The Pragmalinguistic Interpretation of Mediadiscourse Within the Framework of Mass Communication Studies

Аннотация

This study explores the pragmalinguistic interpretation of mediadiscourse in the framework of mass communication. This article encompasses the pragmatic strategies employed in two presidential speeches, focusing on how speech act, implicature and contextual cues are used to achieve specific communicative goals.Moreover, this investigation encapsulated how linguistic choices, contextual cues, and illocutionary acts are strategically employed to shape audience interpretations and achive specific communicative goals. Focusing on the interplay between language and context, this study examines how speech acts, implicature, presuppositions and deixis are utilized to construct persuasive narratives. Keywords: Mediadiscourse, speech, communication, mass media, implicature, pragmatic intention, speech act, conversation. recently become a focal point of extensive investigation Introduction: As the development of our society and in the field of linguistics. A thorough examination of the variable world of humanity is evolving fast and rapidly concept of discourse reveals that, as articulated by in the century of technologies, undoubtedly, its effect Dobrosklonskaya, scholars from the Western European can be visible in the sphere of linguistic studies. The and American linguistic traditions, such as T. Van Dijk concepts of mediadiscourse, mass communication, and Z. Harris, perceive discourse as a form of mediatext, medialanguage, medialinguistics, internet- communication. This communication occurs in both discourse and many other such notions are the oral and written forms, wherein the dynamics of products of today’s modern investigations, and interaction between the sender and the recipient of the technological innovations. One of the pivotal objects of message are distinctly linguistic studies-mediadiscourse has already occupied evident.[Dobrosklonskaya:2006]. leading spaces in the researches of multifold scientists. These terms play a significant role in shaping our In her article about mediadiscourse, comprehension of the media landscape. Mary Talbot, T.G.Dobrosklonskaya researched multifold scientific in her book “Media Discourse: Representation and works that have been done in this field of Interpretation” suggested, that “Media discourse is a pragmalinguistics, and stressed to the words of famous multidisciplinary field. In addition to extensive interest Deutch researcher, T.Van Dijk, “defining the discourse in media and cultural studies, it is the subject of as a complex communicative phenomenon,that scrutiny in linguistics-particularly conversation analysis, includes the entire set of extralinguistic factors, critical discourse analysis, ethnoghraphy of accompanying the process of communication, such as: communication, linguistic anthropology,pragmatics social context, giving an idea about the participants of and sociolinguistics-and also in cultural communication and their characteristics, features of geography,psychology,sociology and tourism studies” production, dissemination and perception of [Talbot:2007] information, culture-ideological background and etc,. gives great to an expanded comprehension of the Literature review contextual perspective of discourse, especially when The emergence of the term of mediadiscourse is studying mass media communication” .[T.Van intricately linked to the notion of discourse which has Dijk:1989,Dobrosklonskaya:2006] American Journal Of Philological Sciences 22 https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajps American Journal Of Philological Sciences (ISSN – 2771-2273) According to T.G.Dobrosklonskaya,“In the most general group); publicity(openness, orientation towards the form, mediadiscourse-is a collection of processes and mass addressee); polemical orientation(creating a products of speech activity in the sphere of mass polylogue with subsequent discussion); staging and communication in all the richness and complexity of mass nature(impact on several groups of addressees their interaction.”[Dobrosklonskaya:2006] simultaneously);information globality and complexity; precedent place in the geocultural picture of the world, Uzbek researcher Rizayeva Kamola Shuhratovna etc.[see Grynyuk:2022:109] devoted one of her articles to the topic of Analyzing English and Uzbek mediadiscourse, and came up with From the given statements, we can comprehend that the ideas of some prominent linguists of this field. She the characteristics of mediadiscourse are mainly relied enriched her article with the definition of on the relationships of addresser and mass addressee, A.V.Smirnova, “mediadiscourse is a complex system of and in this association, the features of publicity, that is texts that are united by a common social task to be the content of the mediadiscourse is created according performed. Hence, the main purpose of this discourse to the requirements, needs and necessities of publicity, is regulation of the behavior and thinking of the relatedness, which indicates that the material is not