CC BY
2Oriental Renaissance: Innovative, educational, natural and social sciences
SJIF 2024 = 7.404 / ASI Factor = 1.7
THE THEORETICAL AND PRACTICAL BASIS OF TEACHING A
FOREIGN LANGUAGE
Pidaeva Shahnoza Bahtiyarovna
Interfaculty department of the English language National University of Uzbekistan named after Mirzo Ulugbek, senior teacher
ABSTRACT
The article deals with the problem of relying on the native language. The transition from one language to another, from a psychological point of view, is in the most general case a change in the rules of transition from a program to its implementation. This transition cannot, of course, be carried out immediately in a fundamental way, that is, by simultaneously and simultaneously switching old rules to new ones. A person is not able to immediately speak a foreign language. He must go through the stage of indirect foreign language proficiency. The intermediary link is a system of rules for the implementation of the program, acting in the native language. In the future, this system of rules is increasingly reduced.
Keywords: reliance on the native language; generation; awareness; linguistic consciousness; channels of understanding speech; extra-linguistic content of the idea; speech communication of the people.
АННОТАЦИЯ
В статье рассматривается проблема опоры на родной язык. Переход с одного языка на другой с психологической точки зрения представляет собой в самом общем случае изменение правил перехода от программы к ее реализации. Этот переход, конечно, не может быть осуществлен сразу принципиальным путем, т. е. путем одновременной и одновременной замены старых правил на новые. Человек не способен сразу заговорить на иностранном языке. Он должен пройти этап косвенного владения иностранным языком. Промежуточное звено — это система правил реализации программы, действующая на родном языке. В дальнейшем эта система правил все больше сокращается.
Ключевые слова: опора на родной язык; поколение; осведомленность; языковое сознание; каналы понимания речи; экстралингвистическое содержание идеи; речевое общение народа.
INTRODUCTION
We will talk about what in the methodology of teaching a foreign language is called the problem of relying on the native language. Unfortunately, we are used to
SJIF 2024 = 7.404 / ASI Factor = 1.7
the fact that in most writings on this topic it boils down to a simple superimposition of the system of one language on the system of another language and the analysis of mismatched fragments. This is exactly the direction that E.A. Bryzgunova calls the comparative study of phonetic systems of two languages. V.N. Yartseva wrote about the shortcomings of works on comparative grammar and phonetics in 1969, with which one cannot disagree. She pointed out that most authors limit themselves to a formal description of the chosen language, first in one language and then in another, without raising the question of the functional significance of this grammatical phenomenon for the language being studied and its place in the grammatical system of the language as a whole. This was said about the works of the linguistic proper. However, how much the same is true with regard to works aimed at teaching the language can be easily seen by picking up at least L.L. Babalova's pamphlets "On the characteristic features of the Russian language in comparison with the English language"
DISCUSSION AND RESULTS
However, even the elimination of the drawback noted by V.N. Yartseva, that is, the introduction of the principle of consistency into comparative grammar and phonetics, will not give us the required optimum. The fact is that comparing the results of speech generation is in itself useless for learning. The comparison for learning purposes consists in a consistent comparison of the operations performed by us at different levels of speech generation and awareness, an analysis of their psychophysical nature and the conditionality of finding those dominant features, the change of which in the easiest way will lead us to the required change in the results of these processes.
The transition from one language to another, from a psychological point of view, is in the most general case a change in the rules of transition from a program to its implementation. Of course, this transition cannot be carried out immediately in a fundamental way, that is, by simultaneously and simultaneously switching old rules to new ones. A person cannot immediately speak a foreign language. He must go through the stage of indirect foreign language proficiency. The mediating link is the system of rules for the implementation of the program, acting in the native language, which is further increasingly reduced.
The final "point" of this process of reducing simultaneous automation is the establishment of a direct link between the program and the system of language rules, which corresponds to full command of a foreign language, the ability to think in a foreign language.
Oriental Renaissance: Innovative, educational, natural and social sciences
SJIF 2024 = 7.404 / ASI Factor = 1.7
The above-described possibilities of relying on the native language, in essence, are reduced to a certain pre-known algorithm of actions that provide the optimal path of reduction and automation.
