ACADEMIC RESEARCH IN MODERN SCIENCE
International scientific-online conference
123
LINGUISTIC AND CULTURAL FEATURES OF THE CONCEPT OF
SPACE/MÀKÀN IN ENGLISH AND KARAKALPAK LANGUAGES
Palimbetova Dilbar Tursinbaevna
Assistant teacher of Nukus branch of Tashkent University of Information
Technologies named after Muhammad al-Khwarizmi
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14810211
Abstract.
This article examines the linguistic and cultural features of the
concept of space in English and Karakalpak languages. The grammatical and
lexical means of expressing spatial relations, as well as the influence of culture
on the perception of space, are analyzed. Particular attention is paid to the
metaphorical use of spatial terms and the differences in the worldview of
speakers of these languages.
Keywords:
space, English, Karakalpak, cultural features, spatial
metaphors.
The concept of space is fundamental in human cognition and
communication, influencing language and culture in profound ways. While all
languages possess ways to describe spatial relationships, the linguistic and
cultural features of space can vary significantly across languages. In this article,
the concept of space will be examined in both English and Karakalpak languages,
with a focus on linguistic structures, cultural perceptions, and the influence of
worldview [8, 253-267].
First and foremost, English and Karakalpak exhibit different approaches to
the linguistic representation of space. In English, prepositions play a crucial role
in expressing spatial relationships. For example, words such as "in," "on," and
"at" provide specific locational contexts. On the other hand, Karakalpak
language, which belongs to the Turkic language family, relies more on
postpositions and case suffixes to convey spatial meanings. For instance, the
locative case suffix "-da/-de" is commonly used to indicate location.
Moreover, English often utilizes phrasal verbs to describe spatial
movement, such as "go up," "come down," or "move forward," which combine a
verb with a preposition or adverb to create a new meaning. In contrast,
Karakalpak tends to use verb affixes to express such movement, which reflects
the agglutinative nature of the language.
In addition to linguistic differences, cultural perspectives on space also
differ between English and Karakalpak-speaking communities. English-speaking
cultures, particularly those influenced by Western ideologies, often perceive
space in terms of ownership and boundaries. For example, the concept of
ACADEMIC RESEARCH IN MODERN SCIENCE
International scientific-online conference
124
personal space is highly emphasized in English-speaking societies, where
individuals value their privacy and personal boundaries [5, 128-129].
Conversely, Karakalpak culture, shaped by its nomadic and collectivist
traditions, tends to have a more fluid perception of space. Shared spaces and
communal living are more prominent, and there is often a greater emphasis on
social interaction within a given space. This cultural difference is reflected in the
language, where expressions related to space frequently emphasize collectivity
and relational aspects.
Another important aspect to consider is the use of spatial metaphors in
both languages. In English, space is commonly used metaphorically to represent
abstract concepts such as time and relationships. Expressions like "a distant
memory," "a close friend," or "a long-term plan" illustrate how spatial terms are
mapped onto non-physical domains.
Similarly, Karakalpak also employs spatial metaphors, but they are often
deeply rooted in the natural environment and nomadic heritage of the region.
Expressions such as "jaqìn jùrek" (close heart) or "alìs jol" (distant road) not
only convey spatial relations but also imply emotional and social connotations.
Furthermore, the differing worldviews of English and Karakalpak speakers
have shaped their respective spatial expressions. The English worldview,
influenced by industrialization and urbanization, tends to prioritize precise
spatial measurements and clear distinctions between public and private spaces.
As a result, spatial terms in English are often used with a high degree of
specificity.
On the other hand, the Karakalpak worldview, shaped by pastoral and
agrarian lifestyles, adopts a more holistic approach to space. There is a greater
integration of natural elements in spatial descriptions, and the boundaries
between different types of spaces are more flexible. This perspective is reflected
in the language through the frequent use of nature-related spatial terms.
Conclusion.
To sum up, the concept of space in English and Karakalpak
languages exhibits significant linguistic and cultural differences. While English
relies heavily on prepositions and precise spatial terms, Karakalpak employs
postpositions and agglutinative structures. Additionally, cultural perceptions of
space in each language are influenced by historical and social factors, shaping
the way people interact with and describe their surroundings. Understanding
these differences not only enhances cross-cultural communication but also
provides deeper insights into the interconnectedness of language and culture.
ACADEMIC RESEARCH IN MODERN SCIENCE
International scientific-online conference
125
References:
1. Leontovich О. A. Russians and Americans: Paradoxes of Intercultural
Communication. Volgograd: Peremena, 2002. 344 pp.
2. Karasik V.I. Linguistic Circle: personality, concepts, discourse. Volgograd:
Peremena, 2002. 477 pp.
3. Kravchenko L. V. Language and perception. Cognitive aspects of language
categorization. Irkutsk: Publishing house of Irkutsk University, 1996. 160 pp.
4. Yakovleva E.S. Fragments of the Russian language picture of the world
(models of space, time and perception). M.: Gnosis, 1994. 343 pp.
5. Karaulov Yu.N. Language consciousness as a process: theoretical background
of one experiment // Word: jubilee collection devoted to the 70th anniversary of
Prof. Chervenkov I. Sofia, 2001, P. 128-129.
6. A concise dictionary of cognitive terms. M.: Moscow University Publishing
house, 1996.416 pp.
7. Vsevolodova M.V., Vladimirsky E.Yu. Ways of expression of spatial relations in
the modern Russian language. M.: Rus. yaz., 1982. 262 pp.
8. Neisser U. Two Themes in the Study of Cognition // Cognition: conceptual and
methodological issues. Washington, 1992. P. 253-267.
