The phenomenon of political correctness in English and Uzbek languages

Alimov Timur Ermekovich Postgraduate student, Department of Foreign Languages, Patrice Lumumba Peoples' Friendship University of Russia 117198, Russia, Moscow, Miklukho-Maklaya str., 6 alimovcom@mail.ru Other publications by this author

Van' Guanfu Postgraduate Student, Department of General and Russian Linguistics, Patrice Lumumba Peoples' Friendship University of Russia 117198, Russia, Moscow region, Moscow, Miklukho-Maklaya str., 6 1042225231@rudn.ru

1. INTRODUCTION

In recent decades, the world around us has been filled with ongoing discussions, often resulting in the nature of discourse in the mass media, education, in the workplace, in everyday communication and in real social actions, including protests, about what various kinds of subcultural groups can and should claim and minorities (in the broadest sense of the word), which is determined by the global transformation taking place in the modern world, on the one hand, and it seems especially relevant to develop this topic on the material of the Uzbek language, in which political correctness does not yet play such a noticeable role as in English , with another. However, the term itself and some politically correct units are gradually penetrating the Uzbek language. The lack of theoretical development of political correctness in English and the lack of special research on this issue in the Uzbek and Chinese languages indicate the relevance of this study and determine the need to consider this issue in a comparative context.

The research work covered in the article is aimed at solving the following tasks: 1) define the concept of political correctness and explore its evolution in the English language and show the dynamics of implementation in Uzbek society; 2) identify the main aspects of political correctness.

2. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

Interest in the phenomenon of political correctness began to attract the attention of scientists several decades ago, but researchers have not reached agreement on the specific time and place of the emergence of political correctness. Various sources indicate that the earliest mention of the term «political correctness» dates back to 1793 in connection with the case Chisholm v. State of Georgia, which was decided by the US Supreme Court. In this case, the court decided that citizens could sue the states. In this case, the US Supreme Court recognized that the use of the term «United States» was «not politically correct» and recommended replacing it with «the people of the United States». Thus, the court emphasized that true power in the United States belongs to the American people, and not to individual states or the federal government ^[18].

Much later, especially in the early to mid-20th century, the term «political correctness» took on a completely different meaning. At the time, leftist circles began to use it to ironically ridicule the orthodoxies common among die-hard supporters of the Communist Party. They argued that these supporters held the «party line» - the doctrine of the Communist Party - to always be the highest standard of what was factual, acceptable or «politically correct» ^[34]. American scientist J. Hughes believes that the PC appeared thanks to the «Great Helmsman», and speaks of its germination on Western soil: «... political correctness first arose during the dictates of Mao Tse-Tung, then the chairman of the Chinese Soviet Republic, in the 1930s. But half a century later it changed, reappearing in a completely different environment, a developed capitalist society in which freedom of speech was guaranteed by the Constitution for two centuries, and, surprisingly, in American universities» ^{[27, p. 5]}. The modern American manifestation of PC appears in quotes dating back to the 1970s, in the context of the left and feminism. In fact, the first debate over the legality, status and semantics of the term arose in the late 1960s. within the framework of feminism, which has little in common with communism ^[22].

In the 1990s, conservatives used «political correctness» as a weapon to attack liberal intellectuals who supposedly policed language to advance an ideological agenda and suppress oppositional views. One of the first and most influential statements was published in October 1990 by New York Times reporter R. Bernstein, who warned - under the headline «The Growing Hegemony of the Politically Correct» - that the nation's universities were threatened by «growing intolerance, the cessation of debate, pressure to conform» ^[19]. Shortly thereafter, New York Magazine's January 1991 cover story, provocatively titled «Are you Politically Correct?», denounced the emergence of new «fundamentalists» consisting of «multiculturalists, feminists, radical homosexuals, Marxists and new Historians», who insisted that «Western culture and American society are hopelessly racist, sexist, and repressive» ^[16] As M. Weigel stated, suddenly, «instead of being a phrase that the left used to curb dogmatic tendencies within its movement, «political correctness» became a talking point for neoconservatives, who declared that the PC represented a left-wing political program that was seizing control of American universities and institutions. Culture» ^[36].