Language presupposes a set of means for expressing thought; in each individual case, you need to choose one of them. But the reason for the choice is often not specified. The first task of constructing speech in a foreign language is to take into account the actual circumstances of the intended message and correlate them with the grammatical form of the language being studied. So, the practical task (to find objective circumstances for a reasonable construction of speech in a foreign language) leads to the need to distinguish between two forms of social consciousness — cognitive and linguistic, cognitive. The linguistic consciousness of each lexical and especially grammatical category is a set of meanings of all its forms, which are always represented in natural languages by a limited set and clearly attributed to certain conditions of their application. The peculiarity of linguistic consciousness is especially clear when comparing these meanings in several languages, where the forms of the same category have different meanings, as well as when comparing an always limited set of these linguistic meanings with an unlimited set of linguistic properties and relations of the objects themselves. In speech, as a special kind of human action, reflections of non-linguistic reality serve as a means of influencing the speaker on the listener. Due to this function of speech, linguistic meanings reflect non-linguistic reality in the following way:
a) biased;
b) indicating the circumstances that are legalized in the language and ensure the unambiguity of the message.
Cognitive consciousness is a product of cognition of things (objects). The advantage of cognitive consciousness is its truthfulness, which is verified by practice.
Unlike cognitive linguistic consciousness, it has developed as a means of joint activity. The dignity of language, and, consequently, of linguistic consciousness, is checked by the effectiveness of the message, a measure of the coincidence of the addressee's behavior with what the speaker expects from his message. Linguistic consciousness does not strive for a complete reflection of reality, but for a fundamental set of such means of communication that, under conditions established by society, give a certain characteristic to objects and thereby ensure their desired understanding and appropriate implementation in speech behavior.
Cognitive consciousness — cognitive images are a reflection of things and are designed to serve actions with things. The channel of cognition of these images are the senses and logical thinking. The main characteristic of images is truthfulness. The
SJIF 2024 = 7.404 / ASI Factor = 1.7
criterion is practice as matching the actual results with what was expected in accordance with the initial ideas about things. Linguistic consciousness is a reflection of the interests and conditions of communication of thoughts by other people, which is designed to serve the organization of joint activities and is achieved by a certain illumination in speech of the state of things that the listener must consider, and it is unknown to him or it seems otherwise. The channels of understanding speech are not only the senses and not so much thinking as empathy by the listener of the speech message, and for the speaker, the criterion for the correctness of the chosen structure of speech is the appropriate behavior of the addressee of the purpose of the speech message.
Both speech and cognition serve to orient the subject. But the areas of orientation are different, although for a person this is always a public, joint activity in organization. Speech helps listeners to decide on joint activities with the speaker, and cognition — in the purposefulness of object transformations. Joint activities and the production of a useful product are qualitatively different areas.
Linguistic forms, for example, articles and specific forms of the verb, require taking into account not only the objective content of the idea, but also the circumstances of its message. At the same time, each natural language takes into account only some circumstances with its entire set of formal means, each of its categories, and they differ in different languages. So, when choosing an article for a noun in English, it is necessary to be aware whether we are talking about a separate object (table, glass), whether it is known to the addressee, but to solve the problem of the article, the category of gender is not at all important, and in Russian it is necessary to specify the gender of the noun (table, glass) and with it coordinate the verb. Let's move on to the modern forms of the English verb. The indefinite form of the English verb does not mean at all that the action was indefinite, but only that the speaker is interested only in the duration of the action, and other characteristics of the verb are ignored. An action is always a process, but continuous is put only when the speaker wants to emphasize its procedural nature.
In short, even in these relatively simple cases, the choice of the appropriate formal structure of the language is dictated not so much by the subject matter of the idea as by the circumstances of speech that the speaker must take into account. To do this, you must first imagine the entire set of forms of the grammatical category used, understand their meaning (taking into account the circumstances that each of them assumes) and then try on how these meanings actually correspond to the circumstances of the intended speech utterance. The discrepancy between the meanings of formal structures, language signs and representations, and concepts of
SJIF 2024 = 7.404 / ASI Factor = 1.7
the subject content of the idea is especially clear in cases where the situation is even more complicated than in the cases of articles and modern forms of the English verb.
The subject matter of the idea is outside the language: speaking in Russian, we do not think that the table or glass are "men", although we believe that saying "she" about them would be wrong not only from the point of view of grammar, but also logic, since thought does not exist outside of language, but in In Russian, the gender of nouns and adjectives serves as an important indication of the connection of words in a sentence, provides unambiguity of the speech design of the thought. Without such a speech organization, thought loses the certainty of its content. In linguistic meanings proper, the extra-linguistic content of the conceived is reflected not only in thought, that is, in its subject content, but also in the historically established requirements of language and the unambiguity of a speech message, its expressions are understood.
