Methodology of Concept and Conceptual Analysis
1Babanazarova SokhibaAbdusharipovna
2Independent researcher, Department of Uzbek Language and Literature, Faculty of Uzbek Language and Literature, Tashkent State Uzbek language and literature Universitynamed after
AlisherNavoiy, Tashkent, Uzbekistan.
E-mail address: [email protected]
Abstract: This article discusses cognitive linguistics, one of the areas of the anthropocentric paradigm. The views of world linguists on the concept and its types, methods of conceptual analysis are analyzed. The methods of conceptual analysis are explained by means of comparisons. It is well known that man's knowledge of the surrounding world is expressed through concepts. These concepts are a mental-intellectual structure embodied as a product of various mental activities of man. In the process of thinking, a person deals with concepts, not with meanings and notions. Therefore the concept is recognized as a unit of thought and set of knowledge that branched and unified at one point. The article contains stable comparisons in the Uzbek language for conceptual analysis and it is repeatedly acknowledged that the comparisons reflect national and cultural connotations, richness of Uzbek language, and as well as its importance as a mirror of traditions. The analysis focuses on the standard of comparison, which reflects the uniqueness of people's perception and understanding of the world. Therefore, the study of cognitive analysis in relation to comparisons is one of the essential problems of anthropocentric linguistics.
Keywords:Anthropocentric paradigm, cognitive linguistics, concept, conceptual analysis, comparisons, linguoculturology, stable comparisons, standard of comparison, subjective attitude, conceptualization
INTRODUCTION
The emergence of the anthropocentric paradigm in linguistics gave rise to open the ways for the emergence of new directions and allowed the study of previously undiscovered aspects of a magnificent creature like language. This paradigm shifts the researcher's attention from the object of knowledge to the subject, that is, the person is studied within the language and the language is studied in the human context [1, p 4]. In particular, cognitive linguistics, one of the directions of this paradigm, has drawn our attention to the idea of the importance of language as a mental concept. Much of the work done in this area has been devoted to the fact that language is an expression of the human spirit, directly involved in and influences the process of logical thinking.
Cognitive linguistics is a science birthed from the fantastic but felicitous encounter of three disparate areas of study: neuroscience, philosophy, and linguistics. Even chimera requires a gestation period; just so, cognitive linguistics developed over the last decades of the twentieth century and the early twenty-first. Philosophy had long considered whether, what, and how human beings can know. Over the last century, language scholars, sociologists, anthropologists, and ultimately linguists have debated – sometimes hotly – the nature and evolution of language [2, p 49].
One of the most widely used terms in cognitive linguistics is the term concept, and its definition has been the subject of much debate among scholars around the world. Indeed, today we come across a lot the terms like concept, conceptual analysis, conceptualization process, conceptosphere. First of all, let's look for answers to the question of how the term concept came into being and what types it has. V.A. Maslova, a Russian linguist, writes that although the term concept already existed in literature, in 1928 S.A. Askoldov in his article “Concept and word”
analyzed its previously unnoticed aspects [3, p. 45]. The linguist also analyzes several approaches to the concept and summarizes them as follows: “Different definitions of a concept allow us to distinguish the following invariance features:
1) it is the smallest unit of a person's experience of verbalization and ideal imagery through words;
2) it is the basic unit of delivery, storage and processing of knowledge;
3) the concept has moving boundaries and specific functions;
4) the concept is social, its associative sphere defines its principle;
5) it is the main cell of culture. Thus, the concept reflects the world in the human mind and forms the conceptual system”[3, p 50].
Concepts form the basis of the various categories that formed in the human mind, and serve as a starting point for them. It is often noted that the general features of the concept are that it does not have a clear internal structure, but this statement is not very realistic. Because the image of the object that forms the basis of the concept is clear enough, and the secondary parts are abstract and they join interacting with each other around a single basis (nuclear basis). Therefore, it is important to recognize that the conceptual structure is systemic. Its systematic features are manifested in the fact that it is structurally complex and perceived as a whole mental structure [4, p 17].
As you know, the concept is the most actively used unit of many disciplines. It is necessary to distinguish his interpretations in linoculturology, literature, and cognitive linguistics.
The concept as a linguocultural unit represents a specific aspect of a particular culture [5, p 45]. As a unit of cognitive linguistics, a concept is also a unit of thought and is based on the
generalization of ideass, images and linguistic meanings. The formation of the concept begins with the birth of an individual image and ends with the emergence of a linguistic unit [4, p 17].
