89
EXPLORING TYPES OF ANTONYMS IN UZBEK: A COGNITIVE APPROACH TO
OPPOSITES IN MEANING
Ergasheva Mashxura
2nd year student of the Faculty of History and Philology Tashkent
University of Applied Sciences, Gavhar Str. 1, Tashkent 100149, Uzbekistan
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15717949
Abstract
This paper explores how antonyms function in the Uzbek language from a cognitive
linguistic perspective. Rather than viewing opposites as simple binary contrasts, the study
investigates how different types of antonymy (gradable, complementary, directional, and
relational) reflect deeper conceptual structures. Examples from Uzbek everyday language,
idioms, and literary texts are analyzed to reveal how oppositional meaning is not only a
linguistic phenomenon but also a reflection of human cognition. The article also discusses how
some antonymic pairs are asymmetrical and how cultural and experiential knowledge shape
which term is considered the default or dominant one. The goal is to better understand how
Uzbek speakers conceptualize contrast through language.
Keywords
:
Uzbek language, antonymy, semantic opposition, cognitive linguistics, gradable
antonyms, lexical asymmetry, conceptual contrast.
1. Introduction
Antonyms are one of the most intuitive and widely recognized types of word relationships
in any language. Pairs like
oq–qora
(white–black),
katta–kichik
(big–small), or
halol–harom
(permitted–forbidden) are common in Uzbek and frequently used in both spoken and written
texts. However, while antonymy may seem simple on the surface, it actually reflects complex
ways of organizing meaning in the mind. In this article, we explore antonyms not only as
dictionary entries, but as conceptual tools that help speakers categorize, contrast, and evaluate
experiences.
The study applies basic principles of cognitive linguistics, which sees language as part of
human cognition and as shaped by how we perceive and interact with the world. By using this
approach, we aim to show how opposites in Uzbek are more than lexical oppositions—they are
ways of structuring human experience.
2. Types of Antonymy in Uzbek
Scholars such as Cruse (1986) and Murphy (2003) have proposed several fundamental
types of antonymy, and these categories are readily applicable to the structure of oppositions
in the Uzbek language. One major category is
gradable antonyms
, which refer to word pairs
that lie along a continuum and allow for intermediate degrees of meaning. Examples such as
issiqlik–sovuqlik
(hot–cold),
katta–kichik
(big–small), and
ko‘p–kam
(many–few) illustrate how
these contrasts imply a scale of intensity or quantity, often appearing in combination with
modifiers like
juda issiq
(“very hot”) or
sal sovuq
(“slightly cold”). These pairs reflect a more
nuanced contrast than binary distinctions.
In contrast,
complementary antonyms
represent absolute oppositions with no
gradation or middle ground. Pairs such as
tirik–o‘lik
(alive–dead) or
ha–yo‘q
(yes–no) exemplify
this category, where the presence of one member logically excludes the other. These antonyms
are mutually exclusive and define strict boundaries within conceptual categories.
A third type is
directional antonymy
, which involves motion or spatial orientation.
90
Uzbek contains numerous examples of such oppositional pairs, including
kir–chiq
(enter–exit),
yuqoriga–pastga
(upward–downward), and
chap–o‘ng
(left–right). These pairs mirror physical
experience and play a role in the spatial organization of meaning.
Lastly,
relational or reciprocal antonyms
describe roles or relationships that
presuppose one another. Words such as
sotuvchi–xaridor
(seller–buyer) and
o‘qituvchi–
o‘quvchi
(teacher–student) reflect social roles that are inherently interdependent, meaning the
existence of one concept implies the presence of the other.
Together, these four types of antonymy structure how Uzbek speakers perceive and
categorize concepts related to space, quantity, status, interaction, and experience. They reveal
not only the richness of lexical contrast but also the mental frameworks that shape meaning in
the language.
