Keywords
pragmatika
aksiologiya
framing
reframing
How to Cite
Abstract
Maqolada evaluativlikning pragmatik tabiati va reframing jarayonida yuz beradigan aksiologik transformatsiya diskursiv-pragmatik nuqtai nazardan tahlil qilinadi. Evaluativ ma’no faqat leksik-semantik baho sifatida emas, balki so‘zlovchining pozitsiyasini, adresat bilan intersubyektiv munosabatini, voqea va aktorlarga nisbatan qadriyat yo‘nalishini hamda kommunikativ ta’sirni tashkil etuvchi dinamik pragmatik resurs sifatida talqin qilinadi. Framing nazariyasi, Appraisal modeli, stance va aksiologik pragmatika yondashuvlari integratsiyasi asosida reframingning baholash profilini qayta tashkil etish mexanizmi aniqlashtiriladi. Tadqiqotda boshlang‘ich frame (F0), dastlabki evaluativ profil (E0), transformatsiya operatori (R), yangi frame (F1), yangi aksiologik profil (E1) va pragmatik effekt (P)dan iborat integrativ model taklif qilinadi. Natijada reframingda bahoning qutblanishi, intensivligi, baholash nishoni, agentlik taqsimoti, sababiy- moral talqin va presuppozitsion fon o‘zgarishi asosiy aksiologik operatorlar sifatida ajratiladi. Mazkur model media, siyosiy, institutsional va raqamli diskurslarda evaluativ reframingni izchil tahlil qilish uchun nazariy-metodologik asos bo‘lib xizmat qiladi.References
1. Komilova G.O. Bilingual nutqda estetik buzilish orqali madaniy nutqning ifodasi. - “O‘zbekiston: til va madaniyat” jurnali. 2025. Vol. 3 (2). - B. 119-129. ISSN: 2181-922X.
2. Komilova G.O. The phenomenon of bilingualism in the works of English and Uzbek diaspora writers. - Respublika “Ustozlar uchun maxsus jurnal”, 2025. ISSN: 4362-036X. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17178110.
3. Hunston S., Thompson G. (eds.). Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000. DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198238546.001.0001.
4. Martin J. R., White P. R. R. The Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005. DOI: 10.1057/9780230511910.
5. Alba-Juez L., Thompson G. The many faces and phases of evaluation // Evaluation in Context. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2014. P. 3-24. DOI: 10.1075/pbns.242.01alb.
6. Goffman E. Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience. New York: Harper Row, 1974.
7. Fillmore C. J. Frame Semantics // Linguistics in the Morning Calm. Seoul: Hanshin Publishing, 1982. P. 111-137.
8. Entman R. M. Framing: Toward Clarification of a Fractured Paradigm // Journal of Communication. 1993. Vol. 43, No. 4. P. 51-58. DOI: 10.1111/j.1460- 2466.1993.tb01304.x.
9. Chong D., Druckman J. N. Framing Theory // Annual Review of Political Science. 2007. Vol. 10. P. 103-126. DOI:
10.1146/annurev.polisci.10.072805.103054. 10. Cap P. Axiological aspects of proximization // Journal of Pragmatics. 2010. Vol. 42, No. 2. P. 392-407. DOI: 10.1016/j.pragma.2009.06.008.
11. Schön D. A., Rein M. Frame Reflection: Toward the Resolution of Intractable Policy Controversies. New York: Basic Books, 1994.
12. Hyland K. Stance and engagement: a model of interaction in academic discourse // Discourse Studies. 2005. Vol. 7, No. 2. P. 173-192. DOI: 10.1177/1461445605050365.
13. Hart C. Discourse, Grammar and Ideology: Functional and Cognitive Perspectives. London: Bloomsbury Academic, 2014.
14. Bednarek M. Evaluation in Media Discourse: Analysis of a Newspaper Corpus. London/New York: Continuum, 2006.
15. Etaywe A. CDA/PDA of Digital Activism and Discursive Resistance to Disinformation: Ethical Tenor, Positioning, Counter-Framing, and Axiological Bonding // Corpus Pragmatics. 2026. Vol. 10, No. 1, Art. 30. DOI: 10.1007/s41701- 026-00231-x.
16. Taylor L. Reframing the discourse and rhetoric of language testing and assessment for the public square // Language Testing. 2023. Vol. 40, No. 1. DOI: 10.1177/02655322221127421.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.