Education is a complex and important process which the future not just of only one person but the whole nation depends on, hence, it is an important factor of the progress in modern world

Introduction

Education is a complex and important process which the future not just of only one person but the whole nation depends on, hence, it is an important factor of the progress in modern world. The President of the Republic of Uzbekistan Sh. M. Mirziyoyev in his speech on the 43 Opening Ceremony of the CFM of OIC, the topic of which was “Education and Enlightenment are the way to peace and creation” suggested by the First President of the Republic of Uzbekistan I. A. Karimov, said that enlightenment and education are the keys to prosperity of all folks; namely this two factors are leading people on their way to peace and harmony in the world.

Also the President mentioned in that speech that modern world is rapidly changing, and new dangers and challenges are appearing daily and threaten stable and steady development of people, and in such a time it is very important to pay attention to development of the youth endeavoring to knowledge and self-perfection. Understanding of this leads to the necessity of making complex provision for developing and betterment pf system of education and enlightenment, attaching youth to the most modern knowledge, upbringing all-side developed and harmonious individual¹.

The government pays great attention to the process of education on all stages: from pre-school till higher education, and many laws and resolutions are approved for its betterment. The President of the Republic of Uzbekistan Sh. M. Mirziyoyev in the annual message to the Parliament of the Republic of Uzbekistan in 24 January, 2020, announced 3 priorities of 2020 which are science, enlightenment and digital economy and presented the plan of betterment of educational system. For this he suggested to improve qualification of teachers, reorganize the system of professional education, enlarge amount of grants in university and create special grants for girls. Relatively to science, it is planned to work on fundamental and applied investigations in hard and natural sciences and provide scientists and teachers with probationary period in foreign countries².

Also the President signed the Resolution “About additional merits for betterment quality of education in higher institutions and providing active participation of youth in the complex reforms performed in the country”, where 3-year of educational process were established and changes related to teaching subjects were announced³. Complex changes are planned to perform in the educational system of the country to make it (the system) better and prepare specialists who will meet world standards of quality of knowledge.

All these changes affect the language too, as these are extra-linguistic factors directly connected with social life. Vocabulary of any language undergoes serious changes in order to meet the requirements of modern world, and this creates interest and subject of study for linguists. Linguistics is a study of a language: how it is put together and how it is functions. Various building blocks of different types and sizes are combined to make up a language: sounds form words, words create sentences and sentences compound texts. Phonetics deals with sounds, lexicology works with vocabulary units and syntax deals with sentences.

Lexicology (from Greek “lexis” – a word, “logos” – study) - a branch of linguistics; is the study of the grammatical structure of language. It is concerned with the various means of expressing grammatical relations between words and with the patterns after which words are combined into word-groups and sentences⁴. Vocabulary itself is represented with different units: morphemes, words, fusions, idioms, collocations and etc. Lexicology is subdivided into General and Special Lexicology. General lexicology deals with peculiarities of any language, while Specific works with the vocabulary of one exact language.

There are two principal approaches in linguistic science to the study of language material, which are the synchronic and the diachronic approach. They differ in the point from which they are studying a language. The synchronic approach is concerned with the vocabulary of a language as it exists at a given time. Descriptive Lexicology that deals with the vocabulary and vocabulary units of a particular language at a certain time. The diachronic approach deals with the changes and the development of vocabulary in the course of time. It is special Historical Lexicology that deals with the evolution of the vocabulary units of a language as time goes by⁵.

This course paper is concentrated on the study of “Lexical fields of English language” along with the analysis of the translation of “The Duel” written by Alexander Ivanovich Kuprin.

The subject matter of this course paper generally relates to Lexicology and the translation of a common short story.

The topicality of this course paper is lexical fields which are constantly filled with new words, and because of polysemantic character of words in English language, their rotation among several semantic fields, and considered as a subject of linguistic study. In relation to the aim of the course-paper, it will be fair to mention that in the process of writing any piece of literature art, the writer has to know deeply and exactly the word meanings, because namely ability of choosing appropriate vocabulary units guarantee the success of the work as appropriate words can deliver the idea of the author correctly. While translating the piece of writing the same problem was met as the success of translation completely depends on the fact how successfully words are chosen. For this the translator has to know deeply the word meanings of his mother tongue and the equivalent of these words in foreign languages.

The aim of the paper is the study of lexical, or semantic, fields of English language and distinguish their main characteristics. Furthermore, this course project defines the assessment of obtaining useful data and acquisition by translating and plays as a key means of translating any writing sources.

