Home > PHILOLM > Vol. 2019 (2019) > Iss. 4
Philology Matters
Abstract
The thesaurus of socio-political vocabulary is based on intra-systemic conceptual relations between units of this lexical group. The concept “power” is a structure-formed mean for this vocabulary. Being the main descriptors of the the-saurus of socio-political vocabulary, concepts project a number of their characteristics on to the lexical groups organized by them. Moreover, the structure of the corresponding branches of the thesaurus is largely determined by the internal, structural features of the concepts. As a result of this, it seems necessary to analyze these key con-cepts for socio-political vocabulary, as well as the concepts “people” and “nation” that are significant for socio-political vocabulary. As it mentioned, the methodology of conceptual analysis has not been fully developed yet and is presented mainly in the form of specific experiments of such as analysis.
The conceptual system is reflected in the language, a metaphor that may not even be understood by the speakers. Despite the fact that at present there is no uniformity in understanding the relationship between the concept and the semantic structure of the word, a methodology for researching the concept based on the analysis of the basic representations of the word in the language is established. A conceptual analysis of a word involves the consideration of its various aspects: lexicographic representations, denotative component, pragmatic meanings, compatibility, associative connection sand identification on the basis of this connection with the “world image” of native speakers, with the peculiarities of the ideas in the collective consciousness of their knowledge of the world.
First Page
129
Last Page
136
DOI
10.36078/987654391
References
1.Karasik V.I. Yazykovoi krug: lichnost', kontsepty, diskurs (Language circle: personality, concepts, discourse) Volgograd, Peremena Publ., 2002. 476 p.
2.Stepanov Yu.S. Al'ternativnyi mir, diskurs, fakt i printsip prichinnosti [The alternative world, discourse, fact and the principle of causality].Yazyk i nauka kontsa 20-go veka:sbornik statei [Language and science of the end of the 20th century: a collection of articles]. Moscow, 1995, pp. 35-73. (In Russian)
3.Popova Z.D., Sternin I.A. Ponyatie «kontsept» v lingvisticheskikh issledovaniyakh (Essays on cognitive linguistics) Voronezh, 2001. 189 p.
4.Shmeleva T.V. Morbual'naya optika [Mortuary optics]. Lingvistika: byulleten’. uralskogo lingvisticheskogo obshestva – Linguistics: bulletin of the Ural linguistic society, 2001. no. 7, pp. 4-15.
5.Budaev E.V., Chudinov A.P. Kontseptual'naya metafora v politicheskom diskurse: amerikanskii, evropeiskii i rossiiskii varianty issledovaniya [Conceptual metaphor in political discourse: American, European and Russian versions of the study]. Politicheskayalingvistika – Political linguistics, 2006, no. 17, pp. 35-77.
6.Zusman V.G. Kontsept v kul'turologicheskom aspekte (Concepts in cultural aspect) N.Novgorod, DEKOM Publ., 2001. 314 p.
7.KRATKII SLOVAR'' KOGNITIVNYKh TERMINOV. Pod. red. E.S. Kubryakovoi. –Moscow, 1996. 245 p.
Recommended Citation
Amonova, Gulnoza PhD student
(2019)
"CONCEPTUAL IMAGE OF ENGLISH, RUSSIAN AND UZBEK SOCIO-POLITICAL DISCOURSE (COMPARISON),"
Philology Matters: Vol. 2019
:
Iss.
4
, Article 24.
DOI: 10.36078/987654391
Available at:
https://uzjournals.edu.uz/philolm/vol2019/iss4/24
Included in
English Language and Literature Commons, Language Interpretation and Translation Commons, Linguistics Commons, Other Languages, Societies, and Cultures Commons, Reading and Language Commons