FOLKLOR DISKURSIDA GENDER IFODASI VA NARRATIV USLUB
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.67227/32ap7749Kalit so‘zlar:
gender o‘ziga xosligi, diskurs tahlili, folklor diskursi, konseptualizatsiya, kognitiv semantika, kognitiv-assotsiativ zonalar.Abstrak
Diskurs tadqiqotlari va gender lingvistikasining o‘zaro yaqinlashuvi tobora kuchayib borayotganiga qaramay, kengroq ijtimoiy-siyosiy jarayonlar kontekstida gender diskursini tanqidiy o‘rganish yetarlicha e’tibordan chetda qolmoqda. Ushbu maqolada ingliz, italyan va o‘zbek folklor diskursida «erkak» va «ayol» tushunchalarining konseptualizatsiyasi ularning nominativ-konseptual asoslariga alohida e’tibor qaratilgan holda tadqiq etiladi. Folklorning muayyan, o‘zgarmas muallifga yoki yagona narrativ egasiga ega emasligi inobatga olinib, tadqiqot korpusi ushbu og‘zaki matnlarni yozib olgan folklor to‘plovchilarning genderiga ko‘ra tahlil qilinadi. Folklor yagona muallif yoki doimiy hikoyachisiz mavjud bo‘lgani sababli, tadqiqot metodologiyasida folklor to‘plovchilarning genderi matn uslubini o‘rganishning muhim tahliliy mezoni sifatida qo‘llaniladi. Natijalar to‘plovchining genderiga qarab gender tushunchalarining shakllanishida sezilarli uslubiy va konseptual tafovutlar mavjudligini ko‘rsatadi. Erkak va ayol to‘plovchilar «erkak» va «ayol» tushunchalarining nominativ-konseptual xususiyatlarini qayd etishda turlicha lingvistik afzalliklarni namoyon etadilar. Miqdoriy va sifat tahlili shuni ko‘rsatadiki, ayol to‘plovchilar nozik hissiy va maishiy diskursni qayd etishga ko‘proq moyil bo‘lsa, erkak to‘plovchilar har uchala folklor an’anasida tizimli va ijtimoiy maqomga oid nominativ belgilarni ta’kidlaydilar.
Yuklashlar
Havolalar
1. Ashurova D. U. Links of University Disciplines with Contemporary Branches of Linguistics // Topical Issues of Philology. – Tashkent, 2008. – P. 23–34.
2. Benveniste E. Structure des relations de personne dans le verbe // Problèmes de linguistique générale. – Gallimard, 1974. – P. 292–300.
3. Crane T. F. Italian Popular Tales. – California: ABC-CLIO, 2001.
4. Cross E. A. Fundamentals of English. – New York, 1927.
5. Fedorov S. Fiabe Italiane. – Moscow: Oriental Book, 2011.
6. Fedorov S. Fiabe Italiane Popolari: Del Vento Tramontano. – Moscow: Litres, 2019.
7. Hartland S. E. English Fairy and Other Folk Tales. – Forgotten Books, 2008.
8. Jacobs J. English Fairy Tales. – New York: Dover Publications, Inc., 2001. – 230 p.
9. Knox D. Folk-Lore: A Quarterly Review of Myth, Tradition, Institution, & Custom. – London: Folk-Lore Society, 1917. – 387 p.
10. Madaev O., Sobitova T. Poetic Creation of the Oral Folklore. – Tashkent: Sharq, 2010.
11. Manser M. Dictionary of Proverbs. – USA: Facts on File Press, 2007.
12. Mills S. Feminist Stylistics. – London: Routledge, 1995. – 184 p.
13. Muhammedova S., Saparniyozova M. Text Linguistics. – Tashkent, 2011.
14. Nurmonov A., Rahimov A. Introduction to Linguosynergetics. – Tashkent: Akademnashr, 2013. – 213 p.
15. Rasulova M. I. Characteristics of Conceptual Analysis of Lexical Units // Problems of the System-Structural Linguistics. – Samarkand. – P. 15–17.
16. Safarov Sh. Discourse Linguistics. – Chelyabinsk: ChGIK, 2018. – 315 p.
17. Shomaqsudov Sh., Shorahmedov Sh. Khikmatnoma. – Tashkent, 1990.
18. Shomaqsudov Sh., Shorahmedov Sh. Ma’nolar Mahzani. – Tashkent: State Scientific Publishing House, 2001.
19. Slyshkin G. G. Linguocultural Concepts and Metaconcepts. – Volgograd, 2004.
20. Stepanov Yu. S. Constants: Dictionary of the Russian Culture. Exploration Research. – Moscow: Languages of the Russian Culture, 1997. – 824 p.
21. Strafforello G. Proverbi di tutti i popoli. – Milano, 1883. – 694 p.
22. Uzbek Folk Tales. – Vol. I. – Tashkent: Teacher, 2007. – 385 p.
23. Uzbek Folk Tales. – Vol. II. – Tashkent: Teacher, 2007. – 384 p.
24. Uzbek Folk Tales. – Vol. III. – Tashkent: Teacher, 2007. – 384 p.
25. Van Dijk T. A. Discourse Studies and Education // Applied Linguistics. – The Hague, 1981. – P. 1–26.
26. Van Dijk T. Elite Discourse and Racism. – London: SAGE Publications, 1985.
27. Xoshimov G. M. About the Theory of Concepts and Their Taxonomy in the System-Structural Linguistics. – Samarkand, 2010. – P. 68–70.