Also in 1991, President George H. W. Bush gave a commencement speech at the University of Michigan: «[Although] the notion of political correctness arises from the laudable desire to sweep away the debris of racism and sexism and hatred, it replaces old prejudices with new ones» ^[26]. Bush's speech focused on the importance of protecting freedom of speech and against McCarthyism, which he believed was embodied by political correctness. Thus, political correctness became a matter of national policy. As K. Gibson rightly notes in an article entitled «How politically correct» went from compliment to insult, «the term political correctness was used both in the literal sense - with pride, to express a positive idea, and in the context of irony, indignation, insults and political disagreement» ^[26]. The above examples show an internal contradiction in the concept of political correctness; it seems to express the ideals of justice, but at the same time, it can include insults and hostility towards political opponents in various areas.

As a backlash to the political correctness movement, political incorrectness arose. «After a period of initial acceptance, reactions ranged from mild criticism to outright hostility, ironic parody or contemptuous dismissal. At the same time, different genres and figures arose in political culture, which in different ways express views and use language that is blatant in its political incorrectness» ^{[27, p. 16]}. For example, a blatant example of “political incorrectness” in the West is now considered to be the numerous statements and statements of 45 US President Donald Trump, for whom the «concept of PC was very different in meaning from the earlier use of this term and was used to condemn a much wider range of socio-political models behavior» ^[35]. Trump wasn't just considered personally politically incorrect, he waged war on the PC, openly criticizing it as America's biggest enemy, a tedious waste of time, and worse, something that prevents America from "getting things done" and "doing the right thing" i.e. act decisively and judiciously to counter national threats such as Islamic terrorism, illegal immigration, and foreign commercial competition ^[37]. Steve Brotman notes that for Trump, political incorrectness has become the new norm of political correctness ^[21]. Bill Mar, host of the popular American show “Politically Incorrect,” notes «that Trump says everything frankly, and people like it. He points out that an entire generation of Americans is tired of political correctness and cautious politicians - they are sick of it» ^[28]. K. Chau believes that «for conservative Americans, the term “political correctness” has become synonymous with political cowardice and an overly sensitive attitude to language» ^[5]. We can observe similar examples in Western Europe, for example, in Germany, critics of the migration policy of former Chancellor Angela Merkel (in most cases, representatives of right-wing radical forces) allowed themselves to make frank statements about their reluctance to see Muslim migrants in their country ^[31]. The right-wing party “Alternative for Germany”, which entered the Bundestag in the 2017 elections, openly calls for expelling uninvited guests from the country, thereby violating all laws of political correctness, while the Germans did not hide their disappointment in the current migration policy, condemning the behavior of migrants in receiving countries ^[25].

Having analyzed the history of the emergence and modification of the concept of “political correctness” in the Western world using the example of the United States, which, of course, significantly influences political and social life on a global scale, we can come to the conclusion that political correctness is symbolic censorship, which, in turn, means «a set of mainly unofficial, but also semi-official and less often official prohibitions, the common distinguishing feature of which is the taboo of symbolic meanings considered by certain collective socio-political actors as ethically unacceptable and politically provocative» ^{[12, p. 222]}. Probably, it is precisely this emphasis in the interpretation and understanding of the phenomenon of political correctness - an emphasis that well reflects the widely declared adherence to certain standards of sociocultural and linguistic behavior in Western European countries, which contribute to the achievement of a conflict-free atmosphere in society - that can become a methodological tool for its comprehensive analysis in the context of this study.

2.1. The language of political correctness

The language, culture and mentality of different peoples are closely interconnected. The value system accepted in society is reflected in the language and influences its development. Changes in public life: cultural, social or political, lead to changes in the perception of the world by its members, which is also reflected in the language system. As S.G. Ter-Minasova rightly notes, «language is a mirror of culture, it reflects the social consciousness of the people, their mentality, national character, way of life, traditions, customs, morality, value system, attitude, vision of the world» ^{[13, p. 14]}. A clear example of such a relationship is the changes in the cultural picture of the world in English-speaking countries caused by the spread of the concept of political correctness. Speaking about the reason for the emergence of politically correct language, it is worth mentioning the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis of linguistic relativity, according to which «language is the most important tool for thinking and perceiving reality, ... the thinking of a member of a certain ethnic and cultural community depends on language and only on it» ^{[10, p . 49]}. Therefore, if a person uses words that negatively evaluate a concept, then the speaker subconsciously develops a negative attitude towards the concepts. Supporters of political correctness adhere to this point of view, believing that «by changing language, people can radically change their forms of thinking and behavior» ^{[10, p. 50]}.

Politically correct speech is a specific “language code”, which, from the point of view of sociolinguistics, «represents the norms of linguistic behavior that an individual must, in the eyes of others, follow to a greater or lesser extent, and some of these norms will be norms of linguistic behavior - codes of the corresponding language» ^{[1, p. 137]}.

