282
REFERENCES
1.BowkerLynne, Jennifer Pearson
Working With Specialized Language
"Neologisms can also
be formed in another way, however, by assigning a new meaning to an existing word." 2002
2.Niska, H. Explorations in translational creativity: Strategies for interpreting neologisms.
Workshop
paper,
8
th
Aug,
Stockholm
University.
Available
from: 1998.
http://lisa.tolk.su.se/kreeng2.htm
3.Yrokari, C. Translating English Neologisms in science, Technology, and IT: A General
Survey and a Case Study for Greek. 2005.
4. www. wordspy. Com.
SPECIFIC FEATURES OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE SPORT TERMINOLOGY
Akhmedov Oybek Saporbayevich
Doctor of Philological Sciences (DSc),
Professor of Uzbekistan University of World Languages
Any terminological system is an integral part of the lexical layer of the universal language. The
question of the role of the special lexicon in the universal language has not been widely analyzed as
a whole system in linguistics. According to most linguists, there is a regular relationship between the
general lexicon and the special lexicon of a language. Sometimes it is observed that the term in the
terminology is transferred to the universal language, and sometimes, on the contrary, the lexeme from
the universal language is transferred to the special lexical layer. So, they complement and enrich each
other. These two phenomena are referred to in linguistics with the concepts of determinologization
and terminologization.
The sports terminological system of the English language is composed of several complex
linguistic phenomena, it is a legal matter that terminological units require clarification of their
definitions and explanations in translation, and it is the main function of any term.
This rule also applies to English sports terms. As noted by I.V.Arnold, “The unique aspect of
word formation from terminological units is that a word formation system is developed based on the
internal system and functions of the elements of the lexicon of the field. Therefore, it is observed that
the morphological method is very productive in English” [1;59]. The process of creating English
sports terminological units relies on 4 main linguistic methods:
1) morphological method;
2) syntactic method;
3) semantic method;
4) word acquisition.
English sports terms are structurally divided as follows:
1) single component terms;
2) compound terms;
a) terms consisting of many components;
b) terms with following components, consisting of many lexemes;
3) metaphorical terms;
4) terms in the form of abbreviations.
In the terminological system of customs and duties, single-component terms do not constitute
a majority in terms of quantity. At the same time, they perform a semantic-functional function in
other sectors of the sports, outside the scope of specialization.
Therefore, as a result of the above-mentioned word formation methods, the lexical-semantic
composition of the lexical units of a special field in English is transformed from a simple form to a
complex form through an evolutionary path.
Linguistically, the terminological system of sports is a) semantic; b) structural; s) is
characterized by signs of attachment to the general literary language and is formed under the influence
of the lexical layer of the general literary language and performs a specific task.
283
It is an undeniable axiom that the majority of terminological units are formed on the basis of
extralinguistic factors. V. P. Danilenko writes:“The reflection of any process that takes place in
society is first manifested in terminology or as a result of transformational changes of certain
terms”[2; 98].
The semantic accuracy of emerging new terms is directly related to the acquired language
source. So, the degree to which England's sports has developed determines the level of semantic
precision of English sports terms.
Terminology is an "affective" aspect of the general literary language, so it clearly and clearly
reflects that the terminological system of a particular language is "susceptible" to external socio-
physical changes. Sports terminology is characterized by a dynamic structure, as a result of the
movement and change of the dynamics of development, changes in the semantics of these
terminological units occur in an evolutionary form and are correlated with several terminological
units.
Ferdinand de Saussure was one of the first to state that "language is a whole system and all
elements form this whole" based on existing factsand theoretically justified it. V.M. As Sergevnina
rightly stated: "Terminological system" means a complex whole of scientific and specialized concepts
interconnected by linguistic designations” [3; 135 ].
Therefore, the common features of the terminology of sports require study without separation
from the integrated system of general linguistics. Specific features of sports terminology are observed
in its manifestation through the conceptual stages of human mental activity and experiences. In this
terminological system, the terms that are functionally leading terms in the field of sports today find
their expression. Consequently, sports terminology is a structural part of physical terminology, and
physical terminology has a “terminological field” consisting of a unique multi-layered system. The
concept of “terminological field”is used in the course of terminological studies as a term that paves
the way for revealing certain features. Although the word “field" in terminology is a foreign
phenomenon compared to pure terms, in some cases this rule is not fully applied, "it is observed that
this or that term acquires multiple meanings”.
