SOME FEATURES OF STUDYING SEMANTIC STRUCTURE OF PHRASEOLOGICAL UNITS IN RUSSIAN AND UZBEK

Аннотация

The article discusses the problems of comparative study of formal phraseology in Russian and Uzbek languages. KEYWORDS :- Form phrases, base combination, semantic content, lexical-grammatical hierarchy, categorical delimitation, archetype, macrosema, phraseological-spiritual group I The allocation of adverbial phraseological units NTRODUCTION has been carried out for a long time and is typical The study of the semantic structure, as well as the for the system of both the Russian and Uzbek formalization of phraseological units, requires a languages. But the bulk of the research devoted to multifaceted, comprehensive approach, since its the development of this problem was conducted content side is hidden from direct observation. on the material of the Russian language. And this The study of the semantic side of phraseological is not surprising, because the formation of units requires knowledge of the features of their phraseology as an independent field of linguistics structural and semantic organization. This article was the result of the works of Russian linguists is aimed at describing units of one phraseological and, first of all, the works of Acad. V,Vinogradov, class, namely the adverbial phraseological units of which were fundamental for the comprehensive the Russian language. study of phraseology in general. He was one of the first to point out the existence of "idiomatic types When determining the object of our research, we of adverbs" in the language, which he considers proceeded from the fact that adverbial from the point of view of their structural and phraseological units in both Russian and Uzbek grammatical arrangement and syntactic languages are not given sufficient attention, functioning. [1, 291]. although this category of phraseological units is quantitatively inferior only to verbal ones. In M ATERIALS AND METHODS addition, they differ markedly from units of other phraseological and grammatical classes by their Phraseological units, as vocabulary units of a diverse semantic structure, grammatical language, have much in common with words. But structure and syntactic function (combinability, a closer examination of the meanings they express environment and distribution). reveals that they also have a significant difference. CURRENT RESEARCH JOURNAL OF PEDAGOGICS 101 ISSN – 2767-3278 https://masterjournals.com/index.php/crjp CURRENT RESEARCH JOURNAL OF PEDAGOGICS 2(6): 101-107, June 2021 DOI: https://doi.org/10.37547/pedagogy-crjp-02-06-20 ISSN 2767-3278 ©2021 Master Journals Accepted 18th June, 2021 & Published 23th June, 2021 In the semantic structure of phraseological units, to semantic groups, a significant role is assigned two semes, as it were, coexist, one of which is a to its vocabulary definition, some questions are carrier of material meaning, and the other also used that have a categorical feature (for expresses additional shading values of the tone example: when? Since when? - with a temporal "very", "extremely". meaning; where, from where? - with a spatial meaning, etc.) Let's compare: quickly - in all the shoulder blades that there is urine, i.e. not just fast, but very fast. R ESULTS AND DISCUSSION Consequently, from the point of view of the internal content of phraseological units belonging At the next stage of the semantic classification of to the category of adverbial ones, they consist of NFE, the values of a narrower range of units are at least three elements: the seme of material detailed on the basis of highlighting a less abstract content, the categorical seme and the amplifying seme (macroseme). Thus, the archiseme “quality” seme. includes such macrosemes as: “proper quality”, “transmission of information”, “quality of However, the quantitative composition of semes performance”, “existence in the environment”, in the semantic structure of NFE is not limited to which allow this FSG to be divided into four the elementary units of meanings discussed groups. above. Within one sememe, there are also semes that allow them to be grouped into a phrase- NFE with the “proper quality” macroseme, in turn, semantic group (FSG), subgroups and depending on the semantics they express, can be microgroups. For example, in units of the type: represented as an opposition of two specific like the back of your five fingers, like a saddle on semantic real meanings: “good”, - “bad” (what is a cow, in all eyes, out of the corner of the eye, not needed; God knows how). for fear, but for conscience, through a tree stump, The other three macrosemes have a more like a bird of heaven, not a sleeve for a fur coat, etc. complex semantic structure, which makes it - there is such an element of meaning that allows possible to isolate more semes of the third level: them to be combined into one group, although “concentration” and “inaccessibility” - in M - 2 (ie each of the presented NFE has a differential seme the “information transfer” macrosome), characteristic only of it; “Good”, “bad”, “diligence” an