CC BY
10Scientific Journal Impact Factor (SJIF 2022=5.016) Passport: http://sjifactor.com/passport.php?id=22257
VIEWS ON THE COMPONENTS OF ANALOGIES
Yulduzkhon Shakarbek qizi Shukhratova
Lecturer at Fergana state university
ABSTRACT
This article discusses the views of linguists on analogies and their views on the constituent parts of analogies.
Keywords: Identification, member, basis of analogy, standard of identification, basis of analogy, subject of analogy, formal index of analogy.
INTRODUCTION
Humans differ from other living beings in their ability to imitate. That is why scientists believe that man's first knowledge was based on analogy. Perhaps the analogy in this respect is an important event in the history of universal science. Some dictionaries also provide relevant information about the role of analogy in human thinking. For example, the Dictionary of Philosophy states: "The ability to see, imagine, and compare a characteristic, process, or essence of something in the human mind as a result of comparison has provided a great opportunity for the social, economic, and spiritual development of mankind (e.g. 'machine, wind, water mill, syringe, etc.). Therefore, analogy is one of the most important tools of thinking in the search for and discovery of innovation, and this feature of analogy makes it a necessary category for all sciences. The "concretization function" of analogy is explained in detail in philosophy, logic, linguistics, and fiction. "
The analogy is mostly a verbal phenomenon. Because if a certain object is compared to an object, if the same object is compared to an object,
the same object can be likened to something else elsewhere. Simulation is an artistic representation based on the vivid and exaggerated depiction of an image object by likening it to another object-event, based on the general characteristics of the object being imitated.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Research on analogies in Uzbek linguistics shows that the issue of the constituent parts of analogies is also on the agenda. Linguists differ on this point. Some sources state that the analogy is three, while others refer to it as four. Opinions also differ on the naming of these members.
In the monograph of Professor N.Mahmudov it is noted that the members of the analogy are divided into the following four types:
Scientific Journal Impact Factor (SJIF 2022=5.016) Passport: http://sjifactor.com/passport.php?id=22257
1) the subject of the simulation;
2) simulation standard;
3) the basis of the analogy;
4) formal index of simulation [1].
It is possible to observe that different ideas are expressed in naming elements of analogy. In scientific research, we see that they are called differently. For example, in the works of linguists such as A.Rustamov and I.Yormatov, the first member is something similar, that is, the subject of analogy is called by analogy, while in the work of N.Mahmudov and M.M.Cheremisina, the subject of comparison, M.Mukarra The object of analogy in the work of A. Saadi, the object in the work of B.V. Tomashevsky, the object of analogy in the work of M.A. Shapiro, the object or subject compared in the work of S.L. Nevelova, the basis of analogy in the work of M. Yakubbekova called
The second part of the analogy is the analogy, that is, the standard of analogy is similar in the work of A.Rustamov and I.Yormatov, the object of analogy in the work of
A.I.Yefimov, the standard of comparison in the work of N.Mahmudov and M.M.Cheremisina, M.Mukarramov in the work of A.Sadi, in the work of
B.V.Tomashevsky, in the work of M.A.Shapiro, in the work of S.L.Nevelova, in the work of M.Yakubbekova called terms.
The third part of the analogy is similar quality, ie the term of the basis of analogy is similarity in the works of A.Rustamov and I.Yormatov, the basis of comparison in the works of A.I.Efimov, the basis of comparison in the work of N.Mahmudov, in the work of B.V.Tomashevs-kiy analogous sign, in the works of D.Khudoyberganova, M.A.Shapiro, M.Yakubbekova, in the work of S.L.Nevelova, such terms as analogy.
DISCUSSION
The fourth member of the analogy is the analogy additions, ie the formal indicators of the analogy in the works of I.Yormatov, D.Khudoyberganova, M.A.Shapiro, M.Yakubbekova, the means of analogy, N.Mahmudov's it can be seen that the formal index of comparison in his work is called by such terms as the formal index of analogy in the works of M.M.Cheremisina and S.L.Nevelova.
Having studied the classifications of the above scientists, G. Jumanazarova prefers to name the members of the analogy in the following order:
1) the subject of identification (basis);
2) simulation standard;
3) basis of identification (sign);
4) formal means of simulation [2].
RESULTS
Scientific Journal Impact Factor (SJIF 2022=5.016) Passport: http://sjifactor.com/passport.php?id=22257
There are specific expressions of such members that indicate the relation of analogies to language. For example, the first part is a lexical expression of the object or concept to which the analogy is based, namely the subject (basis) of the analogy. It can be called the subject of analogy. For example, without the same object, it is never possible to compare it to anything and to create a similar analogy.