Some liberal scholars pursue progressive social change through language, coining neutral neologisms to replace words they consider biased, offensive, and perpetrators of bias and oppression against disadvantaged groups. J. Mast views PC as a specific phenomenon, arguing that PC is in fact «a set of discourses and strategies designed to combat historically rooted and socio-culturally entrenched hierarchical systems of classification» ^[29]. On the one hand, this is the tabooing of words and expressions that do not meet certain criteria (politeness, tolerance, etc.), on the other hand, their replacement with more acceptable neutral (euphemisms) or positively colored definitions, as well as the creation of new words and phrases (so-called newspeak). N. Fairclough adheres to a similar point of view, considering «political correctness as “cultural politics” and political disagreements, at the center of which are different representations, values and concepts of identity» ^[23]. Since both sides of the conflict believe that cultural change must come with language change, these disagreements, he argues, have a lot to do with the nature of discourse. Active PC advocates strive to achieve the institutionalization of anti-racist and anti-sexist language. At the same time, the illocutionary force of activists’ statements is very variable (request, persuasion, demand), but in any case we are talking about the desire to change individual behavior and language. They are convinced that the transformation of discourse will lead to changes in social practices through “processes of dialectical internalization.” For example, writes N. Fairclough, if you call a person a “partner” and not a “lover” or “cohabitant,” this will lead to a change in the perception of extramarital affairs and the attitude of others towards them, and, consequently, to a change in value orientations ^[23]. As D. Moller adds, «political correctness is an attempt to establish norms of speech (or sometimes behavior) that are believed to protect vulnerable, marginalized or historically persecuted groups and function by shaping public discourse, often by suppressing speech or other forms of social cues that contain the danger of insult, arbitrariness, desecration, and lowering the self-esteem of representatives of these groups and their supporters» ^[30].

Terminologically linking political correctness with language, S. G. Ter-Minasova highlights such an aspect as replacing some linguistic expressions with others, which makes it possible to eliminate painful, sensitive moments that humiliate a person: «political correctness of language is expressed in the desire to find new ways of linguistic expression to replace those, which hurt the feelings and dignity of the individual» ^{[13, p. 215]}. In her opinion, political correctness represents a “purified”, “correct” version of language that excludes or minimizes discrimination against certain groups that are in a disadvantaged social position ^{[13, p. 216]}, while some linguists add that in every country there are linguistic and sociocultural prerequisites that either promote or, conversely, hinder the formation of a language of political correctness ^[6]

The point of view expressed by Russian researcher V.V. Mayba. is also worthy of attention, who considers the language of political correctness as a two-level formation, that is, words and expressions that directly express the values and attitudes of political correctness, and, in fact, politically correct linguistic units, which are the result of the application of political correctness ideologies to the language system, performing the function of metaconcepts ^[6]. Mainly PC is trying to establish a new polite public discourse to replace the various forms of individual and public use of combinations expressing prejudice and derogatory to human dignity ^{[27, p. 59]}.

It is worth noting that political correctness was initially introduced in order to ensure successful communication, which required the selection of special linguistic means in a specific speech situation. The ideologists of political correctness argued that it is associated with the desire to respect the feelings and dignity of the individual and is aimed at respecting his rights in all spheres of life, including language. However, as noted by M.V. Melnikov, the actualization of modern political correctness is an example of the inventive way in which social engineers, such as manipulators of the New World Order, work, when the vocabulary of formal communication is subject to careful self-censorship, and “incorrect” language causes a great negative resonance in society ^{[7, p. 129]}. Currently, there is a constant increase in the number of prohibited words and a ban on too specific discussion of certain areas of life, which is reflected not only in the media, but also in fiction and scientific literature, and in colloquial speech. Italian philosopher Umbert Eco notes that at the moment, political correctness is the main enemy of tolerance ^{[13, p. 223]}.

Let's give just a few examples. Firstly, in the context of political correctness, not only the language code is subject to correction, but also symbolic images. Phillip Island's iconic fairy penguins have been renamed "Little Penguins" in Queensland to avoid offending the gay community. London-based book publisher Ladybird Books has asked "sensitive readers" to reconsider the fairy tales Cinderella and Sleeping Beauty for inclusivity. One of the problems was the presumption of gender pronouns. For example, the princess says “man” when she first sees the prince and has not yet met him, although gender-neutral language is preferable in such situations.” Secondly, there are aspects of political correctness that go beyond the consideration of not only linguistics, but also semiotics as the science of signs. Actions and actions may not be politically correct. As a sign of inclusivity, British theaters have opened “gender-neutral toilets” for the convenience of transgender people ^[20]. The United States of America has gone even further, and US passport applicants can choose their own gender (one of three genders, including non-binary "X"), with parents listed as Parent 1, Parent 2 ^[24]. The so-called “politically correct language” has become normative for the formal style of communication and determines the dynamics of the social climate in English-speaking countries.

