Structural Organization of the Euphemistic Text of the Uzbek Language on the Example of the Nominative Field “Oolmok” (to Die)

Full Text

Introduction

Euphemism is a uniquely organized system of linguistic codes, a complex systemic object of linguistic analysis, “a sublimation of the processes of cognition and transformation of reality through the prism of personal emotional experiences, complex mental and psychological processes, exteriorizing internal intentions by creating semantic correlates identical to the result of analytical activity” [1. P. 718], which meets the requirements of harmonious social communication of the subject within the framework of a certain communicative act, thereby inducing scientific discussions among researchers in various fields of linguistics (sociolinguistics, pragmatics, psycholinguistics, cognitive science, etc.). The vector of modern scientific paradigm — the scientific picture of the world — is oriented towards structuring, ordering and hierarchical organization of all objects that are subject to practical and cognitive activity. Euphemism does not eliminate this norm, and, like any object that has an expanded structure, to which the action is directed, can be studied from the point of view of three main aspects: determination of sequence, hierarchical structure and holistic approach. While certain elements of the sequence (genesis and evolution of euphemistic units) as a logically conditioned complex of operations moving one after another (history and reasons for origin, methods of formation and expression, functional-­pragmatic structure of euphemistic signs, etc.) have been considered within the framework of the structural-­functional approach, the euphemistic text (understood in the broad aspect of its interpretation as a configuration of semiotic units united by semantic implication) in the form of a hierarchical structure, which is formed by means of elements of differential complexity, currently remains a little-­studied area. A review of theoretical literature has shown that the phenomenon of euphemism in the context of linguistic research is mainly determined through the prism of one of its aspects. From the point of view of the functional-­semantic approach, certain thematic classifications of euphemisms are presented (see B.A. Larin 1961 [2], A.M. Katsev [3], L.S. Turganbaeva [4], L.P. Krysin [5], V.P. Moskvin [6], L.V. Porokhnitskaya [7], J.S. Neaman & C.G. Silver [8], K. Allan, K. Burridge [9], A.Zh. Omonturdiev [10], N. Ismatullaev [11]), and methods of forming euphemistic nominations are identified (see A.M. Katsev [3], V.P. Moskvin [12], E.I. Sheigal [13]). From the point of view of stigmatic denotation and pragmatics, euphemization is considered a way of preserving the appropriateness of language (see N.M. Berdova [14], N.V. Pryadilnikova [15], E.E. Tyurina [16], V.P. Moskvin [6]). Euphemia has been studied within the framework of cognitive linguistics — the basis for euphemistic nominations formation (see L.V. Babina [17], N.N. Boldyrev, Yu.V. Aleksikova [18]) and from the point of view of discursive linguistics (see E.I. Sheigal [11]). From the stylistic approach standpoint, the problems of stylistic affiliation of euphemistic nominations and euphemistic vocabulary functional styles have been investigated (I.R. Galperin [19], V.P. Moskvin [6], E.P. Senichkina [20], B. Warren [21]).

In the works of researchers, the main attention is paid to those components and features that directly interfere with the content of euphemistic signs, however, the form, which is a reflection of the transformation of semantic content from simple to complex, is considered insufficiently significant and therefore has not been fully studied. The form is defined as something known in advance, dialectically correlated with the content components of the whole [22], as a result of which, in linguistic studies it is important to take into account, that the form of a euphemism has its own specificity, determined by goals and reasons, both at the structural and content levels.

We have noticed that the expanded structure of a euphemism forms a complex system of semantic space of speech, with figurative, verbal and non-­verbal components, therefore, in our opinion, the expansion of form leads to the expansion of content, which is capable of marking euphemistic units in the process of written and oral communication, and as a result, has a direct impact on the degree of priority of perceived information in a communicative situation. In addition, we note that at the structural level, the organization of a euphemistic text is accompanied by: special segmentation of the text, differentiation (vertical and horizontal), which divides structural elements, and integration, determining the coding of a euphemistic nomination by semiotically heterogeneous linguistic signs, correlating with the individual psychological characteristics of the subject in the course of the processes of mental activity. The purpose of this study is to identify the main stages of the structural organization of a euphemistic text, which forms the nominative field “oolmok” in the Uzbek discourse, with subsequent quantitative and stylistic analysis of the empirical material. For a more complete representation of the euphemistic code “oolmok”, stylistic affiliation, as well as empirically relevant research material (within the framework of this study, the task of their full explication is not set), we will turn to corpus data that allow us to consider the key linguistic codes, cultural values and traditions associated with the concept “oolmok”, forming a complex structural organization of the euphemistic text.