The second part is the lexical expression of the simulated image, which serves to simulate the object (simile) of the simile, that is, the standard (symbol) of the simile. The main reason why it is called the standard (symbol) of analogy in linguistics is that the analogy serves as a symbolic embodiment of the characteristics of the subject (basis). These members of the analogy have their own unique and distinctive features. Linguist M. Yuldashev comments on this feature as follows: "The linguopoetic basis of any analogy is the standard of direct analogy. The poetic value of analogy as a visual medium, and the weight of aesthetics, are determined by the same standard of analogy. The originality of the analogy is based on the originality of the same analogy standard. "[3]
The third part of the analogy is a similar quality, that is, the basis (sign) of the analogy, which is a lexical expression of the sign of similarity between something, event or concept, which is similar to each other by its name [4]. In other words, it is an expression of the generality that led to the analogy between the subject (basis) and the standard of representation (representation) in the simulation device [5]. For this reason, it has always been used in the text of folk epics to express a common sign, feature, event or action that is specific to two objects or events [6].
The fourth member is the lexical-grammatical indicators (units) that are actively involved in the expression of the analogical relationship, that is, the formal indicators (means) of analogy, that is, the analogy additions [7]. Based on this member, it will consist of a set of lexical, grammatical, stylistic, and semantic elements that form the analogical relationship in the simulation device [8].
CONCLUSION
In this case, the lexical, morphological, syntactic, stylistic, poetic nature of each member of the simulation device must be in accordance with the semantic proportions, in addition, folk melodies must be consistent with the melody and rhythmic dimension of the poetic structure. 'should be noted [9]. The purpose of this approach is to figuratively compare two things, events, or concepts, expressed in lexical units, in the analogies, which are the pictorial means of language.
Of course, this applies, first of all, to the process of oral creative improvisation, and secondly, to the grammatical rules of literary language.
Scientific Journal Impact Factor (SJIF 2022=5.016) Passport: http://sjifactor.com/passport.php?id=22257
REFERENCES
1. Mahmudov N. Semantic-syntactic asymmetry in simple Uzbek sentences. - Tashkent: Teacher, 1984.
2. Jumaniyozova G. Linguopoetic features of analogies in folk epics. -Tashkent: Tafakkur, 2011. 14-p.
3. Yuldashev M. Secrets of the word Cholpon. - Tashkent: Manaviyat, 2002. - p.58-p.
4. Shukhratova Yulduzxon. (2021). An International Multidisciplinary Research Journal. An International Multidisciplinary Research Journal, 41(43).
5. Qizi, S. Y. S. (2021). Syntactic Valence, Syntactic Relation. The American Journal of Interdisciplinary Innovations Research, 3(04), 129-132.
6. Shakarbekqizi, S. Y. (2021). Linguistic morphological means of expressing an analytic attitude. ACADEMICIA: An International Multidisciplinary Research Journal, 11(10), 1865-1868.
7. Shuxratova, Y. (2020, December). PROSE TEXTS AND THE CONCEPT OF SORROW OF SPEECH. In Конференции.
8. Шухратова, Ю. Ш. (2021). SIMILARITY AND COMPARISON IN COMPOUND SENTENCES. Экономика и социум, (5-1), 454-457.
9. Shuxratova, Y. (2021, March). DRAMATIC WORKS AND THE SAD CONCEPT OF SPEECH. In Archive of Conferences (Vol. 17, No. 1, pp. 266-268).
10. Nabijonova, F. (2022). Boshlangich sinflarda didaktik oyinlarning ahamiyati: Nabijonova Feruza. Qo'qon universitetining ilmiy materiallar bazasi, 1(000006).
11. Tillaboyeva, G., & Umarova, N. R. (2021). ALISHER NAVOIY ASARLARIDA BADIIY TAXALLUSLARNING QO 'LLANILISHI. Студенческий вестник, (13-5), 70-72.
12. Tillaboyeva, G. S. Q. (2022). ALISHER NAVOIY SHE'RIYATIDA "SHAXS" TUSHUNCHASI. Oriental renaissance: Innovative, educational, natural and social sciences, 2(2), 182-196.
13. Usmanova, O. S. (2022). National curriculum and new generation mathematics textbook. Asian Journal of Multidimensional Research, 11(2), 11-16.
