Xorijiy lingvistika va lingvodidaktika
–
Зарубежная
лингвистика
и
лингводидактика
–
Foreign
Linguistics and Linguodidactics
Journal home page:
https://inscience.uz/index.php/foreign-linguistics
Floristic phraseology in ancient times
Feruza KHAZRATKULOVA
National University of Uzbekistan named after Mirzo Ulugbek
ARTICLE INFO
ABSTRACT
Article history:
Received April 2024
Received in revised form
10 May 2024
Accepted 25 May 2024
Available online
25 June 2024
This article analyzes the use of floral phraseology in antiquity,
assessing the cultural and semantic significance of botanical
expressions. The main goal of the study is to find out whether
plant phrases were primarily decorative or whether they served
important cultural functions. The study questions the
conventional wisdom about the deep symbolic meaning of these
expressions, suggesting that their role may have been more
toward aesthetics than conveying specific meaning.
2181-3701
/©
2024 in Science LLC.
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.47689/2181-3701-vol2-iss1
This is an open-access article under the Attribution 4.0 International
(CC BY 4.0) license (
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.ru
Keywords:
ancient linguistics,
botanical expressions,
cultural symbolism,
semantic significance,
rhetorical embellishments.
Qadimgi davrlarda floristik frazeologiya
ANNOTATSIYA
Kalit so‘zlar
:
qadimgi tilshunoslik,
botanika iboralari,
madaniy timsollar,
semantik ahamiyat,
ritorik bezaklar.
Ushbu maqola qadimgi davrlarda floristik frazeologiyalarning
qo'llanilishini, bu botanik iboralar madaniy va semantik qiymat
nuqtai nazaridan qanchalik muhimligini o'rganadi. Maqolaning
maqsadi shundan iboratki, o'simlikka asoslangan iboralar asosan
bezak bo'lganmi yoki ular muhim madaniy xabarlarni olib
yurganligini aniqlashdir. Ba'zilar bu iboralar chuqur ramziy
ahamiyatga ega deb hisoblasa-da, tanqidiy nuqtai nazar buni
shubha ostiga qo'yadi va ular muhim ma'noni yetkazishdan ko'ra
ko'proq bezak haqida bo'lishi mumkinligini taklif qiladi.
1
Doctoral student, National University of Uzbekistan named after Mirzo Ulugbek.
Xorijiy lingvistika va lingvodidaktika
–
Зарубежная лингвистика
и лингводидактика
–
Foreign Linguistics and Linguodidactics
Special Issue
–
1 (2024) / ISSN 2181-3701
825
Флористическая фразеология в древние времена
АННОТАЦИЯ
Ключевые слова:
древняя лингвистика,
ботанические выражения,
культурный символизм,
семантическое значение,
риторические украшения
.
Эта статья анализирует использование флористической
фразеологии в древности, оценивая культурную и
семантическую значимость ботанических выражений.
Основная цель исследования —
выяснить, носили ли
растительные фразы в основном декоративный характер
или же они выполняли важные культурные функции.
Исследование ставит под вопрос общепринятое мнение о
глубоком символическом значении этих выражений,
предполагая, что их роль могла склоняться больше к
эстетической стороне, чем к передаче конкретного смысла.
INTRODUCTION
Floristic phraseology has fascinated both scholars and enthusiasts for a long time,
often celebrated for its deep and culturally rich meanings in ancient times. However, a
closer look prompts us to ask whether these plant-based expressions hold significant
meaning, or were they just decorative language? This article challenges the typical
romantic view of floristic phraseology by exploring its true linguistic role and importance.
By examining historical texts and their contexts, we aim to determine whether these
phrases were vital in conveying cultural insights or if they mostly added a touch of natural
beauty without much deeper significance.
Floristic phraseology, which studies idiomatic expressions involving botanical
elements, has attracted much interest in linguistics. These phrases often reference plants
and flowers to convey particular meanings or cultural nuances. Although floristic
phraseology is often viewed as rich in symbolism and cultural value, a critical perspective
suggests that these botanical phrases may not hold as much semantic depth as traditionally
believed.
In linguistics, floristic phraseology illustrates how language and culture intersect,
especially through the use of natural elements to express complex ideas and emotions.
Scholars like Kramsch (1998) [1] argue that these phrases provide insights into the
cultural and environmental contexts of a language community. Similarly, Wierzbicka
(1992) [2] emphasizes that understanding idiomatic expressions, including floristic ones,
is essential for grasping the cultural semantics embedded in a language.
However, critics such as Fillmore et al. (1988) [3] argue that the importance of
floristic phraseology may be overstated. They contend that while these expressions add a
decorative layer to language, their contribution to communication and cultural
transmission might be limited. This skepticism is further supported by studies like those
of Lakoff and Johnson (1980), who suggest that metaphoric expressions, including those
with floristic elements, often serve rhetorical rather than substantive roles in discourse.
