Keywords
substandart leksika
evaluativlik
konnotatsiya
baholash kategoriyasi
pragmatik presuppozitsiya
kognitiv faoliyat
so‘zlashuv tili
slang
semantik struktura
pragmatika
implitsit ma’no
ekspressivlik
metaforizatsiya
kognitiv semantika
diskurs
so‘zlovchi munosabati
ingliz tili
o‘zbek tili
qiyosiy
How to Cite
Abstract
Ushbu maqolada ingliz va o‘zbek tillaridagi aqliy faoliyatni ifodalovchi substandart fe’llarning evaluativ-konnotativ paradigmasi baholash kategoriyasi va pragmatik presuppozitsiya mexanizmlari nuqtayi nazaridan tadqiq etiladi. Tadqiqotda fikrlash, tushunish, bilish, eslash, unutish, taxmin qilish va anglash kabi kognitiv jarayonlarni ifodalovchi so‘zlashuvga xos, slang va stilistik jihatdan belgilangan fe’l birliklariga asosiy e’tibor qaratiladi. Tadqiqotning maqsadi mazkur birliklarning semantik strukturasida evaluativ va konnotativ ma’nolarning ifodalanish usullarini aniqlash hamda turli kommunikativ vaziyatlarda yashirin bahoning yuzaga chiqish mexanizmlarini ochib berishdan iborat. Tadqiqotda tavsifiy, komponent, kontekstual, qiyosiy hamda diskursiv-pragmatik tahlil metodlaridan foydalaniladi. Natijalar substandart mental fe’llar nafaqat kognitiv jarayonlarni nomlashini, balki so‘zlovchining shaxsning intellektual qobiliyati, aqliy faoliyatning muvaffaqiyati yoki muvaffaqiyatsizligi hamda kommunikativ xatti-harakatiga munosabatini ham ifodalashini ko‘rsatadi. Ijobiy, salbiy va kontekstga bog‘liq baholash turlari ajratiladi. Pragmatik presuppozitsiya avvalgi kognitiv holat, kutilayotgan intellektual me’yor va shaxslararo munosabatlarga oid yashirin axborotni faollashtiruvchi muhim mexanizm sifatida belgilanadi. Qiyosiy tahlil ingliz va o‘zbek tillarida aqliy faoliyatning baholovchi konseptuallashuvida universal tendensiyalar bilan bir qatorda lingvomadaniy farqlar ham mavjudligini ko‘rsatadi.References
1. Aitchison, J. (2012). Words in the mind: An introduction to the mental lexicon (4th ed.). Wiley-Blackwell.
2. Allan, K., Burridge, K. (2006). Forbidden words: Taboo and the censoring of language. Cambridge University Press.
3. Ariel, M. (2010). Defining pragmatics. Cambridge University Press.
4. Austin, J. L. (1962). How to do things with words. Oxford University Press.
5. Bednarek, M. (2006). Evaluation in media discourse: Analysis of a newspaper corpus. Continuum.
6. Brown, P., Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge University Press.
7. Cruse, D. A. (1986). Lexical semantics. Cambridge University Press.
8. Crystal, D. (2003). The Cambridge encyclopedia of the English language (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
9. Culpeper, J. (2011). Impoliteness: Using language to cause offence. Cambridge University Press.
10. Cutting, J. (2002). Pragmatics and discourse: A resource book for students. Routledge.
11. Evans, V., Green, M. (2006). Cognitive linguistics: An introduction. Edinburgh University Press.
12. Fillmore, C. J. (1982). Frame semantics. In The Linguistic Society of Korea (Ed.), Linguistics in the morning calm (pp. 111-137). Hanshin Publishing Company.
13. Geeraerts, D. (2010). Theories of lexical semantics. Oxford University Press.
14. Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole J. L. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and semantics: Vol. 3. Speech acts (pp. 41-58). Academic Press.
15. Halliday, M. A. K., Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2014). Halliday’s introduction to functional grammar (4th ed.). Routledge.
16. Hunston, S., Sinclair, J. (2000). A local grammar of evaluation. In S. Hunston G. Thompson (Eds.), Evaluation in text: Authorial stance and the construction of discourse. Oxford University Press.
17. Hunston, S., Thompson, G. (Eds.). (2000). Evaluation in text: Authorial stance and the construction of discourse. Oxford University Press.
18. Jackendoff, R. (2002). Foundations of language: Brain, meaning, grammar, evolution. Oxford University Press.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.