Based on the experience of world linguistics, the study of the concept from a cognitive point of view, conceptual analysis and its results provide information that is very important for Uzbek linguistics. After all, with the help of the conceptual analysis the world of thinking and imagination of the Uzbek speaker are expressed.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
There are several methods of conceptual analysis available today. The variety of methods of conceptual analysis is not explained by the fact that the problem is not sufficiently studied. On the contrary, it suggests that the tasks of researchers are different in each case.
Scott McGlashan, a British researcher, writes about the methodology of cognitive analysis and explains it as follows: “If the cognitive linguistic approach is to be taken as a description of cognition, then we must be clear about the methods by which evidence is gathered both for the development and testing of cognitive descriptions. In cognitive science, development and testing of descriptions are based upon two observational methods. The first method, the direct observation, develops and tests cognitive description by direct observation of neural activity underlying human cognition. The second method, the indirect observation, constructs and validates cognitive descriptions on the basis of observation of the behaviour of human cognitive agents” [6, p 18].
Russian linguist V.A.Maslova identifies the following stages in the conceptual analysis:
- Defining a reference situation, the concept belongs to this situation, if there is a literary text, this operation is based on it;
- To determine the place of this concept in the linguistic scene of the world and in the lexical consciousness of the nation by referring to encyclopedic and linguistic dictionaries; in which case we see the dictionary definition as the core of the concept;
- Refer to the etymology and consider its features;
- Dictionary interpretations provide only a general understanding of the meaning of a word and encyclopedic dictionaries of concepts. The analysis should involve a wide variety of contexts:
poetic, scholarly, philosophical, journalistic, proverbial and proverbial involvement, etc;
- The obtained results should be compared with the analysis of the associative relations of the main lexeme, for example, by analyzing the concept of "time" we establish its relationship with the concepts of "future", "action", "space";
- If an important concept of culture is chosen for analysis, it should be repeated and interpreted in painting, music, sculpture, etc. [3, p 66].
From the above, it can be seen that conceptual analysis is directly related to semantics.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
When it comes to the social potential of language, the role of literary language, whether written or oral, is great. The language of fiction, in particular, the language of folklore, plays an important role in linguistics as a certain functional form of language [7, p 9]. The works of folklore cannot be imagined without comparisons. It is known that comparisons are described in the literature as a means of description, in linguistics as a methodological figure, in psychology as a practice of thinking, and in philosophy as a means of knowing the world [8, p. 15]. Stable comparisons are a great ethnopsychological, linguoculturological and linguistic [9, 9] as a completely unique richness of the Uzbek language, a unique reflection of the national and cultural imagination and traditions of the people, an inexhaustible source of power for graceful and influential speech and as a magnificent means of preserving the succession of images between generations[9, p 3].
The linguistic and conceptual landscape of the universe is reflected in the comparisons.
Let us consider the comparisonsfrom this point of view.
An important source in the study of comparisons in the Uzbek language is the
"Explanatory Dictionary of Uzbek Comparisons" by N. Makhmudov and D. Khudoiberganova.
Explaining several comparisons in the introduction to this dictionary, N.Mahmudov recognizes stable comparisons as the most valuable source of information about the culture and mentality of the people citing examples of national characteristics in some comparisons. For example, he emphasizes that comparisons such as, as inoffensive as a turtle-dove, as frog, and as the moon are the products of national thinking. There are many such examples of comparison in Uzbek Language. For example, there is no denying that such religious and national views of our people are reflected in such comparisons such as like doppi (embroidered skullcap), like prayer, like the Kaaba, like cradle, and silky. The comparisons are based on the writer’s personality, the person’s inner world, and his feelings and experiences. At the same time, the subjective attitude of the person is expressed through comparisons. It is precisely such expressions that show the signs of nationalism and mentality in the comparisons. For example, the Explanatory Dictionary of Uzbek Language Comparisons describes the like a snake comparison as follows: “Cold. Extremely unpleasant, shocking”. The furious wind is pulling her hair and skirts to bring her back to the trail, and cold and ugly hands like snakes are throwing stones at her (N.Eshonqul. Momoqoshiq) ”.
This standard of comparison is also found in the speech of other language speakers. In particular, in Chinese linguoculture, the snake-like analogy is used more positively as a symbol of beauty.
Such a different attitude towards objective existence is, of course, due to the national-ethnic peculiarities of the peoples. Some comparisons serve to express multiple meanings that highlight the rich expressive potential of our language. The Dictionary of Uzbek Comparisons gives
examples of the use of many comparisons such as like snake, like dog, like fire, and like a bullet in several senses. In the process of observing the comparisons, we were convinced that the national perception, national-ethnic identity of our people is more vividly reflected in the comparisons using personal names (like Alpomish, like Rustam), animal names (like a frog, like a tortoise, like a fox), myths and legends( like a giant, like a samandar,like a witch, like monsters, like a phoenix) , abstract nouns (like ghost, like shade)as a standard of comparison. [11, p 87].
