Methodology of Studying Linguistic Units in Different Texts and

Discourses

Rano Sayfullaeva

1,2

and Gulshan Nasrullaeva

2,3

National University of Uzbekistan named after Mirzo Ulugbek, Tahskent, Uzbekistan

Alisher Navoi Tashkent State University of Uzbek Language and Literature, Uzbekistan

Karshi branch of the Tashkent University of Information Technologies, Uzbekistan

Keywords: Linguistic Unit, Text, Discourse, Scientific Discourse, Political Discourse, Use of Metaphors in Text and

Discourse.

Abstract: This research discusses the methodology used to study different texts and discourses. It is based various

approaches from the world linguistics regarding, specifically focusing on the function and classification of

linguistic units like metaphors. The main task of metaphors is to express the speaker’s abstract (scientific,

scientific popular, or scientific-artistic) speech in an understandable and effective form. The role of metaphors

is particularly important in describing scientific concepts, hypotheses, political, even official information in a

figurative way that is understandable to a member of society with any worldview. In world linguistics,

anthropomorphic metaphors are widely studied in scientific and commercial discourse. In order to make the

Uzbek economic communication effective, it is proved on the basis of concrete examples that there is a need

for a wide study of the use of metaphors in commercial texts, a systematic study of linguistic units used in

political texts and discourses, especially metaphors.

1 INTRODUCTION

When perceiving the world through language,

metaphors stand as the most effective linguistic

phenomena. The study of metaphors among language

units has been undertaken since ancient times, and

their significance is evident from this historical

interest. The scientific exploration of metaphor,

initiated by Aristotle, has evolved across many stages

to the present day. Numerous types of metaphors have

also been scrutinized in global linguistics. Renowned

linguists such as A. Richards, M. Black, N. D.

Arutyunova, M. Johnson, and J. Lakoff have

advanced these metaphor studies, significantly

shaping our understanding of its role and place within

language. As the anthropocentric approach currently

dominates linguistics, significant emphasis is placed

on examining anthropomorphic metaphors in the

context of various speech situations. Given their

vividness, imagery, expressiveness, and emotionality,

metaphors often serve the primary purpose of

influence in speech, rather than simply conveying

information.

Corresponding author

Based on various aspects of learning, research has

been conducted to analyse metaphors in language.

Consequently, metaphor study has entered the realm

of interdisciplinary research, with key investigations

emerging that focus on the role of metaphors in

scientific language. For many years, researchers have

been intrigued by the phenomenon of metaphor,

particularly its nominative nature and aesthetic

potential. While a great deal of research has been

dedicated to various aspects of metaphorology, the

range of approaches to understanding the essence of

metaphor underscores its complex nature and the

ongoing need for further study. Metaphor is currently

a focal point for linguists, literary critics, cognitivists,

neuropsychologists, and other scientists. Presently,

the portrayal of the metaphorical worldview is

achieved through the reconstruction and theoretical

understanding of individual elements from a stylistic

perspective.

The study of linguistic units in various texts and

discourses, including metaphors, has been

extensively undertaken by scholars such as

Yu.D.Apresyan, O.I.Glazunova, D.Davidson,

282

Sayfullaeva, R. and Nasrullaeva, G.

Methodology of Studying Linguistic Units in Different Texts and Discourses.

DOI: 10.5220/0012486000003792

Paper published under CC license (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)

In Proceedings of the 1st Pamir Transboundary Conference for Sustainable Societies (PAMIR 2023), pages 282-287

ISBN: 978-989-758-687-3

E.Kassirer, D.Lakoff, M.Johnson, E.Mackormack,

and H.Ortega-i-Gasset. Other scholars like

M.A.Arbib, N.D.Arutyunova, A.Vejbitskaya,

R.D.Leng, E.Mackormack, I.P.Merkulov, M.Minsky,

have made significant contributions regarding the

theory of frames and associative images. Scholars

like J.Searle, Yu.S.Stepanov, F.Wheelwright have

focused their studies on metaphors, generative

semantics, and the cognitive, communicative,

emotional, and volitional influencing functions of

metaphor. R.Yakobson, O.N.Laguta, among others,

have conducted scientific studies on the gradual

development of metaphorology. In our republic,

scientists such as M.Mirzaev, M.Mirtojiev,

M.Mukarramov, Z.Tohirov, and S.Usmonov have

examined metaphors from various perspectives.

