THE STUDY OF LINGUISTIC UNITS REPRESENTING THE CATEGORY OF ADDRESS IN MODERN LINGUISTICS ON THE EXAMPLE OF ENGLISH AND UZBEK LANGUAGES
Keywords:
Semantic types, address, categories, research, language, meaning, national, spirituality, education, consciousness, youth, interpretation, analysis, linguistic means, terms, communicativepragmatic approachAbstract
This article is devoted to the linguo-pragmatic and linguoculturological features of the category of references in the English and Uzbek languages, and also discusses their scientific and theoretical problemsқ. We can witness the application of a linguocultural approach, which reflects an objective connection between a person, language and culture as a system of values and allows the development of an individual through the adoption of common cultural values, understanding of linguistic norms, customs, and creative abilities. heritage of other linguistic cultures. This, in turn, shows that mastering the internal potential of the language is of particular importance for enhancing national spirituality and its upbringing in the minds of young people. In modern linguistics, treatment as a category of language has always attracted the attention of researchers. The study of the category of treatment from a semantic point of view has recently been carried out in terms of more communicative-pragmatic factors. The emergence of pragmatics as a scientific science allows researchers to study the tendency to appeal as a separate type of speech action that in a certain way affects the interlocutor. Pragmatic factors ensured the differentiation of the category of circulation,i.e. the emergence of different types of calls. By the end of the twentieth century, the semantic types of the category of address became the subject of a separate study.
References
Andronkina, N.M. (2009). The Cognitive-action approach to the formation of linguistic and sociocultural competence in teaching German to students of a linguistic university Author's dissertation. in pedagogical sciences. Saint Petersburg, 50 p.
Arutyunova N.D. The proposal and its meaning. Logical-semantic problems. – M., 1976.– p. 356.
Arutyunova N.D. Nomination and text (Nomination - appeal) // Language nomination. Types of nominations. – M., 1977. – p. 564.
Bagrov, Y.D. (2017). Authentic tasks in teaching a foreign language in higher education.
Professional Education in Russia and abroad, 1(25), 119-123.Babaytseva V.V., Maksimov L.Yu. Syntax. Punctuation. – M., 1981. – p. 113.
Bagna Ibrahim. Types and functions of the Russian address as the name of the addressee in different types of literature: AKD. – M., 2004. – p. 3-6.
Dolinin K.A. Speech genres as a means of organizing social interaction // Speech genres-2. - Saratov, 1999. –p. 10-11.
Dohova Z.R. Linguistic status of the appeal: Abstract. diss. ... Candidate of Philological Sciences. - M., 2007 – p. 3.
Karabayeva A. Technology of formation of intercultural competence of teachers on the basis of game educational activities (on the example of mastering the disciplines of the languages of the cycle): Author's abstract. dis. ... Cand. ped. sciences.- Shymkent: SKSU, 2009 .p. 26
Krasilnikova E.V., Linguistic and professional aspect of the formation of foreign language communicative compentence.//Pedagogy. Psychology. Social work. Juvenology. Sociokinetics, - №.1, 2010
Kruchinina I.I. Address // Linguistic Encyclopedic Dictionary / Ed. V.N. Yartsevoy. – M.,1990. – p. 340-341.001.
Labunskaya V.A Human Expression: Communication and Interpersonal Cognition. –Rostovon-Don, 1999. p.382
Levin Yu.I. Lyrics from a communicative point of view // Structure of texts and semiotics of culture - The Haqul. - Paris, 1993. p.606
Logical analysis of the language. Cultural concepts. - M., 1991 .p 75.
Lomonosov L.V. Complete works. – ML., 1952. – T.7. p. 267
Nikonova, Zh.V. (2008). Main stages of frame analysis of speech acts (on the material of modern German). Bulletin of N.I. Lobachevsky Nizhny Novgorod University, 224-28.
Pronichev V.P. Syntax of address. - L., 1971. - S. 88.Polonsky A.V. The categorical and functional essence of addressee (based on the material of the Russian language in comparison with Polish): Abstract. dis. ... doct. philol. sciences. Oryol: Oryol state. un-t, 2000. – p. 29-30.
Pronichev V.P. Syntax of address. – L., 1971. – p. 88.
Rozhdestvensky Yu.V., Blinov A.B. Introduction to linguistics. Manuals for stud. phil. fac. higher. study. institutions. - M .: Publishing Center “Academy”, 2005. - p. 36–41.
Rozina R.I. GIFT (relevant semantic class of verbs possession) // Faces of the language. To the 45th anniversary of E.A. Zemsky. -M., 1998 .- p. 305.
Rudnev A.G. Complicated sentence syntax. – M., 1959. – p. 177.
Ryabtseva N.K. "Question": the prototypical meaning of the concept //
Safarov, Sh.S. (2018). Linguistics of discourse. Chelyabinsk: CHGIK, p. 315
Shvedova N.Yu. Propagation of a sentence by including an appeal // Russian grammar. T. 2. – M., 1980. – P. 163-166.
Tomberg, O.V. (2012). Speech portrait in comparative description: linguocultural aspect. TSU Vector of Science, 21(3), 196-200.
Umarhuzhaev, M.E. (2010). Lexicology and Phraseology of the German language. Andijan, 152 p.
Zakharova, K.A. (2017). Complex of methodological tools for the formation of sociolinguistic competence of bachelors. News of VGPU, 9(122), 14.
Zakharova E.P. Types of communicative categories // Problems of speech communication. - Saratov, 2000. - p. 248–249.
Zemskaya E.A. The category of politeness in the context of speech actions // Logical analysis of language. Language of speech actions. –M., 1994. - p.129.
Zolton, D. (2005). The psychology of the language learner: Individual differences in second language acquisition. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 270 p
