American Journal Of Philological Sciences
105
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajps
VOLUME
Vol.05 Issue04 2025
PAGE NO.
105-111
10.37547/ajps/Volume05Issue04-27
Discursive Features of Pedagogical Terms in English And
Uzbek (On the Example of a Comparative Analysis of
Charles Dickens's "Hard Times" And Cholpon's "Night
and Day")
Nizomova Mokhinur Baratbayevna
Head of the Department of Practical English at Karshi State University, Doctor of philosophy (PhD) in Philological sciences, Associate
Professor, Uzbekistan
Received:
18 February 2025;
Accepted:
17 March 2025;
Published:
17 April 2025
Abstract:
This article explores the discursive features of pedagogical terminology in English and Uzbek languages
through the analysis of Charles Dickens’ Hard Times and Cho‘lpon’s Kecha va Kunduz. By examining socio
-cultural
contexts, stylistic devices, metaphorical expressions, and the ideological connotations of terms, the study reveals
how educational and moral concepts are discursively constructed in two different cultures.
Keywords:
Pedagogical term, discourse, metaphor, semantic connotation, ideological discourse, Hard Times,
Kecha va Kunduz, comparative analysis, English language, Uzbek language.
Introduction:
The discourse related to education is one
of the key communicative forms that reflects the socio-
cultural environment of any society. Every language
and nation expresses its pedagogical views through
specific linguistic and discursive structures. Charles
Dickens’ Hard Times critiques the utilitarian
educational system of Victorian England, while
Cho‘lpon’s Kecha va Kunduz promotes the ideas of
national awakening and enlightenment within Uzbek
society. This article aims to provide a comparative
analysis of pedagogical terms and their discursive
representations as manifested in these two literary
works.
Charles Dickens’s Hard Times offers a sharp critique of
the mechanical, fact-based educational system that
dominated England during the Industrial Revolution. In
the novel, terms such as "facts", "system", and
"utilitarianism" become central pedagogical concepts,
reflecting an education model centered exclusively on
quantifiable knowledge and economic utility.
In contrast, in Cho‘lpon’s Kecha va Kunduz, pedagogical
discourse is shaped by the unique socio-spiritual
challenges of Uzbek society, emphasizing national
awakening, reform, and enlightenment. Terminologies
such as "maorif" (education), "ustoz" (teacher),
"madaniyat" (culture), and "tarbiya" (moral upbringing)
serve as core pedagogical markers in the discourse.
The Semantic Load of Pedagogical Terms
In Hard Times, pedagogical terms are imbued with
negative semantic connotations. For example, Mr.
Gradgrind’s famous assertion —
“Now, what I want is
Facts” —
symbolizes an education system that
prioritizes factual knowledge at the expense of human
moral and emotional development. This serves as a
metaphor for a dehumanized model of instruction.
Conversely, in Kecha va Kunduz, pedagogical terms
carry positive semantic connotations. The character of
Otabek associates concepts such as "ilm" (knowledge)
and "ustoz" (mentor) with spiritual salvation and
cultural revival. This contrast reflects the differing
discursive approaches to education in the respective
societies.
Metaphorical and Stylistic Expressions
Dickens employs industrial metaphors to portray
pedagogical terms: the school becomes a “factory of
facts” and children are depicted as “p
roducts of a
conveyor belt”. This stylistic device reinforces his
American Journal Of Philological Sciences
106
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajps
American Journal Of Philological Sciences (ISSN
–
2771-2273)
critical stance toward the dehumanizing aspects of the
education system.
Cho‘lpon, by contrast, portrays teachers as guiding
lights of national rebirth, spiritual leaders who
illuminate the path to a better future. He uses
metaphors such as “seeing with the eyes of the heart”
and “the light of knowledge” to represent the
transformative power of education. These metaphors
enhance the idealistic and humanistic orientation of his
discourse.