Political correctness, according to its critics, has created an ultra-oppressive socio-political environment in which abstract ideals associated with diversity, equality and social justice take precedence over truth, common sense, the national interest and even nature itself. According to A. Skalchru, «the more political correctness tries to smooth out conflicts that arise in society, the more of them it generates» ^[33]. As stated, for example, by L.G. Ionin, «political correctness... is not an accidental ideological phenomenon limited by place and time, but a fundamental and most important characteristic of modern mass democracy... ideology, serving, on the one hand, to justify the domestic and foreign policies of Western states and unions, and on the other - suppressing dissent and ensuring ideological and value consensus» ^[3].

2.2. Political Correctness in Uzbekistan

It must be emphasized that most of the works of scientists known to us are devoted to the consideration of political correctness in relation to Western cultures, while Uzbek culture is beyond the attention of researchers, however, political correctness is not the prerogative of only American society. Many Russian linguists ^{[8, p. 135; 15, p. 95]} note that currently this phenomenon is international in nature. Thanks to English, which has become the language of international communication over the past few decades, more and more societies are being involved in this process. It should be noted that phenomena that fall within the realm of political correctness vary among different peoples.

In recent years, political correctness has increasingly attracted the attention of the Uzbek public. This happens for obvious reasons. Firstly, for the Uzbek people, who are increasingly involved in the process of intercultural communication, the ability to correctly interpret the content of politically correct statements in English is the key to effective communication. Secondly, the multinationality of the Uzbek state, the strengthening of intercultural and interfaith hostility, violation of human rights, and the manifestation of xenophobia speaks of the need to cultivate tolerance, behavioral and linguistic correctness in Uzbek society.

The emergence of political correctness in the Uzbek language and culture is facilitated by the processes of globalization, the development of modern technologies, and some other factors. M. Yu. Palazhchenko in his dissertation “Political Correctness in Linguistic and Cultural Tradition (in English and Russian Material)” notes that the creation of new, politically correct terminology is the prerogative of economically prosperous societies ^[9]. At the same time, in Uzbek society there is a deliberate refusal to borrow Western liberal norms and a consistent orientation towards the principles of «national identity and cultural traditions» in constitutional development ^{[4, p. 23]}.

Researchers agree that ideas about political correctness in the Republic of Uzbekistan are still very vague. It is impossible to find a definition of political correctness in Uzbek dictionaries (whether political, sociological, cultural or explanatory). This tells us that the phenomenon has not yet received due attention. The idealization of the American way of life led to the penetration of many phenomena into the Uzbek language, including political correctness, but unlike the West, here it did not develop into ideology. Political correctness is not so popular in the Republic of Uzbekistan, and part of the origins of the unpopularity of politically correct terms originate in the Uzbek language itself. As Russian scientists Z. Popova and I. Sternin point out, the assimilation of political correctness is a slow process, because borrowed concepts, especially abstract ones, usually belong to the category of single, non-systemic ones - they do not immediately find a paradigm, and the semantic composition of the word that names them is not immediately formed , they are expressed for a long time in descriptive phrases, accompanied by explanations, etc., which usually explains their difficult entry into the culture of the people who borrowed them ^[11]. In addition, the difficulty of understanding and using euphemistic constructions on the part of the Uzbek society is due to the fact that it (the language) is not very burdened with the norms of political correctness. The reasons for this state of affairs are the lack of relevant laws and instructions in the Republic of Uzbekistan, as well as the lack of formation of this concept in the minds of the majority of Uzbek language speakers. E.V. Kharchenko notes the fact of rejection of other people’s ideas with differences in value systems, enshrined in spiritual priorities ^{[14, p. 276]}. Different understandings of morality underlie the Muslim (i.e., Uzbek) consciousness, on the one hand, and the Western – Christian, on the other. Western man is formed on the values of Protestant ethics with its priority of personality and individual self-realization. Individualism is one of the key characteristics of Western countries, particularly English-speaking communities. The concept of individualism brings to the fore such important things for English-speaking cultures as the attitude towards the human person as the highest value (there is the so-called cult of the individual); freedom and independence of the individual, its self-realization must be respected and respected.

