Lexicology and its object

Semasiology (deals with the meaning of the word);

Wordformation (studies all possible ways of the formation of new words in English);

Etymology (studies the origin of words);

Phraseology (studies the set-expressions, phraseological units);

Lexicography (studies compiling dictionaries).

4. Word and word studies
What Is a Word? What is Lexicology? What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet...
(W. Shakespeare. Romeo and Juliet, Act II, Sc. 2) These famous lines reflect one of the fundamental problems of linguistic research: what is in a name, in a word? Is there any direct connection between a word and the object it represents? Could a rose have been called by "any other name" as Juliet says? These and similar questions are answered by lexicological research.
For some people studying words may seem uninteresting. But if studied properly, it may well prove just as exciting and novel as unearthing the mysteries of Outer Space.
It is significant that many scholars have attempted to define the word as a linguistic phenomenon. Yet none of the definitions can be considered totally satisfactory in all aspects. It is equally surprising that, despite all the achievements of modern science, certain essential aspects of the nature of the word still escape us. Nor do we fully understand the phenomenon called "language", of which the word is a fundamental unit.
We do not know much about the origin of language and, consequently, of the origin of words. It is true that there are several hypotheses, some of them no less fantastic than the theory of the divine origin of language. We know nothing — or almost nothing — about the mechanism by which a speaker's mental process is converted into sound groups called "words", nor about the reverse process whereby a listener's brain converts the acoustic phenomena into concepts and ideas, thus establishing a two-way process of communication. We know very little about the nature of relations between the word and the referent (i. e. object, phenomenon, quality, action, etc. denoted by the word). If we assume that there is a direct relation between the word and the referent — which seems logical — it gives rise to another question: how should we explain the fact that the same referent is designated by quite different sound groups in different languages. We do know by now — though with vague uncertainty — that there is nothing accidental about the vocabulary of the language; that each word is a small unit within a vast, efficient and perfectly balanced system. But we do not know why it possesses these qualities, nor do we know much about the processes by which it has acquired them.
The list of unknowns could be extended, but it is probably high time to look at the brighter side and register some of the things we do know about the nature of the word.




We do know that the word is a unit of speech which, as such, serves the purposes of human communication. Thus, the word can be defined as a unit of communication. Then, the word can be perceived as the total of the sounds which comprise it and the word, viewed structurally, possesses several characteristics.
The modern approach to word studies is based on distinguishing between the external and the internal structures of the word. By the vocabulary of a language is understood the total sum of its words. Another term for the same is the stock of words.
The external structure of the word is its morphological structure. For example. in the word post-impressionists the following morphemes can be distinguished: the prefixes post-, im-, the root press, the noun-forming suffixes - ion, -ist, and the grammatical suffix of plurality -s. These morphemes constitute the external structure of the word post-impressionists. The external structure of words, and also typical word-formation patterns, are studied in the section on word­formation.
The internal structure of the word, or its meaning, is nowadays commonly referred to as the word's semantic structure. This is certainly the word's main aspect. Words can serve the purposes of human communication due to their meanings, and it is most unfortunate when this fact is ignored by some contemporary scholars. The area of Lexicology specialising in the semantic studies of the word is called semantics.
Another structural aspect of the word is its unity. The word possesses both external (or formal) unity and semantic unity. Formal unity of the word is sometimes inaccurately interpreted as indivisibility. The example of post­impressionists has already shown that the word is not, strictly speaking, indivisible. Yet, its component morphemes are permanently linked together in opposition to word-groups, both free and with fixed contexts, whose components possess a certain structural freedom, For example. bright light, to take for granted.
The formal unity of the word can best be illustrated by comparing a word and a word-group comprising identical constituents. The difference between a blackbird and a black bird is best explained by their relationship with the grammatical system of the language. The word blackbird, which is characterised by unity, possesses a single grammatical framing: blackbirds. The first constituent black is not subject to any graminatical changes. In the word-group a black bird each constituent can acquire grammatical forms of its own: the blackest birds I've ever seen. Other words can be inserted between the components which is impossible so far as the word is concerned as it would violate its unity: a black night bird.
The same example may be used to illustrate what we mean by semantic unity. In the word-group a black bird each of the meaningful words conveys a separate concept: bird— a kind of living creature; black — a colour. The word blackbird conveys only one concept: the type of bird. This is one of the main


i?




features of any word: it always conveys one concept, no matter how many component morphemes it may have in its external structure.
A further structural feature of the word is its susceptibility to grammatical employment. In speech most words can be used in different grammatical forms in which their interrelations are realised. So far we have only underlined the word's major peculiarities, to convey the general idea of the difficulties and questions faced by the scholar attempting to give a detailed definition of the word. The difficulty does not merely consist in the considerable number of aspects that are to be taken into account, but, also, in the essential unanswered questions of word theory which concern the nature of its meaning.
All that we have said about the word can be summed up as follows. The word is a speech unit used for the purposes of human communication, materially representing a group of sounds, possessing a meaning, susceptible to grammatical employment and characterised by formal and semantic unity.
5. Comparative study of the English and Uzbek languages.
Comparative study of different pecularities of English words with words of other languages shows that there are various symptoms of this contrast between English and other languages.
The wordformation, the semantic structure of correlated words and their usage in speech are different in different languages. Every language has its own lexical system. Not all the meanings which the English word has may be found in its corresponding word in Uzbek. For example. Compare the meanings of the word «hand» and its corresponding word “кул”.
«Кул»

50. 
    одамнинг бармок учларидан елкагача булган кисми, аъзоси (рука);
    

2. 
   хайвонларнинг олдинги оёклари (лапа); 3) бармок (палец); 4) хар кимнинг ёзув усули (почерк); 5) имзо (подпись);
   

6. 
   иш усули (прийм работы); 7)ихтиёр, изм (воля); 8) имконият (условия) «hand»
   

50. 
    кул (pyкa); 2) хaйвонларнинг олдинги оёклари (лапа) 3) тараф (сторона, положения)
    

4. 
   бошкариш (контроль, положения) 5) розилик, ваъда (согласия, обещание); 6) ёрдам (помошь) 7) бир уйинчи кулидаги карта ( карты, исходящиеся на руках у одного игрока); 8) ишчи (рабочий); 9) денгизчи (матрос); l0) бажарувчи шахс (исполнитель, автор); ll) бир туда одам (компания, группа); l2) уста (мастер); l3) эпчиллик (ловкость); l4) ёзув, хат (почерк); l6) карсаклар (аплодисменты); l7) манба (источник); l8) соат стрелкаси (стрелка); l9) канот (крыло); 20) боFлам, даста (пучок); 2l) кафт (ладонь) 22) сон гушти (окорок); 23) жилов (повод).
   

As can be seen from the above only some meanings may be described as identical but others are different. The correlated words «hand» and «кул» may be the components of different phraseological units:


l3




«hand»
the hand of god — xyдо рози (божья воля) at the hand — ёнида, якинида (близко, рядом)
to live from hand to mouth— зyрFa кун курмок (пребываться)
at any hand — хдр эх,тимолга карши (во всяком случае)
to have clean hands — хдкикатгуй булмок (быть честным)


кули ишга бормайди (рука не поднимается) кулни кулга бериб (рука об руку) кулингга эрк берма (рукам воли не давай) кулидан келмайди (руки кроткие) кули тегмайди (руки не доходят)


«Кул»


Besides that the correlated words in English and in Uzbek may coin different derivatives. For example. «hand» (handful, handless, handy, handily, handiness,hand_v), «кул» (кул, кулла, кулсиз, кулли). The verb «to take» does not coincide in the number of meanings with its corresponding word « олмоц ».