https://ijmri.de/index.php/jmsi
volume 4, issue 4, 2025
1122
A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF PHRASEOLOGICAL UNITS TO THE NAMES OF
FLORA AND FAUNA IN ENGLISH AND UZBEK
Xudoyorova Dilora Abdirashitovna
Master's student at the Karshi State University
Annotation:
Creating and analyzing a system of terms related to fauna and flora in Uzbek and
English is an important experience for linguists and linguistics specialists.This article presents a
comparative linguistic analysis of phraseological units in English and Uzbek that incorporate the
names of flora (plants) and fauna (animals). It examines the semantic and structural parallels and
divergences in how these two linguistically distinct languages conceptualize and express human
experiences, traits, and observations through the natural world. The study explores common
conceptual metaphors, cultural specificities, and the degree of idiomaticity, highlighting both
universal human perceptions and unique ethnocultural perspectives embedded within their
respective phraseologies.
Keywords:
Phraseological units, English, Uzbek, comparative linguistics, flora, fauna,
idiomaticity, cultural specificity, conceptual metaphors, paremiology.
Introduction
Many young language learners complain that language has many hidden sides, its own
peculiarities, especially the inconsistency between the scientific, artistic, journalistic and
pragmatic aspects of words, describing language as an endless source of knowledge. Of course,
if languages were currently composed only of dictionaries, then both people, speech,
and all the technologies related to speech created by mankind: from a simple newspaper to
multimedia, would be insensitive and uninteresting. Because the miracle that adorns people and
this world and gives bright emotions is language and its peculiarities.
Flora is all the plant life present in a particular region or time, generally the naturally occurring
(indigenous) native plants. Flora (pl.: floras or florae) is all the plant life present in a particular
region or time, generally the naturally occurring (indigenous) native plants. The corresponding
term for animals is fauna, and for fungi, it is funga [1]. Sometimes bacteria and fungi are also
referred to as flora as in the terms gut flora or skin flora for purposes of specificity [2].
All of the animal life that exists in a specific area or period of time is referred to as fauna. Flora
is the equivalent name for plants. The term "biota" refers to the collective term for flora, animals,
and other living organisms, including fungi. Fauna, such as the "Sonoran Desert fauna" or the
"Burgess Shale fauna," is a term used by zoologists and palaeontologists to describe a typical
group of species occurring in a particular time or location. Palaeontologists occasionally use the
term "sequence of faunal stages" to describe a group of rocks that all have comparable fossils.
Faunistics is the study of animals from a specific area [3].
Methods and literature review
Phraseological units are characterized by their fixedness (resistance to change in form) and
idiomaticity (non-compositional meaning). For this study, phraseological units encompass
https://ijmri.de/index.php/jmsi
volume 4, issue 4, 2025
1123
idioms, proverbs, sayings, and set phrases that incorporate names of plants or animals.
The comparative methodology involves:
1. Corpus Collection. Identifying and cataloging PUs containing flora and fauna names from
established phraseological dictionaries, academic studies, and linguistic corpora for both English
and Uzbek.
2. Categorization. Grouping PUs based on the type of flora/fauna referenced (e.g., domestic
animals, wild animals, trees, flowers).
3. Semantic Analysis. Deconstructing the literal and figurative meanings of each PU, identifying
the underlying conceptual metaphors or metonymies (e.g., a fox symbolizing cunning, a lion
symbolizing bravery).
4. Structural Analysis. Examining the grammatical patterns and lexical components of the PUs.
5. Comparative Analysis. Contrasting the identified PUs across English and Uzbek to discern
parallels in conceptualization and divergences attributable to linguistic or cultural factors.
Among Western linguists, Sh. Balli was one of the first to use the term phraseology in 1905. He
interpreted phraseologisms as expressive units of the language from a stylistic point of view.
Among the scientists who studied phraseologisms in the 20th century, it is worth noting the
semantic classification of V.V.Vinogradov. The scientist made a semantic classification of
Russian phraseology, and this classification became an impetus for the intensive study of
phraseologisms in many languages. In this regard, it is worth mentioning the theoretical and
practical research of such scientists as N.N. Amosova, A.V. Kunin, researchers of English
phraseology, II. Chernysheva, A.D. Reichstein, researchers of German phraseology, M.I. Retsker,
researchers of French phraseology [4].
