Volume 03 Issue 09-2023
218
International Journal of Advance Scientific Research
(ISSN
–
2750-1396)
VOLUME
03
ISSUE
09
Pages:
218-222
SJIF
I
MPACT
FACTOR
(2021:
5.478
)
(2022:
5.636
)
(2023:
6.741
)
OCLC
–
1368736135
A
BSTRACT
In this article, the linguistic landscape of the world, which is a component of linguistics and cultural studies,
such as linguistics and spiritual studies, studies lexicons and lacunae without alternatives. Language units,
mythology and archetypes, customs and ceremonies, proverbs, proverbs, phraseologies, norms, patterns
and symbols, metaphors and linguistic images, the methodological basis of the language, speech behavior
and speech culture are revealed in the linguistic landscape of the world.
K
EYWORDS
The linguistic landscape of the world, proverbs, sayings, customs and ceremonies, and behaviour.
I
NTRODUCTION
Commenting on the formation of the
anthropocentric paradigm in linguistics, N.
Mahmudov explains the following points:
"According to the objective nature of the
language, in the anthropocentric paradigm, they
gave man the main place, in which language is the
main element. Makes up a person. It does not
form the linguistic image of the world on the basis
of any idea, the reason for this can be called the
moderation of language tools, that is, the word
can serve to express different thoughts and ideas.
After all, "the linguistic image of the world is a
reflection of the knowledge of existence in the
medium of language, as well as a means of
acquiring new knowledge and expressing it" [1,
16].
Journal
Website:
http://sciencebring.co
m/index.php/ijasr
Copyright:
Original
content from this work
may be used under the
terms of the creative
commons
attributes
4.0 licence.
Research Article
ANALYSIS OF THE LINGUISTIC LANDSCAPE OF THE WORLD
BETWEEN THE UZBEK LANGUAGE AND THE TURKISH
LANGUAGE
Submission Date:
September 20, 2023,
Accepted Date:
September 25, 2023,
Published Date:
September 30, 2023
Crossref doi:
https://doi.org/10.37547/ijasr-03-09-36
Nadira Lutfullayevna Usmanova
Teacher, Department Of Turkish Philology, Tashkent State University Of Oriental Studies, Uzbekistan
Volume 03 Issue 09-2023
219
International Journal of Advance Scientific Research
(ISSN
–
2750-1396)
VOLUME
03
ISSUE
09
Pages:
218-222
SJIF
I
MPACT
FACTOR
(2021:
5.478
)
(2022:
5.636
)
(2023:
6.741
)
OCLC
–
1368736135
According to G. Gachev[2], "The national image of
the world includes national space, lifestyle,
language, national spirituality, national mentality,
national way of understanding existence, national
concepts of existence, value system, etc. Each era
creates its own national image. It is natural that
the national languages that are formed and
continuously develop on the basis of these
categories describe the world in different and
unique ways. However, it is known that "language
enriches the conceptual model of the world
through its system of meaning and the
combination of these systems through national
and cultural diversity. W. Humboldt for the first
time observes the linguistic representation of the
world on the basis of philosophical dialectics.
While studying the language on a philosophical
basis, he focuses on the linguistic image of the
world and its structural elements, including the
categories of the general linguistic image of the
world, national linguistic image, and special
language image. Later, the linguist scientist
Dimitriyeva L [3]. pays special attention to the
question of the interdependence of the language
image of the world and the categories of the
nation and puts forward the idea that the mother
tongue is the only strong link in his research. He
also thinks in detail about the nation, and the
national linguistic image of the world.
As a separate field of science and science,
linguoculturalology, which arose at the
intersection of language and culture, is required
to have its own research object, subject, goals and
tasks. In this, first of all, it is necessary to
determine the general descriptive features of
linguistics and cultural studies. V. N. Telia gives
the definition that "Linguistics is a science that
studies the person in a person, or more precisely,
the cultural factor." Therefore, in the center of the
science of language and culture, the complex of
linguistic landscape of the world is first of all a
human
phenomenon.
According
to
G.
