THE IMPACT OF UZBEK CULTURAL NORMS ON ENGLISH PRAGMATIC COMPETENCE
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54613/ku.v17i.1358Keywords:
Uzbek culture, pragmatic competence, intercultural pragmatics, EFL, politeness.Abstract
This article examines the impact of Uzbek cultural norms on the development of pragmatic competence in English as a foreign language. Pragmatic competence refers to the ability to use language appropriately according to context, social relations, and communicative intent. Drawing on theories of intercultural pragmatics and politeness, the paper analyzes how collectivism, respect for hierarchy, indirectness, and hospitality influence Uzbek learners’ English communication. The study argues that pragmatic transfer can result in both effective politeness strategies and pragmatic failure. Pedagogical implications for English language teaching in Uzbekistan are discussed, emphasizing explicit pragmatics instruction and intercultural awareness. The article also argues that pragmatic competence does not develop automatically alongside grammatical proficiency and so it requires explicit pedagogical attention, pragmatic competence as a main component of communicative competence, the study contributes to the second language acquisition (SLA) research and offers practical implications for improving the effectiveness of EFL instruction in culturally diverse contexts.
Foydalanilgan adabiyotlar:
1. Abdulxayeva, M. M. qizi ., & Botirov, H. O. o'g'li . (2025). THE ROLE OF CULTURAL BACKGROUND IN ENGLISH–UZBEK FOREIGN LANGUAGE ACQUISITION. GOLDEN BRAIN, 3(17), 137–143. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17686076
2. Bardovi-Harlig, K. (1999). Exploring the interlanguage of interlanguage pragmatics: A research agenda for acquisitional pragmatics. Language Learning, 49(4), 677–713. https://doi.org/10.1111/0023-8333.00105
3. Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge University Press.
4. Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
5. House, J. (2010). Impoliteness in Germany: Intercultural encounters in everyday and institutional contexts. Intercultural Pragmatics, 7(4), 561–595. https://doi.org/10.1515/iprg.2010.026
6. Kasper, G., & Rose, K. R. (2002). Pragmatic development in a second language. Blackwell.
7. Spencer-Oatey, H. (2008). Culturally speaking: Culture, communication and politeness theory. Continuum.
8. Thomas, J. (1983). Cross-cultural pragmatic failure. Applied Linguistics, 4(2), 91–112.
9. THE IMPACT OF UZBEK CULTURAL NORMS ON ENGLISH PRAGMATIC COMPETENCE. (2025). International Journal of Artificial Intelligence, 5(12), 2848-2851. https://www.academicpublishers.org/journals/index.php/ijai/article/view/9479
10. Taguchi, N. (2015). Instructed pragmatics at a glance: Where instructional studies were, are, and should be going. State-of-the-Art Article. Language Teaching, 48(1), 1–50. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444814000263.
Downloads
Published
Iqtiboslik olish
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 QO‘QON UNIVERSITETI XABARNOMASI

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.