Functional and Ideological Value of Pedagogical Terms
in Discourse: A Comparative Perspective
In discourse, the functionality of pedagogical terms
plays a pivotal role in reflecting the socio-cultural
orientation of a given society. In Dickens's Hard Times,
the term education is portrayed as a mode of
instruction strictly grounded in facts, devoid of
humanistic
and
moral
values.
Through
this
representation, Dickens critically addresses the
mechanistic and utilitarian nature of the Victorian
education system.
I
n contrast, Cho‘lpon’s Kecha va Kunduz advances
national enlightenment and cultural revivalist ideas
through the terms maorif (education) and ustoz
(teacher). In this narrative, education is depicted as a
vital force for personal growth and collective
awakening.
Ideological Connotation of Pedagogical Terms
In Hard Times, pedagogical vocabulary carries a
negative ideological load, reflecting a system where
economic efficiency outweighs human development.
The educational terminology reinforces a critique of a
society that prioritizes production over personality.
Meanwhile, Cho‘lpon utilizes pedagogical terms as
ideological tools against colonial pressure, advocating
for self-awareness and intellectual emancipation.
Terms such as maorif and ustoz are charged with
nationalistic sentiment and are seen as essential for
cultural liberation.
Thus, in both literary works, pedagogical terminology is
not merely linguistic but functions as a medium for
expressing broader ideological, aesthetic, and socio-
political realit
ies. In Dickens’s narrative, such terms
serve as vehicles for social criticism; in Cho‘lpon’s text,
they become instruments of moral and national
progress.
Discourse-Based Interpretation
This article offers a discourse analysis of pedagogical
terms as repr
esented in Charles Dickens’s Hard Times
and Cho‘lpon’s Kecha va Kunduz. It examines the
contextual application, ideological implications, and
cultural meanings of educational terminology, while
also exploring how these terms function in the
stratified social fabric of each society.
Language, as a reflection of collective knowledge,
values, and ideologies, serves not only as a
communicative tool but also as a cognitive and cultural
construct. Pedagogical terminology, in particular, is
tied to notions of upbringing, discipline, education, and
socialization. The linguistic representation of such
terms in both Dickens and Cho‘lpon’s works
underscores their role in articulating educational
principles and cultural consciousness.
In English ("Hard Times")
In Uzbek ("Kecha va
Kunduz")
education
ta’lim
discipline
tartib
teacher muallim
school maktab
pupil
shogird
knowledge
bilim
moral instruction
axloqiy tarbiya
intellect
aql-idrok
reform islohot
training mashq-tayyorlov
Discourse of pedagogical terms in the work "Hard
Times":
For example: “Teach these boys and girls
nothing but facts. Facts alone are wanted in life.”
Analysis: Here, the words “teach”, “facts”, “life”
express the utilitarian approach to education in the
in
dustrial era of the 19th century. The verb “teach”
indicates a methodical rigidity and inhumane manner
of treatment in the context. For example: “Bitzer was
an excellent young man, who knew all the definitions
by heart”. Analysis: The word “definitions” in
dicates a
formal approach in the pedagogical process. In this
context, knowledge is associated with memorization,
social conformity.
Pedagogical discourse in "Night and Day".
For
example: "The world looks different to educated
children". Analysis: "Educated" is a social status in
Uzbek discourse that denotes not only formal
education, but also cultural and moral upbringing. For
example: "In the school of the old man, the child only
memorized, while the heart remained empty."
Analysis: Here, the soullessness of the medieval
religious-educational environment is criticized through
the discourse of "school" and "memorization". The
metaphor of "heart" shows the humanistic aspects of
the pedagogical system.
