International Journal Of Literature And Languages
44
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ijll
VOLUME
Vol.05 Issue05 2025
PAGE NO.
44-46
10.37547/ijll/Volume05Issue05-13
An Analysis of The Morphological and Syntactic
Properties of Visual Cognitive Verbs
Karimjonova Shahlo Ravshanjonovna
Fergana State University, Senior Lecturer, Department of Practical English, Doctor of Philosophy in Philology (PhD), Uzbekistan
Received:
16 March 2025;
Accepted:
12 April 2025;
Published:
14 May 2025
Abstract:
Visual cognitive verbs play a key role in expressing perception and cognition. This paper explores their
morphological properties, including inflections and derivational forms, as well as their typical syntactic patterns,
such as argument structure and complementation. By analyzing a selected corpus of contemporary written and
spoken texts, we investigate how these verbs function in real usage. The results highlight both core similarities
and subtle distinctions among visual cognitive verbs, shedding light on their role in conveying perception and
mental processes. This study contributes to a deeper understanding of how expresses visual and cognitive
meaning through specific verbal constructs.
Keywords:
Verb, see, look, linguistics, language, cognitive linguistics.
Introduction:
The co
ncept of “cognitive science” is
among modern scientific terms and encompasses
various scientific fields aimed at studying the processes
of how knowledge is formed, processed, stored, and
effectively used in the human mind. This field serves to
explore the essence and mechanisms of cognitive
activity by conducting a systematic analysis of human
mental processes. Specifically, cognitive science
focuses on the subjective processes of human
perception and the creation of new knowledge based
on the results of understanding the world. Logical
philosophy has long carried out the study of cognitive
processes and methods of acquiring knowledge. As a
result, contemporary cognitive sciences are also
developing aspects not directly related to language.
Nonetheless, the study of perception is currently
advancing in linguistic research because language, by
its very nature, manifests itself as a form of thought. In
the cognitive approach, the concept of knowledge
holds a central position.
When Professor A.Mamatov analyzes the language
system from a cognitive point of view, he emphasizes
that while cognitive science is focused on studying
cognitive processes, cognitive linguistics deals with
how these cognitive processes are reflected and
verbalized through language. According to him, a
cognitive approach to language involves viewing
linguistic forms as reflections of the human mind,
cognition, and cognitive structures. “Cognition” is
regarded as a structure that represents any type of
knowledge based on human cognitive activity.
Professor A.Mamatov’s view clearly elucidates the
essence of cognitive linguistics. He points out that while
cognitive science is a field that studies general cognitive
processes, cognitive linguistics specifically investigates
how these cognitive processes are manifested in
language and what kind of verbalization process they
entail. This standpoint highlights one of the core
principles of the cognitive approach: the intrinsic
connection between language and thought.
Here it is crucial to stress the idea that the formation of
language is closely connected with the human mind,
thought, and cognitive structures. After all, language is
not only a means of communication but also a structure
that reflects human cognitive processes. In this respect,
language systems develop based on cognitive activity
and reflect the systematization of various categories of
knowledge.
Hence, Professor A.Mamatov’s approach reinforces the
theoretical foundations of cognitive linguistics,
underscoring the need to study language as a complex
system linked to cognition and thought. This approach
is particularly important in semantic analyses, the
International Journal Of Literature And Languages
45
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ijll
International Journal Of Literature And Languages (ISSN: 2771-2834)
cognitive properties of metaphors, and linguistic
research related to human worldview.
Visual cognitive verbs (VCVs) in English
–
commonly
exemplified by see, look, watch, gaze, stare, observe,
notice, and view
–
encode both the act of vision and the
cognitive interpretation of that visual input. While
these verbs share semantic commonalities, their
morphological and syntactic properties can differ
significantly. A detailed examination of their forms and
structures can reveal how the English language
captures nuances of perception and cognition.
Recent studies in cognitive linguistics and comparative
philology (e.g., Langacker, 2008; Talmy, 2000)
underscore the interplay between perception verbs
and conceptualization, demonstrating that verbal
forms often encode both physical and metaphorical
aspects of seeing. Nevertheless, a precise account of
their morphological patterns (inflectional and
derivational) and syntactic behavior (valency,
transitivity, complementation, etc.) is crucial for
understanding how English speakers express mental
states and perceptual processes.
METHODS
Data Collection
A corpus-based approach was employed to ensure
empirical grounding. Two main sources of data were
used:
1. The British National Corpus (BNC): A balanced corpus
of modern British English, containing both spoken and
written texts.
2. The Corpus of Contemporary American English
(COCA): To capture regional and stylistic variation in
American English.
From these corpora, a keyword search for the verbs
see, look, watch, notice, observe, gaze, and stare was
performed. Each verb’s occurrences were filtered to
obtain 200 random samples per verb, ensuring a total
of 1,400 tokens.
Analytical Framework
1. Morphological Analysis:
Inflectional Forms: Tense, aspect, and person (e.g., see,
sees, seeing, saw, seen).
Derivational Extensions: Adjectival or nominal forms
(e.g., watchful, observer, noticeable).
Frequency Counts: Proportion of each form relative to
total occurrences.
2. Syntactic Analysis:
Argument Structure: Determined whether verbs are
used transitively (e.g., She saw the dog), intransitively
(e.g., He looked), or with complement clauses (e.g., I
see that you’re busy).