In the new stage of Uzbek linguistics, several

scientific studies on metaphors have emerged.

Particularly, from the scientific observations and

conclusions of linguists like D.Khudayberganova,

Sh.Makhmaraimova, and G.Kabuljonova, it's evident

that studying the Uzbek language from the

perspective of metaphor theory is vital.

However, the sociolinguistic features of the

anthropomorphic metaphor in linguistic, cognitive,

and lexicographic aspects have not been sufficiently

addressed in existing scientific works. This study

aims to examine anthropomorphic metaphors in

various discourses (artistic, journalistic, and

scientific) and determine their sociolinguistic value

and social significance.

Traditional views on metaphor consider it merely

as a linguistic unit or a contextual growth, without

taking into account its functions that facilitate the

exchange of ideas. However, thought itself possesses

a metaphorical character; it emerges through

comparison and is expressed in language. The

scientist I.M. Sechenov, who was the first to study the

psycholinguistic nature of metaphor, proved the

process of transformation of human emotions into

symbols through purely physiological factors.

By the 1930s, the English linguist A.A. Richards

proposed naming the constituents of the metaphor as

“content, essence” and “shell, figurative (image)”.

Richards considered metaphor as an organic

phenomenon that emerges in the process of

interaction of conceptual structures situated in layers

deeper than linguistic combinations, and existing at

the foundation of words.

G.N. Sklyarevskaya highlights that in the 1960s

and 1970s, metaphor was studied from four

perspectives - nominative-subject, formal-logical,

psychological, and linguistic. She notes that these

studies have evolved into eleven independent

directions in recent years (Sklyarevskaya G. N.

(1993)).

In addition to this classification, three main stages

can be identified in the history of the artistic-

philosophical interpretation of metaphor: 1)

interpretation of metaphor as a special type of

comparison; 2) an interactive concept - its proponents

believe that the collision of different levels of

meaning in linguistic devices creates a special context

that allows us to perceive all objects in a new way; 3)

the concept of the "semantic turn", which involves the

development of new perspectives on the world,

resulting from the interaction of various "linguistic

landscapes" that shape the cultural landscape of

language.

O.A. Svirepo describes the three main

mechanisms of metaphor formation as follows: 1)

semantic (developed by Black, Richards, Rotbart, and

others); 2) pragmatic (developed by Cohen, Marglit,

Shiblz, Lakoff, and Johnson); 3) semiotic

(investigated by Henle).

As previously noted, the study and research of

metaphor in world linguistics is generally conducted

according to the classification proposed by Russian

linguist O. Laguta: 1) Ancient metaphorology

(Aristotle, Philodemus, Theophrastus, Cicero,

Quintilian); 2) Medieval metaphorology (Isidore of

Seville, the Venerable Bede, Georgius Choeroboscus,

Philipp Melanchthon); 3) New Age metaphorology;

4) 20th-century metaphorology, which involves new

aspects of investigation, such as defining its

boundaries.

Words related to human organs and other similar

phenomena may undergo metaphorical

transformation over time. For instance, 'eye' initially

referred to the human organ of vision before it was

extended metaphorically to denote similar-looking

objects in nature – the 'eye' of a ring, 'eye' of a needle,

or 'eye' of a spring, etc. Until now, scientific texts in

the Uzbek language devoted to the study of

anthropomorphism have hardly been analysed. These

metaphors have mainly been examined through

literary texts. To fully uncover the specific features of

anthropomorphic metaphors, it is necessary to

analyse texts of different styles from linguistic,

sociolinguistic, and linguacultural perspectives.

Uzbek linguistics also features numerous studies

on metaphors, which serve as a means for deeper

understanding of the world. For example, B.