Kolshansky[4], "Linguculturalology focuses on
the human factor in a person, more precisely, on
the cultural factor. The formation of the center of
linguistics from the phenomenon of culture
shows that the science of man is a phenomenon
belonging to the anthropological paradigm. The
issue of the relationship between language and
culture is complex and contradictory. Regardless
of how this problem is interpreted by scientists, it
is important to determine the role of the human
factor in the reflection of culture in linguistics,
especially in linguocultural science. The study of
the state of perception of the system of cultural
values by the language and speakers of the
language, prof. As N. Mahmudov noted, "Language
and culture usually mean the explanation of this
or that culture through language or, on the
contrary, through the study or explanation of
culture. one or another language, more precisely,
the meaning of culture in lingua-cultural studies
is not "level (speech culture), but "the level
achieved in mental-spiritual or economic
activity", but "the level of human society in the
spiritual-educational
sphere
set
of
achievements", social and spiritual-educational
life (cultural history, Uzbek culture)".
No two cultures are ever completely compatible.
These inconsistencies are also observed in the
Volume 03 Issue 09-2023
220
International Journal of Advance Scientific Research
(ISSN
–
2750-1396)
VOLUME
03
ISSUE
09
Pages:
218-222
SJIF
I
MPACT
FACTOR
(2021:
5.478
)
(2022:
5.636
)
(2023:
6.741
)
OCLC
–
1368736135
lexical-semantic,
functional,
stylistic,
and
grammatical features of the linguistic-cultural
units of the languages being compared. The fact
that some units belonging to this layer have an
equivalent in a second language does not mean
that these units are linguistically equivalent. We
can perceive the concept field that exists in the
linguistic landscape of a representative of one
culture as a reality or a lacuna phenomenon in the
language of a representative of another culture, or
it can exist in a non-verbalized state. These
features of language and cultural units become
clearer when they are classified by comparative
analysis, considering the semantic-structural
features of both languages.
We can divide linguistic units into two large
groups. Here, we can include in the first
classification units that belong to culture and
exist in real life as objects, events, actions, and
spoken materiality. Examples of Uzbek linguistic
and cultural units are chapon, doppi, tandir, elder,
mahalla, sumalak, mahsi-kalish, somsa, sovchilik,
toy, etc. They are also characterized because they
can be fully adequate or partially equivalent to
each other. Sometimes, units that are adequate
are not considered adequate in all aspects of
semantic meaning. We can compare this with the
example of the wedding lexeme, which occupies a
large place in Uzbek culture, and its Turkish
translation.
Linguistic-cultural unit of weddings in Uzbek is
equal to the lexeme of weddings in Turkish. I
explained this unit in the "Annotated Dictionary
of the Uzbek Language" as follows:
1. Marriage, marriage, circumcision and other
relations with parties and spectacles, the general
name of folk ceremonies;
2. According to the agreement between the
matchmakers, money, sarpo, material and similar
things are given by the groom to the girl;
3. In connection with the sending of these things,
a ceremony is held at the home of the bride and
groom;
4. Holidays are all about celebrations and
entertainment."
The Turkish equivalent of a wedding is in the
Turkish dictionary
1. The general name of folk ceremonies with
parties and spectacles with marriage, marriage,
circumcision and other relationships
2. Marriage ceremony of two people;
3. wedding reference: wedding gift ring, gold,
party.
