ФОРМИРОВАНИЕ И РАЗВИТИЕ ФРАЗЕОЛОГИИ КАК САМОСТОЯТЕЛЬНОЙ НАУЧНОЙ ДИСЦИПЛИНЫ В МИРОВОМ И УЗБЕКСКОМ ЯЗЫКОЗНАНИИ

УДК 811.0+811.92

Abstract

This article examines the development of phraseology as an independent branch of linguistics and analyzes its theoretical foundations, object of study, and significance in modern linguistic research. The study reviews the historical evolution of phraseological studies, highlighting the contributions of prominent scholars such as Charles Bally, A.V. Kunin, V.V. Vinogradov, E.D. Polivanov, and other researchers who played an important role in establishing phraseology as a distinct scientific discipline. Particular attention is paid to the semantic, grammatical, and etymological characteristics of phraseological units, as well as to different approaches to their classification and interpretation. The article also discusses the role of phraseological units in reflecting national culture, historical experience, and the worldview of a speech community. The findings demonstrate that phraseology possesses its own theoretical framework, research methods, and practical applications, which justify its status as an independent field of linguistic inquiry. The study emphasizes the importance of phraseological research for understanding language development, intercultural communication, and the preservation of cultural heritage.

Аннотация

В данной статье рассматривается становление фразеологии как самостоятельной отрасли языкознания, анализируются её теоретические основы, объект исследования и значение в современной лингвистике. В работе освещаются основные этапы развития фразеологической науки, а также вклад таких учёных, как Шарль Балли, А.В. Кунин, В.В. Виноградов, Е.Д. Поливанов и других исследователей, сыгравших важную роль в формировании фразеологии как самостоятельной научной дисциплины. Особое внимание уделяется семантическим, грамматическим и этимологическим особенностям фразеологических единиц, а также различным подходам к их классификации и интерпретации. Рассматривается роль фразеологизмов в отражении национальной культуры, исторического опыта и мировоззрения народа. Результаты исследования показывают, что фразеология обладает собственным предметом изучения, методами исследования и практической значимостью, что подтверждает её статус самостоятельной лингвистической науки. Подчёркивается важность фразеологических исследований для изучения развития языка, межкультурной коммуникации и сохранения культурного наследия.

Keywords: phraseology, phraseological unit, linguistic discipline, semantic analysis, classification, idiom, linguoculturology, intercultural communication, language and culture.

Ключевые слова: фразеология, фразеологическая единица, языковедческая дисциплина, семантический анализ, классификация, идиома, лингвокультурология, межкультурная коммуникация, язык и культура.

Introduction

In the context of contemporary language development, extensive cultural integration, and the continuous enrichment of intercultural relations, the comparative study of languages belonging to different language families has gained particular significance. Phraseology is regarded as one of the most important linguistic means of reflecting the national and cultural characteristics of a language. It embodies the customs, traditions, historical experience, lifestyle, and mentality of a particular nation. Phraseological units, therefore, serve as significant linguistic indicators that reveal both the universal and culture-specific features of a speech community. From this perspective, the investigation of similarities and differences within the phraseological systems of languages spoken across different countries and regions is of considerable importance. Obviously, phraseological unit is considered to be a specific linguistic unit with cultural connotation or cultural information “woven” into its semantics [12, p. 996]. The study of phraseology enables researchers to gain a deeper understanding of the similarities and distinctions in national worldviews, cultural mentalities, and perceptions of reality among different peoples.

Within the linguistic picture of the world and human linguistic consciousness, there exist not only individual lexical units but also stable word combinations known as phraseological units or phraseologisms, which are reproduced in speech as ready-made expressions [10, p. 138]. The phraseological system of any language reflects the rich diversity of human relationships and experiences. Phraseological units encompass concepts such as happiness, love, surprise, irony, hatred, curiosity, and anxiety, as well as human qualities including honesty, determination, integrity, nobility, intelligence, agility, stubbornness, foolishness, talkativeness, stinginess, and irritability. They also represent notions of similarity and difference, beginning and end, abundance and scarcity, unity and conflict, birth and death, kinship and age, success and failure, truth and falsehood, order and disorder, prosperity and poverty, mistakes and punishment. Consequently, phraseological units collectively form a comprehensive phraseological picture of the world [10, p. 138].

Comparative typology is a branch of linguistics aimed at identifying similarities and differences among the languages of the world and explaining the factors underlying these phenomena. It examines both related and unrelated languages at various linguistic levels, including phonetics, phonology, morphology, syntax, lexicon, and phraseology, while also addressing issues relevant to language teaching and linguistic theory [14, p. 13].

