КЛАССИФИКАЦИЯ ПОЧЕТНЫХ МЕЧТОВ В АНГЛИЙСКОМ ЯЗЫКЕ

Аннотация

In this article, the various honorific titles in English and their specific addresses are fully described in whom and in which case they are reflected. Keywords: honorific system, politeness category, honorific references, titular, titles. КЛАССИФИКАЦИЯ ПОЧЕТНЫХ МЕЧТОВ В АНГЛИЙСКОМ ЯЗЫКЕ Аннотация. В этой статье полностью описаны различные почетные титулы на английском языке и их конкретные адреса, в ком и в каком случае они отражены. Ключевые слова: почетная система, категория вежливости, почетные обращения, титуляр, титулы. Honorifics have currently occupied an important position within the domain of socio- pragmatic studies of language and within the theories of communication. Honorifics are derived from outputs of politeness strategies where these directly or indirectly convey a status deferential between speaker and addressee or referent, where they indirectly convey such a status deferential, as in French Tu / Vous pronouns do via the general strategy of pluralizing in order to impersonalize1. Honorifics have been defined as “politeness formulas in a particular language which may be specific affixes, words, or sentence structure”2. Languages which have a complex system of honorifics are, for instance, Japanese, Mudurese (a language of Eastern Java), Hindi, and Arabic; English, on the other hand, has no complex system of honorifics, but there are few cases of compound honorifics; e.g. professor doctor, dear sir, etc.3 J.T. Irvine points out that “linguistic honorifics are forms of speech that signal social deference, through conventionalized understandings of some aspects, of the form meaning relationship”4. From this brief account of the concept of honorifics, we may define it as linguistic or non- linguistic means or device that can function to convey social deference or respect influenced by the dimension of power and solidarity. The honorifics can be divided into two main types: referential honorifics and absolute honorifics. In the rest of the chapter, we want to provide information about the use of these types in English and Uzbek. Let's first think about the division of Honorifics into these types and features of use in English. 1Brown P. and Levinson S. (1978): “Universals In Language Usage”. In: E.N. Goody (ed.), Questions and Politeness: Strategies in Social Interaction. – Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. – P.183. (pp 56-289.) 2Richard J. Platt J. and Weber. H. (1985): Longman Dictionary of Applied Linguistics. – London: Longman Group Ltd. – P.131. 3Ibid.: P.131. 4Irvine J. T. (1995): “Honorifics”. In: J. Verschueren et al. (eds.), Handbook of Pragmatics. – Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins. – P.1. (pp 1-22.) 6 49 International scientific journal ISSN: 2181-3906 «MODERN SCIENCE АND RESEARCH» 2023 VOLUME 2 / ISSUE 5 / UIF:8.2 / MODERNSCIENCE.UZ Referential Honorifics Honorifics are grammatical forms utilized in speaking to express social superiority. The part of speech affected is different from one language to another, and the honorifics may be distinguishable from simply very polite forms used in formal address. In many languages they affect the pronouns: in French, “Vous” is used rather than “Tu”; in Uzbek, we use the pronoun “siz” rather than the familiar one “sen” in addressing a single person. Honorifics seem most highly developed in certain oriental languages, such as Japanese and Korean5. A. Agha claims that the use of honorifics in all communities is governed by the social status of persons to whom deference is paid, but it is also sensitive to interactional variables6. With regard to status, the general norm: the higher the status, the greater the degree of deference. M. Farghal and A. Shakir view social honorifics “as the encoding of social information in human interaction. Such information is manifest in the use of pronouns and titles of address”7. The view of honorifics as directed indexes of context seems unable to account for the complexity and diversity of actual uses of honorifics adequately. For example, the treatment of honorifics as status difference markers cannot explain their reciprocal use, despite the fact that honorifics are generally used by a person of a higher status to a person of a lower status; this treatment in addition to that, must assume that in the non-reciprocal use of honorifics not only honorific form but also non-honorific forms are markers of status differences. On the other hand, the treatment of honorifics as markers of non-intimate relationships cannot account for the nonreciprocal use of honorifics, because it must assume that two individuals perceive the same relationship differently as non-intimate and intimate8. S. Levinson points out that honorifics can be divided into two main types9. The first type is called “relational” which is more important than the second one and mainly concerned with the socially deictic information in languages of the world. Within this relational system of honorifics, three subcategories are distinguished;