Authors

  • Elyor Isroilov
    Samarkand Oriental University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.71337/inlibrary.uz.jmsi.89437

Abstract

 This paper explores the linguocultural characteristics of phraseological units in English and Uzbek languages. By analyzing idiomatic expressions and set phrases in both linguistic systems, the study reveals how phraseological units reflect the values, traditions, and worldview of their respective cultures. The comparative approach uncovers both shared human experiences and culture-specific elements embedded in language, the individual's spiritual reality, the problem of generating its content, and the characteristics of expressing the decorative world of people in the speech process. The findings suggest that phraseology is a significant mirror of national identity and plays a crucial role in intercultural communication and translation studies. The issues raised by this article's discussion of the connection between language and culture are pertinent and important.


background image

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

volume 4, issue 3, 2025

646

LINGUOCULTURAL FEATURES OF PHRASEOLOGICAL UNITS IN ENGLISH AND

UZBEK LANGUAGES

Isroilov Elyor Najmiddin ugli

Master’s Degree Student of Samarkand Oriental University

Abstract:

This paper explores the linguocultural characteristics of phraseological units in

English and Uzbek languages. By analyzing idiomatic expressions and set phrases in both

linguistic systems, the study reveals how phraseological units reflect the values, traditions, and

worldview of their respective cultures. The comparative approach uncovers both shared human

experiences and culture-specific elements embedded in language, the individual's spiritual reality,

the problem of generating its content, and the characteristics of expressing the decorative world

of people in the speech process. The findings suggest that phraseology is a significant mirror of

national identity and plays a crucial role in intercultural communication and translation studies.

The issues raised by this article's discussion of the connection between language and culture are

pertinent and important.

Key words:

phraseological units, linguoculture, English, Uzbek, idioms, comparative linguistics,

cultural semantics.

Introduction

The problems of the relationship between language and culture are currently relevant and of high

priority. This is due to the fact that the most ancient ideas about the world are recorded in the

linguistic picture of the world and influence the formation and reflection of the national

mentality [8]. Language reflects not only the mental processes of its speakers but also their

collective cultural identity. Thus, the problem of linguisticization of existential constants in

different ethnic societies seems relevant not only for philology and linguistics, but also for

linguacultural and lingua cognitive studies. This approach is necessary because it allows us to

identify the features of the structure and functioning of ethnic, national-cultural and individual

linguistic consciousness, the very mental world of members of a certain language community. At

the same time, a more detailed designation of national-ethnic specificity in phraseology in a

particular language is far from necessarily the result of the advantage of the "technique" of one

language over another, the result of a greater development of a particular language in relation to

another. Among the various linguistic structures, phraseological units stand out as highly culture-

bound entities. These idiomatic expressions encapsulate historical events, social norms, religious

beliefs, and collective experiences, making them key indicators of a nation's linguocultural

profile. In the context of English and Uzbek, the study of phraseological units is especially

intriguing. English, a Germanic language with global influence, and Uzbek, a Turkic language

with deep roots in Islamic and Central Asian traditions, offer rich material for comparative

exploration. Despite differences in linguistic lineage and cultural heritage, both languages

display a strong tendency to use figurative expressions to represent complex ideas and social

realities. Let's look at some phraseological unit translation techniques and examine how

V.V.Vinogradov proposed using them. These include choosing an analogue, choosing an

equivalent, translating descriptively, translating lexically, translating contextually, and tracing.

The theoretical knowledge required for the translator to recognize the units in the text, analyze

them, and provide the translation in this context is also contained in the classification of

phraseological units. The following categories are differentiated based on the indicated levels:

1)

Phraseological equivalents

-are phraseological units that share the same component


background image

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

volume 4, issue 3, 2025

647

composition, semantics, and structural and grammatical organization;

black list

- qora ro'yxat;

Sog'in Sigir-

milk cow

.

2)

Phraseological analogues

: these convey the same or a comparable meaning, but their internal

forms are quite different; Qora sigir oq sut berar-

A black hen lays a white egg,

speak turkey,

talk

turkey

- ochiqdan ochiq gapirmoq.