The researcher F.Usmanov, who studied the comparisons from the linguocultural and cognitive point of view, and based on a figurative basis he writes that comparisons can be divided into other groups such as 1) man, 2) natural phenomena, 3) flora, 4) fauna, 5) mythological, artistic and folklore characters, 6) realias of everyday life and 7) others and cites a hierarchy of valuable scene elements reflected in stable comparisons [10, p. 93].
Hierarchy of valuable scene elements reflected in static comparisons
In this classification, realities of everyday life, objects in the group of "others" and natural phenomena are combined into an object code. In this case, man-made objects in the universe - artifacts and naturally occurring objects - phenomena - natural facts are considered to be the object code. In general, it can be said that in the figurative expressions created by any nation, the representation of valuable content through the subject code plays a key role. This indicates the selection of the necessary units for the life of the nation in the axiological perception of the world.
The materials collected for the "Explanatory Dictionary of Uzbek language analogies"
show that the people's attitude to a particular object, sign, action, associative way of thinking is reflected in the comparisons. This can be seen, for example, comparisons of the man in the Uzbek Language. Stable comparisons about man in the Uzbek language can be divided into the following spiritual groups [12, p. 94].
1. Comparisons with human organs: lips as red as cherry, face as red as pomegranate.
2. Comparisons related to the appearance of man: as beautiful as the moon, as thin as a ghost/
stick.
3. Comparisons related to the physical features of man: as strong as a bear, as delicate as a flower, as strong as a dragon.
4. Comparisons of the human voice: howling like a wolf, bawling like a bear, resonant like a bell.
5. Comparisons of human speech: talking like a machine gun, singing like a nightingale, barking like a dog.
6. Comparisons of human character: innocent as a saint, gentle as silk, faithful as a dog.
7. Comparisons of the human state: solidifying like a candle, whitening like a wall, melting like butter.
8. Comparisons of human behavior: work like a dog, crawling like a tortoise, firing like a bullet.
The comparisons related to the human being in the Uzbek language show that they have more comparisons that describe the state and behavior of a person than the comparisons of other spiritual groups. Thus, it can be concluded that Uzbek speakers are more likely to represent human behavior figuratively [12, p 95].
CONCLUSION
Data collected during the research of comparisons confirm that they have absolute anthropocentric peculiarities. It is gratifying that anthropocentrism has emerged as a separate paradigm in linguistics, and the number of researches in this area is increasing in world linguistics. And without a doubt, this field is one of the serious successes in language research.
The reason is that in this regard, special attention is paid to the role of the personality factor in language. In conclusion, today, in the perfect study of language, reliance on the anthropocentric paradigm, that is, the study of language in connection with the people who created it, is extremely important. Indeed, as the German scholar W. von Humboldt noted, "Language is the outward manifestation of the spirit of nations: the language of the people is its spirit, and the spirit of the people is its language, and nothing else can be imagined that is exactly suitable each other" [13, p 47]. The stable units depicted in the mind of a nation are important because they reflect the national consciousness of that nation. Therefore, static comparisons have been the subject of much research in linguistics and can continue to be the object of important researches. There is a great deal of research on comparisons in world linguistics. It's hard to even count them. There is a great need for such a large-scale study in our Uzbek linguistics. And a number of achievements have been made in this regard today. In particular, the creation of the "Explanatory Dictionary of Uzbek Comparisons" is one of the significant achievements in this direction. Cognitive study of comparisons is one of the most important further tasks in our linguistics.
REFERENCES
1. Mahmudov N. In search of perfect ways to study the language. - 2012.
2. Linda A.King. Full of life: a cognitive linguistic reading of metaphors of abundance in the gospel of John. – 2017.
3. Maslova V.A. Cognitive linguistics. - 2008.
4. SafarovSh. Cognitivelinguistics. - 2006.
5. Usmanova Sh. Linguistics. – 2019.
6. G. Scott McGlashan. Towards a cognitive linguistic approach to language comprehension. – 1992.
7.Saparniyazova M. Syntactic and semantic features of Uzbek folk riddles. - 2005.
8. Khudoyberganova D. Texts representing the content of the simulation. - 2012.
9. Mahmudov N. Similarities and national image. - 2013.
10. Usmanov F. Cultural connotation in analogies. - 2018.
11. Babanazarova S. The national landscape of the world in analogies. - 2019.
12. Khudaiberganova D. Anthropocentric study of the text. - 2013.
13. Humboldt V. von. About the difference of humanity. - 1984.
14.Mahmudov N., Khudoiberganova D. Explanatory dictionary of Uzbek analogies. - 2013.