Materials and methods of studies

The material of the study is euphemisms of the nominative field “oolmok” (‘to die’), presented in “Uzbek tilining kiskacha evfemik lugati” (Brief euphemistic dictionary of the Uzbek language) (A.Zh. Omonturdiev, 2006)^[1], and constituting the largest group, which makes it possible to conduct a detailed analysis. However, the above-­mentioned dictionary does not have an electronic version, so the procedure for selecting the empirical database was carried out with the corpus of the euphemistic dictionary of the Uzbek language in paper format using the directional (targeted) sampling method. As a result of the targeted selection from the UTKEL (Brief Euphemistic Dictionary of the Uzbek Language), more than 3,000 euphemisms, 659 euphemistic codes of the nominative field “oolmok” were found, identified as empirical research material and grouped by the number of units included in the euphemistic text. Within the framework of the corpus approach of linguistic science to language study, which consists in representativeness relative to the phenomenon under study — euphemism, the following methods were used: the linguistic-­statistical method, the sampling method in empirical research, and stylistic analysis.

Results of the study

The analysis of the structural idiosyncrasy of the form of reproduction of the euphemistic text of the Uzbek language using the example of the nominative field “oolmok” revealed that its structure can manifest itself in the form of two central parameters — the degree of formalization and complexity. The possibilities of formalization aimed at revealing the form (structure) of thoughts as the reproduction of substantive knowledge in the concept of mathematical analysis —calculus, where in the course of the formalization process the euphemistic semantic space should be in some sense a fixed complex of provisions, were presented in the developed theory of the relational model of the euphemistic potential of a linguistic sign, namely a lexical unit (see S.A. Logvina [23]). In the context of this study, we will consider the complexity of the configuration of the extensional form of the euphemistic text, which is one of the key indicators of the structure. Researchers argue that “a more complex expression in form is also more complex semantically” [24. P. 40], which finds its equivalent in the concept of iconicity as a one-­to-one relationship between the content and form of a language unit, which is expressed in a structural (form miming form) analogue between its two sides, the signifier and the signified (see the works of R. Barthes [25], W. Eco [26], C.W. Morris [27]), leading to semantic diffuseness. Consequently, “euphemisms consisting of two or more components are semantically more complex than single-­word euphemisms; with their help, a greater distance is created between the negative denotation and its designation” [24. P. 39]. Let us turn to the linguistic realizations of an increasingly complex structure:

Oolmok ‘to die’ — khukm ookilmok ‘to adjudge’ — kaitmas safarga ketmok ‘to set out on a journey from which there is no return’ — hayotinning soonghi nuktasi boolmok ‘to become the last point of one’s life’ — zhoni zhasadi kishvaridan barkham topmok ‘to free the soul from the body’ — dorul fanodin dorul bakoga rikhlat kilmok ‘to leave the material life for the spiritual life’ (from here on — authors’ translation — A.T.).

Kabriston ‘cemetery’ — abadiy makon ‘eternal space’ — bir kuloch er ‘tiny land’— iti yok kishlok hamma boradigan joy ‘a village without a dog, a place where everyone will definitely end up’.

Kummok ‘inhumation’ — mozorga topshirmok ‘to give to the grave’ — chin uyiga kuzatmok ‘to see off to the true home’ — kora er bagriga kuymok ‘to put in the bosom of the black earth’.

The more developed the structure of an indirect lexical unit is, the less concrete the reproduction of the stigmatic connotation becomes; such “speech redundancy always leads to semantic complication, even if it turns out to be false” [24. P. 40]. The accumulation of form leads to the “expansion” of content, which in turn leads to semantic uncertainty; cf.: oolmok ‘to die’ — olamdan ootmok ‘to pass away’; oolim ‘death’ — bir oyoghi kabrda ‘with one foot in the grave’.

Differentiation (vertical and horizontal) and integration are two central categories that determine the gradient of structural levels of a euphemistic text formation. Integration, representing a set of processes used “in the case of euphemistic nomination of codes aimed at achieving intellectual protection, determines the coding of a euphemism by semantically heterogeneous means that represent a semantic, substantive and functional integrity” [28. P. 84]. The form of interaction of linguistic codes of such a community does not have equal rights and is realized within the framework of the concept of additivity “the value of the euphemistic code corresponding to the whole object, will be equal to the sum of the values ​​of the quantities that correspond to its parts with any division of the element into parts” (see [29]) with a dominant, and in some cases sublimating activity of one of the elements of the reproduction of semantic content.

