LINGUISTIC MEANS REFLECTING THE SUBJECT IN LEGAL DISCOURSE

Аннотация

This article talks about the cognitive-discursive paradigm, discursive analysis, legal discourse, subject in legal discourse, legal discourse and its institutional and personal characteristics,themain tasks that show personality in discoursein world and Uzbek linguistics. Key words:discourse, systemic-structural paradigm, declarative task, subject, institutionality , personality Leader linguistic analyses in line discursive analysis last ten years during advantage as is coming and this universal paradigm change with depends.If systemic-structural paradigm within research text inside connections definition, description, modeling directions according to take visited if, cognitive-discursive paradigm within researchers interest text and meaning build to the processes It is focused on the whole of the text essence only linguistic factors with mutual related was communicative, socio-cultural, cognitive to factors based without to be determined started. Such understanding text and discourse concepts modern to bedescribed is based on. Legal of discourse main tasks between the following highlight needed : legal, evidentiary, information and declarative tasks. Highlight this is necessary research in the text task when critical discourse analysis school from representatives then (T.Van Dijk, I. Farklav) [1], social mutual impact in the field text purpose understood , it is the addressee of the world socio-legal inthelandscape tothesurface arrival possiblewas changes evaluation own insidetakes . Regularity level according to first place legal task possesses, because, legal of discourse many genre samples acceptance to the doer shown the movement done increase or him/her refusal to comply about directly correct or indirectly instruction ( court) decision, law, decree )​ represents. Importance according to second place information task holds: legal of discourse every one genre-this acceptance done decision, event was fact (court) decision, law, decree, contract, complaint and others) about of the message one Legal of discourse information space formation for this task important importance has. Evidence task mainly court discourse genres is typical ( court decision, judge separately opinion, complaint, lawyer speech and others ) and personal position to justify Declarative​ ​ task or​ this at the level legal of discourse every one in the genre done increased and known social, legal values, ideas and relationships promote todoannouncement indoing manifestation will be Legal "institutional" in the discourse and "personality" contradiction available. Legal discourse only institutional discourse as seeing exit world linguistics scientific in literature wide widespread ( Karasik, 2000, Sheygal, 2000; Konovalova, 2008; Borisova, 2010; Kojemyakin, 2010.) [5] in them institutionalism and prototypical signs subject personal the beginning take throw away impossibility because of personnel with mutual to contact enters. R. Vodak stating that institutional discourse pure in the form relatively less occurs [2]. The real in dialogue, discourses mixed "mutation" occurs", personal of meanings existence level discourse type and communication to the situation looking at differentiation possible. Discourse purity about the issue, our in our opinion, legal communication in learning big interest wakes up and of the research main problem In our opinion , legal of discourse one row in genres page535 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE ISSN:2692-5206,ImpactFactor:12,23 AmericanAcademicpublishers,volume05,issue03,2025 Journal: https://www.academicpublishers.org/journals/index.php/ijai institutionalism and personnel to each other opposite not , maybe dialectical in a relationship willbe. This highlight It is necessary, in our article person about not, maybe personalized legal discourse in mind we are holding: legal discursive practices every always institutional in appearance certain institutional roller features carrier as manifestation divider subject in the presence of done increased and it is limited communication topic with This is related to signs the subject's personal sphere to pass obstacle does. Legal in discourse institutional and personal relationships ratio one how many factors: subject discursive expert to the community addition; discourse appearance to be cultural environment; subject institutionalization level defining known onesociety traditions with isdetermined . Legal in discourse subject linguistic status in determining personnel important importance Personality is​ ​ ​ subject in speech participation, he /she legal position, relationship and roles how expression with related linguistic event . Legal in texts personnel not only linguistic, maybe legal also covers concepts takes, because this subject legal responsibility and obligations speech onthecontrary represents . Legal in discourse personality indicator​ main aspects thefollowing : 1.Grammatical forms : Subject personality usually person and time suffixes (