ANTROPOSENTRIZM PARADIGMASINING ASOSIY TUSHUNCHA VA TAMOYILLARI
Kalit so'zlar
https://doi.org/10.47390/SPR1342V5I9Y2025N13Kalit so'zlar
antroposentrizm, paradigma, kognitiv tilshunoslik, lingvokulturologiya, Sapir–Uorf gipotezasi, Gumboldt, paremiologiya, madaniyat.Annotasiya
Maqolada zamonaviy tilshunoslikda antroposentrik paradigmaning shakllanishi va rivojlanishi yoritilib, uni qiyosiy-tarixiy hamda strukturaviy-funksional yondashuvlardan keyingi bosqich sifatida baholash mumkinligi koʻrsatiladi. Antroposentrizmning falsafiy asoslari, V. fon Gumboldt gʻoyalari, Sapir–Uorf gipotezasi hamda kognitiv tilshunoslikning oʻrni tahlil qilinadi. Til, inson tafakkuri va madaniyat oʻrtasidagi uzviy bogʻliqlikka alohida eʼtibor qaratilib, paremiologiya misolida maqollar xalq mentaliteti va qadriyatlarini aks ettirishi koʻrsatib beriladi. Xulosa sifatida, antroposentrik paradigma til va inson tajribasining ajralmasligini taʼkidlab, kognitiv tilshunoslik hamda lingvokulturologiyani uning asosiy yoʻnalishlari sifatida belgilaydi.
Manbalar
1. Artem’eva, E. Yu. (2003). Lingvokul’turnaia sostavliaiushchaia sovremennogo politicheskogo protsessa (spetsifika angloiazychnykh gosudarstv) [The linguocultural component of the modern political process (specifics of English-speaking countries)] (Doctoral dissertation abstract). Nizhnii Novgorod.
2. Adilova, G. (2022). Metaphorization of linguocultural concepts. PNR Journal of Language and Education, 6(2), 45–59. Retrieved from https://www.pnrjournal.com/metaphorization-linguocultural-concepts
3. Boduen de Kurtene, I. A. (1963). Izbrannye trudy po obshchemu iazykoznaniiu [Selected works on general linguistics] (Vol. 2). Moscow.
4. Djumambetova, G. K., & Shakurova, F. (2023). Comparative analysis of Karakalpak and English proverbs. Journal of Academic Leadership, 14(2), 34–48. Retrieved from
5. Djumambetova, G. K., Khabibullaeva, N., & Jumayeva, S. (2022). Differences and similarities of proverbs in English and Karakalpak languages. Central Asian Journal of Language Studies, 7(4), 15–26.
6. Gaidenko, P. P. (2005). Antropotsentrizm [Anthropocentrism]. In Bol’shaia rossiiskaia entsiklopediia (Vol. 2, pp. 91–92). Moscow: Bol’shaia rossiiskaia entsiklopediia.
7. Gumbol’dt, V. fon. (1985). O razlichii stroeniia chelovecheskikh iazykov i ego vliianii na dukhovnoe razvitie chelovecheskogo roda [On the diversity of human language structure and its influence on the spiritual development of humankind]. Moscow.
8. Hymes, D. H. (1963). Objectives and concepts of linguistic anthropology. In F. L. Whitney (Ed.), The teaching of anthropology (pp. 277–300). Berkeley: University of California Press.
9. Kun, T. (1975). Struktura nauchnykh revoliutsii [The structure of scientific revolutions]. Moscow: Progress.
10. Teliia, V. N. (1996). Rol’ obraznykh sredstv iazyka v kul’turno-natsional’noi okraske miroponimaniia [The role of figurative means of language in the cultural-national coloring of worldview]. In Etnopsikholingvisticheskie aspekty prepodavaniia inostrannykh iazykov (pp. 82–89). Moscow.
11. Vezhbitskaia, A. (2001). Ponimanie kul’tur cherez posredstvo kliuchevykh slov [Understanding cultures through key words]. Moscow: Iazyki russkoi kul’tury.
12. Lucy, J. A. (1992). Language diversity and thought: A reformulation of the linguistic relativity hypothesis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
13. Maslova, V. A. (2001). Lingvokul’turologiia [Linguoculturology]. Moscow: Akademiia.
14. Stepanov, Yu. S. (2001). Konstanty: Slovar’ russkoi kul’tury [Constants: Dictionary of Russian culture]. Moscow: Akademiia.