F.N. Guketlova used the term "zoomorphic code" to define the ethno-cultural specificity of the
zoonomic lexicon describing man, and made a comparative study of the animalistic lexicon of
the French, Kabardino-Circassian varus language. Focusing on the metaphorical features of
zoonyms, he studied the lexical-semantic variant, the connotation of the word zoos.
The linguocultural interpretation of animalistic phraseology in the context of teaching Russian as
a foreign language is the focus of S.O. Kochnova's research. Kuang, T. Kiong investigated
Russian zoomorphisms' system-structural structure. N.V. Solntseva investigated the functional
capabilities of zoonyms in word creation in three languages, AA Kipriyanova examined the
functional qualities of zoo lexemes in paremia, and R.K. Asabin examined the ethno-connotation
of English zoonyms. Three major groups of phraseological linguistic units were distinguished
by A.V. Kunin [5]. We categorised the compounds containing zoonomic components according
to the A.V. Kunin classification. Furthermore, the Uzbek phraseological units with zoonomic
components serve as the foundation for this essay.
Also, in 1928, Ye.D. Polivanov, using this term in his scientific works, said the following: "I
found it necessary to use the term "phraseology" as a special science that relates to lexis in the
same way that syntax relates to morphology." Indeed, since the 1950s, phraseology has been in
the spotlight of world linguistics. As a result of a number of monographic scientific studies on it,
its object has been identified, research methods have been developed, and this science has
established its place among other areas of linguistics. As a result of extensive phraseological
research conducted in recent years on the basis of materials from many languages,
phraseologisms are defined as follows. A stable linguistic unit consisting of two or more
components and denoting a single phraseological meaning is called a phraseologism or
phraseological combination (phrase). But if we want to give it a broader definition, phraseology
https://ijmri.de/index.php/jmsi
volume 4, issue 4, 2025
1124
enters speech in a ready-made form, and its most important feature is to distinguish and isolate
phraseologisms from word combinations formed in speech (i.e., not ready-made) and, on this
basis, determine the signs of phraseologisms.
Works by P. Kühn, H. Burger, V.V. Vinogradov, N.M. Shanskii, and numerous others centre on
the semantic properties and traits of phraseological units. The growth of this issue appears to be
promising for determining the cultural and national traits of English phraseological units, which
enables us to expand our vocabulary and, consequently, improve our speech. [6] The semantic-
pragmatic and connotatively evaluative relationships of phraseological units based on English
language imagery of animals are examined in this study. One of the most prevalent types of
language nomination is animalistic phraseology, which is a vast layer of phraseological units.
This is because people understand the world around them and, to some degree, understand
themselves in it by comparing themselves to animals. In many cultures, phraseological units that
contain animal names are very common and ubiquitous. This is demonstrated by the fact that
they have a strong connotative potential and are frequently employed as a feature of the human
image in languages all across the world. The lexicon of any language includes a substantial
number of phraseological units having a zoomorphic component.
Results
Phraseological units are an essential aspect of language, comprising idioms, proverbs, similes,
metaphors, and other fixed expressions that are deeply rooted in a particular culture or language.
They often draw upon elements from the natural world, including flora and fauna, to convey
complex meanings and experiences. Flora and fauna are two distinct categories representing
plant life and animal life, respectively. Both have significant cultural, ecological, and symbolic
importance in various societies. Due to their close connection with human life, flora and fauna
have been integrated into languages, giving rise to numerous phraseological units that are widely
used in everyday communication [7]. The use of flora and fauna in phraseological units can be
traced back to ancient times when people closely observed and interacted with the natural world
for their survival and livelihood. As a result, these elements became deeply ingrained in language,
reflecting the cultural beliefs, practices, and values of different communities. The semantic
analysis of phraseological units related to flora and fauna involves exploring the metaphorical
meanings and cultural associations they carry. Many of these expressions use the characteristics,
behaviors, or symbolic representations of plants and animals to convey emotions. moral values,
social norms, and various human experiences. In cross-cultural and contrastive studies,
researchers examine how different languages express similar concepts related to flora and fauna
through their phraseological units. Such investigations shed light on the similarities and
differences in how various cultures perceive and interact with the natural world.