The most significant parameter of the organizational complexity of the spatial differentiation of structural linguistic signs is differentiation, which projects the heterogeneity of the organization, its universality of functioning and differential relationship in the set goals, such as: differentiation in the selection of goals, by the functions performed, and by the number of lexical units actively participating in the formation of the nomination.

Differentiation by the vertical parameter explicates the depth of the hierarchy structure and, in the context of a euphemistic text, is determined by the volume and levels of complexity of linguistic, psychological, and cognitive processes that are involved in the formation of the semantic content of the euphemistic code: “A high degree of vertical differentiation indicates the volume of the element of the euphemistic text — a set of processes, concepts, and intentions transmitted within the framework of an intellectual object — a euphemism” [28. P. 84]. According to the theoretical concept of identifying euphemistic units within the linguistic field developed by S.A. Logvina, such a phenomenon as euphemism can be represented by the following linguistic forms:

• euphemisms — automatisms, which are intellectual objects of minimal complexity, for example ketmok ‘to leave’, vafot etmok ‘to decease’, which use a ready-­made, frequently used and well-­known to all communicants form with a low degree of Abstraction, as a result of which the subject of the communication process expends the least amount of mental effort, which similarly manifests itself in the quantity and quality of mental operations;
• euphemisms — occasionalisms are more complex intellectual objects, during the coding of which the participant in communication always resorts to situational code switching — overcoming automatism in the selection of syntactic structures from among those already prepared, referring to the principle of humanity and the principle of here and now, for example oyok kokmok ‘to stumble’, khuftongacha kolmaydigan kurinadi ‘will not stay until the khufton’ (khufton is an obligatory four–time night prayer in Islam. The time for performing khufton begins with the disappearance of the evening dawn after sunset and continues until dawn, thereby there is a similarity that by this time the human body must be buried). These euphemistic units have an average level of Abstraction (at which the identification of the information of the original component can be understood to a sufficient degree) and high pragmatic potential. In addition, euphemisms — occasionalisms have intentions of conscious involvement of the subject of the communication process in its formation;
• euphemistic simulacra — intellectual objects of a highly complex level of Abstraction, are of an exclusively simulative nature, in which two processes are synchronized: connotative amelioration and substitution of the original information (where the implementation of complex modulation is needed — falsification of a concept, significantly influencing the perception or behavior of other people through implicit and coding procedures in the interests of the manipulator), for example, Vatan tuproghida erkalanib yotmok ‘to embrace one’s native land’, ajal denghiziga gark bulmok ‘to drown in the sea of death’. In such a situation, the automation of perception is excluded, this is only seeming information exchange, however, in reality, the information producers deliberately do not allow the recipient to understand the reality of the transmitted information [1. P. 720–721].

Differentiation of a euphemistic text by horizontal parameter has heterogeneous configurations, both in complexity and in the size of syntactic relations. Within the framework of our study, in the context of increasing complexity of the structure of euphemistic unit, the emphasis shifts from the ways of expressing meaning to structural changes (the number of linguistic signs in the structure of a euphemistic text). Before presenting the classification of horizontal differentiation of a euphemistic text, it should be noted, that the interpretation of the text is understood in its classical version — a meaningfully interconnected, logically connected sequence of linguistic signs that have integrity and structure, and possess a specific purposefulness and pragmatic attitude (see I.R. Galperin [19], O.S. Akhmanova^[2], Yu.M. Lotman [30]). Consequently, a text is capable of performing two functions: to act as an object of reference, and a system of signs. Expanding on this statement, we can say that texts act as referents for other texts. “The space of all the signified, to which a text refers (directly or simply by mentioning or hinting) is defined as the universum of textual projections” [31. P. 21].