Sarimsakov considers a metaphor to be a literary

innovation, differentiating it from a simile (tashbeh)

based on the omission of comparative words

An analogy involves two components that form a

comparison. A metaphor is distinguished by the

Methodology of Studying Linguistic Units in Different Texts and Discourses

283

omission of words such as “like" or "as" (Sarimsakov

B. (2004)). The notion of positioning a metaphor as

an alternative to another metaphor arises from views

that have long existed in the scientific and literary

heritage. This understanding of metaphor can be

found in the works of Ibn Khaldun, Umar Roduyani,

Rashididdin Watwat, Kays Razi, and Sheikh ibn

Khudoidad Tarazi. The examination of metaphors in

Uzbek linguistics has found its significant scientific

and research development in the last decades of the

20th century.

Scientist M.M. Mirtojiev, who conducted

comprehensive research on Uzbek lexicology,

classifies metaphors into speech and language

phenomena. Regarding the types of metaphors in

German linguistics - personification, symbolization,

allegory, synaesthesia - he states, “These types of

metaphors, related to speech phenomena, can be

applied to metaphors related to language phenomena

with certain modifications. In this case, it is necessary

to exclude the symbolism and allegories arising

purely from the nature of speech. This is because

symbolization is a metaphor that occurs in relation to

ellipsis in speech, and allegory surfaces in the context

of speech and intonation. Based on this, metaphors,

which are linguistic phenomena, are categorized into

forms such as simple metaphor, personification, and

synaesthesia” (Mirtojiev M.M. (2010)).

According to M.M. Mirtojiev, a simple metaphor

cannot be viewed as a nearly reduced simile. A simple

metaphor is based on a straightforward comparison,

the similarity of referents, while personification is

rooted in the attribution of animate qualities to an

inanimate referent. Synaesthesia, on the other hand,

is based on comparing and simulating the

characteristics of a referent perceived by one sense to

a referent perceived by a different sense.

All the aforementioned metaphors are mostly

conventional metaphors (M. Yoldoshev, Z. Isakov,

Sh. (2010)). Linguist R. Kongurov identifies

metaphor as a figure of speech, and responds to N.I.

Ashmarin's assertion that the usage of figurative

words - nouns, adjectives, adverbs - in place of other

word groups constitutes a metaphor, in the sense of a

move towards abstraction. Figurative words,

although their expressions cannot be imitated by

sound, impart a specific impression of the

phenomenon they represent. Metaphorical figurative

words are tied to the subject; thus, the speaker

(subject) perceives the phenomenon they express.

However, they do not evoke a concrete image in the

listener. Onomatopoeic words denote auditory

phenomena. The events represented by metaphorical

descriptive words cannot be seen or heard: 'Sidiqjan's

heart was broken' (A. Kahhor, K.ch.), 'My heart is

about to burst' (M. Sholokhov, I.t.), 'The fleeting

decision of Sahib Doro Haydar burned in his chest,

thinking it was one of his fading dreams, he shrugged

his shoulders and remained silent' (Oybek, Navoi)”

(Call R. 1966).

In this regard, the scientist has analysed the

phenomenon of metaphorization in figurative words,

which is under-studied not only in Uzbek linguistics,

but also in world linguistics. The meaning of this type

of words differs entirely from that of independent

words. Independent words maintain a certain

reference to the basis of analogy at any level of

metaphorization. The metaphorization of figurative

words is characterized by a high degree of abstraction

in the process.

N.M. Mahmudov distinguishes synesthetic

metaphors among others and states, “Words in

synesthetic metaphors can be mutually contradictory,

even completely opposite to each other. Such unusual

combinations are also called 'oxymoronic

combinations' (for example, 'bitter truth' is good and

'sweet lie' is bad. - E.V.)” (Mahmudov N. (2009)).

In particular, D.S. Khudayberganova takes a

fresh, modern approach to the study of metaphors.

This scholar views metaphors not only as a

phenomenon that reveals aspects specific to the

national-cultural thinking of the speakers of the text

but also as having significant cognitive-semantic

value. According to her, texts built on the basis of

similes and metaphors provide an opportunity to

determine the forms of text that are moulded in a

particular language. She regards metaphors as

precedent forms of the text (Khudaiberganova D.S.