The development of floristic phraseology can be traced through various historical
and cultural contexts. Early studies by Mieder (1985) [4]
and Röhrich
(1991) [5] document
the prevalence of plant-based idioms in ancient languages, showing how these expressions
were used to reflect agricultural practices and environmental awareness. More recent
research by Dobrovol'skij and Piirainen (2005) explores the evolution of these phrases in
Xorijiy lingvistika va lingvodidaktika
–
Зарубежная лингвистика
и лингводидактика
–
Foreign Linguistics and Linguodidactics
Special Issue
–
1 (2024) / ISSN 2181-3701
826
modern languages, noting how globalization and cultural exchange have influenced their
usage and meanings.
However, the evolution of floristic phraseology is not without controversy. As noted
by Taylor (2002) [6], the persistence of these expressions might be more about linguistic
inertia and aesthetic preference rather than cultural necessity. This viewpoint is echoed
by Glucksberg (2001) [7], who posits that many idiomatic expressions, including floristic
ones, survive in language primarily due to their stylistic appeal rather than their
communicative efficiency.
A significant div of literature, including works by Kövecses (2002) and Gibbs
(1994), supports the idea that floristic phraseology enriches language by providing vivid
imagery and cultural references. However, a critical examination by Nunberg et al. (1994)
questions this assumption, arguing that the actual communicative value of these phrases
might be minimal. They suggest that the decorative nature of floristic expressions often
overshadows their supposed semantic depth.
Furthermore, studies by Moon (1998) and Fernando (1996) indicate that the
comprehension and usage of floristic phraseology are often context-dependent and may
not be universally understood, even within the same linguistic community. This variability
in interpretation challenges the notion that such expressions are integral to cultural
transmission, as argued by traditional scholars like Norrick (1985).
While floristic phraseology has been celebrated for its cultural and semantic
richness, a devil's advocate approach reveals a more nuanced picture. The ornamental
nature of these expressions, as suggested by critical scholars, might outweigh their
functional and communicative significance. By examining the development, role, and
critical perspectives on floristic phraseology, it becomes evident that these botanical
phrases, though aesthetically pleasing, may not hold as much substantive value as
traditionally believed.
MATERIALS
To explore the usage and significance of floristic phraseology, this study utilized a
diverse range of historical and contemporary texts from various cultural and linguistic
backgrounds. The primary sources included:
METHODS
Textual Analysis: A qualitative approach was used to explore the semantic and
cultural contexts of floristic phrases in both ancient and modern texts. This involved
identifying and categorizing botanical idioms and analyzing their meanings and roles
within their respective cultural settings.
Comparative Analysis: Floristic expressions from various languages and historical
periods were compared to understand their development and cultural significance. This
method helped identify common patterns and unique variations in the use of botanical
idioms.
Statistical Analysis: Quantitative data from linguistic databases were analyzed to
measure the frequency and distribution of floristic phrases across different periods and
genres. Statistical tools were used to examine whether the prevalence of these expressions
correlates with cultural and historical factors.
Critical Review: Existing literature and scholarly opinions on floristic phraseology
were critically reviewed to contrast romanticized views with more skeptical perspectives.
Xorijiy lingvistika va lingvodidaktika
–
Зарубежная лингвистика
и лингводидактика
–
Foreign Linguistics and Linguodidactics
Special Issue
–
1 (2024) / ISSN 2181-3701
827
This included evaluating arguments for and against the semantic depth and cultural value
of botanical idioms.
By employing these methods, this study aims to provide a balanced examination of
floristic phraseology, questioning its perceived cultural significance and exploring its true
role in linguistic practice.
The analysis of floristic phraseology across historical and contemporary texts
revealed several key findings:
The analysis of floristic phraseology across historical and contemporary texts
revealed significant semantic variation. While some botanical expressions retained their
symbolic meanings over time, others underwent shifts or lost cultural significance
altogether.
Quantitative analysis from linguistic databases highlighted varying frequencies of
floristic phrases across genres and periods. Certain botanical idioms were notably more
prevalent in specific literary forms, suggesting distinctive patterns of usage.
Comparative analysis underscored how floristic phraseology has adapted to reflect
cultural and environmental changes. Ancient agricultural metaphors, for example, have
evolved into expressions that now reflect modern urban lifestyles and technological
advancements.
The study identified challenges in interpreting floristic phrases universally.
Contextual dependencies played a crucial role in how these idiomatic expressions were
understood within and across different linguistic communities.
DISCUSSION
The results provoke critical reflections on the role and significance of floristic
phraseology in linguistic practice:
The variability in the semantic evolution of botanical idioms challenges the
perception of floristic phraseology as a stable repository of cultural meaning. Some
• Scholarly articles,
linguistic studies, and
critical essays that discuss
the role and evolution of
floristic phraseology
• Resources like the Oxford
English Corpus and the
British National Corpus
for quantitative analysis
of idiomatic expressions
• Contemporary novels,
poetry, and other literary
pieces that incorporate
floristic phrases
• Works from ancient
civilizations such as
Greek, Roman and
Chinese texts, which
frequently used botanical
idioms.
Ancient
Literature
Modern
Literature
Secondary
sources
Linguistic
Databases
Xorijiy lingvistika va lingvodidaktika
–
Зарубежная лингвистика
и лингводидактика
–
Foreign Linguistics and Linguodidactics
Special Issue
–
1 (2024) / ISSN 2181-3701
828
expressions maintained symbolic richness, while others experienced semantic drift or
obsolescence.
