Phraseology as a science

Uzbek linguistics study of phraseological unities began in 1950s. Famous scholars Ya. Pinkhasov, M. Khusainov, I. Kuchkortoyev, Sh.Rakhmatullayev, A.Mamatov did some researches on this field.

Linguist scholar Sh. Rakhmatullayev’s service is enormous for Uzbek phraseology. This scholarwidely researched the grammatical features of Uzbek idioms. He was the first who began to study phraseological unity as a lexical unity. Though there are a number of arguments on the volume and study object of Uzbek phraseology like on English one, the scholars are ontinuing to research phraseological treasure from different points. Study of idioms, the richest and most figurative part of a language which form phraseological layer serves to research any language profoundly. Idioms areliving in a language because of their importance in theoretical and practical linguistics. They play a

great role in making the speech much more attractive and impressive. Idioms are the means of expressing national spirituality through a language. They convey a nation’s soul, history and social life. That’s why they are one of the main factors in keeping the level of nationality and developing it.

It is known that the English and Uzbek languages genetically belong to two different families that are the German and Turkish. English is an analytic language; however Uzbek belongs to synthetic languages. It is obvious in phraseological samples of English and Uzbek. As it is studied in the works

idioms in the English and Uzbek languages have peculiar features of semantics, structure and semantic-structure. They have grammatical categories, lexical and grammatical variations are inherent.

Like other lexical unities idioms become obsolete and new idioms emerge. Semantic classification of English idioms is versatile and controversial. English linguists L.P. Smith and W. Ball divided these idioms into groups in their works on English idioms. But it is not on classificati on level. The most ancient and traditional principle of classifying the idioms is a “thematic” one which is based on idioms’ origin. This classification was used by English and American scholars (L.P. Smith and others).

According to this principle idioms are classified due to their origin. L.P. Smith separates the idioms of seamen, hunters, soldiers, farmers, animals and birds, cooks. Sometimes this factor of the classification is called “etymologic” principle. But it cannot be the general principle. Because this factor does not include the semantic-structural formation of phraseological unities. Russian scholarV.V. Vinogradov’s classification of Russian idioms is used for English ones too. Russian linguistV.V. Vinogradov divides idioms in both languages into three groups according to semantics. As the linguist G.B. Antrushina says, “this division is the first semantic one and hasn’t lost its value in linguistics” [1, 189] V.V. Vinogradov’s classification is based on semantic interrelation of components of idioms. In his opinion, the more the components’ meanings differ from the one of an idiom, the more semantic relation would be strong. As T.I. Arbekova considers, “semantic classification of idioms is based on the followings:

1) Closeness feature of components to truth;

2) Irrelativeness feature of subjective meaning of the principal component and the one of an idiom;

3) Existence of associative component within the meaning of an idiom” [3,100].

Studying the structure of idioms is as necessary as the semantic point and has theoretical and practical significance. The structural classification of idioms is based on their characteristics of being parts of speech like words. Each idiom is unique not only from the semantic point, but also from the formation one. While syntactic analyzing idioms are analyzed not separable but as a whole. Idioms

dates back very old history and came off as a separate independent branch of linguistics and is improving. However, a lot of scientific researches should be done further. “The ch allenges and mess in phraseology shouldn’t intimidate the linguists, as none of sciences has started ready and is always in

motion and development” [5, 342].