In each of the above interpretations of the lexeme
wedding, it is understood that it is a ceremony
related to mutual relations, that is, marriage. It is
observed that the event related to the wedding
took the form of a feast in both cultures. However,
the existence of components such as circumcision
in the explanatory dictionary of the Uzbek
language is not reflected in the semantic field of
the wedding, which is considered adequate for
the wedding lexeme. Also, the second explanation
given to the equal unit of the wedding (money,
sarpo, material, etc. given by the groom to the girl
Volume 03 Issue 09-2023
221
International Journal of Advance Scientific Research
(ISSN
–
2750-1396)
VOLUME
03
ISSUE
09
Pages:
218-222
SJIF
I
MPACT
FACTOR
(2021:
5.478
)
(2022:
5.636
)
(2023:
6.741
)
OCLC
–
1368736135
according to the agreement between the gods) is
not found in the lexeme explanation. In Turkish,
in Uzbek culture, after the wedding ceremony, the
bride and groom live with the groom's parents,
and in Turkish culture, the bride and groom live
separately. Also, the groom's family sends gifts to
the bride's family a day or two before the
wedding. The gift consists of money, sarpo and
food products. On the occasion of the wedding
(gift), he comes to the bride's house and sends her
dowry to the groom. Sepi is a gift given to a girl by
her parents and relatives, which usually consists
of things. Based on the above examples, it can be
said that according to the agreement between the
grooms, the absence of the combination of money,
sarpo, material, etc. given by the groom to the girl
is explained by the absence of such things. a
situation within a culture. Therefore, when a
semantic meaning considered adequate or
equivalent in a certain sense in terms of the
linguistic landscape of the world is taken in
another context, differences are observed
according to the feature of functionality.
As an example, there are cases when the wedding
of language and cultural unity is used figuratively
or figuratively. In this case, this unit is used in the
meanings of joy, victory, and good day, and the
figurative meaning is understood only when it is
taken into general analysis within the context.
Equivalent linguistic-cultural units not only
record intercultural compatibility but also reveal
their distinguishing features. The phenomenon of
congruent
lexical
units
whose
content
components
are
linguistically
dissimilar;
although not similar in form, lexical units whose
content components correspond to each other
create the phenomenon of equivalence. An
equivalence
phenomenon
describes
a
relationship between two corresponding units,
but these units do not form all connections.
Everything in the linguistic landscape of the
world has its own characteristics, and this thing is
not equally perceived by representatives of one
or
another
culture.
For
this
reason,
representatives of different nationalities can
follow different "concepts" behind the same
concept.
From the definitions and descriptions given
above, we have formed a brief understanding of
purely linguistic and cultural units. But here it
should be noted that there are also functional
linguistic and cultural units of the language. We
saw an example of a unit related to this
classification above in the example of a wedding
lexeme. In modern linguistics, views on accepting
lingua-spiritual studies as the second branch of
linguistics-cultural studies are put forward. As
linguistic cultural studies consider the issues that
arise at the intersection of language and culture,
it is appropriate to conditionally divide culture
into material and spiritual classifications. In this
place, language-spirituality separates from the
issues of material culture and includes concepts
related to spirituality.
R
EFERENCES
1.
Mahmudov N. Tilning mukammal tadqiq
yo‘llarini izlab//O‘zbek tili va adabiyoti –
T.:
2012, 3-16 b.
Volume 03 Issue 09-2023
222
International Journal of Advance Scientific Research
(ISSN
–
2750-1396)
VOLUME
03
ISSUE
09
Pages:
218-222
SJIF
I
MPACT
FACTOR
(2021:
5.478
)
(2022:
5.636
)
(2023:
6.741
)
OCLC
–
1368736135
2.
Георгий
Дмитриевич
Гачев.
Национальные образы мира. –
M.: 1988.
3.
Дмитриева Л.М. Топонимическая картина
мира: отражение бытийных ценностей //
Язык. Человек. Картина мира: Мат
-
лы все
Рос. Конф. –Омск, 2000
.
4.
Караулов Ю.Н. Общая и русская
идеография. –М.: Наука, 1996.
5.
Маслова В.А. Введение в когнитивную
лингвистику. –М.: Флинта: Наука, 2007.
6.
Колшанский Г.В. Объективная картина
мира в познании и языке. –М.: Наука,
1990.
7.
Ширинова
Р.Х.
Олам
миллий
манзарасининг бадиий таржимада қайта
яратилиши: Филол. фан. д
-
ри …дисс. –
Тошкент, 2007.
8.
Арутюнова
Н.Д.
К
проблеме
функционирования типов лексического
значения // Аспекты семантических
исследований.
Дискурс.
Лингвистический
энциклопедический
словарь. –М.: Советская энциклопедия,
1990.