In the context of this study, special attention is paid to the syntactic explication of the euphemistic text of the Uzbek language of the thematic group “oolmok” based on the material of “Uzbek tilining kiskacha evfemik lugati” (A Brief Euphemistic Dictionary of the Uzbek Language) by A.Zh. Omonturdiev and its linguistic signs. In order to clearly illustrate the growing complexity of the structural organization, we have analyzed the differential forms of expression of a euphemistic text, selected by targeted sampling, and divided them into four groups depending on the number of sign units that are part of the euphemistic text and word classes that determine the maximum forms of representativeness of the lexical paradigm:

1. A one-­word euphemism (euphemistic unit);

• noun: kyafan ‘shroud’, tobut ‘funeral bier’, yettisi ‘seven, that is, seven days’, yighirmasi ‘twenty, that is, twenty days’, kirki ‘fortieth deathday’;
• adjective: rahmatli ‘grateful’ is said about the deceased in the Islamic religion, which means that Allah may have mercy on him and show him His generosity, bestowing His blessings and other benefits;
• expressed using a verb: vafot etmok ‘to decease’, kurbon boolmok ‘to become a victim’, olamdan ootmok ‘to pass away’;
• linguistic signs with broad semantics — descriptions: usha zhoy ‘that very place’, oorin ‘place’ represent the possibility of acting as substitutes for various signs that belong to objects that are differential in nature. For example, the description oorin in the phrase abadiy oorin oolmok ‘to get an eternal place’ replaces the negative connotation kabriston ‘cemetery’, which allows encoding the sent information;

2. Euphemisms, which consist of two or more words (euphemistic expressions). A euphemistic expression, being a minimal relatively integral unit in the communication process, symbolizes a linguistic sign (unit of language), the structure of which can consist of two or more lexemes; in this case, the interpretation of the meaning does not correspond to the basic principles of classical semantics, therefore, the interpretation is determined by the principles of euphemization inherent in a specific language and cultural community:

• noun + noun, or two nouns: zhinoyat zhoyi ‘crime scene’, vokea zhoyi ‘scene of the accident’, zhinoyat sodir etilgan zhoy ‘scene of the commission of the criminal act’ — image of the scene of death;
• noun + adjective, or noun and adjective, for example, comparing death with sleep abadiy uyku ‘eternal sleep’, abadiy tinchlik ‘eternal peace’;
• verb + noun, or verb and noun: adam diyoriga zhunatmok ‘to go to the forefathers’, adam chulistonika ketmok ‘to go to the valley of the ancestors’. These euphemistic explications in Uzbek society, adherents of the Muslim religion have an amphoteric nature of interpretation: reunification with the Creator, and reunification with previously deceased relatives;
• verb + prepositional phrase/adverb, or verb and prepositional phrase/adverb, for example, abadiy uikuga ketmok ‘to fall asleep in eternal sleep’, abadiy oorin olmok ‘to obtain an eternal place’, bevakt ketmok ‘to leave this world prematurely’;
• preposition + noun, or preposition and noun. It is worth noting, that in the Uzbek language, prepositions of place are conveyed by suffixes attached to the end of the word form to which they refer. “In”, “on”, “under” in Uzbek are conveyed by the suffix — da. For example, er ostida ‘under the ground’, osmonlarda ‘in heaven’, kabrda ‘in the grave’.

3. Euphemistic nominations consisting of more than two words (euphemistic sentences). In order to explicate the euphemistic meaning, a syntactic form is often used — a sentence that has potential to act as a minimal unit of a communicative act, for example, a simple sentence: oolim — oliy mas’udlik ‘death is a high blessing’, mas’udlik onini — oolim saodati ‘a moment of happiness is the bliss of death’, oolim — bu dunyoning eng ulug mukofoti ‘death is the highest reward in the world’, takdirdan kochib kutula olmayslik ‘you can’t escape fate’, takdirda bor ekan ‘it was destined for him/her by fate’, takdirda yozilgan bulmok ‘what is written by fate will happen’.

4. Figurative euphemistic nominations (metaphors, metonymies, phraseological phrases, tropes, etc.). In this section it should be noted that the meaning of certain euphemisms is not determined by the semantics of individual linguistic signs of the language, which are one of the components of this composition and fall into the category of a complete sentence. As a result of the study of empirical data, “figurative euphemisms in their structure can be classified as fixed word combinations, phrasemes, idioms, cliches, etc. All of them are non-­discrete, i.e. non-­limiting, not fully divided units. In figurative euphemisms, as in idioms, the nominal part, as a rule, does not change; the verb is more flexible. In grammatical terms, euphemisms are characterized by: attributive predicate; inactive verb; the effective past and the continuous present, etc. The following stylistic devices are often used in the process of forming these explications:

