Badalova soxiba pardayevna contrastive analysis of professional lexicon in english and uzbek languages

1.3-§. The linguistic status of professional lexicons
The dissemination of specialized information is the overarching goal of professional communication. The language for special purposes (LSP) is utilized to fulfill the communicative goal in the majority of fields and disciplines. LSPs, on the other hand, are not uniform linguistic phenomena, and their variability can be seen on both the horizontal and vertical axes.
The horizontal axis depicts the diversity of specialized languages developed as a result of professional activity, as well as their interdependence/overlapping in some cases, while the vertical axis depicts the heterogeneity of personal LSPs based on selected conceptual, linguistic, and pragmatic parameters. One of these parameters is register, which is defined as “a variety of a language or a level of usage, as determined by the degree of sophistication and choice of vocabulary, pronunciation, and syntax, according to the communicative purpose, social context, and user's standing”. As a result, register as a variable connects the extralinguistic reality with the information transfer's language realization.
The 'social environment,' which simply refers to the many features of work culture within a discourse community, has a significant impact on the formality of professional communication. These parameters determine of subject material studied/ dealt with, working conditions (freelance/ actual workplace/ teleworking, etc.), institutional context, communication code used, interpersonal relationships (particularly hierarchies), and so on.
From a linguistic standpoint, it is important to emphasize that participants in professional communication make conscious language choices in order to maximize the efficiency of specialized information transfer in a specific communicative scenario. As a result, all linguistic means must be recognized as equally significant, including those considered informal, non-standard, or "belonging to the lower style level, such as professional jargon and occupational slang".⁴⁶ This is in direct opposition to Eugene Wüster's and the Vienna school of terminology's formal approach to specialized languages, particularly terminology.⁴⁷
One of the reasons why there have been so few systematic studies of informal professional communication is likely due to the great influence of the Wüsterian method. In her research, Suchodolska notes that professional groups and their in-group lexis have received little attention in Polish, Russian, or English linguistics⁴⁸. Another factor could be a paucity of primary language resources, such as specialized corpora (both written and spoken), as well as the difficulty of getting trustworthy data through other means. Without a doubt, research into the non-standard layer of professional communication used by the majority of LSPs is a crucial component of a complete picture of national LSP macrosystems, such as the Polish and English ones.
In Uzbekistan, the demand for high-quality reference materials grows even more urgent in light of the Ministry of Education in Uzbekistan recent increased focus on “Changes to the regulation on the rating system of monitoring the level of knowledge and skills of students of academic lyceums and vocational colleges”⁴⁹ The Ministry declared the 2020/2021 school year “the year of improving the quality of education at a young age”
Compulsory foreign professional language training is one of the elements of the full vocational training path. However, while the new core curriculum was quickly implemented, language teachers had almost no educational materials (textbooks, workbooks, reference works such as learners' specialized dictionaries) at the time, and the market was slow to adapt to the new situation.
A dictionary of non-standard professional vocabulary is one of the resources with the greatest potential for bridging the gap between authentic informal professional communication and the parties interested in such communication (trainees/students, (socio)linguists, authors of educational materials, LSP teachers, translators, and so on). In multilingual situations, the requirement for a parallel bilingual reference work of this type becomes even more crucial (e.g. multinational companies).
In such instances, the vocabulary pool⁵⁰ can come from a variety of languages, resulting in the creation of a unique in-group lexis that is usually incomprehensible to outsiders. A dictionary, it is argued, might significantly improve professional communication within a discourse community, particularly between beginners and seasoned colleagues, as well as reduce the time required for full inclusion in a professional society. It could potentially become a non-essential source of sociolinguistic data. When compared to a collection of informal professional texts, the dictionary can be described as highly structured, concise, focused on the rare and unique, and presenting multilingual material in a user-friendly manner.
The work should be viewed as a maximising dictionary, i.e. one that registers a relatively complete array of language phenomena occurring in informal professional communication, in light of the dictionary functions outlined above, i.e. becoming a tool in enhancing in-group professional communication and a source for authors of LSP educational materials as well as sociolinguistic research. Obviously, adapting the dictionary to the needs of certain consumers will have an impact on the work's content and structure.