Individualism is closely related to another very important concept in the English-speaking world: privacy. It explicates the presence of such values in English-speaking cultures as personal freedom and personal autonomy. A. Vezhbitskaya also emphasizes that a distinctive feature of Western civilization was and remains the distinction between public and private life ^{[2, p. 187]}. American values such as privacy and individualism are not fundamental to Uzbek culture, which is characterized by collectivism, especially clearly manifested in mahallas (Uzbek neighborhoods) - the guardians of age-old national foundations. Circulation of resources - mutual exchanges at toy (weddings), which create a network of mutual obligations, redistribute capital and help “keep the community intact.” All this together, and not the “Uzbek character”, gives local residents a «sense of home», «a sense of community» ^[32]. As the great Uzbek philosopher pointed out in his treatise, «Only through associations of many people helping each other, where each provides the other with some share of what is necessary for survival, can a person achieve the level of perfection to which he is destined by his nature» ^[17]. For her, Uzbek culture, the value of personal relationships and unity with the team is important. In Uzbek culture, compared to Western culture, the opposition of “public” and “private” is blurred, and its poles are practically not formed. Modern Uzbek society can be characterized as a hybrid society. It has distinctly modern features, while at the same time archaic clan relationships persist within society (although this also varies from province to province). In addition, people sometimes talk about the “Soviet syndrome”: many aspects of the old system persist even after 30 years of independence.

Professor S.G. Ter-Minasova believes that the English language is generally more polite, more sensitive to the feelings of an individual, and explains this for historical and social reasons. The English mentality has always been characterized by a caring attitude, first of all, towards the individual, respect for his interests, feelings and experiences ^[13]. The relatively low prevalence of this phenomenon in Uzbek culture does not mean that English speakers are more polite than Uzbek speakers. In this case, according to A. Vezhbitskaya, «we are dealing not so much with “politeness” as such, but with various cultural values» ^{[2, p. 45]}. The very idea of being correct or simply observing linguistic tact, naturally, has long existed in the Uzbek language. However, in Uzbekistan, unlike Western European countries, a slightly different linguistic behavior has developed, sometimes more aggressive, but also more sincere.

CONCLUSION

The study allows us to draw the following conclusions:

1) the phenomenon of political correctness is presented both on the socio-cultural level, closely related to ideology and politics, which consists in the persistent adherence to neutral formulations in relation to various groups of people, and the establishment of restrictions on freedom of speech, and on the linguistic (linguistic) level, which considers political correctness from the point of view of linguistic code aimed at finding new ways of linguistic expression instead of negative stereotypes that hurt the feelings and dignity of a person, infringing on his rights by habitual linguistic tactlessness and / or straightforwardness in relation to various kinds of subcultural groups and minorities;

2) the constant dynamics of politically correct language: what seemed acceptable yesterday ceases to be so; words that were considered an example of political correctness begin to be regarded as unacceptable, contrary to new moral norms;

3) in the Uzbek cultural space, in connection with the transition of Uzbekistan to market relations and the development of private property, it is gradually assimilating the concepts of political correctness, however, unlike Western countries, this concept has not become ideological, the attitude towards this phenomenon is mainly negative, Uzbek society for the most part resist other people's values. The term political correctness itself is not often used in research to describe a phenomenon important to Western society and in the media;

4) perhaps political correctness will never become such a comprehensive ideology in Uzbekistan as in the West, due to the uniqueness of the mentality and the Muslim religion, but the emergence of an increasing number of politically correct words and expressions cannot be denied. The Uzbek difference from the West is that the Uzbek people are much freer in their choice of words, no one forbids Uzbeks to call a spade a spade, in addition, the Uzbek media are not under such strict control of public opinion as in the United States. Difficulties are caused by differences in cultural norms and value orientations, grammatical design and semantics of statements, their associative connections, etc.;

5) we can conclude that the common features of American and Uzbek communicative behavior are openness, informality, directness in communication and emotionality. However, these features of American speech behavior do not prevent the spread of ideas of political correctness in society, since the communicative behavior of Americans is much more strongly influenced by such features of the American mentality as individualism, law-abidingness and attitude towards any person as a client on whom one’s own well-being and achievement of high social status depends . As noted above, the ideology of political correctness in American society is formed primarily at the political and even legislative levels, and social and political prerogatives, accordingly, dictate the laws of its development to the language.