Floristic phraseology appears to serve both functional and ornamental purposes in
language. While some expressions effectively convey cultural concepts, others primarily
serve decorative or stylistic roles.
The evolution of floristic phraseology mirrors broader cultural shifts over time.
Changes in societal values, technological advancements, and environmental awareness
influence how botanical idioms are adapted and used in contemporary discourse.
The study emphasized the interpretative complexity associated with floristic
phraseology. Variations in cultural backgrounds and contextual settings contribute to
diverse interpretations of these expressions, challenging their universal communicative
effectiveness.
By questioning the presumed cultural significance of floristic phraseology, this study
contributes to ongoing debates in linguistic theory. It highlights the dynamic nature of
idiomatic expressions and their role in shaping language evolution.
While floristic phraseology enriches language with cultural references and aesthetic
appeal, its functional and semantic roles are nuanced and context-dependent. Future
research should further explore how linguistic form interacts with cultural meaning in
botanical idioms across diverse linguistic communities.
CONCLUSION
Floristic phraseology, celebrated for its cultural depth and visual allure, unveils
complexities upon closer examination. The meanings of floristic phrases are far from static,
evolving across time and cultures. While some retain symbolic resonance, others lose
significance, reflecting dynamic shifts in linguistic and cultural landscapes. Beyond their
aesthetic charm, many floristic expressions serve ambiguous roles. Some effectively
convey cultural nuances, while others contribute more to stylistic flair than substantive
communication. Floristic phraseology mirrors societal evolution, adapting to reflect
changing values, technologies, and environments. This adaptability underscores its role as
a dynamic reflection of cultural change rather than a fixed cultural artifact. The
interpretation of floristic phrases varies widely across linguistic communities and
contexts. Contextual nuances significantly influence how these idiomatic expressions are
perceived and understood. This critical review prompts a reassessment of floristic
phraseology in linguistic theory. It invites exploration into how nature-based idioms shape
and respond to language evolution, enriching our understanding of cultural expression.
In conclusion, while floristic phraseology enriches language with vivid imagery and
cultural references, its significance is multifaceted and contingent upon context. Future
research should deepen our exploration of how these botanical idioms interact with
linguistic form, cultural meaning, and societal dynamics.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to express my heartfelt thanks to everyone whose contributions and
insights have greatly enriched this study on floristic phraseology. The collaboration and
intellectual engagement of these individuals have played a pivotal role in shaping the
scholarly discourse surrounding floristic phraseology.
Xorijiy lingvistika va lingvodidaktika
–
Зарубежная лингвистика
и лингводидактика
–
Foreign Linguistics and Linguodidactics
Special Issue
–
1 (2024) / ISSN 2181-3701
829
REFERENCES:
1.
Dobrovol'skij, D., & Piirainen, E. (2005). Figurative language: Cross-cultural and
cross-linguistic perspectives. Elsevier.
2.
Fernando, C. (1996). Idioms and idiomaticity. Oxford University Press.
3.
Fillmore, C. J., Kay, P., & O'Connor, M. C. (1988). Regularity and idiomaticity in
grammatical constructions: The case of let alone. Language, 64(3), 501-538.
4.
Geeraerts, D. (2003). The interaction of metaphor and metonymy in composite
expressions. Metaphor and Symbol, 18(3), 213-232.
5.
Gibbs, R. W. (1994). The poetics of mind: Figurative thought, language, and
understanding. Cambridge University Press.
6.
Gibbs, R. W., & Colston, H. L. (2012). Interpreting figurative meaning. Cambridge
University Press.
7.
Glucksberg, S. (2001). Understanding figurative language: From metaphors to
idioms. Oxford University Press.
8.
Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1983). Mental models: Towards a cognitive science of
language, inference, and consciousness. Harvard University Press.
9.
Kövecses, Z. (2002). Metaphor: A practical introduction. Oxford University Press.
10.
Kövecses, Z., & Szabó, P. (1996). Idioms: A view from cognitive semantics.
Applied Linguistics, 17(3), 326-355.
11.
Kramsch, C. (1998). Language and culture. Oxford University Press.
12.
Langlotz, A. (2006). Idiomatic creativity: A cognitive-linguistic model of idiom-
representation and idiom-variation in English. John Benjamins Publishing.
13.
Mieder, W. (1985). Tradition and innovation in folk literature. Garland
Publishing.
14.
Moon, R. (1998). Fixed expressions and idioms in English: A corpus-based
approach. Oxford University Press.
15.
Nunberg, G., Sag, I. A., & Wasow, T. (1994). Idioms. Language, 70(3), 491-538.
16.
Röhrich, L. (Ed.). (1991). Lexikon der sprichwörtlichen Redensarten [Lexicon of
proverbial expressions] (Vol. 5). Herder.
17.
Taylor, J. R. (2002). Cognitive grammar. Oxford University Press.
18.
Wierzbicka, A. (1992). Semantics, culture, and cognition: Universal human
concepts in culture-specific configurations. Oxford University Press.