2015).

In Uzbek linguistics, a group of scientists and

researchers interpret revitalization as a special type of

metaphor. L. Djalolova, however, sharply

distinguishes revitalization from metaphor and

regards it as an independent expressive tool.

According to her, revitalization is a phenomenon

separate from metaphor, “in which human action,

emotion, speech, and thought are transferred to

inanimate objects, but humans are not understood

through them.” M. Mirtojiev presents revitalization as

a semantically significant type of metaphor. The

scientist prefers the term "personification" in

linguistic studies because "animation" is more

characteristic of artistic expression. However, this

seems slightly controversial. Animation as

personification is a broader phenomenon than mere

personification. In Eastern literary studies,

personification itself has forms such as diagnosis and

speech. Animation, in general, is the attribution of

PAMIR 2023 - The First Pamir Transboundary Conference for Sustainable Societies- | PAMIR

284

features characteristic of living things to inanimate

objects: autumn slumbers, my heart laughs. M.

Mirtojiev’s perspective of revitalization as a

semantically significant type of metaphor appears to

be scientifically accurate.

G.K. Kabuljonova (2004) investigated

metaphorical movements in the Uzbek language

using the method of component analysis. She found

that metaphor cannot be the same for all lexical

semantic groups (LSGs). There are also certain rules

for transferring names: different LSGs are assigned

for transfers in various situations. For example,

animal names are often used to represent human

nature, while plant names are often used to represent

appearance.

Kabuljonova (2004) defines the philosophical

foundations of metaphor study as follows:

1. Objectivity: Everything exists as it is before and

after we begin to study it.

2. Substantiality: Any object of study, including a

language unit, is a sum of its qualities. Existence

is matter.

3. The distinction between phenomenon and

essence, particularity and generality: In the

assessment of language units, it is necessary to

distinguish between the phenomenon and the

essence, the particularity and the generality.

4. The possibility of intermediate situations between

conflicting events: It is necessary to take into

account the possibility of intermediate situations

between conflicting events.

Kabuljonova's (2004) study provides a valuable

contribution to the understanding of metaphor in the

Uzbek language. Her findings have implications for

the study of metaphor in other languages as well.

Kabuljonova categorises views on the nature of

metaphor into three groups: 1) Metaphor is (almost)

any means of transferring a name (as per Aristotle, E.

Cassirer); 2) Metaphor as a reduced simile (according

to A.A. Potebnya and his followers); 3) Metaphor is

a special type of transference (proposed by A.

Wierzbicka, N.D. Arutyunova, and Uzbek linguists).

Broadly speaking, G. Kabuljonova provides a

theoretically comprehensive and original perspective

on the nature of metaphors, summarising the

achievements of global linguistics. Similes based on

metaphors influence the nature of metaphors. Hence,

a metaphor, when the simile is evident, is

comprehensible; when the simile is crafted, it

becomes unclear; and when the simile is lost, it is

imperceptible. The loss of similitude transforms

metaphorical adjectives into plain nouns.

Sh. Mahmaraimova has taken a complex approach

to the study of metaphor from both linguistic-

cognitive and linguistic-cultural perspectives. The

scientist analysed theoretical views on the emergence

mechanism of theomorphic metaphors, cognitive

laws driving metaphorical thinking, and reception,

processing, storage, and transmission (representation)

functions of metaphor-imbued knowledge. The

scientist deeply explored the ethnogenesis of

theomorphic images that form the object of

theomorphic metaphors under the influence of local

mythological systems, using the gradual development

of metaphorical thinking as an example. This method

highlighted its stark distinction from religious

metaphors. The spelling of names identifying

theomorphic images and the synthesis of images

related to the object of theomorphic metaphors and

religious metaphors were explained for the first time.

The scientist also provided clear conclusions about

the occurrence mechanism. Based on the materials

from world literature translated into Uzbek,

frequently used theomorphic metaphors in discourse

were identified, demonstrating the "cliché" of

theomorphic metaphors in typical communicative

situations that express the national-mental and

communicative expression of the language owner. It

was theoretically proven that theomorphic metaphors,

which have the quality of moral-evaluative psychic-

mental unity, hold their proper place in the national

linguo-cognitive image of the world, indicating their

importance as linguocultures (Makhmaraimova Sh.