3)

Non-equivalent phraseological units

—those that don't correlate in another language's

phraseological system;

Gretna green marriage-

Uydan qochgan sevishganlar o'rtasidagi turmush,

come Yorkshire over smb

-aldamoq, nonni tuya qilmoq. Gretna green marriage. [6]

Methods

The study adopts a

qualitative, comparative-descriptive

methodology. Phraseological units

were sourced from bilingual dictionaries, literary texts, and idiomatic corpora, such as:

Oxford Dictionary of Idioms

(English)

O‘zbek tilining frazeologik lug‘ati

(Uzbek)

Online databases and language corpora

The selection criteria included:

High frequency and cultural relevance

Non-literal or metaphorical meaning

Unique or culture-bound imagery

Each unit was analyzed for:

Denotative and connotative meaning

Cultural symbolism

Historical/religious background

Equivalence in the counterpart language

To ensure contextual depth, idioms were examined within authentic language use (literary texts,

media, and conversational speech).

Results

1. Cultural Specificity and National Mentality

Furthermore, a phraseological unit's high level of country identity may be the root cause of some

translation challenges. In these situations, the translator's job will be to modify it to fit the target

audience's language, culture, and origin. A deeper comprehension of the meaning of a

phraseological unit may result from an examination of its origins. All phraseological units can be

divided into two categories based on their origin: native and borrowed.

The primary sources of native phraseological units are the language's professional and

terminological units, such as navigation:

to cut the painter – “to become independent”, to lower one’s colours – “to give in”;

British literature, e.g. the green-eyed monster – “jealousy” (W. Shakespeare);

British traditions and practices e.g. baker’s dozen – “a group of thirteen”.

In the past, bakers would deliver 13 loaves of bread to British bread merchants rather than 12. A

black sheep is "a less successful or more immoral person in a family or in a group,"

According to stories and superstitions. e.g. a black sheep – “a less successful or more immoral

person in a family or in a group”. People believed that a black sheep was marked by the devil.

historical facts and events, personalities, e.g. to do a Thatcher – “to stay in power as prime

minister for three consecutive terms”, to carry coals to Newcastle – “to take something to a place

where there is plenty of it available”. Newcastle is known as a city in Northern England where a

lot of coal was produced.

phenomena and facts of everyday life concerning different spheres such as sport, environment,

food, etc., e.g. to get a head start – “start before all others” from horse racing (sport), to eat one’s

words – “to admit that something you said was wrong”.

The main sources of borrowed phraseological units are as follows:

the Holly Script, e.g. the kiss of Judas – “any display of affection whose purpose is to conceal

any act of treachery”;


background image

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

volume 4, issue 3, 2025

648

ancient legends and myths belonging to different religious or cultural traditions, e.g. Achilles’

heel – “a week part of something, especially of someone’s character, which is easy for other

people to attack”;

facts and events of the world history, e.g. to meet one’s Waterloo – “to be faced with, esp. after

previous success, a final defeat, a difficulty or an obstacle one cannot overcome” (from the

defeat of Napoleon at Waterloo in 1815);

variants of the English language, e.g. a hole card – “a secret advantage that is ready to use when

you need it” (American);

other languages (classical and modern), e.g. the fair sex – “women”, from French: le beau sex;

let the cat out of the bag – “reveal a secret carelessly or by mistake”, from German: die Katze aus

dem Sack lassen. [7]

Many phraseological units emdiv cultural values and social norms specific to each nation:

English

:

"The squeaky wheel gets the grease"

(emphasis on individualism and self-assertion)

Uzbek

:

"Yig‘lamagan bolaga sut yo‘q"

(literally "No milk for the child who does not cry") –

similar meaning but framed in a family context. English idioms often reflect Western

pragmatism and urbanization, while Uzbek idioms reveal communal values, hospitality, and

agricultural traditions.

2. Religious and Historical Influence

English idioms

like

"turn the other cheek"

or

"by the skin of one's teeth"

have Biblical origins.

Uzbek idioms

, such as

"Harom yegan halol demas"

(One who eats forbidden things does not

speak of honesty), often derive from Islamic teachings and folklore.

These references provide insight into the underlying moral and ethical structures of each society.

3. Shared Concepts, Local Expressions

Despite cultural differences, many idioms express universal human experiences:

English:

"Don’t count your chickens before they hatch."

Uzbek:

"Tuxumdan jo‘ja sanama."