A certain number of properties can be distinguished in action, but each natural language defines and designates only some of them and omits other properties. It is impossible to replenish the types of the Russian verb with modern forms of the English language and vice versa.
And yet the main thing, of course, is not the numerical limitation of the subject properties marked by language, and not that they are also somewhat different in content than the properties that are marked in the same objects by scientific thinking. The main thing is that in language these properties organically merge with the characteristics of a completely different plane — social relations. Such a fusion of heterogeneous properties — material and social — in the sciences of the objects themselves is unacceptable. And in language, as in a special kind of human action, it serves as a means of influencing the speaker on the listener. The peculiarity of this effect is that it is carried out not physically, but through such a message about things, such an image of them, which leads the listener to understand these things, develops a certain attitude towards them.
Of course, the language fixes not one-time, but typical circumstances of speech communication of a people speaking a given language. And naturally, the peculiarities of the historical development of each language lead to the fact that messages in different languages have different characteristics. Thus, in English and Russian, the points of view on the essential characteristics of the action are different. And that's why the construction of speech in these languages requires not the translation of words from one language into another, but a transition from the point of view of one language to the point of view of another.
SJIF 2024 = 7.404 / ASI Factor = 1.7
To clearly distinguish linguistic consciousness, we need a picture of the totality of the meanings of each language category, in which the characteristic features of linguistic meanings are clearly and clearly visible — their normative limitations, selectivity (for each position there is only one and strictly defined) and the obligation of such a choice. This discrepancy in the content and nature of cognitive and linguistic reflection distinguishes even a separate linguistic meaning from a cognitive representation or concept of the same object of non-linguistic reality. In cognitive reflection, this element is connected with other sides of the same object or other objects and is freely supplemented by their previously unaccounted-for properties. And in linguistic reflection, in meaning, it is connected with the interests of influencing the listener through a certain illumination of these objects, and any other illumination of them would only interfere with the main purpose of speech. Cognitive and linguistic reflection are included in different systems: in one case, in the relationship between things; in the other, in the relationship between people.
As a special linguistic reflection, meaning forms the semantic side of a separate formal structure of a language — the middle link between a linguistic sign (formal structure) and the same part of non-linguistic reality that this sign denotes. The connection between a linguistic sign and an object is mediated by meaning, a linguistic sign is not a sign, symbol or signal of a non—linguistic object, a means of communicating about it. The initial name of an individual object, accompanied by an index gesture, is not a link between an audio signal and this object, but an act of highlighting a visual picture of this object as its meaning. In the future, this initial "visual meaning" of a linguistic sign (name) is included in situations with other objects with a similar function, in various relationships with them, and increasingly loses its visibility and its visible position as an intermediate link, but all the more it is confirmed in a really mediating function. And since there is no direct connection between a sign and its object, it is impossible to understand the language correctly or intelligently construct speech in a foreign language (without taking into account this invisible, actually linguistic meaning).
CONCLUSION
Taking into account the specifics of linguistic meanings implies a clear distinction between linguistic and cognitive consciousness. The latter is a product of cognition of things (better to say objects), which can be, in particular, the language itself, and serves as a means to help navigate things.
The advantage of cognitive consciousness is its truthfulness, verified by practice, a systematic impact on things and a measure of the coincidence of its actual results with the expected ones. Free from momentary needs, but providing for a variety of
SJIF 2024 = 7.404 / ASI Factor = 1.7
uses, cognitive consciousness strives to fully reflect its objects and is open to additions and even applications.
And therefore, in each individual case of its application, linguistic consciousness in relation to non-linguistic reality is a closed, normative, mandatory and unambiguous system for everyone. Each natural language is only open to new means of speech communication, new standards, to the extent that it improves communication capabilities and behavior guidance through speech.
Linguistic consciousness is one of the forms of social consciousness, and as such it does not constitute anything new.
REFERENCES
1. Bryzgunova E.A. Intonation and syntax / Modern Russian language: edited by V.A. Beloshapkova. M.: Gramota, 1999.
2. Shpet G.G. Psychology of social being. - M.; Voronezh: Institute of Practical Psychology, 1996.
