Keywords
reframing
diskurs
pragmatika
frame semantics
interaksional sotsiolingvistika
inferensiya
baholash
kontekstualizatsiya
raqamli diskurs.
How to Cite
Abstract
Maqolada framing va reframing hodisalarining zamonaviy diskursiv- pragmatik tabiatini izohlash, ularni semantik, kognitiv va kommunikativ qatlamlar kesishmasida tavsiflash maqsad qilingan. Framing muayyan voqelikni tanlab aktualizatsiya qilish, ayrim elementlarni saliyentlashtirish va qabul qiluvchining inferensial yo‘nalishini belgilash jarayoni sifatida; reframing esa mavjud interpretativ ramkani yangi nominatsiya, predikatsiya, agentlik, baholash, presuppozitsiya, implikatura, modallik yoki metaforik sxema vositasida qayta tashkil etish sifatida talqin qilinadi. Tadqiqot konseptual-integrativ yondashuv, diskursiv-pragmatik tahlil va nazariy modellashtirish metodlariga tayangan. Goffman, Fillmore, Gumperz, Entman, Park va Takanashi, Gordon va Tannen, Hart hamda Sullivan qarashlari o‘zaro qiyoslanib, framing nazariyasining sotsiologik, semantik, kognitiv va interaksional yo‘nalishlari umumlashtirilgan. Natijada framing va reframingni farqlash uchun besh mezon – interpretativ tayanch, lingvistik signal, pragmatik niyat, inferensial oqibat va diskursiv qayta pozitsiyalash – taklif etiladi. Maqolada reframing oddiy qayta nomlash yoki ijobiylashtirish emas, balki adresatning vaziyatga nisbatan bahosi, sababiy bog‘lanishi yoki harakatga yo‘naltirilishini o‘zgartiradigan dinamik diskursiv operatsiya ekani asoslanadi. Raqamli diskursda esa platforma affordanslari, vizual komponentlar, hashtaglar va izohlar freym qatlamlarini kuchaytirishi yoki raqobatlantirishi ko‘rsatiladi.References
1.Komilova G.O. Badiha nasr va madaniy muloqot: Jek Keruakning poetik merosi tahlili. – “Filologiya masalalari” ilmiy-metodik jurnali. Toshkent: O‘zDJTU,
2024. Vol. 51, No. 4. – B. 208–226. ISSN: 1994–4233. DOI: 10.36078/987655113. 2.Komilova G.O. Bilingual nutqda va mediya matnlarda estetik buzilish orqali madaniy identity ifodasi. – NamDU ilmiy axborotnomasi, 2025. 6-son. – B. 518–521. ISSN: 2081-1458; 2187-0427.
3. Goffman E. Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1974. 586 p.
4. Fillmore C. J. Frame semantics // Linguistics in the Morning Calm. Seoul: Hanshin Publishing Company,
1982. P. 111–137.
5. Gumperz J. J. Discourse Strategies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1982. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511611834.
6. 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.
7. Tannen D., Wallat C. Interactive frames and knowledge schemas in interaction: Examples from a medical examination/interview // Social Psychology Quarterly.
1987. Vol. 50, No.
2. P. 205–216.
8. Park J. S.-Y., Takanashi H. Introduction: Reframing framing: Interaction and the constitution of culture and society // Pragmatics.
2011. Vol. 21, No.
2. P. 185–190. DOI: 1075/prag.21.2.01par.
9. Gordon C., Tannen D. Framing and related concepts in interactional sociolinguistics // Discourse Studies.
2023. Vol. 25, No.
2. P. 237–246. DOI: 10.1177/14614456231155073.
10. Hart C. Frames, framing and framing effects in cognitive CDA // Discourse Studies.
2023. Vol. 25, No.
2. P. 247–258. DOI: 10.1177/14614456231155071.
11. Sullivan K. Three levels of framing // WIREs Cognitive Science.
2023. Vol. 14, No. 5. e1651. DOI: 10.1002/wcs.1651.
12. Lakoff G. Don't Think of an Elephant! Know Your Values and Frame the Debate. White River Junction, VT: Chelsea Green Publishing, 2004.
13. Fairclough N. Media Discourse. London: Edward Arnold, 1995.
14. Civila S., Lugo-Ocando J. A. News Framing and Platform Affordances in Social Media // Journalism Practice. Published online 21 February 2024; Vol. 20, No. 1,
2026. P. 188–210. DOI: 10.1080/17512786.2024.2319249.