1. linguistic typology

3. Meaning and referent.
To distinguish meaning from the referent, i.e. from the thing denoted by the linguistic sign is of the utmost importance. To begin with, meaning is a linguistic phenomenon whereas the denoted object or the referent is beyond the scope of language. We can denote one and the same object by more than one word of a different meaning. For example, an apple can be denoted by the words apple, fruit, smth, this, etc. So far as all these words have the same referent.
It follows that in the functional approach meaning may be viewed as the function of distribution: 1) semantic investigation is confined to the analysis of the different or sameness meaning; 2) meaning is understood essentially as the function or the use of linguistic signs.
Take, for example, the noun "screen". We find it in its direct meaning when it names a movable piece of furniture" used to hide smth or protect smb, as in case of "fire screen" placed in front of a fireplace. The meaning is figurative when the word is applied to anything which protects by hiding, I as in "smoke screen". We define this meaning as figurative comparing it to the first that we called direct. Again – when by a "screen" a speaker means "a silver-coloured sheet on which pictures are shown, this meaning in comparison with the first will be secondary. When the same word is used attributitively in such combinations as "screen actor", "screen star", "screen version", etc., it comes to mean "pertaining to the cinema" and is abstract to comparison with the first meaning which is called concrete. The main meaning is that which possesses the highest frequency, at the present stage of development all these terms reflect, relationship existing between different meanings of a word at the same period, so the classification may be called synchronic and. paradigmatic, although the terms are borrowed from historical lexicology and stylistics.
Instrumental investigations have prove that in English the fully stressed vowel is characterized by a greater intensity, a high fundamental frequent, pitch and more duration in comparison with the unstressed vowels. The relationship between the components of word accent depends on the position of stressed syllable.
In Russian the main distinction between the stressed and unstressed vowels depends on their length which is accompanied by their quality and intensity, while pitch is irrelevant, though in some cases it contributes to weakening intensity of the stressed vowels and to change their timbre in final positions.
As to Uzbek it is said that word accent is realized more often with combination of fundamental frequency of tone and intensity , and that the stressed syllable is distinguished from an unstressed syllable, first of all, by a greater force. We regard that in Uzbek word accent intensity is the main component, while pitch (fundamental frequency of tone) and duration are prosidically additional correlates of it. Acoustically, languages with dynamic stress do not use both intensity and pitch equally. Though there is an exception, for example, the Scandinavian languages use both dynamic stresses, in Uzbek is based on perceptual dimensions, though it was proved by instrumental investigation.
In Uzbek word stress is free as it may fall on any syllable. E.g. deraza “ a window”, qonun “ a law”, kotib “ secretary” etc. Word stress in Uzbek has become free as a result of language contacts which are observed in the cited examples. In the Turkic languages, particularly in Uzbek, word stress usually falls on the final syllable. Turkic languages are regarded as agglutinative, the word bola “ a child” may have four suffixes as bola-la-ri-miz-ga “for our children”, in the word form ishqi-boz-li-gi-miz-dan “as we like” there are six different suffixes. In these examples word stress tends to be at the end of the word form and very often the last syllable receives stress.
We distinguish four degrees of word stress in Uzbek: primary /’/ secondary /, / tertiary/^v / and weak, e. g. uylarimizda “ at our house” , kutubxona “ library” , studentlar “ students” etc. recent experimental investigation proves the correctness of this idea as to Uzbek.

2.