The most distinctive and remarkable traits of some persons are reflected in phraseology, which
makes them instantly remembered. Among the most numerous and internally varied categories
of phraseological funds are phraseological units that contain the names of animals and plants.
Phrasological units are a cultural-informational resource in every language because they exhibit a
person's attitude towards their "smaller brothers" and represent centuries of human studies of the
appearance, habits, and behaviour of animals. Plant and animal names are frequently included
into phraseological formulations. The strong potential for connotation creation in the direct
meanings of these lexical units is the reason for this demand for animal imagery. Numerous
concepts about the qualities of human nature that are supposedly present in animals are linked to
each animal and plant name.
For example:
a lone wolf
- a person acting alone; a fox selfish, dishonest businessman, a
predator, The oldest domestic animal in almost all cultures it is the dog, that's why the
comparison with the dog are the most numerous in both languages. Negative connotations bring
https://ijmri.de/index.php/jmsi
volume 4, issue 4, 2025
1125
ideas about the dog as al persecuted being, dependent from the person, sometimes living in the
toughest conditions, designed for the protection of housing, hunting, etc. (lead a dog's life to
have been afflicted; treat like a dog to be unkind to anyone; dressed up like a dog's dinner
dressed vulgar). At the same time, the British appreciated the loyalty, friendliness, endurance
dog (die for one dog to be very loyal; funny dog funny guy). Similarly, you can analyze features
of zoomorphism "cat": has long being close to someone, the cat has earned the trust and love of
man because of its softness, intelligence, prudence (as tame as a cat is quite tame; as wary as a
cat very careful), but, being wild animals by nature, cats are peculiar cunning, deceit (cat in the
pan is a traitor; cat shuts its eyes when stealing cream to close their eyes to their sins). As for
Uzbek context, cat denote dubious, treacherous person.
Discussion
Phraseological units related to the flora and fauna in English and Uzbek involve the study of the
meanings and cultural meanings of these expressions in both languages.
Proverbs in which zoonyms participate have a unifying feature in both English and Uzbek, both
in terms of their dual purpose, that is, highlighting negative aspects or being directed towards an
educational goal. We can also see this through the semantic analysis of the following proverbs:
1. "To kill two birds with one stone" -
"Bir o'q bilan ikki qushni o'ldirish". This idiom means
achieving two tasks or goals with one action. It conveys the idea of efficiency and achieving
several goals at once.
2. "A snake in the grass"
- "two-faced, an enemy disguised as a friend". This expression refers
to a treacherous or deceitful person who hides his true intentions or actions.
These idioms about plants and animals in English and Uzbek use metaphors and images from the
natural world to express abstract ideas or experiences. Semantic analysis shows that while literal
translations may differ, the underlying meanings and cultural associations are often similar in
both languages. More examples on this topic:
1. "To have butterflies in one's stomach."
This idiom often refers to feeling nervous or
anxious while waiting for something important or exciting.
2. "A leopard can't change its spots."
This idiom refers to a person's character or nature not
changing over time.
3. "To hold one's horses."
This idiom refers to waiting patiently and not rushing into action.
This means to initiate or start a process or action that will lead to future results. This expression
refers to the agricultural practice of planting seeds in the soil, which eventually grow into plants.
It metaphorically refers to starting actions or plans that will yield positive results in the future.
In both English and Uzbek, these phraseological units related to flora and fauna use metaphors
and imagery drawn from the natural world to convey abstract ideas or experiences. The semantic
analysis shows that while the literal translations may differ, the underlying meanings and cultural
associations are often similar in both languages. More examples for this topic:
1. "To have butterflies in one's stomach."
This phrase means to feel nervous or anxious, often
in anticipation of something important or exciting.
2. "A leopard can't change its spots."
This proverbial phrase implies that a person's character
or nature is unlikely to change over time.
https://ijmri.de/index.php/jmsi
volume 4, issue 4, 2025
1126
In English
In Uzbek
Definition
1 A snake in the grass Ikki yuzlamachi, do'st
niqobi
ostidagi
dushman".