Before discussing the formation and development of phraseology as an independent linguistic discipline, it is necessary to consider the origin and meaning of the term “phraseology.” According to numerous scholarly sources, the term phraseology (from the Greek phrasis “expression” and logos “study” or “science”) was first introduced into linguistic scholarship by the Swiss-French linguist Charles Bally in his work Précis de Stylistique. Bally is widely recognized as one of the pioneers of phraseological studies. In his works, he examined not only word combinations but also the distinctive characteristics of phraseological units [3, p. 6].

It should be noted that Bally introduced the term phraseology as a branch of stylistics concerned with the study of word combinations. In his works on stylistics, he devoted separate sections to phraseology and distinguished four categories of phraseological expressions:

1. Free word combinations (Les groupements libres);
2. Usual word combinations (Les groupements usuels);
3. Phraseological series (Les séries phraséologiques);
4. Phraseological unities [7, p. 16].

Phraseology studies stable word combinations, phraseological units, and idiomatic expressions. Historically, phraseological studies first emerged within literary scholarship. The need to translate stable expressions from one language into another revealed the difficulty of rendering their meanings through literal translation, which led to the identification and use of equivalent phraseological expressions in target languages. As a result, phraseology initially developed as a subject of literary studies. Subsequently, phraseological expressions were collected and explained in dictionaries, and their meanings and grammatical structures became objects of linguistic investigation. Today, phraseology is studied within both linguistics and literary studies.

The term phraseology was reportedly first used in world philology by the English scholar Neander in 1558. In Russian linguistics, systematic studies of phraseological units began in the nineteenth century, whereas phraseological research in Uzbek linguistics developed during the 1950s [12, p. 55]. Since then, phraseological units have been extensively investigated by both Russian and English linguists, who have made significant contributions to the theoretical and practical development of phraseological studies.

Literature review

A significant contribution to the development of phraseological studies was made by the Russian linguist A.V. Kunin. He is widely recognized as the author of influential phraseological dictionaries of both Russian and English. In his scholarly works, Kunin argued that phraseology should be regarded not as a subsection of lexicology but as an independent branch of linguistic science. His research focused on the functional and semantic properties of phraseological units in speech, and he proposed their classification into several groups [7, p. 8].

Another prominent scholar, E.D. Polivanov, anticipated that phraseology would eventually occupy a stable and independent position within linguistics, comparable to such disciplines as phonetics and morphology [13, p. 44]. According to Polivanov, the gradual development of linguistic science would eliminate theoretical gaps and establish phraseology as a fully recognized field of study. Contemporary linguistic research confirms the validity of his prediction.

Following Polivanov, B.A. Larin became one of the first scholars to advocate the recognition of phraseology as an independent linguistic discipline. He argued that phraseology had not yet reached full theoretical maturity but emphasized the necessity of its separation into an autonomous field of research. In his view, the existing approaches within lexicography, stylistics, and syntax were insufficient for explaining the complex nature of phraseological phenomena [8, p. 89].

N.N. Amosova made an important contribution to the semantic classification of phraseological units. Taking into account the degree of figurative meaning within phraseological expressions, she distinguished two major categories. If only one component of a phraseological unit possesses a figurative meaning, she referred to it as a phraseme. If all components of the expression are used figuratively, the unit is classified as an idiom [1, p. 151].

The studies conducted by V.V. Vinogradov stimulated extensive research on phraseology in numerous languages. His systematic and theoretically grounded classification of phraseological units became one of the foundations for the establishment of phraseology as an independent linguistic discipline [7, p. 46]. Although Vinogradov’s classification remains highly influential, scholars emphasize the necessity of adapting his framework to the specific structural and semantic features of individual languages, including Uzbek.

Research on phraseological units encompasses several major directions. The grammatical study of phraseological expressions involves the analysis of their morphological and semantic properties, as well as their functional equivalence to words, word combinations, or sentences. Etymological studies focus on determining the linguistic origin of phraseological units and tracing the processes of semantic change, modification, and modernization that they undergo over time. Furthermore, phraseological expressions may reflect regional dialects, religious beliefs, and various aspects of everyday life, making them valuable sources of linguistic and cultural information.

The study of English idioms has been supported by numerous specialized dictionaries published by leading academic institutions. Among the most influential reference works are the Oxford Dictionary of Idioms published by Oxford University Press [11] the Cambridge Idioms Dictionary issued by Cambridge University Press [2] and various idiom and phrasal verb dictionaries produced by Longman for learners of English [9]. These works have contributed significantly to the documentation and analysis of English phraseology.

Phraseological innovation is particularly evident in American English, where social, cultural, and technological developments continuously generate new concepts requiring linguistic expression. While some new phraseological units emerge through the creation of entirely new expressions, others develop through novel combinations of existing lexical elements. As N.N. Amosova rightly observed, the formation and development of phraseology as a linguistic discipline is the result of extensive research conducted by phraseologists working across different languages and linguistic traditions [1, p. 178].