• metaphor: “oolmok” in the meaning of: 1) travel: safar kilmok ‘to travel’, umr karvoni manzilga etmok ‘to get to the destination’; 2) the concept of transport, figuratively expressing the meaning of “oolmok”: umr karvoni safarga otlandi ‘a harnessed carriage for traveling’, toort oyokli chobin ot ‘literally a four–wheeled horse-­drawn carriage’; 3) in the sense of transition from one world to another in order to fulfill a duty: omnatini topshirmok ‘to fulfill a duty before God’, hakikiy hayotga yol olmok ‘to leave for the real life’, foniy dunyodani bokiyga ketmok ‘lit. to pass from another world to another world’, dunyoni muttahamlardan halos kilmok ‘to free the world from the ignorant’; 4) the destination is the kingdom of God: egasika kerak bulmok ‘to be necessary for the owner’, chin dunyoga ravona bulmok ‘to return to the true place’; 5) the point of completion of life’s journey and the starting point of a new journey: umriga intiho yasalmok ‘to end one’s life’, hayotiga nukta koymok ‘to put an end to life’, dunyo eshigidan chikmok ‘lit. to go out the door of the world’, dunyo galvalaridan kutilib ketmok ‘to get rid of the problems of the world, to start a new life’; 6) bodily signs: bir yaprok uzildi ‘one hair fell off’, oyoghini uzatib ketmok ‘to stretch one’s legs’, yuragi urishdan tuhtadi ‘the heart stopped beating’;
• metonymy, figurative periphrases, formed with the help of metonymic transfer, and reproduced in a form characteristic of a given natural phenomenon, actional and artifactual “contexts”, projecting perceptual images, associations in the form of a cemetery, a grave, the afterlife and the organisms living in it: kabr yokasida tebranish ‘with one foot in the grave’, tobutga karamok ‘to look into the stretcher’, takhta olmok ‘loaded into the stretcher’, tobut tortmok ‘the grave took him’, marhumlar diyori ‘the land of the dead’, images of the afterlife dargoghiga chorlamok ‘to be invited to the monastery’, zhonini tamug kazarmasiga yubormok ‘to send one’s life to the underworld’, tamug kazarmasiga yubormok ‘to go to the underworld’, tamug elatiga yubormok ‘to go to one’s native place’;
• phraseological units: 1) in the meaning of imminent, approaching death: bir haftaga bormaydi ‘will not last even a week’, tort beshkunligi kolibdi ‘literally four to five days left’, author’s phraseological units denoting imminent death: huftongacha kolmaydigan korinadi ‘will not stay until the khufton’; 2) reunification with loved ones and the Creator, which for a believer — a Muslim should be the only correct path: ollohga kerak bulmok ‘to be needed by God’, rahmati parvardigorga ulanmok ‘to unite with God’, Khudo marhamat kilmok ‘to be accepted by God’; 3) with the concept of “settling scores”: zhoniga kasd kilmok ‘to settle scores with life’, zhonini fido kilmok ‘to sacrifice one’s life’, zhonini tamug kazarmasiga yubormok ‘to send the soul to the barracks of hell’. In such euphemistic units, “the figuratively motivated internal form suppresses those meanings that are considered indecent or taboo” [31. P. 142]. The meaning of figuratively motivated euphemistic codes, “like idiomatic phraseological units, cannot be understood from the meaning of the components that make up these linguistic signs” [24. P. 41];
• personification. According to the Muslim faith, Azrael acts as a mediator of transition to another world, or as a certain creature that captures the spirit of a person. In the Uzbek language, he is euphemistically called Malyakul–maut (literally, the angel of death);
• depersonification. To a certain extent, the anthropometric nature serves as a confirmation of the existence of differential semantic associative links in the human perceptual system, which manifest themselves as a result of the assumption of the identity of an individual in some kind of functional, external, etc. similarity, close proximity, contiguity, mobilization in one direction, for example, kora er bagriga kuydi ‘the black earth accepted him/her’, kora er bagriga berdi ‘the black earth took him/her’;
• meiosis rhetorical device is mainly used for expressiveness and is based on implementing the producer’s communicative intention by reducing the intensity of the properties of phenomena and objects of speech: uykuga ketmok ‘go to rest’, umr yakunlanmok ‘life is drawing to a close’;
• stylistic device of allusion — gul suldi ‘the flower withered’, containing a cultural code — the death of great people, namely women. The great Uzbek poet and thinker A. Navoii, having learned of the death of the wife of the ruler of Khorasan, Hussein Baykara, gives him the following lines: “Sarvigulning soyasida suldi gul” (quoted from: [10. P. 35]) ‘In the shade of Sarvigul the flower withered’;
• hyperbole: oolgunimcha ‘until death’, sungi nafasimgacha ‘until the last breath’;
• litota: khukm okilmok ‘to pass a sentence, to execute’, khukm izho ethylmok ‘to carry out a punishment’, oliy zhazoga khukm kilinmok ‘to sentence to capital punishment’;
• irony: okhirghi hayrlashuv ‘last date’, khur bolmok ‘become free’;
• metalepsis — the absence of permanent constancy, as a result of which the process of euphemization in this case is distinguished to a greater or lesser extent by irony and occasionality. For example, the stable combination u ooz umrni sizlarga berdi ‘he/she gave you his/her century’ instead of he/she died is based on metalepsis, representing the relationship of completion, approaching the end of life;
• foreign language vocabulary. As a result of the interference of the Arabic language into the Uzbek language and culture, which is largely due to the religious factor, where the social attitude and aspects of individual life are regulated in accordance with the commandments of the Quran and Hadith accounts, a large number of borrowed words have penetrated, which take a direct part in the process of euphemization. For example, in Arabic there is a lexeme azhal “أزهل” ‘death, term’, which is used in the meaning of the direct nomination “oolmok” — the end of life — death, formed by means of a stylistic device — antonomasia, and implements euphemization in the original language. Thus, the expressions azhali etib keldi ‘the term has come’ in the meaning “the time has come for death”; azhal kimningdir boshi uzra parvonaday aylanmokda in the meaning ‘death becomes the center of rotation around someone’s head’, where the cognitive-­semantic object refers to “death is very close”, penetrated into the vocabulary of the Uzbek language on the basis of this concept;
• bookish words or high style, based on the idea of ​​aesthetic beauty, capable of acting as euphemistic codes of a language, due to the fact that members of a given language community do not use them in their usual everyday communication. For example, khudoning dargokhiga bormok ‘to go to God’s house’, khudo omonatini olmok ‘to receive God’s grace’;
• nominalization of the term “death” is expressed with the help of the personal pronoun u ‘he/she’, the index pronoun usha ‘that/that’, thereby not naming the frightening phenomenon and conveying the addressee’s respectful attitude towards death;
• ellipsis: vakt ‘time’. In the sentence vakti soati etibdi ‘time has struck’, the lexical unit vakt ‘time’ indicates the length of a person’s life and acquires the semantic content of “death time”.