Some linguists consider the "field" to be a set of specific concepts and words, while others put
forward the idea that the terminology is somewhat systematic. There are also linguists who accept the
concept of "field" as a systematicity in the connection between terms.
Based on the characteristics of our research, we believe and support the following opinion put
forward by Reformatsky: “The terminological field is a set of terms of the science of certain fields”
[4; 91]. In other words, the terminological field of sports is a set of terminological system that
combines such directions as finance, sports, accounting, customs, marketing, management, audit.
Based on our observations, it is clear that the sports terminology reflects the interconnection of
scientific concepts specific to certain specialties at the linguistic level. The terminological system
formally expresses the internal structural image with the help of certain semantic symbols through
the term-elements that are integrated into its composition. This theoretical view can be explained as
follows:
a)
the aspect of meaning (semantics) that forms certain terminological groups of the term;
b)
in the formation of the terminological system, word formation and derivational,
structural process affecting the interaction of terms;
c)
c) lexical-semantic process in the formation of phenomena of polysemy, synonymy,
antonymy, homonymy in the terminological system.
In the study, it was observed that the system of English sports terms, which is part of the
terminological field of sports, is more stable compared to the special lexicon of the Uzbek language,
and extralinguistic factors have minimal influence on it. Also, as a result of the analysis of many
special dictionaries, it was found that this system is organized based on existing facts, and that there
is a principle of systematicity in it.
The formation of terminological units of sports by the “calque” method leads to the enrichment
and development of the vocabulary of the Uzbek language, and the sports realities and concepts that
284
have arisen as a result of the development of the integration process of the sports play the role of a
nominative tool.
Although the creation of sports terms in Uzbek language relies on certain word-forming
methods in Uzbek linguistics, this process is directly related to the development paradigm of science.
Most of the terms of the field are represented by the main (leading) terms, which have their position
in the terminology in advance and are characterized by their structural-semantic means. However, the
terms created by the "calque" method differ from ordinary lexemes created by this method by the
clarification of their scientific definition. This shows that in the process of creating a new term, it
cannot be considered a full-fledged term without clarifying the functional-semantic difference and
content limit of other concepts, without distinguishing their specific signs. The definitive function,
which is one of the main signs of the term, is significantly reflected in the development of scientific
language, in the structure of terminology. In sport terminology, the conceptual development structure
of this system is reflected in the functional-semantic structure of terminological units.
The peculiarity of these terms is that they reflect the theoretical concepts of the sports system
in their conceptual structure. Terms with a wide semantic range mean only one meaning in the
terminological system and do not express an expressive-emotional connotation. According to
linguists, such terms include the “deep essence of thought”.
In the special lexicon of the English language, such terms perform their functional tasks with
the help of a base (field) identifier attached to their semantic structure. In this case, the dynamics of
movement in terminology cannot cause "washing away" of the mixed terminological border or the
transfer of certain terms to another terminological system. They are only influenced by the
development paradigm of science. As a result, terms with broad semantics reflect the dynamics of
physical development. It can be observed in the following examples that multiple meanings are
manifested in such terms in a hidden form.
It is worth noting that the terms included in the group of general scientific terms turn into a
separate lexical unit as a result of the "special" paradigms of science. In the process of such a change,
they will have the position of an interdisciplinary term.
As a conclusion, it should be noted that English and Uzbek language sports terminology reflects
stages and systems based on a complex hierarchy, and its structural elements are expressed in words
and phrases that act as terms. Information on sports terminology can be gleaned from industry
dictionaries and industry practices, just like other terminology. There are certain requirements and
criteria for including lexical units in the form of field-related terms in special explanatory dictionaries.
