Authors

  • Muhabbat Jumayeva
    Navoi State University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.71337/inlibrary.uz.jmsi.113450

Abstract

 This scientific article considers the cognitive aspects of the analysis of language units. Syntactic, semantic and pragmatic analyses are discussed. As a result of the intensification of semantic research in linguistics, it became clear that the description of language units in terms of form and content does not allow for a complete explanation of the language.


background image

https://ijmri.de/index.php/jmsi

volume 4, issue 4, 2025

1082

THE CONCEPT OF A CONCEPTUAL FIELD IN COGNITIVE LINGUISTICS AND

CREATING ITS INTERPRETATION

Jumayeva Muhabbat Mustaqimovna

Doctoral student of the Department of English Linguistics, Navoi State University

Annotation:

This scientific article considers the cognitive aspects of the analysis of language

units. Syntactic, semantic and pragmatic analyses are discussed. As a result of the intensification

of semantic research in linguistics, it became clear that the description of language units in terms

of form and content does not allow for a complete explanation of the language.

Keywords:

cognitive, syntax, semantics, pragmatics, language units, linguistics, analysis,

linguistics, comparative typology, lingvopragmatic features, lingvocultural signs, comparison

and conceptualization, categorization, interpretative analysis methods, descriptive and structural

semantic methods, lingvocultural terms.

Independence has created broad opportunities for the development of science and education,

along with other areas of the social life of our people. The granting of the Uzbek language the

status of the State language, the elevation of the attitude to the system to the level of state policy,

and the growing interest in studying foreign languages ​ ​ indicate that significant work is

being done in this regard. Based on the needs of the higher education system in the social sphere

and economic sectors, in order to improve the quality of education, train competitive personnel,

effectively organize scientific and innovative activity, and develop international cooperation, as

well as in order to implement the Resolution of the President of the Republic of Uzbekistan No.

PQ-4391 dated July 11, 2019 “On measures to introduce new principles of management in the

system of higher and secondary specialized education”, a Concept for the Development of the

Higher Education System of the Republic of Uzbekistan until 2030 has been developed.

The study and analysis of the vocabulary of language by scientists from the perspective of

conceptual semantics, justified by the fact that it is a conceptual layer that actively participates in

the synthesis of knowledge, production infrastructure, technologies, politics, culture, etc. - the

systematic study of the linguistic and cultural characteristics of the factors that ensure the

professional success of each person's activity has become a matter of great importance. Various

aspects of this issue have been covered to varying degrees by European, American and Russian

scientists in their time in scientific research in the form of dissertations, monographs, scientific

articles, theses. However, until now, the conceptual structure of drama, the specificity of the

conceptual field, cognitive features, linguopragmatic features, linguocultural signs, especially in

a comparative typological sense, have not been the object of separate research. This indicates the

relevance of the topic of this dissertation.

This dissertation research will serve to a certain extent in implementing the tasks set out in the

Presidential Decree No. 4947 of February 7, 2017 “On the Strategy of Actions for the Further

Development of the Republic of Uzbekistan”, the Resolution of April 20, 2017 “On Measures for

the Further Development of the Higher Education System”, and other regulatory legal documents

related to this activity.

Ipanova O.A. (M. 2005), Malysheva E.G. (M. 2011), Redkozubova K.Y. (M. 2004), Letova A.D.


background image

https://ijmri.de/index.php/jmsi

volume 4, issue 4, 2025

1083

(M. 2004), Rapoport N.V. (M. 1999), Vasilyuk I.P. (S.P. 2004), Chayka S.A. (M. 2002), Avlova

T.B. (M. 2002), Mayorenko I.A/ (M. 2005), Novikova V.V. (M.2007) conducted dissertation

research on this topic. Gorintseva V.N. conducted research on the linguistic features of

Shakespeare's dramatic works. Makarov V.S. worked on the issues of translating Shakespeare's

dramatic works. W. Shakespeare's works, Igoshina O.A., Kozina N.O., Neshkova E.G.,

Medvedova T.V. and others studied the linguocultural aspects of language material related to

various discourses. In Uzbek linguistics and translation studies, Jamol Kamol, Yusuf Shomansur,

M. Shayhzoda and other translators conducted research on Shakespeare's work. The purpose of

the research work is to study the conceptual field in the discourse of the drama from a

linguocultural perspective. The tasks of the research work: - to theoretically define the concepts

of discourse, conceptual field and linguocultural aspect;

- to study the problems and directions of linguocultural research at the current stage;
- to study the basic concepts and principles of discourse theory;
- to create the concept of conceptual field in cognitive linguistics and its interpretation;
The subject of the research is the pragmalinguistic loading of the constituent elements of the

conceptual field, linguocultural terms and conceptospheres. Research methods used in the

research work; In solving the specified tasks, comparison and conceptualization, categorization,

interpretation analysis methods, descriptive and structural semantic methods, as well as

component analysis observation and classification methods and statistical calculations were used

to determine the amount of processed material. Traditional linguistics focused on studying

language units only from the formal side. This view, especially the semantic approach to

language, is further strengthened by considering the sign to consist only of form. In structuralism,

language was divided into strict layers, each of which was considered a closed system. The

relationship of language units with the objective existence they represent was left out of the

research. Later, it became clear that such a study of language was one-sided, that form could not

be separated from meaning. As a result, attention was paid to the meaning side of units.

