A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF PHRASEOLOGICAL UNITS TO THE NAMES OF FLORA AND FAUNA IN ENGLISH AND UZBEK
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Creating and analyzing a system of terms related to fauna and flora in Uzbek and English is an important experience for linguists and linguistics specialists.This article presents a comparative linguistic analysis of phraseological units in English and Uzbek that incorporate the names of flora (plants) and fauna (animals). It examines the semantic and structural parallels and divergences in how these two linguistically distinct languages conceptualize and express human experiences, traits, and observations through the natural world. The study explores common conceptual metaphors, cultural specificities, and the degree of idiomaticity, highlighting both universal human perceptions and unique ethnocultural perspectives embedded within their respective phraseologies.
Downloads
Article Details
Section
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.
How to Cite
References
1.Kuhar, Francisco; Furci, Giuliana; Drechsler-Santos, Elisandro Ricardo; Pfister, Donald H. (December 2018). "Delimitation of Funga as a valid term for the diversity of fungal communities: the Fauna, Flora & Funga proposal (FF&F)". IMA Fungus. 9 (2): A71 – A74. doi:10.1007/BF03449441. hdl:11336/88035. ISSN 2210-6359
2.Clifford E. Starliper; Rita Villella; Patricia Morrison; Jay Mathais. "Sampling the bacterial flora of freshwater mussels" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 2016-02-01
3.Lina Ding, Marina V. Lysyakova Comparative Analysis of Animal Phraseological Units with Religious Component in Russian and Chinese // Вестник РУДН. Серия: Теория языка. Семиотика. Семантика. 2024. №2.
4.Mukhammadieva Shakhzoda Farkhodovna. (2023). SYSTEMATIZATION OF PHRASEOLOGICAL UNITS OF THE ENGLISH AND UZBEK LANGUAGES. Web of Scientist: International Scientific Research Journal, 4(5), 640–645. https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/HW4EK
5.Kunin, A.V. Course of phraseology of modern English: Studies: for institutions and foreign languages departments. Moscow: "Phoenix". 1996, p.177.
6.Rejapov A.A. A STUDY OF THE PRAGMATIC, CHARACTERISTICS OF THE PHRASES EXPRESSED BY FAUNA AND FLORA IN ENGLISH AND UZBEK LANGUAGES // Экономика и социум. 2024. №11-2 (126).
7.English Idioms in Use Intermediate: 62 Units of Vocabulary Reference and Practice McCarthy, Michael; O'Dell, Felicity Published by Cambridge University Press, 2017., p. 78-80.
8.Авалиани Ю.Ю. Проблема фразеологической синонимии в современном языкознании (обзор литературы) / Ю.Ю. Авалиани, Л.И. Ройзензон. // Труды - Самарканд, 1963. Вып. 132.- С. 110.
9.Yuldashev, O. (2023). STUDY OF FOLKLORE ASPECTS OF UZBEK FOLK PROVERBS. International Bulletin of Applied Science and Technology, 3(10), 37-39.
10.Ahrorova, R. U. (2021). SEMANTIC ANALYSIS OF PHRASEOLOGICAL UNITS REPRESENTING "YOUTH" IN FRENCH AND UZBEK LANGUAGES. Theoretical & Applied Science, (7), 122-126
11.Arsentieva, E.F. Phraseology and phraseography in comparative aspect (on the material of Russian and English languages). Kazan: KFU. 2006, p.3