(2018)).

The analysis reveals that the anthropomorphic

metaphor is intricately structured and possesses high

pragmatic potential. Its model is composed of the

frames "body", "body parts", "appearance", and

"human character".

The deployment of metaphors is also highly

effective in medical scientific discourse, where they

are used to represent diseases that need treatment,

signs and symptoms of diseases, and their

consequences. The employment of metaphors in

scientific popular speech also yields positive

outcomes.

The utilisation of metaphors in the energy field

enables clear and concise expression of ideas. In such

texts, meanings are transferred based on the similarity

of individual signs, movements, and shapes. For

example, "Heat engines use gases, gas-vapour

mixtures, or water vapour as working bodies because

these bodies must possess expansion and

compression properties. In internal combustion

engines, air serves as the working body; it absorbs the

heat energy generated by fuel combustion and

performs mechanical work by pushing the piston

Methodology of Studying Linguistic Units in Different Texts and Discourses

285

during the expansion process (Khudoyberdiyev T.S.

(2008))."

Similarly, in texts about geometry, human

behaviour is sometimes transferred to objects. For

example, the following sentence describes a

geometric shape shift:

If each point of a given shape F in space is moved

in some way, a new shape F1 is formed. If in this

transfer (reflection) different points of the first shape

move to different points of the second shape, this

transfer is called a geometric shape shift.

Similarity substitution in space maps straight lines

to straight lines, ray to ray, segment to segment, and

angle to angle. This permutation also reflects plane to

plane (Haydarov B.Q. (2017).).

The highlighted words each carry distinct

meanings within the context.

In linguistic theory, metaphorical words are used

to explain the essence of linguistic phenomena and

express them in an understandable manner. For

instance, when researching in the field of phonetics,

there is a need to explain sound-related processes

figuratively. For example, “...contractions

(absorption of phonemes) are based on...” (Eltazarov

J. (2004)) the highlighted word in this sentence has

taken on a metaphorical meaning. In the sentence

“The rate of absorption of ions depends on their

concentration in the medium”, there is another

figurative meaning that differs from the absorption of

sound.

The active expression of anthropomorphic

metaphors in scientific texts is also demonstrated in

the following example: “No method can compete

with chromatography, which is a physico-chemical

research method, in terms of its universality and

effectiveness in separating complex mixtures.”

(Muhamadiev N.Q. (2017)) The inability to compete

is, in reality, a characteristic of human behaviour. Its

application in scientific language to substances leads

to a clear, figurative, and understandable expression

of thought.

While anthropocentric studies are conducted in

linguistics, the anthropomorphic type of metaphors is

not specifically studied. Researching

anthropomorphic metaphors in relation to various

discourses carries important scientific-theoretical and

practical significance.

2 CONCLUSION

It has been found that metaphors have been

extensively studied in various aspects within global

linguistics. Particularly, metaphors are investigated

not only within artistic texts, but also in scientific,

official, and journalistic texts. In Uzbek linguistics,

the phenomenon of metaphor in scientific and popular

scientific texts deserves special investigation.

Studying anthropomorphic metaphors in different

discourses reveals the lexical and grammatical

potential of linguistic units, how meanings are

extracted, and how lexical and metaphorical

meanings develop, particularly in poetic texts. Dual

research from both linguistic and literary perspectives

would yield fruitful insights into the metaphor as a

principal means of shaping the linguistic landscape

for both the creator and the reader of a text.

The methodological potential and tasks of

anthropomorphic metaphor have not been

systematically studied in Uzbek linguistics. While

metaphor is multifaceted and can be a subject of

research for all fields, metaphors which are

significant for scientific, popular scientific,

journalistic, and conversational styles are formed

through text and communication in artistic style.

Therefore, it is crucial to study them on a large scale

sociolinguistically, focusing on the process of

creation, formation, classification, levelling,

sectorisation, and the function of metaphors.

