SEMANTIC AND PRAGMATIC ANALYSIS OF THE SPEECH ACT OF WARNING (BASED ON FRENCH AND UZBEK)

This article provides a comparative account of the semantic and pragmatic properties of the warning speech act in French and Uzbek. The study aims to identify how illocutionary force, degrees of directiveness, politeness strategies, and context-driven inferences are encoded across the two languages, and to integrate these observations into a unified descriptive model. Methodologically, the paper combines speech act theory, semantic role analysis, pragmatic implicature, and corpus-oriented observation. The empirical basis is a small, curated dataset consisting of situational dialogues, written warnings, and institutional notices. The main contribution is a parameter-based decomposition of warnings into (i) source of danger, (ii) probability of harm, and (iii) addressee agency, alongside evidence that illocutionary force is differentially signaled: French relies more on modal and conditional marking, whereas Uzbek more frequently employs evidential and emphasis-related devices. The results are relevant for translation practice, language teaching, and reducing pragmatic failure in intercultural interaction.