COGNITIVE ANALYSIS OF ANOMOTOPOIC LEXEMAS IN RUSSIAN, ENGLISH AND UZBEKISTAN
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.55640/Keywords:
onomatopoeia, cognitive linguistics, concept, phonosemantics, reduplication, iconicity, comparative analysis.Abstract
The present article provides a cognitive analysis of onomatopoetic lexemes in Russian, English, and Uzbek within a comparative-typological framework. The study explores the linguistic nature of sound-imitative units, their mental representation, and the processes of conceptualization. Particular attention is given to phonosemantic features, reduplication models, emotional-expressive functions, and culture-specific characteristics of onomatopoeic expressions. Based on data from the three languages, the research identifies both universal patterns and nationally determined features, as well as the degree of iconicity in the relationship between sound and meaning. The findings demonstrate the role of onomatopoetic lexemes in concept formation and their discursive functions in shaping cognitive models of reality.
Downloads
References
1.Lakoff G., Johnson M. Metaphors We Live By. – Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1980. – 276 p.
2.Mahmudov N. M. Til va nutq madaniyati. – Toshkent: Fan, 2010. – 224 b.
3.Rahmatullayev Sh. Hozirgi o‘zbek adabiy tili leksikologiyasi. – Toshkent: Universitet, 2006. – 312 b.
4.Воронин С. В. Основы фоносемантики. – Ленинград: Изд-во ЛГУ, 1982. – 244 с.
5.Карасик В. И. Языковой круг: личность, концепты, дискурс. – Волгоград: Перемена, 2002. – 477 с.
6.Маслова В. А. Когнитивная лингвистика: Учебное пособие. – Минск: ТетраСистемс, 2004. – 256 с.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors retain the copyright of their manuscripts, and all Open Access articles are disseminated under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 (CC-BY), which licenses unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided that the original work is appropriately cited. The use of general descriptive names, trade names, trademarks, and so forth in this publication, even if not specifically identified, does not imply that these names are not protected by the relevant laws and regulations.

Germany
United States of America
Italy
United Kingdom
France
Canada
Uzbekistan
Japan
Republic of Korea
Australia
Spain
Switzerland
Sweden
Netherlands
China
India