деразани ёпинг (иpronounced as /и:/)
While it may be questionable whether the former is actually a request or an order, the latter one is undoubtedly a request.
Uzbek imperatives can be made more polite by the use of the name, for instance, Лола ойнани ёпингtends to be more polite than Деразани ёпинг. What is more, some lexical/phrasal downgraders, such as appealers or in particular they decrease the impact of a request, for example:
Китобни узатиб юборинг илтимос? Китобни олиб беролмайсизми? When discussing the degree of politeness, we should remember the importance of the modification used in these constructions in both the languages under examination. From the theoretical point of view, the request proper may be separated from other elements, which mitigate the illocutionary force of a request, yet in actual encounters they usually occur and function together.
A very interesting and detailed cross-cultural analysis of the lexical-syntactic structures of formulae and patterns of English and Uzbek requests and invitations needs to be presented and discussed by linguists. We grouped requests into three categories, namely:
1) Direct Orders,
2) “Embedded” Orders, and
3) Conventionally Indirect Requests and Invitations. The first category corresponds to MD, since Direct Orders “ask in the most direct way for a performance of an action”. On the basis of the research carried out, it is stated that there are many differences between English and Uzbek as regards the lexical-syntactic structure, frequency of occurrence (i.e. this type of request prevails in Uzbek) and the use of Direct Orders. Within Direct Orders, we can distinguish several patterns of typical request in both languages in question, they are as follows:
Basic Verb Form Imperative– is almost always followed or preceded by the politeness marker (PM) – please which softens the imposition. In the case of absence of PM, the strength of the illocutionary force increases. Examples correspond to Uzbek Explicit Imperatives Proper and Infinitives respectively.