https://ijmri.de/index.php/jmsi
volume 4, issue 5, 2025
155
THE ROLE OF PHRASEOLOGICAL UNITS IN REFLECTING LINGUCULTURAL
FEATURES USED IN “QORAKO’Z MAJNUN” BY SAID AHMAD
Djabbarova Kizlarxan Abdulaxatovna
Senior teacher, Uzbekistan State World Languages University
e-mail djabbarovaq@gmail.com
ABSTRACT:
This article is about increasing
interests in exploring the issues of literature of
being learned language in harmony with language features and the history of people. T
he study
of phraseological units has become an important aspect of translation and linguacultural
,
r
evealing linguistic specificity and complexity of Phraseology has acquired both theoretical and
practical significance for further study of the principles and mechanisms characterizing the
development of its translation keeping their national coloring. This article analyzed d
espite the
fact that the work “Qorako’z Majnun” by Said Ahmad has been deeply discussed several times
and linguistic aspects of
phraseological units used in the work
have been well investigated.
However, there is still a number of semantic and stylistic linguacultural issues remain unexplored.
Key words:
linguacultural, semantic, stylistic issue, principles of culture, linguistic aspects.
Introduction
Linguistics in the twenty-first century is actively advancing the concept that language is not just
a tool for communication but also the cultural code of a nation. It occurred as a result of the
emergence of a new anthropocentric paradigm, which elevates man to the role of "the measure of
all things" and concentrates on examining the "human component" in language. Because he is
the unique carrier of universal and national-specific values, the human is seen as the center of the
Universe and language. As a result, Yu.S. Stepanov asserts that linguistics is a study concerned
with "language in the human and the human in language" (Teanov, 2004). According to this
paradigm, a human person is not only a carrier of a language, but of a certain conceptual system
through which he perceives, cognizes, and conceptualizes information about the world and
cultural practices (Ashurova, Galieva, 2018). Language is not only a means of communication
but also a repository of cultural heritage. The concept of linguoculture refers to the interrelation
between language and culture and how they influence each other. Among the various elements
that serve as a bridge between language and culture, phraseological units
—
stable combinations
of words with a figurative meaning—play a vital role. These include idioms, proverbs, and other
fixed expressions that carry meaning beyond the literal interpretations of their components.
Phraseological units are deeply embedded in the collective consciousness of a language
community and reflect its historical background, values, worldview, and national identity
.
They
often arise from cultural practices, folklore, mythology, and common experiences. For example,
an idiom like “kick the bucket” in English reflects a metaphorical way of referring to death,
avoiding direct mention, which may be linked to cultural taboos or sensitivity.
In linguocultural studies, the analysis of phraseological units provides valuable insight into how
people conceptualize their environment, social relationships, emotions, and beliefs. The
figurative nature of these expressions allows speakers to convey complex cultural meanings with
brevity and creativity
.
Moreover, phraseological units often reflect humor, sarcasm, irony
,
and
https://ijmri.de/index.php/jmsi
volume 4, issue 5, 2025
156
national stereotypes, which can be challenging to translate without cultural context.
Many language studies are now conducted within the context of the anthropocentric paradigm.
Furthermore, the emergence of the anthropocentric paradigm resulted in a shift in linguistic
views, methods of investigation, and the emergence of new interdisciplinary linguistic trends
such as Sociolinguistics, Cognitive Linguistics, Linguacultural, Gender Linguistics, and so on,
focusing on the study of relationships between language and society, language and mind,
language and culture.
Linguacultural is a new language study that originated within the context of the anthropocentric
worldview. It is a fast growing area that sits at the crossroads of linguistics, cultural studies,
cognitive linguistics, ethnolinguistics, and sociolinguistics. It does, however, play an important
role in the study of language and culture. Linguacultural is concerned with the deep semantics of
linguistic units and the relationship between linguistic meanings and the conceptions of universal
and national cultures. Linguacultural is defined by V.N. Telia as "a study aimed at investigating
and describing the correlation between language and culture in scope of modern culture national
self-consciousness and its sign representation" (Tелия, 1996, p.16); by V.V. Vorobyev as "an
integrated scientific discipline studying correlations and interactions between culture and
language in their functioning" (Воробьев, 2008, p. 37); and by V.V. Krasnykh as “a discipline
studying manifestation, reflection and fixation of culture in the language and discourse”. It
should be noted that, while the definitions provided above differ, the basic premise is that
Linguacultural investigates the relationship of language and culture. Linguacultural, in other
words, studies the links between language and culture, how culture is expressed in language, and
how language conveys, stores, and transmits cultural knowledge.
Linguacultural is a very new science, hence there is no precise chronology of its development.
V.A. Maslova, on the other hand, picks out two eras. The first is based on the writings of W. von
Humboldt, E. Sapir, and B. Whorf in Western Linguistics and A.A. Potebnya in Russian
Linguistics. The second phase began in the late nineteenth century and has since been recognized
as a distinct branch of linguistics. Along with these two phases, the academics identify one that
will occur in the next decade - the growth of Linguacultural as an interdisciplinary discipline
(Maслова, 2007, p.28).