Unquestionably, a bilingual dictionary of non-standard professional lexicon will differ from a traditional bilingual (terminological) dictionary and a terminological dictionary in some important ways, both methodologically and structurally, but some fundamental decisions must be made, including the extent to which the dictionary should reflect an LSP's social stratification⁵¹. This leads to the fundamental difficulty of differentiating various types of professional vocabulary, including informal or non-standard units, which is critical during the extraction process, the construction of lemma lists, and the accurate labeling of individual entries.
However, the popularity of a field will always influence the standardization of terms in that field, and language users must always agree on how to use certain terms in specific contexts⁵². Furthermore, Tsakona answers the question of what should be regarded a standardised term, in keeping with a more contemporary approach to terminology, the so-called socio - cognitive approach⁵³. According to the researcher, standardization as defined by the Vienna School is unattainable.
As a result, standardisation is “meant not as an intentional procedure of founding, collecting, or establishing terminology, but rather in a broader sense, as more than just a result, and more precisely as a sociolinguistic phenomenon: a standardized is one which is well – known is a speech community, is often used in specialized publications or the media and is also accepted by the speakers”⁵⁴.
Despite the fact that at least two of the three prerequisites (i.e., knowledge of a term by a speech community and acceptance by speakers) are subjective, evaluative, and possibly non-quantifiable, it seems reasonable to use the attributes listed above as a guide to distinguishing between specialized vocabulary: If one of the listed conditions is not met, a particular word or phrase will be considered for a non-standard specialized/professional vocabulary unit. A corpus research and a questionnaire are two complementing method strategies that can be used to select non-standard vocabulary candidates.
Professional vocabulary occurs in a variety of forms. Professionalisms enter a specialized language in a natural way, first appearing in a discourse between members of a professional community. Another dichotomy is that of the origin of the vocabulary, with terminology proper created in an artificial manner and professionalisms entering a specialized language in a natural way, first appearing in a discourse between members of a professional community. Despite his outdated perspective on terminology formation, the author correctly recognizes the 'natural' store of specialized vocabulary. Kania goes on to say that while there are some similarities between artificially created terminology and naturally occurring professional lexis, the former is characterized by greater stability, standardization, high precision, lack of geographical variations or emotional connotations, and is primarily used in the formal (official) style⁵⁵.
Professionals, on the other hand, are less stable, lack standardisation, may have geographical variances (which can be considered synonymous relative to one other and their standardised kin), may have an emotional load, and will be utilized in an informal (unofficial) way. In truth, slang and such units have a lot in common.⁵⁶ The above dichotomy and discussion are crucial because they highlight the characteristics of the informal units of professional vocabulary.
Professional lexicon is "the language characteristic of a specific professional group or profession, and based on an independent set of vocabulary," according to Kozierkiewicz. A purposeful distortion of a word's traditional meaning is common in lexicons. Contrary to popular belief, professional lexicon is not always used in a bad sense. Nonetheless, it is true that slang frequently entails a shift in meaning from what we are used to, which can lead to misinterpretation of the word in a specific context, as well as amusing and unexpected situations"⁵⁷.
Fox, Fertleman, Cahill, and Palmer provide a useful example of the characteristics of lexicons in professional communication⁵⁸. The writers examine the origins and purposes of medical lexicons in the British medical profession, as well as make an attempt to classify the material under consideration, before providing approximately 200 lexicon units with explanations. The authors of the study pinpoint when medical personnel begin to use lexicons. When students begin their practice/internship in teaching hospitals later in their medical studies, their apprehension to use medical lexicon fades, and use of lexicon peaks in the first years of practice. In the discourse of more senior medical practitioners, professional lexicons are less common (or at least less disparaging):

Three major reasons are thought to be behind the use of professional lexicons in medicine:^59
it helps overcome anxieties encountered during normal medical practice	express frustration and anger against a patient group	maintain social grouping and rapport.

The authors also identify the derivational mechanisms that result in medical jargon. The simplest technique is to use an acronym, which reflects the necessity for abbreviation in communication. Another technique is metaphor, which "may be a funny application of more standard terminology." The greatest collection of professional lexicon units, as surprising as it may appear for a medical field, consists of basic vulgarity and harsh name-calling. Euphemism is a final but crucial source⁶⁰ of professional lexicons.

In general, professional lexicons, depending on the larger and narrower extralinguistic environment can range from extremely formal to highly informal, necessitating a careful selection of acceptable language methods. While it is true that informal communication at work might involve non-work-related themes and that the line between professional and casual topics can be blurred, the current research focuses on informal communication that is focused on professional concerns.