This article examines the role of pragmatics in professional discourse, focusing on how pragmatic strategies are employed in specific professional contexts, including business negotiations, medical consultations, and legal proceedings. Pragmatics, the study of language use in context, plays a crucial role in facilitating effective communication and achieving communicative goals in professional settings. Through a review of relevant literature and analysis of real-world examples, this article explores how speakers employ pragmatic strategies such as politeness strategies, speech acts, and conversational implicature to achieve their professional objectives. Additionally, the article discusses the impact of cultural norms, power dynamics, and professional roles on pragmatic behavior in professional discourse. Practical implications for professionals and recommendations for improving pragmatic competence in professional communication are also addressed. By shedding light on the pragmatic dimensions of professional discourse, this article aims to enhance our understanding of effective communication in professional contexts and provide insights for practitioners, educators, and researchers
This article examines the role of pragmatics in professional discourse, focusing on how pragmatic strategies are employed in specific professional contexts, including business negotiations, medical consultations, and legal proceedings. Pragmatics, the study of language use in context, plays a crucial role in facilitating effective communication and achieving communicative goals in professional settings. Through a review of relevant literature and analysis of real-world examples, this article explores how speakers employ pragmatic strategies such as politeness strategies, speech acts, and conversational implicature to achieve their professional objectives. Additionally, the article discusses the impact of cultural norms, power dynamics, and professional roles on pragmatic behavior in professional discourse. Practical implications for professionals and recommendations for improving pragmatic competence in professional communication are also addressed. By shedding light on the pragmatic dimensions of professional discourse, this article aims to enhance our understanding of effective communication in professional contexts and provide insights for practitioners, educators, and researchers
| № | Author name | position | Name of organisation |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Qulmanova M.. | ! | University of Tashkent for Applied Sciences, |
| № | Name of reference |
|---|---|
| 1 | [1]Searle, J. R. (1969). Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [2]Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J. L. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and semantics (Vol. 3, pp. 41-58). New York: Academic Press.[3]Brown, P., & Levinson, S. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.[4]Bargiela-Chiappini, F. (2003). Face and politeness: New (insights) for old (concepts). Journal of Pragmatics, 35(10-11), 1453-1469.[5]Heritage, J., & Maynard, D. W. (2006). Communication in medical care: Interaction between primary care physicians and patients. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.[6]Conley, J. M., & O'Barr, W. M. (2005). Just words: Law, language and power. Chicago: University of Chicago Press[7]Putnam, L. L., & Jones, T. S. (1982). Reciprocity in negotiations: An analysis of bargaining interaction. Communications Monographs, 49(3), 171-191.[8]Bargiela-Chiappini, F. (2003). Face and politeness: New (insights) for old (concepts). Journal of Pragmatics, 35(10-11), 1453-1469.[9]Spencer-Oatey, H., & Xing, J. (2008). The impact of culture on business negotiations: Chinese-Western comparisons. Intercultural Pragmatics, 5(3), 363-376.[10]Heritage, J., & Maynard, D. W. (2006). Communication in medical care: Interaction between primary care physicians and patients. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press[11]Robinson, J. D. (2003). An interactional structure of medical activities during acute visits and its implications for patients' participation. Health Communication, 15, 27-57.[12]Beck, R. S., Daughtridge, R., & Sloane, P. D. (2002). Physician-patient communication in the primary care office: A systematic review. The Journal of the American Board of Family Practice, 15(1), 25-38.[13]Conley, J. M., & O'Barr, W. M. (2005). Just words: Law, language and power. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.[14]Matoesian, G. M. (2001). Law and the language of identity: Discourse in the William Kennedy Smith rape trial. Oxford: Oxford University Press.[15]Danet, B., Hoffman, S., Kermish, I., Levy, R., & Olshtain, E. (1980). Languages of the courtroom. Law & Society Review, 14(3), 427-456.[16]Bargiela-Chiappini, F. (2003). Face and politeness: New (insights) for old (concepts). Journal of Pragmatics, 35(10-11), 1453-1469.[17]Spencer-Oatey, H., & Xing, J. (2008). The dynamic role of face in intercultural business interactions. Intercultural Pragmatics, 5(2), 335-363.[18]Heritage, J., & Maynard, D. W. (2006). Problems and prospects in the study of physician-patient interaction: 30 years of research. Annual review of sociology, 32, 351-374.[19]Robinson, J. D. (2003). An interactional structure of medical activities during acute visits and its implications for patients' participation. Health Communication, 15(1), 27-59.[20]Conley, J. M., & O'Barr, W. M. (2005). Just words: Law, language and power. University of Chicago Press.[21]Matoesian, G. M. (2001). Law and the language of identity: Discourse in the William Kennedy Smith rape trial. Oxford University Press.[22]Putnam,L. L., & Jones, T. S. (1982). Reciprocity in negotiations: An analysis of bargaining interaction. Communication Monographs, 49(3), 171-191.[23]Spencer-Oatey, H., & Xing, J. (2008). The dynamic role of face in intercultural business interactions. Intercultural Pragmatics, 5(2), 335-363 |