The tasks of this work are:

1. 
   To identify what lexical field is;
   
2. 
   To clarify its features;
   
3. 
   To show how polysemy affect lexical fields.
   

The paper’s novelty is demonstration of the effect of polysemantic character of English words, which is caused by monosyllabic character of words which exist in English language.

The theoretical value is that results of the research of this paper might be used in theoretical courses.

The practical value of this writing is presented in analyses of lexical fields and their peculiarities.

Methods of investigation are complex, general and scientific-theoretical. Material that were used during research are:

• 
  Various monolingual dictionaries;
  
• 
  Scientific literature on related topic;
  
• 
  The practical books of English.
  

The structure of the course paper is formed by introductory part, 2 chapters, conclusion and bibliography.

Introduction presents general outline of the course paper. It provides with brief information about whole course paper and includes the problems that are going to research and discuss in the project. Moreover, this course paper points out the aim of this research, tasks of the work, scientific novelty, theoretical value, practical value and other peculiarities and features of the course paper.

Chapter I consists of theoretical material related to the topic: first studies of lexical fields, scientist who contributed to development of lexical fields and described on their own outcomes, methods of investigation of lexical fields and their components are the main points of the chapter 1.

Chapter II provides with practical material. It is mostly based on the translation of the work “the Duel” written by Alexander Ivanovich Kuprin. Thus the chapter begins with some information about the author of the short story, then main theme and images of the short story are described. Continuously, the short story is going to be analyzed and some activities related to the translation are followed.

Conclusion summarize all results of the work and finish the whole paper. List of used literature represents all materials that were used and applied in the process of writing this course paper.

The list of used literature provides with information about sources which were used during the process of investigation of this course paper.

CHAPTER I. LEXICAL FIELDS AS A SUBJECT OF LINGUISTIC STUDY
1.1. The notion of lexical fields. Lexical field theory

Linguistics is a study of a language. A language is a hierarchy, a system of units and rules according to which these units can combine. The system of any language includes several levels: phonetic, morphemic, lexical and syntactical⁶. The lexical level is considered to be the central level of language as words are made up of phonemes and morphemes and at the same time they themselves make up bigger units of speech - sentences and texts.

Lexicology is a branch of linguistics, the science of language. The term Lexicology is composed of two Greek morphemes: lexis meaning “word, phrase” and logos, which denotes “learning, a department of knowledge”⁷. Lexicology deals with all vocabulary units of the language, thus, the lexical level is considered to be the central level of a language as words are made up of phonemes and morphemes and at the same time they themselves make up bigger units of speech – sentences, which at the same time create texts.

Vocabulary of any language is huge and its units must be classified according to some principles. The concept of “field”, which is considered to unite words into a system according to their meaning and through these systems shows their interdependence, was introduced by I.A. Boduen de Kurtene and F. de Saussure in XX century⁸.

However, field approach always was a very arguable topic of all times, since it appeared, and different scholars and researchers understand it differently.

The promoters of this direction in the study of language were G. Ipsen and J. Trier, who were German scientists. At the first time the term “semantic field” was noticed in the work of G. Ipsen where he investigated similarities and differences between German language and other languages of Indo-European family, where the notion “semantic field” was described as the collection of words, possessing the same meaning.

Lexical field theory, or word-field theory, was introduced on March 12, 1931 by the German linguist Jost Trier. He argued that words acquired their meaning through their relationships to other words within the same word-field. An extension of the sense of one word narrows the meaning of neighboring words, with the words in a field fitting neatly together like a mosaic. If a single word undergoes a semantic change, then the whole structure of the lexical field changes. The lexical field is often used in English to describe terms further with use of different words. Trier's theory assumes that lexical fields are easily definable closed sets, with no overlapping meanings or gaps. These assumptions have been questioned and the theory has been modified since its original formulation⁹.

J. Trier’s conception was very popular abroad. Trier believed that the language of a certain period is a stable and relatively completed system, where words possess meanings not independently, but because other words, closely-spaced with former ones, possess them as well. Trier’s merit is regarded to be the core idea of the terms of “lexical field”, divided into elementary items – concepts. He also introduced these terms into linguistic use. The fields of this kind are decided to be called as paradigmatic fields.

Another scholar, O. Dukhachek believed that division in semantic fields must be done if only it is based on their semantical structure. This fact made it possible for him to establish the two main types of linguistic fields: verbal linguistic fields, a centre of which is a word, and conceptual linguistic fields, where words are linked by the fact, that they contain one common meaning (elementary fields) and some close meanings (complex fields) in their semantics.