Comparative differences based on discursive analysis
American Journal Of Philological Sciences
107
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajps
American Journal Of Philological Sciences (ISSN
–
2771-2273)
Aspekt
"Hard Times" (Dickens)
"Kecha va Kunduz" (Cho‘lpon)
Educational
approach
Factual, utilitarian, dryly
numerical
Ma’naviy,
madaniy-axloqiy
asoslangan
Pedagogical
images
Mr. Gradgrind, Bitzer – cold and
emotionless
Qori aka
– axborotga to‘liq, lekin
g‘oyadan yiroq
Terminology
Based on precise, technical,
industrial thinking
Emotsional, milliy-ma’naviy ruh
bilan boyitilgan
Language tools
Emphasis on objective facts
Sub’ektiv idrok
,
obrazli
tilda
ifodalangan
Semantic-paradigmatic analysis
1.
education
–
state-imposed instruction
2.
discipline
–
enforced order, mental rigidity
3.
pupil
–
object of state ideology
4.
training
–
industrial conformity
5.
teacher
–
mechanical knowledge dispenser
In Cho‘lpon’s novel:
1.
tarbiya
–
ruhan yetuklik
2.
maktab
–
ijtimoiy zamin
3.
muallim
–
yo‘l ko‘rsatuvchi, ruhoniy qiyofa
4.
bilim
–
idrok orqali shakllanadigan nur
5.
tartib
–
axloqiy nazorat, emas zo‘rlik
Pedagogical terms should be considered not only as
semantic units, but also as a discursive mirror of social
consciousness, culture, and the educational
system
.
While Dickens's "Hard Times" reflects the standardized,
robotic education model of industrial society through
these terms, in Cholpon's "Night and Day" these terms
are associated with the spiritual awakening of the
people and the need for moral reform.
Criteria for Analyzing Pedagogical Discourse in Literary
Works:
1.
Discursive-Pragmatic Criterion
.
Concept: What communicative function do pedagogical
terms perform within context? Theoretical Foundation:
According to
Teun A. van Dijk and N. Fairclough’s
discourse theory, every linguistic unit reflects a certain
ideology and is oriented toward practical action.
In Hard Times (by Charles Dickens): The phrase “Teach
nothing but facts” portrays education as a utilitarian
instrument stripped of humanism. Terms like “facts,”
“rules,” and “discipline” serve not the individual but the
system.
In Kecha va Kunduz (by Cho‘lpon): Words such as “ilm”
(knowledge), “ma’rifat” (enlightenment), “o‘qish”
(learning), “o‘qituvchu” (teacher), and “madrasai usuli
jadid” (modernized madrasa) emphasize the spiritual
and national objectives of education. Education is
depicted as a force for awakening society. For example:
“Ilm kishi ko‘zini ochadi, yuragiga nur soladi”
("Knowledge opens a person's eyes and brings light to
their heart.")
Here, “ilm” is not merely about factual information, but
a means of spiritual and moral revolution.
2. Sociolinguistic Criterion
Concept: In what social groups, classes, and strata are
pedagogical terms used?
Theoretical Foundation: Based on Basil Bernstein’s
theory of “elaborated and restricted codes.”
In Hard Times: Terms such as “pupil,” “teacher,” and
“school” are employed exclu
sively within the context of
children from the industrial working class. The
character Bitzer is portrayed as a memory machine
—
an absorber of facts
—
symbolizing the inequality in
educational access and content between social classes.
In Kecha va Kunduz: Lex
ical items like “jadid”
(reformer),
“maorif”
(education/enlightenment),
“ustoz”
(teacher),
“savodsiz”
(illiterate),
and
“qadimcha” (old
-fashioned) reveal sharp social
stratifications and ideological divisions. Educational
reform (maorifparvarlik) is represented as the ideal of
a new society; through the jadid school, the people are
to be liberated from oppression and ignorance.
3.
Semantic-Normative
(Lexico-Grammatical)
American Journal Of Philological Sciences
108
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajps
American Journal Of Philological Sciences (ISSN
–
2771-2273)
Criterion
Concept: What morphological structure and semantic
functions do pedagogical terms possess? Theoretical
Foundation: Halliday’s Systemic Functional Grammar
(SFG).
In Hard Times: Nominal expressions such as
“instruction,” “knowledge,” and “training” are used to
convey pedagogical processes in an abstract,
bureaucratic, and emotionally detached register. These
terms
function
metonymically
—
for
example,
“knowledge” is reduced to “memorization.”
