168
Phraseological units are stable, reproduced, expressive word combinations, having as a rule a
complete meaning. However, we should differ a word combination from different combinations of
words, as A.M.Peshkovsky emphasized. He wrote: “not any two words in our speech, form a word
combination as well as a word is an external-internal and physico-psychological unity”. A
combination of words is a process, a kind of linguistic “energy”, uniting words in speech, while a
word-combination is a free equivalent of phraseological unit. It is one of the important contributions
made by the academician V. V. Vinogradov. He writes, “Near a word as a notional unit there are
more complex meaningful units. They are such combinations in which a separate word loses its
meaning, but the meaning of the whole combination dominates having new semantic qualities,
developing additional and sometimes new meaning in relation to the sum of those meanings that are
in the words in combinations. A phraseological unit is close to a word semantically and functionally
grammatically but it is not identical to it. A phraseological unit embellishes expressively-emotionally
the meaning it denotes, thus with a science of a word the observations dealing with fusions,
phraseological units and phraseological combinations are organically connected.
A combination is a nominative unit taking part as a word in the process of speech formation.
This statement was proved in the works of many scholars. Syntax which studies a combination of
words and word combinations is called minor (maly) syntax; the unity of words and word
combinations for constructing of sentences is studied by major (bolshoy) syntax.
Many scholars tried to study the distinguishing features of phraseological units and define and
characterize them. A. I. Smirnitsky, A. B. Koonin, N. M. Shansky and others gave the definition,
detailed description and classifications of phraseological units. They distinguished idioms as a kind
of phraseological units. Idioms express certain meanings on the secondary metasemiotic level, based
on the transferred, metaphorical meaning. Some idioms are given in the dictionaries. Different models
of verbal collocations were worked out and included in the manual in the early 30-s of the XX th
century by the famous English methodologist and scholar H. Palmer and in the dictionary by A. S.
Hornby [3;21-121].
REFERENCES
1. Ter-Minasova S.G. Language and intercultural communication. Moscow, 2004.
2. Maslova V.A. Linguoculturology. Moscow, 2007.
3. Hornby A.S and others. The Advanced Learner’s Dictionary of Current English. L., 1978.
TILLARARO MUTANOSIB MUQOBILLIK MUAMMOSI TARIXIGA DOIR
Tlektesov F.M.- NDPI,
Tillararo mutanosib muqobillikni aniqlash hamda ulardan unumli foydalanish, uni o`rganish
ehtiyoji mazkur muammoning, qadim tarixdanoq ilk savdo, iqtisodiy, madaniy hamda qo`shnichilik
aloqalarining o`zaro yaqin tilli qabilalar, shu jumladan ehtimol, turli tillarda so'zlashuvchi qabilalar
o'rtasida o`rnatila boshlanishi bilan kun tartibidagi muammo darajasiga chiqqan. Shu boisdan hali
tilshunoslik ilmi tashkil bo`lib, taraqqiy etishidan bir muddat ilgari ilk falsafiy mutafakkirlar tillararo
mutanosib muqobillik muammosi borasida paydo bo'lgan ba'zi savollarni nazariy jihatdan yoritishga
harakat qilishgan. Ana shunday mulohazalar jumlasiga qadimgi yunon olimi va faylasufi Empirikning
ayni muammoga qaratilgan "...yer yuzidagi har insonning yashash joyi, kelib chiqishi va millatiga
ko`ra farqlanuvchi odatiy kundalik hayoti bor …"[6; 92].
Zamonlar o‘tib tilshunoslar tillararo munosabatlar, shu jumladan ikkidan ortiq tillararo
munosabatlar doirasida tadqiqotni amalga oshirish mobaynida mazkur muammoga qayta - qayta
murojaat qilishga majbur bo‘lib kelishgan. XIX asr oxirida semantika tilshunoslikning mustaqil
tarmog‘i sifatida ajratilishi hisobiga tillararo muqobillik muammosini leksik-semantik sathda alohida
ajratib o‘rganish imkoni paydo bo‘lgan. Til birliklarining ma’nosi tadqiqi bilan bog‘liq har qanday
yangi yo‘nalish: diaxron semantika, sinxron semantika, formal semantika, kognitiv semantika
kabilarning umumiy tilshunoslikda yangi tarmoq o‘laroq paydo bo‘lishi yuqorida so‘z yuritilgan
masala tadqiqi mohiyatiga oydinlik kiritib borgan.
169
Qiyosiy tilshunoslik bilan bog‘liq masalalar XX asrning ikkinchi yarmiga kelib lingvistik
tadqiqotlarning zalvorli qismini tashkil eta boshlagan. Bunday tadqiqotlar jumlasiga o‘z oldiga
tillararo tipologik umumiylik, lisoniy universaliyalarni aniqlashni qo‘ygan kontrastiv tabiatdagi
izlanishlarni kiritish mumkin. Bundan yarim asr ilgari V.G. Gak tillararo tipologik tadqiqotlar
metodologiyasi ko‘p jihatdan rivojlanmaganligini ta’kidlagan bo‘lsa[4 ; 98], bugunga kelib “turli
tillardagi alohida lingvistik hodisalar tadqiqi amalga oshirilgan juda ko‘p sonli empirik tadqiqotlar
yuzaga kelgan”[7; 6]ligini ishonch bilan ta’kidlash mumkin.