Complementation Patterns: Presence or absence of
direct objects (e.g., notice something), prepositional
objects (e.g., look at something), or bare infinitives
(e.g., see someone do something).
Modifiers: Common adverbs and prepositional phrases
that occur with each verb (e.g., watch carefully, gaze
intently).
Data Analysis
Each token was coded for:
Verb Form: Simple present, simple past, present
participle, past participle, or derivational forms.
Syntactic Pattern: Transitive vs. intransitive usage, type
of object or complement, and presence of prepositions.
Contextual Meaning: Literal (physical perception) vs.
metaphorical (cognitive/figurative usage).
The results were tabulated to facilitate quantitative
comparisons, and illustrative examples were selected
for qualitative discussion.
RESULTS
1. Morphological Characteristics
Inflectional Variation: All verbs followed regular tense
and aspect patterns (see → saw/seen, look → looked,
looking, looks, etc.). However, see showed irregular
forms (saw, seen), while most others (look, watch,
notice) were regular.
Derivational Forms:
Observe → observer, observation, observant
Notice → noticeable, noticeably
Watch → watcher (rare), watchdog (compound),
watchful
See → seer (archaic), foresee, foreseeable
These derivatives often shift the focus from the act of
seeing to the agent (observer) or the quality of being
noticeable (noticeable).
2. Syntactic Patterns
Transitivity:
See, watch, notice, observe → predominantly
transitive, taking direct objects (see a friend, watch a
movie, notice a change, observe a pattern).
Look → predominant
ly intransitive, requiring a
preposition when taking an object (look at something).
Gaze, stare → often intransitive with directional
prepositions (gaze at the stars, stare into space).
Complementation:
See, notice, observe → commonly introduce object +
bare infinitive (see him run, observe them discuss).
International Journal Of Literature And Languages
46
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ijll
International Journal Of Literature And Languages (ISSN: 2771-2834)
Look → typically requires a preposition or adverb (look
at something, look around).
Watch → frequently collocates with object + gerund or
object + bare infinitive (watch him singing, watch her
dance).
3. Frequency and Contextual Usage
Literal vs. Metaphorical: See was found to have a higher
number of figurative uses (e.g., I see what you mean),
while gaze and stare were more literal.
Register: Observe and notice were more frequent in
formal contexts (academic articles, reports), whereas
look and watch were found commonly in
conversational texts.
DISCUSSION
The morphological and syntactic examination reveals
both shared and unique characteristics among English
visual cognitive verbs. While certain forms (e.g., look at,
see something) appear straightforward, deeper
analysis uncovers the ways in which each verb can
expand or shift meaning in various contexts. For
instance, the combination of see with a bare infinitive
(see someone do something) emphasizes direct,
complete perception, whereas a gerund construction
(watch someone doing something) highlights an
ongoing action.
Moreover,
morphological
derivatives
such
as
noticeable or observant demonstrate how core
perception verbs link to broader cognitive processes
(evaluation, awareness). The corpus analysis confirms
that visual cognitive verbs are not only about
perceiving with the eyes but also about interpreting
and conceptualizing that perception.
A key contribution of these findings is in clarifying the
gradient between purely physical seeing (look, watch)
and cognitively loaded perception (observe, notice).
For
language
pedagogy,
understanding
these
distinctions can aid learners in choosing the correct
verb depending on context
—
watch for continuous
attention, notice for sudden awareness, or observe for
a more deliberate act of perception.
CONCLUSION
This study has shown that English visual cognitive verbs
exhibit a range of morphological forms and syntactic
patterns. Irregular verbs like see and derivatives from
notice or observe expand their functional scope.
Syntactically, while transitivity is common, certain
verbs (e.g., look, gaze, stare) often depend on
prepositions for objects or directions. These nuanced
features influence how English speakers encode both
immediate
visual
experiences
and
cognitive
interpretations.
Future research could compare these findings cross-
linguistically (e.g., with Uzbek, Spanish, or Russian) to
see how different languages handle visual and
cognitive perception. Incorporating psycholinguistic
experiments may also reveal the cognitive load of
choosing between different perception verbs in real-
time communication.
REFERENCES
Абдуазизов А. О составных частях когнитивной
лингвистики // Хорижий филология, 2007, № 3.
Ашурова Д.У. Развитие когнитивной лингвистики в
Узбекистане // Хорижий филология, 2016, № 3.
Беляевская Е.Г. Когнитивные основания изучения
семантики слова // Структуры представления
знаний в языке. –
М., 1994. –
С. 89.
Кубрякова Е.С. Начальные этапы становления
когнитивизма;
лингвистика
–
психология
–
когнитивная наука // Вопросы языкознания. –
М.,
1994. №4. –
С. 37.
British National Corpus (BNC). (2007). [Online
Resource].
Davies, M. (2008). The Corpus of Contemporary
American English (COCA). [Online Resource].
Langacker, R. W. (2008). Cognitive Grammar: A Basic
Introduction. Oxford University Press.
Mamatoᴠ A.E. Tilga kognitiᴠ yondashuᴠning mohiyati
nimada? // Tilshunoslikning dolzarb masalalari: Prof.
A.Nurmonoᴠ taᴠalludining 70 yilligiga bagʻishlab
oʻtkazilgan ilmiy
-amaliy anjuman materiallari.
–
Andijon, 2012.
–
B. 213.
Talmy, L. (2000). Toward a Cognitive Semantics Vol. I &
II. MIT Press.