In Kecha va Kunduz: Words like “ma’rifat”
(enlightenment), “savod” (literacy), “qalam” (pen), and
“o‘quvchi” (student) are polysemous. For instance
,
“savod” refers not only to the ability to read and write,
but also to a broader capacity for perceiving and
understanding the world: “Savodsiz qolgan odam –
ko‘zi ko‘r, qulog‘i kar” (“A person left illiterate is blind
and deaf.”)
4. Ideological-Normative Criterion (Critical Discourse
Analysis)
Concept: What ideological current is expressed through
pedagogical terminology?
Theoretical Foundation: Based on the theories of
Michel Foucault and Pierre Bourdieu, where knowledge
is seen as a mechanism of power and social control.
In Hard Times: Through the character of Mr. Gradgrind,
education is depicted as a repressive apparatus
designed to regulate society. The educational model
advanced
through
terminology
emphasizes
quantifiable outcomes and economic utility, rather
than holistic development or moral value.
In Kecha va Kunduz: Pedagogical discourse becomes a
spiritual weapon against colonial oppression. Terms
such as “madrasai qadim” (traditional religious school),
“o‘qituvchi” (instructor), and “ustoz” (ment
or) are
employed critically to expose the role of the old
educational system in supporting injustice. In contrast,
the new education is framed as the core of national
awakening:
“Jadid maktabi yuraklar ostonasiga harfni emas,
haqiqatni yozmoqchi edi.”
(“Th
e jadid school sought to inscribe not just letters but
truth onto the threshold of people’s hearts.”)
5. Stylistic and Connotative Criterion
Concept: What emotional, evaluative, and stylistic
connotations do the pedagogical terms carry?
Theoretical Foundation: Based on the stylistic theories
of Roman Jakobson and I. V. Arnold.
In Hard Times: Words such as “teacher” and
“education” are employed within ironic contexts,
portraying them in a cold, dehumanized, and formal
semantic tone. Almost every pedagogical term in the
novel functions not merely with denotative meaning
but with heavy connotative load. For example,
“education” is shown as a mechanical and lifeless
process, stripped of empathy.
In Kecha va Kunduz: The term “ilm” (knowledge) is
sacralized and consistently carries a positive
connotation, often appearing in spiritual or devotional
contexts. “O‘qituvchi” (teacher) is not merely a
profession, but a spiritual guide and moral leader.
Example: “Ustoz degani –
najot keltiruvchi, zulmatga
sham yoquvchi de
makdir.”
(“A teacher means one who brings salvation, who lights
a candle in the darkness.”)
6. Contextual-Valency (Syntactic-Semantic) Criterion
Concept: In what syntactic structures and lexical
combinations are the terms used?
Theoretical Foundation: Based on the semantic valency
theories of V. V. Vinogradov and Yu. D. Apresyan.
In Hard Times: Constructions like “to teach facts,” “to
train minds,” and “to enforce order” reflect predicate
-
adjective collocations that allow no space for subjective
interpretat
ion. Pedagogical terms in Dickens’s Hard
Times are analyzed within a semantically constrained
system that is realistic, ideologically determined, and
socially constructed. These terms are not mere
semantic units, but lexical manifestations of colonial
modernity, class-based social stratification, and
pedagogical repression.
In Kecha va Kunduz: Metaphoric expressions such as
“ilmga oshno bo‘lmoq” (to become acquainted with
knowledge), “qalamni olish” (to take up the pen), and
“kitob o‘qimoq” (to read a book)
highlight the
emotional and intellectual dimensions of education. In
these syntactic structures, contextual meaning plays a
crucial role.
For instance: “U kitobdan haqiqat izlagan edi –
madrasada topolmadi.”
(“He searched for truth in the book –
but could not find
it in the madrasa.”)