3. Cognitive Models Behind Antonymy
Cognitive linguistics does not treat antonyms merely as isolated vocabulary pairs but as
reflections of deeper mental models that structure our understanding of the world. According
to Lakoff and Johnson (1980), much of human thought is metaphorical, and many oppositional
concepts arise from what they call
image schemas
—fundamental cognitive patterns rooted in
bodily experience. In the Uzbek language, this can be seen in oppositional pairs such as
yuqori–
past
(up–down), which emdiv vertical orientation and are metaphorically extended to
express emotional states:
kayfiyati yuqori
(“he is in high spirits”) suggests a positive state, while
ruhiyati tushgan
(“his mood is down”) indicates negativity or depression. Similarly, the pair
oq–
qora
(white–black) goes beyond literal color to signify opposing cultural concepts such as
purity versus danger or good versus evil. Another common pair,
issiq–sovuq
(hot–cold), is often
metaphorically extended to describe emotional or relational warmth, as in
iliq munosabat
(“warm attitude”), versus coldness or detachment. These examples show that antonyms in
Uzbek do not merely serve as linguistic labels for opposites, but are embedded in how speakers
conceptualize physical, emotional, and moral experience.
4. Lexical Asymmetry in Oppositional Pairs
Not all antonym pairs in Uzbek are semantically or cognitively equal. Some display what
Cruse (1986) refers to as
lexical asymmetry
, where one member of the pair serves as the
unmarked or default term, while the other is contextually marked or dependent. For example,
in common usage, people typically ask
necha yoshdasiz?
(“how old are you?”), rather than
formulating an inverted or marked expression such as
qanchalik yosh emasligingizni ayting
(“how un-young are you?”). This illustrates how
yosh
(young) functions as the conceptual
default. A similar tendency is seen in the pair
katta–kichik
(big–small), where
katta
often
dominates as the neutral or socially valued term –
katta odam
not only refers to physical size
but implies status and respectability. The pair
halol–harom
(permitted–forbidden) further
demonstrates asymmetry with deeper cultural and religious dimensions.
Halol
carries strong
ethical and spiritual connotations in Islamic and Uzbek moral thought, while
harom
is defined
primarily in opposition to
halol
, often introduced only to signal transgression or taboo. Such
asymmetries reflect underlying conceptual hierarchies in cognition, where certain qualities –
youth, largeness, moral purity – are seen as normative, and their opposites are cognitively and
culturally marked.
5. Case Examples from Uzbek
Antonymic word pairs in Uzbek are not only used for logical or grammatical contrast, but
91
also play an important role in conveying cultural meaning and values. For instance, the pair
oq–
qora
is employed both literally and metaphorically. In everyday expressions like
Bu ishning oqi
bilan qorasi aralashib ketgan
(“The good and bad sides of this matter are mixed”), the colors do
not just denote visual properties but symbolize ethical dualities, with
oq
associated with purity
and goodness, and
qora
with negativity or misfortune. Another common pair,
ko‘p–kam
(many–
few), often appears in proverbs and idiomatic speech, such as in the saying
kam gapirib, ko‘p
ish qil
(“speak less, do more”), which reflects a cultural preference for humility and productivity
over verbosity. Similarly, the emotional contrast between
sabr
(patience) and
g‘azab
(anger)
illustrates not just psychological states but moral valuation: patience is elevated as a virtue,
while anger is often discouraged or morally framed as destructive. In such cases, antonymy
does more than distinguish semantic opposites – it encodes deeply held beliefs about proper
behavior, emotional regulation, and social ideals. These examples show that antonymy in Uzbek
is not merely functional; it is inseparable from the cultural logic that governs meaning, emotion,
and ethics in communication.
6. Conclusion
Antonyms in Uzbek are more than linguistic opposites; they are windows into how
speakers mentally organize their world. Through a cognitive lens, we see that antonyms encode
spatial, emotional, social, and moral structures. They help express contrast not only in language,
but also in thought and culture. Recognizing the different types of antonymy and their cognitive
foundations deepens our understanding of meaning in Uzbek and enriches semantic and cross-
cultural analysis.
References:
Используемая литература:
Foydalanilgan adabiyotlar:
1.
Cruse, D. A.
Lexical Semantics
. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986.
2.
Murphy, M. Lynne.
Semantic Relations and the Lexicon: Antonymy, Synonymy and Other
Paradigms
. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.
3.
Lakoff, George, and Mark Johnson.
Metaphors We Live By
. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press, 1980.
4.
Langacker, Ronald W.
Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, Vol. 1
. Stanford: Stanford
University Press, 1987.
5.
Croft, William, and D. Alan Cruse.
Cognitive Linguistics
. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 2004.