Materials and methods

The present study is based on a qualitative analysis of scientific literature devoted to phraseology and its development as an independent branch of linguistics. The research material includes theoretical works, monographs, scientific articles, phraseological dictionaries, and textbooks by both foreign and Uzbek scholars, such as Charles Bally, A.V. Kunin, V.V. Vinogradov, E.D. Polivanov, S.K. Kenesbayev, Sh.U. Rahmatullayev, and other researchers who contributed to the formation of phraseological studies.

The study employs descriptive, comparative-historical, and analytical methods. The descriptive method was used to examine the theoretical foundations of phraseology and its basic concepts. The comparative-historical method enabled the identification of the main stages in the development of phraseology in world and Uzbek linguistics. In addition, the analytical method was applied to evaluate different scholarly approaches to the classification, interpretation, and scope of phraseological units.

The collected materials were analyzed through a review and synthesis of linguistic theories concerning phraseology. This approach made it possible to determine the role of phraseology within linguistic science and to justify its status as an independent linguistic discipline.

Results and discussion

The analysis of scholarly literature demonstrates that phraseology continues to be interpreted in both broad and narrow senses within modern linguistic studies. Scholars who adopt a broad understanding of phraseology include proverbs, sayings, aphorisms, and other fixed expressions within its scope [7, p. 287]. In contrast, proponents of the narrow approach limit the object of phraseological research to stable word combinations characterized by semantic unity and reproducibility in speech [1, p. 302]. Consequently, the debate concerning the boundaries of phraseology remains one of the central theoretical issues in contemporary linguistic research.

Although the term phraseology originates from the Greek words phrasis (“expression”) and logos (“study”), its interpretation has varied considerably within Turkic linguistics. For instance, the linguist Mirza Kazembek used the concept of phrase in the sense of “sentence” or “utterance” and regarded phraseological units as linguistic formations larger than individual words. In his studies of Turkic verbs, expressions such as g‘ussa bo‘lmoq (“to become sorrowful”) and g‘am yemoq (“to grieve”) were classified as compound verbal constructions [5, p. 217].

The formation of Turkic phraseology as an independent field of linguistic inquiry is closely associated with the works of S.K. Kenesbayev and Sh.U. Rahmatullayev. Their studies conducted during the 1940s and 1950s laid the foundations for systematic phraseological research in Turkic languages. In subsequent decades, phraseological studies achieved significant progress through a series of fundamental monographs, including S.N. Muratov’s Stable Word Combinations in Turkic Languages (1961), Sh.U. Rahmatullayev’s Some Issues of Uzbek Phraseology (1966), and G.A. Bayramov’s Foundations of Azerbaijani Phraseology (1970) [15, p. 200]. These works contributed substantially to the institutionalization of phraseology as a distinct branch of linguistic science.

The analysis further reveals that Uzbek phraseological studies developed in several complementary directions. I. Pinxanov examined phraseological units within the framework of lexicology, focusing on their formation, semantic structure, and degree of motivation. B. Yuldoshev investigated semantic groups of phraseological units and analyzed contextual synonymy between phraseological and lexical meanings. G‘. Salomov concentrated primarily on the translation of phraseological units and the challenges associated with preserving their semantic and cultural content across languages. From an etymological perspective, the majority of phraseological units used in contemporary Uzbek originate from native linguistic sources, while a smaller proportion has been borrowed from other languages. Three principal groups may be distinguished:

• Native Uzbek phraseological units;
• Phraseological units borrowed from Tajik;
• Phraseological units borrowed from Russian [12, p. 67].

This classification demonstrates the complex historical development of Uzbek phraseology and provides valuable insights into language contact and cultural interaction.

Similar to Russian linguistics, Turkic linguistics continues to debate the scope of phraseology. According to S.K. Kenesbayev, scholars who support a broad interpretation include proverbs, sayings, idioms, fixed expressions, and even paired words within the phraseological system. These units share common characteristics, namely stability, reproducibility, and conventionalized usage within the language system. As a result, they constitute an important component of a language’s lexical and cultural heritage.

At the same time, Kenesbayev emphasized the necessity of distinguishing the narrow object of phraseological research. He classified phraseological units according to their semantic and structural properties and identified idiomatic and non-idiomatic expressions as the core elements of phraseology [6, p. 9]. Such an approach enables a more precise definition of phraseological boundaries and facilitates a deeper understanding of their linguistic nature.

A different perspective was proposed by Sh.U. Rahmatullayev, who supported a narrower interpretation of phraseology and relied on the structural-semantic classification developed by V.V. Vinogradov. According to Rahmatullayev, a phraseological unit is a semantic and grammatical whole composed of two or more independent lexical items. Such unit’s function as lexical entities and express a unified meaning comparable to that of a single word.