Comparative Conclusion: Pedagogical Discourse in
Hard Times and Kecha va Kunduz
Work
Purpose of Pedagogical
Discourse
Dominant Idea
Characteristic of the Linguistic
Unit
Hard
Education is depicted as a
Knowledge is measured in Lexical units such as
“facts”
,
American Journal Of Philological Sciences
109
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajps
American Journal Of Philological Sciences (ISSN
–
2771-2273)
Work
Purpose of Pedagogical
Discourse
Dominant Idea
Characteristic of the Linguistic
Unit
Times
mechanical tool for instilling
facts, discipline, and obedience
in children of the industrial
working class.
quantifiable, utilitarian
terms; it supports systemic
control and social order.
“instruction”
, and
“training”
are formal, emotionally
detached, and ideologically
loaded.
Kecha va
Kunduz
Education serves as a spiritual
and national awakening tool
aimed at liberating the people
from ignorance and
oppression.
Enlightenment is sacred;
knowledge is not only
practical but moral and
existential.
Terms like
“ilm”
,
“maorif”
, and
“ustoz”
carry rich connotative,
metaphoric, and emotional
meanings with multi-layered
context.
Analytical Translation of Pedagogical Discourse in
Charles Dickens’ Hard Times (with Uzbek terms
preserved)
1.
“Teach these boys and girls nothing but Facts.
Facts alone are wanted in life.”(in Uzbek: Ta’lim –
faqat
faktlar orqali berilishi kerak)
Analysis: This statement reflects a utilitarian
conce
ption of ta’lim (education in Uzbek), where only
faktlar (facts) are considered essential. It reduces the
educational process to a mechanical function aimed at
preparing students for industrial life.
Discourse Feature: Didaktik utilitarizm (in Uzbek)
—
transforming education into a fact-feeding, mechanical
system.
2.
“You are to be in all things regulated and
governed by fact.”
(in Uzbek: O‘quvchi faqat raqam, ma’lumot va fakt
orqali nazorat qilinadi)
Analysis: The o‘quvchi (student in Uzbek) is regulated
solely through data and measurable outcomes.
Education becomes a tool of control, not of personal
growth. Criterion: Regulyativ-pedagogik til birliklari (in
Uzbek)
—
linguistic units used to enforce authority and
social regulation.
3.
“Girl number twenty, g
ive me your definition of
a horse.”
(in Uzbek: Shaxsiyatni raqam bilan almashtirish orqali
shaxsiy individuallik yo‘q qilinadi) Analysis: By calling a
student “Girl number twenty”, the teacher strips her of
identity. This reflects deindividualizatsiya (in Uzbek)
and the tendency to treat students as interchangeable
parts of a system.
Criterion: The maktab (school) is portrayed as a zavod
(factory)
—
depersonalized and function-driven.
4.
“Facts are sacred” (in Uzbek: Ma’naviy qadriyat
emas, ma’lumot asosida
inson baholanadi) Analysis:
This line reflects a worldview where ma’lumot
(information in Uzbek) replaces ma’naviyat (moral
values) as the basis for judging human worth. Criterion:
A faktologik asosdagi ta’lim falsafasi (fact
-based
educational philosophy in Uzbek) dominates over
character development.
5.
“The school was all fact, and no heart.”
(in Uzbek: Ruhsizlik, mehrsiz muhitda faqat nazariya
yetarli emasligi tanqid qilinadi). Analysis: The maktab
(school) is depicted as lacking in mehr (compassion)
and ruh (soul)
—
making it a cold environment where
students are denied emotional nourishment. Criterion:
The byurokratik ta’lim tizimi (bureaucratic educational
system in Uzbek) fails to foster empathy or holistic
development.
Examples of Pedagogical Discourse in Kecha va
Kunduz (Cho‘lpon)
1.
“Jaholat zulmati bilandir, ma’rifat esa
chiroqdir.”
“Ignorance is darkness, and enlightenment is a lamp.”
Ilm
–
insonni zulmatdan chiqaruvchi vosita. Criterion:
Enlightenment discourse
–
pedagogical evaluation
expressed through metaphorical terminology.