Verbal fields are divided by O. Dukhachek into morphological, syntactical (syntagmatic) and associative, hence, words were sorted among semantic fields according to their inner structure: identical suffixes, prefixes, inflections common in form.

German scientist L. Weisgerber, considered the concept of field as the assembly of structural models of sentences, joined by semantic task community. Thus, all models, by means of which imperative is expressed, are included into the field of imperative sentences: “Go!” – imperative mood; “Let’s go!” – inverted form; “Stand up!” – infinitive; “You are going home immediately” – declarative sentence; “Will you stop at last?” – interrogative sentence; “ “You shouldn’t cry in this way” – some modal verbs¹⁰.

Hence, The lexical field studies the morphology of words, or their shape, form, and construction. When we put together a lexical web, we are relating words that are similar in formation probably because they are also similar in linguistic origins. Hence, when these kinds of lexemes are put together they should have the same structure, and form.¹¹

There is the third approach to understanding what semantic, or lexical, field is, and it is called functional-system approach. The advantage of functional-system approach is in the fact, that it enables to sort words not according their inner structure, but in the sphere of its functioning, connections with the environment. Such approach gives the opportunity to study language in its concrete realization, in action, research means of transporting extra-linguistic phenomena and situations. Functional-system approach suits natural facilities of conversation as well, when different linguistic means are used in their inextricable connection¹².

Functional-semantic field is a concrete linguistic two-side unity, which plane of content includes semantic elements in this language interpretation. In the base of each functional-semantic field there is some certain semantic category, representing semantic invariant, uniting dissimilar language means and stipulating their correlation¹³.

In other words, this definition of the lexical fields is based on the conception that lexical fields are represented by words which affect other words in a sentence. For example, the presence of a certain word can change the whole meaning of another word in a radical sense. However, within the context of a sentence, that word can have a different meaning altogether, because the lexical range changes it¹⁴.

According to the information given above, it will be fair to conclude that:

– there are different approaches to sorting words among fields;

– the term of “linguistic field” contains the idea of grouping of dissimilar linguistic means;

– the features of elements connection and interdependence are the most important inner qualities, and it is based on functional-system approach.
1.2. Characteristics of lexical fields

Modern English vocabulary is very extensive. A question which fairly arises while working with the language is whether this enormous word-stock must be composed of separate independent lexical units, or it should perhaps be regarded as a certain structured system made up of numerous interdependent and interrelated sub-systems or groups of words. This problem is discussed in terms of possible ways of classifying vocabulary items. Attempts to study the inner structure of the vocabulary revealed that English word-stock may be analyzed into numerous sub-systems the members of which have some features in common, thus distinguishing them from the members of other lexical sub-systems. Words can be classified in various ways. However, the semantic classification of words is more detailed.

Words may be classified according to the concepts underlying their meaning. This classification is closely connected with the theory of conceptual or semantic fields. By the term “semantic fields” we understand closely knit sectors of vocabulary each characterized by a common concept¹⁵.

Classification according to the concept underlying the meaning of the words is described by the term lexical, or semantic, field. Example of a lexical field might be group of words characterized by the common concept of the words: “wild animal” – wolf, fox, bear, dear, tiger and etc.

Members of a lexical field are not synonyms but are joined by the common semantic concept (in the example above it is “wild animal”), and this concept is usually called as the common denominator of the meaning. The members of the field are semantically interdependent as they delimit and determine each other. Hence, the term “lexical field” is described as a set of lexical items where the meaning of each is determined by the co-presence of others.

Lexical groups may be extensive as they may include words of different parts of speech. Another point should be discussed in this connection. Lexical groups may be very extensive and may cover big conceptual areas, e g. space, matter, intellect, science and etc¹⁶.

Words making up such semantic fields may belong to different parts of speech. For example, in the semantic field of space we find nouns: expanse, extent, surface, etc.; verbs: extend, spread, span, etc.; adjectives’ spacious, roomy, vast, broad, etc. Also there may be small lexical groups with words belonging to the same part of speech and united by the common concept. Such small groups are called lexico-semantic groups. It is noticed that words which compose lexical (semantic) field and lexico-semantic groups has a criterion of joining: the identity of one of the components of the meaning is found in all other lexical units which compose that set. Any of the semantic component may be chosen to represent the group. For instance, the word “saleswoman” might be analyzed into three different semantic components: “human”, “female”, “professional”¹⁷.

