39 AMERICAN Journal of Language, Literacy and Learning in STEM Education www. grnjournal.us AMERICAN Journal of Language, Literacy and Learning in STEM Education Volume 01, Issue 06, 2023 ISSN (E): 2993-2769 Representation of Maximums in Axiolinguistic Evaluation of Politeness Category in Uzbek and English Languages Аdamboeva Nafisa Qodirberganovna Teacher of the department of foreign languages theory and methodology in Termiz State Pedagogical Institute, jasurbekdilnura@gmail.com Annotation In this article, the positive and negative evaluation from the axiological aspect of the politeness category in English and Uzbek languages is analyzed with the help of examples taken from fiction literature. Keywords: Axiological evaluation, tact maxim, approbation maxim, modesty maxim, agreement maxim, sympathy maxim, gеneriosity mахim. The axiological approach to the study of linguistic sign semantics in linguistics did not appear by chance. This approach required looking at linguistic phenomena as an axiological evaluation language category 1 , determining its relations with other linguistic categories 2 , searching for means of expression of evaluation, showing the role of connotative and denotative content in evaluation expression 3 , and developed around similar problems. The human value system has a graded nature, which is reflected in the axiological rating scale. The rating scale allows you to take into account the dynamics (increase / decrease of the mark), the objective or subjective nature of the assessment, as well as the idea of a starting point - a norm or standard. A distinctive feature of the rating expression is the ability to move along the rating scale. This movement occurs in the zones of "+" (plus) and "-" (minus), that is, the strengthening or weakening of the "good / bad" sign. The intensity of assessment has no discreteness - the distance between bad and very bad is infinite and not limited by the number of specific positions. If we try to imagine this phenomenon, at first it looks like very long chains inexplicably connected by very weak links. It is observed that such problems are an obstacle in the research of the politeness category. Therefore, we believe that there is a need to study the representation of "maxims" for the politeness category in order to solve these problems. From time immemorial, each nation has had established rules and norms for its oral and written communication. Such a set of rules and norms was first published in 1702 in a work called "Theophrastus: or the moral norms of the century". Later, English scientist H.P. as a reasonable principle that defines etiquette, in particular, speech etiquette in oral communication 4 . Grays 1 Арутюнова Н.Д. Типы языковых значений: Оценка. Событие. Факт / Н.Д. Арутюнова. – Москва: Наука, 1988. – 341 с. 2 Вольф Е.М. Функциональная семантика оценки / Е.М. Вольф. –2-е изд. доп. – Москва: Едиториал УРСС, 2002. – 280 с. 3 Цоллер В. Н. Соотношение категорий экспрессивности, эмотивности и оценочности в структуре лексического значения // Науч. ведомости Белорус. гос. ун-та. – 1998. – № 2. – С. 43-54. 4 Watts R. Introduction. In R. Politeness in language: Studies in its history, theory and practice / R. Watts, S. Ide, K. Ehlich // Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. – 1992. – P. 1-17. 40 AMERICAN Journal of Language, Literacy and Learning in STEM Education www. grnjournal.us interpreted in his work called "The Co-operative Principle" as follows: each interlocutor should contribute (in the form of repetitions) necessary at a certain stage of the conversation; a clear common goal and direction for participants to exchange replicas; in other words, interlocutors should consider each other's discursive needs and strive for cooperation 5 . H.P. We analyze the definitions given in Grays' "The Co-operative Principle" with examples in the uzbek language. Фарходбек хўмрайди.  Сиз билмайсиз! - деди силтаниб. - Буни айтибмайди-да! У... ўлади! - деди секин. Ҳафиза ая кетаѐтган жойида таққа тўхтаб, ортига ўгирилди.  Нима дединг?  У ўлади... Ҳафиза ая ортига қайтди. (Ниѐз Нигина. Телепат ѐхуд у дунѐдан қайтган йигит). The above mentioned H.P. Grice's principle of cooperation J. Leach counters by stating that "the associative principle by itself fails to express the relationship between meaning and affective force in non-declarative statements that prefer to express people's intentions implicitly" 6 . That's why, J. Leach offers a broader, socio-psychological interpretation of the principles of pragmatics in speech etiquette 7 . He argues that linguistic pragmatics in speech etiquette is a field of textual rhetoric and interpersonal rhetoric presented as a set of maxims 8 . Interpersonal rhetoric defines purposeful speech behavior guided by the principles of cooperation and politeness. The first arranges the content of words so that what we say is consistent with the perceived illocutionary or discursive purpose. The second principle performs a great regulatory function, because it maintains social balance and friendly relations and suggests that the interlocutor does not avoid cooperation. For example: eng.: If we help each other, I guess, we‗ll both sink or swim in this course give us break. (From the conversation of students); uzb.: Рихсивой аканинг хуш-муомалалик одати ҳамсуҳбатига қаттиқ гапиришга имкон бермади. (Р. Файзий. Чўлга баҳор келди). What is the meaning of the word "maximum" here? the question appear. The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Literary Terms номли луғатда «максимал» сўзига қуйидагича таъриф берилган: ―Maxim- a short and memorable statement of a general principle‖; thus an *APHORISM or *APOPHTHEGM, especially one that imparts advice or guidance 9 . According to J.Leech, he interprets the maxims representing the category of politeness as minimization of harm that can be caused to the interlocutor (the first sub-maxim) and increasing the benefit for him (the second sub-maxim). These maxims represent a certain standard of interaction between interlocutors, which contributes to the success of communication and points to moral standards. Such maxima include: Tact maxim - (respecting the limits of private speech interests): - Please, won't you sit down?? (From the oral speech); ўзб.: — Илтимос, ўтиринг, Рустам ака! (Ў. Ҳошимов.Тушда кечган умрлар.); Gеneriosity Махim - (adherence to equality positions in communication): - инг.: — — You must come and dinner with us. (From the oral speech); ўзб.: — Қани, юринг, чой қилиб бераман, қовун сўяман... (Эркин Воҳидов. Олтин девор.); 5 Grice H.P. 1975. Logic and conversation. In S. Davis (ed.), 1991. Pragmatics: a reader. – Oxford: Oxford University Press. – P. 305-315. 6 Leech G. N. The principles of pragmatics I G.N.L. - London; N.Y., 1983, XII. - P. 80. (250 p.) 7 Ibid.: Leech G. N., 1983. – P. 80. 8 Ibid.: Leech G. N., 1983. – P. 80. 9 The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Literary Terms. Published in the United States by Oxford University Press Inc., NewYork (C) Chris Baldick, 2001. – P.149. (291 p) 41 AMERICAN Journal of Language, Literacy and Learning in STEM Education www. grnjournal.us Аpprobation Маxim - (having a positive attitude towards the interlocutor's position):- инг.: "She must come here, of course, papa," said Patience, as she handed the letter to Clarissa. "Yes, she must come here," said Sir Thomas."But I mean, to stay, —for always." "Yes, — to stay for always. (Anthony Trollope. Ralph The Heir); ўзб.: — Ўз фарзандларидек бўлиб қолған- да? - Ундан ҳам афзал. (А. Қодирий. Меҳробдан чаѐн); Agreement Maxim - (focus on compromise): - "Oh, Ralph!" "That's what they tell me. I haven't been there. I shall come and look at her, you know." "Of course, you will." (Anthony Trollope. Ralph The Heir); o’zb.: – Албатта-ку-я, лекин мен ҳали билмайманку, пойтахтнинг яхшилиғи бор. Кўрамиз, балки яхшидир-да. (А. Чўлпон. Ҳикоялар); Modesty Maxim - (control of self-esteem, its realistic presentation): - ing.: – Please accept this small gift as prize of your achievement. (From the congratulate speech); o’zb.: – Kishilar mubolag'a qilg'andek menda iste'dod yo'q, - dedi Anvar, yerga qarag'an holda. (A. Qodiriy. Mehrobdan chayon); Sympathy maxim - (expressing a benevolent attitude towards the interlocutor and his position): - ing.: I can't let you stay till they come; they'd be the death of me." "Dear me," said the old gentleman, "I'm very sorry to hear that. How long may I stay?" (John Ruskin. The king of the golden river); o’zb.: – Йиғлама, азизим, - деб ѐлворди. – Яратган эгамнинг хоҳиши шулдур. (О. Ёқубов. Улуғбек хазинаси). J. Leach's all maxims are given in terms of moral standards of behavior, that is, speech behavior, but their impact on speech production and speech perception is great 10 . Analyzing the above, it can be concluded that it is very important to use these 6 types of maxims representing the category of politeness in speech. They create a comfortable atmosphere in the conversation, so that neither the speaker nor the listener offends anyone or there is no misunderstanding in the improved communication. REFERENCES: 1. Adamboeva, N. (2023). ASPECTS OF AXIOLOGICAL LINGUISTIC ANALYSIS. Collection of scientific papers «SCIENTIA», (March 10, 2023; Valencia, Spain), 163-166. 2. Grice H.P. 1975. Logic and conversation. In S. Davis (ed.), 1991. Pragmatics: a reader. – Oxford: Oxford University Press. – P. 305-315. 3. Ibid.: Leech G. N., 1983. – P. 80. 4. Ibid. Leech G. N., 1983. – P. 80. 5. Leech G. N. The principles of pragmatics I G.N.L. - London; N.Y., 1983, XII. - P. 80. (250 p.) 6. The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Literary Terms. Published in the United States by Oxford University Press Inc., NewYork (C) Chris Baldick, 2001. – P.149. (291 p) 7. Watts R. Introduction. In R. Politeness in language: Studies in its history, theory and practice / R. Watts, S. Ide, K. Ehlich // Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. – 1992. – P. 1-17. 8. Арутюнова Н.Д. Типы языковых значений: Оценка. Событие. Факт / Н.Д. Арутюнова. – Москва: Наука, 1988. – 341 с. 9. Вольф Е.М. Функциональная семантика оценки / Е.М. Вольф. –2-е изд. доп. – Москва: Едиториал УРСС, 2002. – 280 с. 10. Цоллер В. Н. Соотношение категорий экспрессивности, эмотивности и оценочности в структуре лексического значения // Науч. ведомости Белорус. гос. ун-та. – 1998. – № 2. – С. 43-54. 10 Adamboeva, N. (2023). ASPECTS OF AXIOLOGICAL LINGUISTIC ANALYSIS. Collection of scientific papers «SCIENTIA», (March 10, 2023; Valencia, Spain), 163-166.