2.
“Madrasai jadid –
yurtning uyg‘onish
yulduzidir.”
“The Jadid school is the star of the nation’s awakening.”
Yangi ta’lim –
milliy uyg‘onish ramzi.
Criterion: Ideological-uplifting discourse
–
education as
a means of promoting national liberation.
3.
“O‘qituvchi –
yurakka
nur
sepguvchi
bog‘bon.”
“A teacher is a gardener who sows light into the heart.”
Ustoz obraziga badiiy-ruhiy yuklama beriladi.
Criterion: Emotional and stylistic dominance
–
pedagogical terms carry elevated, symbolic meaning.
4.
“Qadimcha maktablarning savodsizlikdan
boshqa merosi yo‘q.”
“The old schools have left no legacy but illiteracy.”
American Journal Of Philological Sciences
110
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajps
American Journal Of Philological Sciences (ISSN
–
2771-2273)
Eskicha ta’lim tanqidi va jadidlar ta’lim modelining
ustunligi.
Criterion:
Discursive-antithetical
approach
–
contrasting outdated and reformist educational
models.
5.
“O‘qish –
faqat harf o‘rganish emas, hayotni
anglashdir.”
“Reading is not merely learnin
g letters; it is
understanding life.”
Pedagogik terminlarning semantik kengayishi va
falsafaviy talqini.
Criterion: Extensive semantic usage
–
education as a
philosophical path to understanding life.
CONCLUSION
A discursive approach reveals the ideological and
functional nature of pedagogical terminology. In
Charles Dickens’ Hard Times, pedagogical terms reflect
a critical view of Victorian England’s utilitarian, fact
-
based, and dehumanizing educational system. Terms
such as education, discipline, facts, and schooling often
portray a cold, institutional environment devoid of
human warmth. In contrast, Cho‘lpon in Kecha va
Kunduz harmonizes pedagogical terms like ustoz
(mentor), ma’rifat (enlightenment), jadid maktabi
(modern school), and ilm (knowledge) with ideals of
social awakening, free thought, and national self-
consciousness. These terms acquire ideological weight.
In both works, pedagogical terminology forms the
emotional-ethical and socio-educational layers of the
discourse.
Dickens presents education as a harsh and bureaucratic
mechanism of industrial capitalism, turning humans
into cogs in the machinery of society. Conversely,
Cho‘lpon portrays education as a luminous path leading
to liberation and cultural renewal. In Hard Times,
education becomes a tool for suppressing individuality,
while in Kecha va Kunduz, it becomes a spiritual guide
to national awakening.
The pedagogical discourses in Hard Times and Kecha va
Kunduz are deeply embedded within their respective
cultural contexts. Hard Times is shaped by the
Industrial Revolution, class stratification, and the
exploitation of child labor, whereas Kecha va Kunduz
evolves within the intellectual movement of Jadidism,
colonial oppression, and national revival. In these
historical-cultural settings, pedagogical terms acquire
moral significance and evoke different emotional and
aesthetic reactions.
The lexical-semantic differences form a polysemic
pedagogical discourse. Terms like school, education,
training, and facts in Dickens often carry negative or
emotionally sterile
connotations. In
contrast,
Cho‘lpon’s terms—
ilm (knowledge), ustoz (mentor),
ma’rifat (enlightenment), and o‘quvchi (student)—
are
associated with hope, progress, light, and renewal.
Thus, the semantic palette of pedagogical terms in both
authors’ languages is analyzed through contrast.
Pedagogical terms serve as tools for developing
readers’ discursive competence. Through Dickens,
readers are exposed to the shortcomings of fact-
centered education and are encouraged to engage in
critical
r
eflection.
Through
Cho‘lpon,
readers
encounter concepts of freedom, humanism, and the
necessity of cultural reform. In this process,
pedagogical terminology becomes a central focus of
discourse analysis.