Human organs and other related phenomena may

cause subsequent migration. For instance, the term

'eye' initially represented the human organ of vision,

and later included other similar objects found in

nature, such as the eye of a ring, the eye of a needle,

the eye of a spring, etc. Until now, research dedicated

to the study of anthropomorphism in the Uzbek

language has hardly analysed scientific texts,

primarily focusing on literary texts. In order to fully

explore anthropomorphic metaphors and their

specific features, it is necessary to analyse texts of

different styles from a linguistic, sociolinguistic, and

linguacultural perspective.

Metaphors are as old as language itself. Its

scientific study began with the earliest theories of

linguistics and has today risen to the level of

metaphorology. As a separate component of

semiotics, studying the potential of language

expression, metaphor is one of the key issues in

linguaculturology, which investigates the

commonality of language and culture. It is also a

central topic in linguocognitology, which examines

the connection of language and knowledge, language

and ethnic thinking, as well as a significant subject in

ethnolinguistics, which studies culture, oratory and

speech culture, and artistic speech art. Therefore,

metaphor remains one of the main themes in poetics.

PAMIR 2023 - The First Pamir Transboundary Conference for Sustainable Societies- | PAMIR

286

REFERENCES

Usmanov S. Metaphor. (1964). //Uzbek language and

literature. - Tashkent, Issue 4, ‒ B.36.

Khudaiberganova D.S. 2015 Anthropomorphic

interpretation of artistic texts in the Uzbek language:

Philol. science. dr. ... diss. - Tashkent), - B. 64-74

Makhmaraimova Sh. (2018) Cognitive aspect of

theomorphic metaphor in the national linguistic image

of the world: Philol. science. name ... diss. ¬– Against,.

– B. 90-93.

Kabuljonova G.K. (2000) Systematic-linguistic

interpretation of metaphor: Philol. science. name ...

diss. - Tashkent:. - B.33.

Richards A. A. (1990). Philosophy of rhetoric// Theory of

metaphor. - M., - S. 44-67.

Sklyarevskaya G. N. (1993) Metaphor in the language

system. - St. Petersburg: Nauka,.//

https://www.twirpx.com

Svirepo O. A. (2002) Metaphor as a code of culture.

Abstract of diss. cand. philosophical sciences. - Rostov-

on-Don,. -p.56-59.

Sarimsakov B. (2004)Fundamentals and criteria of art. - T.;

Generation of the new age., page 49.

Mirtojiev M.M. (2010) Semasiology of the Uzbek

language. - T.: Mumtoz Soz,. - B.100

Linguistic analysis of literary text: Methodical guide/ M.

Yoldoshev, Z. Isakov, Sh. (2010) Haydarov:

responsible editor N. M. Mahmudov. - T.: Publishing

House of the National Library of Uzbekistan named

after Alisher Navoi,.//

http://library.ziyonet.uz/ru/book/download/112837

Call R. 1966 Figurative words in the Uzbek language. - T.:

Science, - B.76.

Mahmudov N. (2009) The culture of teacher speech. 2nd

edition - T.,. - B. 80.

Hasanov A.A., (2010) linguopoetics of revitalization in

Abdulla Qahhor's stories. Scientific world of

Kazakhstan. 4 (32). -B.37-38.

Khudoyberdiyev T.S. (2008) etc. Instructional manual for

higher educational institutions of technical engineering

- Tashkent. (2008) publishing house named after

Cholpon

Haydarov B.Q. (2017). Geometry, part I, textbook for

students of the 11th grade of secondary educational

institutions and secondary special, vocational

educational institutions, 1st edition, Press and

Information Agency of Uzbekistan "Uzbekistan"

publishing house, creative house

Eltazarov J. (2004)The principle of parsimony and

reduction in language. Monograph. - Samarkand:

SamDU,. -B. 29

Muhamadiev N.Q. (2017) Physico-chemical basis of

optimization and identification of the process of

separation in chromatography - Bulletin of SamDU. -

Samarkand,. - p. 152.

Methodology of Studying Linguistic Units in Different Texts and Discourses

287