Tipologik va kontrastiv tadqiqotlar doirasida tillararo muqobillik muammosiga birinchi
darajadagi e’tibor beriladi. Yakobson o‘rinli qayd etganidek, “O‘zaro farqlanishdagi mutanosib
muqobillik (equivalence in difference) — tilshunoslikning markaziy masalasi hamda tilning asosiy
muammosi”[2; 191]. Ushbu fikrga shu qatori ko‘plab boshqa olimlar ham qo‘shilishgan: “Qiyosiy
tilshunoslikning markaziy vazifasi turli sinf va oilalarga mansub tillarga xos birliklar ya’ni
leksemalar, so‘z yasalish qoliplari, turli grammatik kategoriyalar hamda gaplar o‘rtasidagi
muqobillikni aniqlash iborat” (Sternin 1989, Chervenkova 1989).
Tillarni qiyoslab o‘rganish ixtiyoriy tanlab olingan tillar juftligi, bunda odatda tadqiqotchining
ona tili va tadqiq qilinayotgan xorjiy til muqoyasasidagi lingvistik faktlarni tipologik tadqiq qilishdan
boshlangan, boisi qiyosiy tilshunoslik o‘z ibtidosida ko‘proq xorijiy til ta’limining amaliy masalalari
yechimiga xizmat qilish uchun yo‘naltirilgan soha bo‘lgan. Shu bilan birga, 1970-yillarning boshida
tilning ma’lum jihatlari va xususiyatlari turli ko‘lam va sathga doir qiyosiy tadqiqotlarga jalb qilina
boshlangan. O`tgan asrning yetmishinchi yillaridagi qiyosiy – tipologik tadqiqotlar holatiga baho
berarkan Bondzio: "Tillararo mutanosib muqobillik masalalariga bag`ishlangan asosan ikki til
muqoyasasini ko`zda tutuvchi tadqiqotlarda asosan fonetika (shu jumladan fonologiya ham),
grammatika (bu sathda asosiy tadqiqotlar morfologiya yo`nalishida olib borilganini qayd etish lozim)
sohalaridagina olib borilgani, leksikologiya va sintaksisda bunday o`zaro ikki til qarama-qarshiligi
bo'yicha tadqiqotlarr hamda adabiyotlar deyarli uchramasligi asosiy tipologik o`rganishlar yuqorida
sanab o`tilgan ikki til sath doirasidagina jamlanganini ko`rsatadi"[1; 207-211] deya qayd etgan edi.
Qiyosiy – tipologik tadqiqotlardagi til sathlari o`rganilishidagi bunday nomutanosiblik o`tgan asrning
saksoninchi yillariga kelibgina o`z intihosiga yetgan. Til sathlarining deyarli barchasini qiyoslab
o`rganish va ular o`rtasidagi mutanosib muqobillikni aniqlashga qaratilgan tadqiqotlar sonining
ortishi evaziga qiyosiy – tipologik tilshunoslik sohasidagi manzara o`zgacha tus olgan. Bunday
tadqiqotlar jumlasiga til leksik – semantik sathining kontrastiv – qiyosiy tadqiqiga bag`ishlangan ko`p
sonli tadqiqotlarni ham kiritish lozim bo`ladi.
Natijada, o`tgan asrning saksoninchi yillarida tilshunos olima V.N. Yartseva o`z hamkasbi
Bondzio fikrining mantiqiy davomi o`laroq baholash mumkin bo`lgan quyidagi mulohazani bildiradi:
"Yaqin tarixda qiyosiy – tipologik tadqiqotlarning salmoqli qismini fonologik sathga mansub ishlar
tashkil qilgani holda grammatik sohaga oid tadqiqotlar deyarli ko`zga tashlanmagan bo`lsa, bugungi
kunga
kelib
stilistikadagi
mutanosib
muqobillik,
tarjimadagi
mutanosib
muqobillik,
leksikologiyadagi mutanosib muqobillik hamda so`z yasalashining funksional – semantik
xususiyatlaridagi mutanosib muqobillik masalalariga bag`ishlangangan ishlar tobora ko`payib
borayotganini qayd etish lozim"[8; 3-11] . Ayni o`rinda olima zamondoshlarining hammasi ham
bunday fikrda bo`lmagani: sohadagi ko`p sonli tadqiqotlarning mavjud ekaniga qaramay, kontrastiv
leksika hamda kontrastiv semantika yo`nalishlarida tadqiqotlar qamrovi yetarli darajada emas degan
to`xtamga kelgan tilshunoslar mulohazalarida aks etadi[3; 173-177].