According to V.A. Maslova, there are now four linguacultural schools:
1. Yu.S. Stepanov's Linguacultural School — the goal is to define cultural notions and constants
in their diachronic characteristics.
2. N.D. Arutyunova's school of thought studies universal cultural paradigms based on writings
from many eras and cultures.
3. V.N. Telia's "Moscow school of linguacultural analysis of phraseological units" - the goal is to
examine phraseological units in order to gain a better understanding of cultural semantics;
4. The school of linguists founded by V.V. Vorobyev at the Russian University of People's
Friendship, which promotes the concepts of Country Studies by E.M. Vereschagin and V.G.
Kostomarov.
The following linguocultural studies topics can be summarized:
• linguocultural units and their kinds (linguaculturenes);
• the national world view and linguistic units unique to each country;
• cultural aspects of communicative behavior peculiar to a certain linguocultural community,
social or gender groups, or an individual;
• culture specific phraseology;
• culture specific concepts and their verbalization;
• speech etiquette (the norms and standards of a polite communicative behavior in various
communicative situations of greetings, farewells, apologies, request, etc.).
We may describe the primary responsibilities of Linguoculturology based on the concerns listed
above.
It’s multidisciplinary nature is one of its most notable characteristics. Interdisciplinarity refers to
the connection of two or more sciences based on shared theoretical assumptions, ideas, and
https://ijmri.de/index.php/jmsi
volume 4, issue 5, 2025
157
techniques of study. It should be noted that different definitions of this phenomenon exist, but all
of them are based on the idea of two or more disciplines interacting, and the range of interaction
can range from a simple exchange of ideas to the mutual integration of scientific notions,
methodology, and research methods. When scientific assumptions, theoretical concepts, and
methodological foundations are integrated, new interdisciplinary approaches like as Cognitive
Linguistics,
Linguacultural,
Linguopragmatics,
Ethnolinguistics,
and
Intercultural
Communication arise.
It should be stressed that interdisciplinarity is more than just a mechanical transfer of one
science's core concepts and assumptions into another, but rather their successful collaboration in
the formulation and solution of new challenges. It should be noted that interdisciplinarity is
governed by the very essence of language, its orientation toward man and all domains of human
activity.
Linguacultural is distinguished by both internal and external interdisciplinarity. Internal linkages
may be found in its relationship to linguistic fields such as Ethnolinguistics, Cognitive
Linguistics, Country Studies, Linguoconceptology, Language History, Lexicology, Stylistics,
and Comparative Linguistics. Let's take a look at a few of them.
Ethnolinguistics is primarily concerned with the historical links between language and ethnic
culture. It investigates how language units reflect how various ethnic groups experience and
understand the world. Folk literature (songs, jokes, stories, etc.) as well as religious and mythical
ceremonies are the focus of ethnolinguistics. Its goal is to rebuild ethnic culture and worldviews
using language components. Ethnolinguistics can be divided into various branches: 1)
etymological (issues of reconstructing ontological and social knowledge of the universe reflected
in linguistic unit etymology); 2) dialectological (revealing culture types, terminology of rituals,
culture phenomena, components of spiritual culture of a particular nation). Though
Ethnolinguistics and Linguacultural have many similarities, there are notable distinctions. For
starters, ethnolinguistics is concerned exclusively with national aspects of the language, whereas
linguacultural is concerned with concerns of both national and global culture and their
manifestation in the language. Second, Ethnolinguistics investigates the diachronic elements of
the relationship between language and culture, whereas Linguacultural focuses on the synchronic
representation of culture in language.
Conclusion
Phraseological units serve as compact representations of national identity and cultural worldview.
They emdiv traditional wisdom, shared experiences, and values that have been linguistically
codified over generations. As vehicles of cultural transmission, these expressions provide insight
into how different communities perceive life, relationships, and society. The comparative study
of phraseological units reveals both universal themes and unique cultural distinctions, reinforcing
the notion that language is deeply intertwined with culture. Understanding and interpreting
phraseological units not only enhances linguistic competence but also enriches intercultural
communication and appreciation.
The list of used literature:
1.
Азнаурова С.С “Очерки по стилистическим словам”,- Ташкент, 1973
2.
Арнольд И.В. “Стилистика совревенногo английского языка” Л 1981.
3.
Аскольдов С.А. Концепт и слово // Русская словесность: От теории словесности к
структуре текста. – М.: Аcademia, 1997. – С. 267-279.
4.
Boboxonova L.T. “Ingliz tili stilistikasi” Toshkent, O’qituvchi, 1995.
5.
Doniyorov H, Mirzayev “So’z san’ati” Toshkent 1962.
6.
Qilichev D. “O’zbek tilining amaliy stilistikasi” Toshkent 1992.