The findings of the present study indicate that phraseology has gradually evolved into an independent branch of linguistics possessing its own object of investigation, methodological principles, and theoretical foundations. The systematic study of phraseological units contributes not only to a deeper understanding of a language’s lexical resources but also to the exploration of national culture, historical experience, and collective worldview. Therefore, phraseology should be regarded as one of the most significant and well-established disciplines within modern linguistic science.

Conclusion

The conducted analysis demonstrates that phraseology has undergone a long and complex process of development before being recognized as an independent branch of linguistic science. The study reveals that despite the continuing debate regarding the scope of phraseology and the classification of phraseological units, modern linguistic scholarship generally acknowledges phraseology as a distinct discipline possessing its own research subject, theoretical framework, and analytical methods. The comparative examination of world and Uzbek linguistic traditions shows that both approaches have made substantial contributions to the development of phraseological theory and have enriched the understanding of phraseological phenomena from semantic, grammatical, etymological, and linguocultural perspectives.

Furthermore, the findings indicate that phraseological units constitute an essential component of a language’s lexical system and serve as important carriers of national culture, historical memory, and collective worldview. Therefore, the systematic investigation of phraseology contributes not only to the advancement of linguistic theory but also to the preservation and interpretation of cultural heritage.

In conclusion, the historical evolution of phraseological studies, the expansion of its theoretical foundations, and the accumulation of extensive research evidence confirm that phraseology has established itself as an independent and significant field of modern linguistics. Its further development remains important for comparative linguistics, linguoculturology, translation studies, and intercultural communication. The present study contributes to the systematization of scholarly views on the formation of phraseology in world and Uzbek linguistics and highlights the common and distinctive features of its development as an independent linguistic discipline.

References:

1. Amosova N.N. Osnovy angliyskoy frazeologii [Fundamentals of English Phraseology]. – Leningrad: Leningrad University Press, 1961. – 207 p. [in Russian].
2. Cambridge Idioms Dictionary. – Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017. – 505 p. [in English].
3. Gaybullayeva D.F. Atoqli ot komponentli frazeologizmlarning semantik-stilistik va lingvostatistik talqini [Semantic-Stylistic and Linguostatistical Interpretation of Phraseological Units with Proper Name Components]. – Tashkent: Zamon Poligraf Publishing House, 2026. – 180 p. [in Uzbek].
4. Gaybullayeva D.F.K. Universal and National Peculiarities of Phraseological Description of Image in the English and Uzbek Languages // Academic Research in Educational Sciences. – 2021. – Vol. 2. – No. 3. – P. 990–998. [in English].
5. Kazem-Bek M.A. Obshchaya grammatika turetsko-tatarskogo yazyka [General Grammar of the Turkish-Tatar Language]. Vol. II. – Kazan, 1846. – P. 175–179. [in Russian].
6. Kenesbayev S.K. On Some Peculiarities of Phraseological Units in the Kazakh Language // Proceedings of the Academy of Sciences of the Kazakh SSR, Series of Philology and Art Studies. – Alma-Ata, 1954. – Issue 1–2. – P. 9. [in Russian].
7. Kunin A.V. Angliyskaya frazeologiya [English Phraseology]. – Moscow: Vysshaya Shkola Publishing House, 1970. – 344 p. [in Russian].
8. Larin B.A. Essays on Phraseology // Essays on Lexicology, Phraseology and Stylistics. – Scientific Notes of Leningrad State University. – 1956. – No. 198. – P. 200–201. [in Russian].
9. Longman Idioms Dictionary. – Harlow: Pearson Education Limited, 1998. – 402 p. [in English].
10. Mamatov A.E. Zamonaviy lingvistika [Modern Linguistics]. – Tashkent, 2020. – P. 138. [in Uzbek].
11. Oxford Dictionary of Idioms. – Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010. – 408 p. [in English].
12. Pinkhasov I. Hozirgi o‘zbek adabiy tili: leksikologiya va frazeologiya [Modern Uzbek Literary Language: Lexicology and Phraseology]. – Tashkent: O‘qituvchi Publishing House, 1969. – 67 p. [in Uzbek].
13. Polivanov E.D. Vvedeniye v yazykoznaniye dlya vostokovednykh vuzov [Introduction to Linguistics for Oriental Studies Institutions]. – Leningrad, 1928. – P. 61. [in Russian].
14. Rasulova M.I., Shukurova Z.I. Comparative Typology of English, Uzbek and Russian Languages. – Tashkent, 2017. – P. 13. [in English].
15. Yuldoshev B. Frazeologik uslubiyat asoslari [Foundations of Phraseological Stylistics]. – Samarkand: Samarkand State University Publishing House, 1998. – 200 p. [in Uzbek].