Т.А. Язык, познание, коммуникация. - М.: Прогресс, 1989. -С. 372
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Jo’rayeva Muhayyo

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.