This phrase refers to a treacherous or
deceitful person who hides their true
intentions or actions. Uzbek: The Uzbek
phrase "ikki yuzlamachi, do'st niqobi
ostidagi dushman" carries the same
meaning, describing a person who
pretends to be harmless while actually
being cunning or dangerous.
2 To kill two birds
with one stone
Bir o'q bilan ikki qushni
o'ldirish
Bir
o'q
bilan
ikki
quyonni urish
This idiom means achieving two tasks or
goals with one action. It conveys the idea
of efficiency and achieving several goals
at once.
3 Cat-sleep brief sleep Mushuk uyqusiday
The idiom on based on the biological
features of cats. It's meaning is obviously
seen.
4 A dog's life a very
unpleasant existents
It yotish -Mirza turish
The zoononym "Dog" in both expressions
is used here in a general sense, although it
has a prestige, it refers to people who are
in a difficult financial situation.
5 Lion-hearted
Sher yurak
As brave as a lion
Table 1. Examples of the phraseological units to the names of fauna in English and Uzbek
Animal names, or zoonyms, are very common in folk proverbs. Almost all proverbs that use
zoonyms express a figurative character. By using animal images, human characteristics are
shown through animals, that is, the instructive thought presented in proverbs is not addressed to
the animal mentioned in the proverb, but rather to people. Often, through animals, people with
negative characteristics are given nicknames and criticized. Each nation has proverbs that reflect
its own characteristics.
The English and Uzbek proverbs that use animal imagery may not always depict the same
animals in both language versions. In the above proverb, the English version uses the word
"dog," while the Uzbek version uses the word "snake." However, the meaning of the proverb has
not changed with this change; both express the idea of carelessness and negligence. When
comparing Uzbek and English proverbs, the zoonyms "dog," "cat," and "fish" are relatively more
common.
In addition, expressions used with the name of an animal are also divided into categories. (For
example, expressions related only to the name of a snake: "Ilonning yog'ini yalagan", "Yer
tagidan ilonqimirlasa biladi", "Ilon po'st tashlaydi")
In most cases, expressions related to the name of an animal are used in a positive sense. For
example, the expression "
Qo'y og'zidan cho'p olmagan
" means "yuvosh." But there is a
proverb among our people that says "Where there is good, there is also evil." This is natural.
Similar expressions also have a positive meaning, as well as a negative meaning. These
expressions are also divided into negative and positive types according to the scope of
https://ijmri.de/index.php/jmsi
volume 4, issue 4, 2025
1127
application. For example, "
Ammamning buzog'i
" is a landovur, lapashang (in a positive sense),
"Ilonning yog'ini yalagan" is very cunning (in a negative sense).
It is necessary to distinguish between phraseological units and word combinations. A phrase,
whether in a sentence or alone, even if it consists of several words, answers a single question and
acts as a single sentence fragment. Phrase combinations express the relationship of subordination
and dominance, each of which answers separate questions.
Specific plants that are central to the culture or environment appear more frequently in one
language than the other.
English frequently uses "oak," "rose," "apple," "vine."
Uzbek phraseological units often feature plants common to Central Asia, such as "paxta"
(cotton), "qovoq" (pumpkin), "qovun" (melon), reflecting their agricultural significance. For
example, "
Qovun tushirmoq
" (to drop a melon – meaning to spoil something unexpectedly).
The flora and fauna in idioms often reflect the natural geography and cultural practices of a
region.
English idioms often include roses, oaks, lions, foxes, and horses—typical of European
landscape and literature.
Uzbek idioms refer to tulips, wheat, wolves, donkeys, and crows, reflecting Central Asian
steppes, agriculture, and oral traditions.
Phraseology is a crucial component of both Uzbek and English. Fixed phrases or collocations
with figurative connotations beyond the literal interpretation of their separate words are known
as idiomatic idioms. The culture, history, and way of life of the people who use these phrases
are reflected in the language, which is profoundly embedded with them. With its extensive
literary and cultural legacy, English has many idiomatic idioms pertaining to plants and animals.