As a result of the intensification of semantic research in linguistics, it became clear that the

description of language units in terms of form and content does not allow for a complete

explanation of the language. Only the study of language units in relation to the contextual speech

situation provides a greater opportunity to correctly understand their meaning. This increases the

interest of language units from the pragmatic side.

In cognitive linguistics, in order to correctly understand the information given in speech, in

addition to the speakers' knowledge of the language, the listener's knowledge of the world, the

social situation in which the sentence is used, the knowledge of the speakers' psyche in the

process of speaking, and other knowledge should be included. The word cognitive is derived

from the English word "cognize - to know, to understand, to understand", and this field connects

language with thinking (consciousness) and conducts a deep scientific study of the inextricable

connection of the psychological, biological and neurophysiological aspects of its formation with

social, cultural and linguistic phenomena. Cognitive linguistics is in this respect connected with

various fields such as psycholinguistics, anthropolinguistics, ethnolinguistics, sociolinguistics.

According to Sh. Safarov, the task of cognitive linguistics is to acquire and process knowledge

using language, to apply and transmit language in practice, and to conduct in-depth scientific

research into the system and structure of language as a reflection of thought in the human brain.

In the process of understanding a speech product by the listener, all his knowledge about the

world and existence serves equally. Therefore, only by taking into account the interrelation of

this knowledge, we will come closer to understanding the essence of the speech process. As a

result of such a need, the concepts of semantics and pragmatics arise. Language, which is a


background image

https://ijmri.de/index.php/jmsi

volume 4, issue 4, 2025

1084

means of communication without this three-sidedness of language units, cannot find its full

interpretation. Syntactic units have three sides: 1. Syntactics, 2. Semantics, 3. Pragmatics.

Syntactics studies the formal relations of language units, that is, the relations between language

signs. Thus, syntactics is based on the syntactic system of a sentence, which is traditionally

studied under the name of parts of speech. According to syntax, any syntactic unit is interpreted

as a generalized situation that manifests itself in various variants in the speech process. Ch.

Morris, one of the founders of semiotics, divides semiotics into three. 1. Semiotics is the study of

the relationship of a sign with an object of existence. 2.

Syntax is the study of the relationship of a sign with a sign. 3. Pragmatics is the study of the

relationship of a sign with a speaker. It is understood that the semantic syntax of human speech

studies the elements of objective reality reflected in the mind, that is, how the proposition is

expressed through syntactic devices. In other words, it studies the propositional side of the

semantic syntax devices of colloquial speech (Safarov III, 2008).

The structure of a sentence is compared with the fragment of existence expressed by this

sentence. For example, There is a playing ball in the garden. The apple tree burst into blossom.

The sentence, which is the main unit of syntax, expresses some event in existence reflected in the

human mind, a fragment of existence. The fragment of a sentence shows what function the

individual elements of existence reflected in the mind perform in this situation. For example, The

Sun rises in the East. The Sun is a subject of the action. Rises – the action performed by the

subject. In the East – the place of the action. The word combination expresses the mutual

relations of the elements of being reflected in the mind. Tom found the box empty (predicative

connection). A young boy (attributive connection). Played in the garden (adverbial connection).

From the point of view of pragmatics, the syntax and semantics of language units are insufficient

for a complete description of these units. Only when pragmatics is added to syntax and semantics

do they find their true interpretation. For example, Everyone is enjoying his stay.

This statement expresses specific individuals and their situation in a specific time and place, a

proposition. However, this alone is not enough for the proposition expressed by the sentence to

be understandable to the speakers. For this, the speakers must have a general idea of certain

social groups and a specific time and place in which this event occurs. Because the spatial and

temporal situations of all people in the world cannot be the same. Therefore, the above sentence

must be associated with specific individuals, specific places and times. The study of such a

relationship of the proportion expressed by the sentence with the speech situation constitutes the

pragmatic side of the sentence. In conclusion, it can be said that it is not for nothing that this

problem is given attention at a time when the study of semantics issues in cognitive linguistics is

intensified. Because the scope of analysis of semantics has expanded significantly, it has become

necessary to simplify it somewhat, to get rid of the part of meaning related to the context. As a

result, pragmatics has separated from semantics. It is impossible to find a solution to all the

issues raised here in the volume of one article, but their relevance leads linguists to repeatedly

address these problems.

Reference:

1. Yusupov U.K. Theoretical foundations of comparative linguistics - Tashkent, Fan, Academy

of Sciences of the Republic of Uzbekistan, 2007.

2. Safarov Sh. Cognitive tilshunoslik-Jizzakh. Sangsor, 2006.
3. Boldyrev N.N. Language categories as a format of knowledge. Question cognitive

linguistics.2006.No.2

References

Yusupov U.K. Theoretical foundations of comparative linguistics - Tashkent, Fan, Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Uzbekistan, 2007.

Safarov Sh. Cognitive tilshunoslik-Jizzakh. Sangsor, 2006.

Boldyrev N.N. Language categories as a format of knowledge. Question cognitive linguistics.2006.No.2