We have presented stylistic devices, where the system of relations according to the hierarchical structure between the denotate of the initial nomination and its referent determine a more synthetic structure of expression of the form of a euphemistic text, not breaking down into details, in which, on the one hand, “oolmok” acts as a journey (departure) and return to native lands, peace (eternal sleep) and deserved retribution (according to the Muslim faith). On the other hand, “oolmok” is the process of stopping life activity, approaching the earth and, ultimately, the transition to the afterlife (In accordance with common views). Neutralization of the pejorative features of the original concept is implemented by using a form that does not reflect a specific reference. In the nominative field “oolmok” units of different levels of language correlate. Words and stable combinations of traditional (not limited by time frames, in which the national-­cultural semantics is most colorfully and expressively represented), including archaisms originating in the Muslim religion and mythology correlate with modern lexemes, including those that have just appeared, which reflect the “everyday”, in some cases sarcastic and cynical attitude to the natural phenomenon of “oolmok” as an irreversible cessation of all biological functions of the body. As a result of the use of lexemes with a wide semantic range, a number of associations are formed. These associations contribute to the transmission of insufficient information for reading the code, and allow idealizing reality, changing the form of the denotate, and making it unnatural. It is necessary to emphasize, that “at the heart of these associations are processes caused by the peculiarities of the human perceptual system functioning” [33. P. 237], which serve as a beginning for further formation of the structure of a euphemistic text or a complex syntactic unit — whole-­predicative expressions. Metaphorization processes contribute to the fixation of Abstract mental constructs in the meaning of units of various linguistic levels, both the emotional and intellectual originality of a linguistic community representative, and directly project his\her subjectivity to the object of communication.