These idioms use the traits, actions, and symbolic meanings of plants and animals to express a
range of ideas, feelings, and messages.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the study of phraseological units related to the flora and fauna in English and
Uzbek has revealed a deep connection between language, culture, and the natural world. Through
semantic analysis and a comparative approach, we have witnessed the richness and diversity of
idiomatic expressions that rely on the image of plants and animals to express complex meanings
and emotions.
This comparative study underscores the rich interplay between language, culture, and the natural
world as reflected in the phraseological units of English and Uzbek. While both languages
demonstrate universal cognitive patterns in mapping characteristics of flora and fauna onto
human experiences, their specific phraseological inventories are deeply informed by their unique
cultural histories, geographical environments, and societal values. English PUs, rooted in a
diverse history of influences, share common ground with Uzbek PUs in depicting universally
perceived animal traits. However, Uzbek phraseology exhibits a greater emphasis on animals and
plants central to Central Asian nomadic and agricultural life, often imbued with distinct cultural
and religious connotations.
The findings reinforce the notion that PUs are not merely linguistic ornaments but vital
repositories of ethnocultural knowledge. This comparative analysis not only enriches our
understanding of the respective phraseological systems but also provides valuable insights for
cross-cultural communication, language teaching, and the development of more sophisticated
https://ijmri.de/index.php/jmsi
volume 4, issue 4, 2025
1128
machine translation systems capable of handling the nuanced and culturally embedded nature of
idiomatic expressions.
References:
1.
Kuhar, Francisco; Furci, Giuliana; Drechsler-Santos, Elisandro Ricardo; Pfister, Donald
H. (December 2018). "Delimitation of Funga as a valid term for the diversity of fungal
communities: the Fauna, Flora & Funga proposal (FF&F)". IMA Fungus. 9 (2): A71 – A74.
doi:10.1007/BF03449441. hdl:11336/88035. ISSN 2210-6359
2.
Clifford E. Starliper; Rita Villella; Patricia Morrison; Jay Mathais. "Sampling the
bacterial flora of freshwater mussels" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 2016-02-01
3.
Lina Ding, Marina V. Lysyakova Comparative Analysis of Animal Phraseological Units
with Religious Component in Russian and Chinese // Вестник РУДН. Серия: Теория языка.
Семиотика. Семантика. 2024. №2.
4.
Mukhammadieva Shakhzoda Farkhodovna. (2023). SYSTEMATIZATION OF
PHRASEOLOGICAL UNITS OF THE ENGLISH AND UZBEK LANGUAGES. Web of
Scientist:
International
Scientific
Research
Journal,
4(5),
640–645.
https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/HW4EK
5.
Kunin, A.V. Course of phraseology of modern English: Studies: for institutions and
foreign languages departments. Moscow: "Phoenix". 1996, p.177.
6.
Rejapov A.A. A STUDY OF THE PRAGMATIC, CHARACTERISTICS OF THE
PHRASES EXPRESSED BY FAUNA AND FLORA IN ENGLISH AND UZBEK
LANGUAGES // Экономика и социум. 2024. №11-2 (126).
7.
English Idioms in Use Intermediate: 62 Units of Vocabulary Reference and Practice
McCarthy, Michael; O'Dell, Felicity Published by Cambridge University Press, 2017., p. 78-80.
8.
Авалиани Ю.Ю. Проблема фразеологической синонимии в современном
языкознании (обзор литературы) / Ю.Ю. Авалиани, Л.И. Ройзензон. // Труды - Самарканд,
1963. Вып. 132.- С. 110.
9.
Yuldashev, O. (2023). STUDY OF FOLKLORE ASPECTS OF UZBEK FOLK
PROVERBS. International Bulletin of Applied Science and Technology, 3(10), 37-39.
10.
Ahrorova, R. U. (2021). SEMANTIC ANALYSIS OF PHRASEOLOGICAL UNITS
REPRESENTING "YOUTH" IN FRENCH AND UZBEK LANGUAGES. Theoretical &
Applied Science, (7), 122-126
11.
Arsentieva, E.F. Phraseology and phraseography in comparative aspect (on the material
of Russian and English languages). Kazan: KFU. 2006, p.3