Due to the fact that it is difficult to distinguish between term and non-term lexical units in the
translation process, dictionary compilers try to include most of the lexemes found in the
terminological system in dictionaries. The principle proposed by A.S. Gerd regarding the terms that
should be included in the dictionaries is more reasonable for the correct solution of this issue.
According to it, first of all, the level of use of terms in special texts, then the semantic integrity of
terms, and thirdly, the level of validity of terms is meant. The lexicographer A. Hojiev who
emphasized that it is important to select the quality and quantity aspects of the terms in order to
include them in the explanatory dictionary, emphasizes that the main word and related materials make
up the dictionary article. According to it, the components that make up a dictionary article are as
follows:
Vocabulary units:
1) Main word,
2) Stylized compounds,
3) Etymological information,
4) Determining and recording the meaning of vocabulary units,
5) Explanation,
6) Confirming example,
7) Grammatical and stylistic characteristics (signs that record it).
Based on the above, it should be noted that the main word and the explanation given to its
meaning are a permanent component of any dictionary article. So it must be. The remaining
285
components may or may not be present in the dictionary article. The terms do not necessarily have a
sign that records the grammatical characteristics, because the terms are nominative. They are mainly
represented by lexemes in the noun category or with nouns. Therefore, there is no need to record the
grammatical description marks in the dictionary article for the terms.
REFERENCES:
1.Арнольд И.В. Лексикология английского языка. - М.: 1959.
2.Даниленко В.П. Актуальные направления лингвистического исследования русской
терминологии//Современные проблемы русской терминологии. - М.: 1986..
3.СергевнинаВ.М.Принцип системного анализа терминов//Термин и слово. -М.: 1978.
4.Реформатский А. Мысли о терминологии/Современные пробемы русской
терминологии. -М.: 1966.
5.КубряковаЕ.С.Семантика производного термина//Внутренная структура языка. - М.:
1972.
6.Герд А.С.Основы научно-технической лексикографии.-Л.:1986.
7.Ҳожиев А.Тилшунослик терминларининг изоҳли луғати.-Т.:2002.
THE IMPORTANCE OF USING COMMUNICATIVE METHODS IN TEACHING
ENGLISH
Alımova Mukhabbat Quwanishbaevna,
second year master student,
Nukus State Pedagogical Institute, Uzbekistan, Nukus
The importance of communication is enormous for the learners of any language and language
is a tool for communication. We communicate with others, to express our ideas, and to know others’
ideas as well. In order to be a well rounded communicator one needs to be proficient in each of the
four language skills; listening, speaking, reading, and writing, but the ability to communicate
skillfully provides the learner with several distinct advantages. The joy of communicating with others
is immense. In the context of foreign language learning, however there is a problem which teachers
have been aware of for a long time. It is the problem of the student who is structurally competent but
who cannot communicate appropriately. In order to overcome this problem the processes involved in
fluent conversational interaction need to be dealt with. Another pedagogical feature is the deep
integration of critical thinking skills and communicative abilities. Thinking is the understanding and
generation of meaning, and communication is the encoding and decoding of meaning [5].
Language learning today is regarded less of an ‘acquisition of structure’ and more of a learning
of items of use. Keith Johnson [33;5] says that “… knowing a language’ is not the same as ‘the ability
to use language”. The student who is communicatively incompetent is in fact, unaware of the use of
language. The methodologies for language teaching therefore are to be based on the linguistic insights
as to the nature of the language and also on the psychological insights as to the processes involved in
its use, for the development of communicative competence in the learners.
Communicative approaches are based on students forming their own knowledge and
competencies of languages in a social setting. The learners are more involved and the learning is more
effective, if the teachers provide opportunities that best meet learners’ need. While engaged in
communicative tasks language students are given liberty to practice speaking and fluency while
enhancing their knowledge of the target language. The aim of this article will be to consider the
communication developing methods which have appeared to be most influential at the present time.
Communicative Language Teaching (CLT)
CLT is generally regarded as an approach to language teaching. It is based on the theory that
the key function of language use is communication and its primary goal therefore is for learners to
develop communicative competence [15;44]. In other words, its goal is to make use of real-life
situations that necessitate communication. According to the principle of CLT, the learners do not