As a result of identifying the linguistic and statistical features of linguistic codes — euphemisms of the nominative field “oolmok”, in the signs-­symbols according to the differential forms of modeling the world of the euphemistic text “oolmok” through the prism of the aesthetic attitude to these linguistic signs in a combination of idiosyncrasy and stereotypicality (symbolic elements of the linguacultural community), it is possible to present a quantitative analysis of the empirical material (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1. Quantitative ratio of euphemistic units of the nominative field “oolmok” at different levels of the euphemistic text formation
Source: Timur E. Alimov, Gulchekhra N. Davlatova & Khanym R. Sultanova Research

The denotative basis of the concept “oolmok” is largely encoded by figurative linguistic codes — euphemisms — 376 (53 %) units, due to the usual elements of the language, multi–component composition, generalized reference (largely allegorical attribution of linguistic signs to objects of reality), which have the feature of diffuseness of the semantics of the word with the maximum range of defocusing — removing certain properties of the referent from the focus of attention [34; 35] and tropic occasionality, reducing and encoding the effect of the negative natural phenomenon “oolmok”. The second largest group of units was the group of one-­word euphemisms — 127 (17 %) units. Euphemisms of two or more words show a small difference compared to the second group — 122 (16 %) units, the lowest indicator was in the group of euphemisms consisting of more than two words (euphemistic sentences) — 34 (3 %) units, which is due to their highly complex degree of Abstractness, in which the process of replacing information occurs. This process is characterized by high pragmatic potential, and the conscious involvement of the individual in its formation, which in turn requires increased mental activity and, probably, has the ability to manifest itself in time, as well as be reflected in the characteristic structure of speech with text segmentation [1. P. 721].

The analysis of the nominative field “oolmok” labels contained in “Uzbek tilining kiskacha evfemik lugati (A Brief Euphemistic Dictionary of the Uzbek Language)” by A.Zh. Omonturdiev (2006) made it possible to establish stylistic groups of euphemistic substitutes related to the nominative field “oolmok” (Fig. 2).

Fig. 2. Quantitative ratio of euphemistic units of the nominative field “oolmok” by stylistic coloring
Source: Timur E. Alimov, Gulchekhra N. Davlatova & Khanym R. Sultanova Research

The data from Figure 2 clearly demonstrate that the linguistic codes of the Uzbek language of the nominative field “oolmok”, marked “colloquial” form a significant part of the empirical material (317 out of 659 units, which is approximately 48 %). This label accompanies the linguistic signs under consideration with a clearly expressed weakened stylistic shade, which appears primarily within the framework of oral verbal communication, inherent in the informal form of communication. To a large extent, such colloquial units promote detailed creative perception of metaphorical images in a literary text, or reflect language play in speech communication, do not carry a serious semantic load, and at the same time are both ways of the author’s creative representation of scientific thought, often using metaphorical turns, and externally anticipated linguistic techniques of argumentation of such a linguistic representation [36]. They are followed by “basilect” euphemistic nominations, uncodified forms of language, the result of which amounted to 179 (27 %) units. They are used mainly in a particular, relaxed communicative act, reflecting the folklore tradition of Uzbek society and people’s ideas about the natural phenomenon of “oolmok”. In fact, the classification of linguistic signs as basilect expressions suggests that these units can be used exclusively within the framework of a speech act, which can be characterized as “colloquial–slangy”.

Group “other” included 94 (14 %) units, which were divided into three categories: 1) expressions from official business speech: dokhili rakhmat bulganlar ‘those who suffered a disaster’, kurbon bulmok ‘to become a victim’, dafn etish ‘to inhumate’, creating a certain emotional background, a solemn mourning atmosphere; 2) bookish expressions, for example, saodat kuchoghiga kirmok ‘to enter the arms of happiness’, which became a catch phrase from the novel by A. Kodiriy “Ootgan kunlar” ‘Past days’; 3) dialects iti yuk kishlokka ketmok ‘to go to the village where there are no dogs’, oyok kokmok ‘to stumble’; 4) ironic euphemisms: katta sarguzasht ‘big adventure’, okhirghi hayrlashuv ‘last date’.

The final group includes “obsolete words and expressions” — 69 (11 %) units, which at the first stage enrich the book vocabulary, and at the second, completely cease to be used in speech communication. The internal form (semantic correlation) of obsolete euphemistic nominations over time ceases to have the function of neutralizing the pejorative characteristics of the original components, as a result of which the implementation of the substitution function is impossible. Thus, it can be assumed, that certain words and expressions will go out of active use after some time and pass into the category of obsolete linguistic signs.