One of the most important points of studying lexical fields is the issue of polysemantic words. One polysemantic word may refer to different lexico-semantic groups. Such lexico-semantic groups are very important for understanding particular meaning of polysemantic words in lexical context. It is very important to mention that a word in combination with a member of other lexical group can become a synonym to another word. Lexico-semantic groups seem to play a very important role in deter-mining individual meanings of polysemantic words in lexical contexts. For instance, the verb “to take” refers to different lexico-semantic groups: 1. go (to take a transport); 2. drink (to take tea); 3. get (take something).

Such word-groups are often used not only in scientific lexicological analysis, but also in practical class-room teaching. In a number of textbooks, we can find words with some common denominator of meaning listed under the headings Flowers, Fruit, Domestic Animals, and so on.

Another approach to the classification of vocabulary items into lexico-semantic groups is the study of hoponymic relations between words. By hyponymy is meant a semantic relationship of inclusion. In this approach two different notions exist, which are hyponym and hyperonym, which are interdependent with each other and represent notions of the word relationships. Hyperonym is considered to be the main conception that serves for generalization for minor conceptions¹⁸. Hyponym is the most specific term, which is included in heperonymous notion. Thus, e.g., vehicle includes car, bus, taxi and etc. hence, in this example “vehicle” is hyperonym, and other words, which are included in this notion are called hyponyms. However, this hyper-hyponymic grouping may derivate, which means that with each new level this notion will drop down on one level. Thus, in case if there were one hypernym and several hyponyms, after derivation hyponyms will become hypernyms and will create their own small lexico-semantic groups. For example, in case with vehicle in the role of hypernym and car, bus as hyponyms, car might bus might become a hypernym if there appear such words as bus-driver, conductor, pass, and these specific terms will be hyponyms.

It is of importance to note that in such hierarchical structures certain words may be both classifiers and members of the groups. In such a case the more specific term is called the hyponym of the more general, and the more general is called the hyperonym or the classifier. Hyponymic classification may be viewed as objectively reflecting the structure of vocabulary and is considered by many linguists as one of the most important principles for the description of meaning¹⁹.
1.3. Lexical fields and componential analysis

A lexical field is a set of semantically related lexical items whose meanings are mutually interdependent. The single most influential study in the history of lexical field theory is Trier’s (1931) paper, in which he presents a theoretical formulation of the field approach. In his writing Trier emphasizes that only a mutual interconnection of the words under consideration can provide a decisive answer regarding their exact value. Words should not be considered in isolation, but in their relationship to semantically related words: demarcation is always a demarcation relative to other words.²⁰

One method which has been developed in the framework of structural semantics is componential analysis. As a tool to discover, predict and explain the semantic relations among the items in a lexical field, it is an attempt to provide field theory with a solid theoretical and methodological basis. The crucial insight of componential analysis is that word meanings are made up of atomic elements or components²¹.

While different conceptions of the notion ‘lexical field’ were suggested after Trier’s initial formulation, the most important development is the emergence of componential analysis as a technique for formalizing the semantic relationships between the items in a field: once a lexical field has been demarcated, the internal relations within the field will have to be described in more detail.

It is not sufficient to say that the items in the field are in mutual opposition—these oppositions will have to be identified and defined. Componential analysis is a method for describing such oppositions that takes its inspiration from structural phonology: just like phonemes are described structurally by their position on a set of contrastive dimensions, words may be characterized on the basis of the dimensions that structure a lexical field.

Componential analysis provides a descriptive model for semantic content, based on the belief that meanings can be described on the basis of a restricted set of conceptual building blocks—the semantic ‘components’ or ‘features.’

To demonstrate the principles of componential analysis there was taken a field consisting of the terms siège, pouf, tabouret, chaise, fauteuil, and canapé (a subfield of the field of furniture terms in French). The word which acts as a superordinate to the field under consideration is siège, ‘seating equipment with legs.’ If it is used the dimensions s1 ‘for seating,’ s2 ‘for one person,’ s3 ‘with legs,’ s4 ‘with back,’ s5 ‘with armrests,’ s6 ‘of rigid material,’ then chaise ‘chair’ can be componentially defined as [+ s1, + s2, + s3, + s4, − s5, + s6], and canapé ‘sofa’ as [+ s1, − s2, + s3, + s4, + s5, + s6], and so on.²²

An especially intriguing possibility of componential analysis is the potential to determine universal meaning components across different languages. Many believe that the elementary components of sound and meaning are language-neutral, while complexes of components such as phonemes and word-meanings as well as their paradigmatic and syntagmatic relations are unique to particular languages.²³

While componential forms of description are common in formal types of semantic description, the most important theoretical development after the introduction of componential analysis is probably attempt to identify the components words consist of.