Nazarimizda bu holat til leksik-semantik tizimining mohiyatidan, uning ichki tuzilishi
murakkabligi, nihoyatda mo`rtligi, sath ichidagi va sathlararo aloqalarning chalkashligi, eng muhimi
mazkur sath asosiy birligi bo`lmish – so`zning semantik qismlarga ajratishdagi va ularni aniqlashdagi
mushkulotlardan kelib chiqadi[5; 218-235]. Bu boradagi eng muhim muammolardan biri tizimli
qarama-qarshi leksik-semantik tadqiqotlar uchun tertium comparationisni tanlashdir. Ushbu tanlovni
belgilaydigan va taqqoslash xarakterini belgilaydigan tushuncha mutanosib muqobillik
tushunchasidir, chunki kontrastiv tipologiyaning maqsadi har doim taqqoslanadigan hodisalarning
o'xshashliklari va farqlarini aniqlash, shu bilan ulardagi mutanosib muqobillik darajasini belgilashdir.
170
ADABIYOTLAR RO’YXATI
1.
Bondzio W. Bemerkungen zur linguistischen Konfrontation in der Lexik. //
Wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift der Humboldt-Universität Berlin, GSR. Berlin, (1973)3:207-211.
2.
Jakobson R. Linguistische Aspekte der Übersetzung. // Übersetzungswissenschaft/
Hrsg. von W. Wills. Darmstadt: Wiss. Buchgesellschaft, 12(1981): C. 191.
3.
Wilske L. Konfrontative Analyse von Benennungsmotivationen im Russischen und
Deutschen. // Zeitschrift fur Slawistik, 33(1988)2: 173 - 177.
4.
Гак В.Г. Опыт применения сопоставительного анализа к изучению структуры
значения слова. // Вопросы языкознания, 1966, № 2: C. 98.
5.
Уфимцева A.A. О типологическом изучении лексики. // Структурно-
типологическое описание современных германских языков. М.: Наука, 1966: 218 - 235.
6.
Фрейденберг О.М. (ред.). Античные теории языка и стиля. Под общ. ред. О.М.
Фрейденберг. M.-JL: ОГИЗ, 1936. – C. 92.
7.
Юсупов У.К. Сопоставительная лингвистика как самостоятельная дисциплина.
// Методы сопоставительного изучения языков. М.: Наука, 1988: C. 6.
8.
Ярцева В.Н. Сопоставительная лингвистика и проблемы вариативности языка. //
Научные доклады высшей школы. Филологические науки, 1986, № 5: 3 - 11.
LINGUOCULTUROLOGY AND TEACHING FOREIGN LANGUAGES
Utepbergenova D.N., Sarsenbaeva G.K.
Assistant teacher of NSPI named after Ajiniyaz
1
st
year student of NSPI named after Ajiniyaz
Linguocultural method is important in the perception, understanding and interpretation of the
artistic text, since the issues of interpretation of the text have long been in the center of attention of
scholars and philologists, both linguists and literary scholars. At the present stage of the development
of philological science, this problem is particularly acute. In order to approach its solution, it is
necessary first of all to draw a very definite boundary between the two aspects of understanding.
The first of these could be defined as understanding in the most direct and ordinary sense,
without which meaningful reading is impossible at all. The second is directly related to that field of
philological knowledge, which is designated by such definitions as "language and literature",
"stylistics and poetics of artistic speech", etc. Undoubtedly, when it comes to the latest achievements
of linguistic analysis, all this should be assessed as an important and basic aspect of understanding,
providing for such a study of the material that has uncovered another riddle of the emotionally
expressive-evaluative impact exerted on the reader of fiction. It should be noted that there can be no
insurmountable obstacle between the two named aspects of understanding topics. For another, this is
reality, different types of literary allusions, presenting historical and philological information, that is
called the vertical context of a work, an author and a whole literary trend.
There is a large number of works in which the classification of various styles according to
the functions of language is given. One of the most important theses of the theory of academician
V.V.Vinogradov is his classification of styles according to their main functions (communication,
message and impact). The function of impact in the most complete form is carried out in the works
of fiction, in the literary text, in the belles-lettres style. However, we can speak about the function of
impact in a broader sense, as a poetic or aesthetic function of language. According to
V.V.Vinogradov, "the poetic function of language is based on the communicative, proceeds from it,
but a new world of speech meanings and relations subordinated to the laws of art is erected above it"
[1;155].
Linguistic analysis of the text can be carried out at three levels: semantic, metasemiotic and
metametasemiotic. The first semantic level of research is the analysis of units of language in their
direct, nominative meaning. However, in the literary text, the content and expression of the semantic
level can serve as an expression for the new meta-content (meta means connotative, metaphorical,
figurative). At the metasemiotic level, additional shades of meaning or "connotations" acquired by