In conclusion of the stylistic analysis of the euphemistic codes of the Uzbek language of the nominative field “oolmok”, it is necessary to emphasize that, regardless of the stylistic correlation of linguistic signs, euphemistic units are used mainly in uncodified speech, in the process of informal communication. It is significant that the designation of death, as evidenced by the etymology of euphemisms in the Uzbek language system, is subject to certain criteria: gender, age and social status of a person. For example, the linguistic explications Rakhmatullohga ulanmok ‘to reunite with Allah’, dokhili rakhmat bulmok ‘to pass into the possession of Allah’, gul suldi ‘the flower withered’ are mainly used to convey information about the death of famous and respected people; olamdan utmok ‘to leave this life’, vafot etmok ‘to pass away’ represent the death of ordinary citizens, and the expressions gul tergani ketmok ‘to go pick flowers’, khur bulmok ‘to become free’, nobud bulmok ‘to disappear’ are used exclusively to denote the death of the younger generations, while khazon kilmok ‘to fade away’, kiz ketmok ‘the girl/ young woman has left us’, and hayot bilan vidolashmok ‘to say goodbye to life’ explicate the death of females.

Conclusions

The result of the conducted study was the selection of 659 euphemistic codes of the nominative field “oolmok”, presented in “Uzbek tilining kiskacha evfemik lugati (Brief euphemistic dictionary of the Uzbek language)” by A.Zh. Omonturdiev, which are related to all the main referents of the situation “oolmok” (to die), as an irreversible cessation of all biological functions of the body, the process of inhumation and the place of stay after death. The structural organization of the euphemistic text by the number of lexical units that participate in the formation of the nomination using the example of the nominative field “oolmok” showed that euphemistic nominations consist of: 1) a one-­word euphemism (consists of one euphemistic nomination); 2) a euphemism that contains two or more words (represents a euphemistic expression); 3) a euphemism consisting of more than two words (a euphemistic sentence); and 4) a figurative euphemism (metaphor, metonymy, phraseological phrases, tropes, cliches, etc.), thereby determining a more synthetic and less detailed structure of expression of a euphemistic text. The selected groups express quantitative representativeness by the number of units that are part of the euphemistic text and the indicator of representativeness of the sample of empirical material, expressed as a percentage. A detailed study of the quantitative analysis of units, percentage ratio and stylistic coloring of differential forms of expression of the euphemistic text determined the objectivity of research corpus modeling and, consequently, the composition of the nominative field “oolmok” of “Uzbek tilining kiskacha evfemik lugati (Brief euphemistic dictionary of the Uzbek language)”.

The material studied allows us to assert that the verbalization of the euphemistic text is characterized by a dynamic, non-­limiting form, is not discrete, and has certain transformation restrictions, taking into account the peculiarities of communication, and is manifested in the reproduction of all the main functional criteria (hierarchy, volume and interference of discrete elements) in the process of implementing the pragmatic settings of the communicative situation. The dynamic structure of the euphemistic text is explicated by means of the categories of complexity and size of linguistic signs, determined by the designated goals of the communicative situation. The complexity and density of the euphemistic text are determined by the communication process, where the text will be placed more closely and densely in accordance with the set pragmatic task to be realized.

 

 

^{1 Омонтурдиев А. Ўзбек тилининг қисқача эвфемик луғати. Т.: Фан, 2006. 134 б. Omonturdiev, A.Zh. (2006). Short euphemistic dictionary of the Uzbek language. Tashkent: Fan. (In Uzbek.).}

^{2 Akhmanova, O.S. (2021). A Dictionary of Linguistic Terms. Moscow : Academy of Sciences of the USSR Publ. (In Russ.).}

About the authors

Timur E. Alimov

RUDN University

Author for correspondence.
Email: 1042228048@pfur.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-9207-8547
SPIN-code: 6878-7041

PhD student at the Foreign languages department, Faculty of Philology

6, Miklukho-Maklaya Str., Moscow, Russian Federation, 117198

Gulchekhra N. Davlatova

Fergana State University

Email: gdavlyatova@inbox.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-0767-8485

PhD in Pedagogical Sciences, Professor, member of the editorial board of the journal “Scientific journal of the Fergana State University”

19, Murabbiylar Str., Fergana, Republic of Uzbekistan, 150100

Khanym R. Sultanova

Baku Slavic University

Email: sultanovaxanim@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-0779-9540

D.Sc. (Philology), Associate Professor

33, Suleyman Rustam Str., Baku, Azerbaijan, 1014

References

Supplementary files