(Don’t count chicks from the egg)

Such idioms show how similar cognitive metaphors are shaped by local culture and language.

4. Structural and Semantic Features

English idioms often show syntactic flexibility and metaphorical abstraction:

"Kick the bucket"

(to die)

"Bite the bullet"

(to endure pain)

Uzbek idioms are generally more poetic, rooted in traditional imagery:

"Qarg‘aning bolasini qarg‘a chiroyli ko‘radi."

(Even a crow sees its child as beautiful – parental

bias)

Discussion

The comparative analysis underscores the close connection between language and culture.

Phraseological units act as linguistic fossils that preserve cultural memory. While some idioms

have direct equivalents, many require adaptive translation due to deep cultural embedding.

Literal translation often fails to convey the intended meaning:

"It's raining cats and dogs" (literal translation would confuse Uzbek readers)

Cultural substitution is often needed: e.g., replacing "carry coals to Newcastle" with "Buxoroga

xurmo olib borish."

This suggests that effective idiom translation depends on understanding both source and target

cultures, highlighting the need for cross-cultural competence in linguistic education.

Language teachers must include cultural commentary when teaching idioms to avoid

misinterpretation. Comparative phraseology can also be a useful tool in bilingual education and

intercultural competence training.

Conclusion

Phraseological units serve as a linguistic lens through which we can view a culture’s history,

values, and worldview. The study of English and Uzbek phraseology reveals both shared human

cognition and unique cultural signatures. Understanding these features is essential not only for

translation and language teaching but also for fostering intercultural dialogue. Further research


background image

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

volume 4, issue 3, 2025

649

may focus on phraseological variation in dialects or sociolects, diachronic changes in idiomatic

usage, and the impact of globalization on idiom innovation and borrowing. Phraseology,

reflecting the national flavor of a particular language, does not exclude common linguistic

properties caused by various factors.

This includes the semantic community of words - members of phraseological units, rethinking,

the possibility of tracing and other phenomena. In Russian linguistics, two ways of comparing

phraseological material have been established.

The first is to identify ways of conveying the meanings of phraseological units of the Russian

language by means of another language. The second is to establish the structural identity and

differences of the identified correlates. A comparative analysis of English and Uzbek

phraseological units revealed, along with discrepancies, similar phenomena in the semantics,

form and functioning of phraseological units.

REFERENCE:

1. Cowie, A.P., Mackin, R., & McCaig, I.R. Oxford Dictionary of English Idioms. – Oxford

University Press, 1993. –250p

2. Karimov, M. O‘zbek tilining frazeologik lug‘ati. Toshkent.: Akadem nashr, 2008. – 188 p.,

204 p.

3. Kussmaul, P. Training the Translator. John Benjamins, 1995. –150p

4. Wierzbicka, A. Understanding Cultures Through Their Key Words.– Oxford University Press,

1997. –150p

5. Baker, M. In Other Words: A Coursebook on Translation. Rutledge, 2011. –189 p

6. Victoria Subbotina Akdeniz Language Studies Conference. Challenges of translating

phraseological units. Procedia. –Social and Behavioral Sciences. –2013 1487.–1492 p.

7. https://portal.tpu.ru.Lecture5. Phraseology.

8. Буянова Л.Ю. Духовно-нравственные основы языкового бытия // Духовные начала

русского искусства и образования. В. Новгород, 2003. С. 34-38.

References

Cowie, A.P., Mackin, R., & McCaig, I.R. Oxford Dictionary of English Idioms. – Oxford University Press, 1993. –250p

Karimov, M. O‘zbek tilining frazeologik lug‘ati. Toshkent.: Akadem nashr, 2008. – 188 p., 204 p.

Kussmaul, P. Training the Translator. John Benjamins, 1995. –150p

Wierzbicka, A. Understanding Cultures Through Their Key Words.– Oxford University Press, 1997. –150p

Baker, M. In Other Words: A Coursebook on Translation. Rutledge, 2011. –189 p

Victoria Subbotina Akdeniz Language Studies Conference. Challenges of translating phraseological units. Procedia. –Social and Behavioral Sciences. –2013 1487.–1492 p.

Буянова Л.Ю. Духовно-нравственные основы языкового бытия // Духовные начала русского искусства и образования. В. Новгород, 2003. С. 34-38.