Masharipov jahongir axmedovich conceptual analysis of the components of metaphor with the elements of mentality in english and uzbek

CONCLUSION 
 
Most people believe that metaphor is the tool of writers, poets or linguists, 
however we argue that not only those people but also ordinary people can use it, 
and even they used it, they have been using it, they will use it down the road. There 
are terms like dead metaphor and new metaphor. Dead metaphors are metaphors, 
once considered to be one, yet at present perceived as normal word. Whereas new 
metaphors are metaphors which you at once notice the difference, the connotation 
and meaning transference. In our first chapter we presented nearly all requisite 
theoretical views. Mostly we based on the English and Uzbek languages, however 
we also presented initial attitudes (Aristotle), the attitudes which are prevalent and 
contemporary views. Moreover, we distinguished conceptual metaphor from 
metaphorical expressions (in some Uzbek linguists’ works this has been done 
though, but they used different notions: linguistic metaphor and stylistic metaphor) 
and contend that conceptual metaphors are more essential, more general and wider 
concept. We also illustrated the types of metaphor according to several categories 
and commented on them. We tried to give examples wherever possible, as 
examples make the rules and theories more comprehensible. We have done so, as 
we want other bachelor graduates to use our research paper as a useful work. In 
some cases we have come across similarities while presenting theories on 
metaphor in English and Uzbek, whereas in some conditions there were clear 
differences. We also cited from Russian, American, Hungarian, German and other 
scientists, as their views are of vital importance. We also highlighted the notion of 
‘concept’. We tried to differentiate the terms ‘notion’ and ‘concept’ (as the latter is 
broader in sense). Since our research paper is intended to carry out conceptual 
analysis, firstly we familiarized with this term and then we defined its structure. 
Also, we highlighted the methods of analysis used in the concepts. Our next 
mission was to define how mentality can affect to metaphor, so in our second 
chapter we discussed how mentality can impact to use certain metaphors, whereas 
others (who have other mindset) use different metaphor for that concept. The 
striking thing is that there is ‘universality’ too. As various people having different 

---

104 
mindset can use one and the same, or at least the similar metaphorical expression 
or conceptual metaphor, despite their discrepancy. The difference can be in age, 
nationality, habitat, environment, flora and fauna, and many other cases. As 
mentality can be affected those factors, when one is deducing some notion. Some 
people claim that (concluding from the formulae of metaphor A is B) metaphor is 
giving a new word to something, such as you are a donkey, time is money or etc. 
However one cannot forget that metaphor can rename something. Like you are a 
flower. You are mick. Are you Afandi? In term of these reasons, we tried to 
present answers to the questions like why similarities and differences occur, why in 
one and the same category of mentality differences can be met? What is individual 
factor? and others. While explaining them, we cited from Kovecses’s examples, as 
they are of valuable importance. He chose several languages like Hungarian, 
Chinese, Japanese, Polish, Tahitian, Zulu and he skillfully laid them out. Wherever 
relevant he presented word-for-word translations, even he indicated cases’ affixes 
with their notions. We dared to take these valuable examples from him and added 
our examples in Uzbek, and enriched them further. In all places throughout our 
research work we presented CONCEPTUAL METAPHORS in capital letters, 
while