Analyzing pedagogical discourse through linguo-
pragmatic criteria requires a comparative approach. In
Dickens, education ensures conformity rather than
social justice. In Cho‘lpon, ma’rifat and ilm promote
independent thinking and personal development. In
the language of both authors, pedagogical terms are
not merely semantic units, but expressions of
communicative intent and aesthetic stance.
For translators and linguists, the discursive analysis of
pedagogical terminology necessitates a bilingual and
bicultural approach. In both Hard Times and Kecha va
Kunduz, pedagogical terms often cannot be rendered
through direct equivalents but require cultural and
contextual adaptation. For instance, pupil in Dickens
implies “a child without individuality,” while education
as discipline reflects “a tool of subjugation
rather than
moral upbringing.” In Cho‘lpon’s case, concepts like
ustoz, ma’rifat, and islоh are deeply intertwined with
national and religious values and thus require socio-
linguistic knowledge to be accurately conveyed in
translation.
REFERENCES
Сaфaрoв Ш. Прaгмaлингвистикa. ‒ Тoшкeнт:
Ўзбeкистoн Миллий энциклoпeдияси, 2008. ‒ 396 б.
Halliday M. A. K., Matthiessen C. M. I. M. Halliday's
Introduction to Functional Grammar.
–
London:
Routledge, 2014.
–
812 p.
Wodak R., Meyer M. Methods of Critical Discourse
Analysis.
–
London: Sage Publications, 2009.
–
213 p.
Fairclough N. Language and Power.
–
London:
Longman, 2001.
–
258 p.
Tojyeva G. N. Diskurs va uning lingvistik aspektlari.
–
Qarshi: Qarshi davlat universiteti, 2017.
–
224 б.
Crystal D. The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language.
–
Cambridge: CUP, 2010.
–
499 p.
Saidov A. B. Ta’lim sohasidagi terminlar: tarjima va
ekvivalentlik masalalari. // O‘zbek tilshunosligi jurnali,
American Journal Of Philological Sciences
111
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajps
American Journal Of Philological Sciences (ISSN
–
2771-2273)
2019.
–
№3. –
45
–
51-betlar.
Sharipov Sh. Matn lingvistikasi.
–
Toshkent: Fan va
texnologiya, 2013.
–
184 b.
Nord C. Text Analysis in Translation: Theory,
Methodology, and Didactic Application.
–
Amsterdam:
Rodopi, 2005.
–
282 p.
Axmedova M. B. Pedagogik matn va diskurs: leksik-
semantik va funksional tahlil.
–
Toshkent: Ma’naviyat,
2021.
–
132 b.
Salkie R. Text and Discourse Analysis.
–
London:
Routledge, 2010.
–
211 p.
Сиддиқ М. Мaънaвий қaдриятлaр: муoмaлa
сирлaри. –
Тoшкeнт, 1994.
Сoдиқoвa Ш. Ўзбeк тилидa ҳурмaткaтeгoрияси. –
Тoшкeнт, 2010. –
96
б.
M.B.Nizomova.Pedagogikaga
oid
terminlarda
pragmalingvistik yondashuv tahlili (Ingliz va o’zbek
tillari misolida)//. So’z san’ati. Samarqand davlat chet
tillari institute.111-117-betlar.
Тoжиeв Ё., Ҳaсaнoвa Н., Тoжимaтoв Ҳ., Йўлдoшeвa O.
Ўзбeк нутқи мaдaнияти вa услубият aсoслaри. –
Тoшкeнт: Фaн, 1994. –
131 б.
Nizomova
M.
B.
Inglizvao’zbektillaridagipedagogikagaoidterminlarningt
araqqiyotbosqichlari.//
ILM
SARCHASHMALARI.
Urganchdavlatuniversitetiningilmiy-nazariy,
metodikjurnali, 2022-1.
–
124-130 betlar. (10.00.00
N:3)
Умурқулoв Б. Лeктoр нутқи вa бaдиий тил. –
Тoшкeнт: Ўзбeкистoн, 1981. –
38 б.
