Education of the republic of uzbekistan samarkand state institute

CHAPTER II COGNITIVE STYLISTICS IN PRACTICE
2.1 Stylistic Analysis and Cognitive Science
Since its inception in the 1970s, cognitive linguistics is a relatively new field whose rapid growth and expansion of research topics dates back to the middle of the 1980s. Since then, a variety of fields like syntax, discourse, phonology, and semantics, all of which are regarded as the representation of conceptual organization in language, have entered the scope of this field of science.
The cognitive grammar is probably the most advanced idea that came from cognitive linguists' work. The formulation of a theory of meaning and grammar that is cognitively probable and meets the following requirements is the goal of cognitive grammar. The only structures allowed in the grammar are:
Schemas for such structures (acquired by exposure to multiple examples of the pattern) Categorization of relationships among the aforementioned elements (Saussurean "sign"). Symbolic, semantic, or phonological structures that typically occur in linguistic expressions.
Other topics of interest in cognitive linguistics include the processes and patterns by which conceptual content is organized in language. Accordingly, the organizing of ideas like scenes and occasions, existence, power and causation, along with movement and area draw in the mental language specialists' advantage. Besides, the ideational and emotional classifications credited to mental specialists like assumption and influence, volition and expectation, as well as consideration and viewpoint arE inspected.
By looking at issues like the semantic structure of lexical and morphological forms as well as syntactic patterns, cognitive linguists aim to determine the integrated organization of conceptual structuring in language. Likewise interrelationships of calculated structures, as in the social occasion of applied classifications into huge organizing frameworks are explored.

The field of linguistics known as cognitive linguistics (CL) interprets language in terms of the concepts that underlie its forms—sometimes universal and sometimes specific to a particular language. Thus, it is closely related to semantics but distinct from psycholinguistics, which explains the mental processes that underlie the acquisition, storage, production, and comprehension of speech and writing by drawing on empirical findings from cognitive psychology.

Adherence to three central positions is characteristic of cognitive linguistics. To start with, it rejects that there is independent phonetic personnel in the psyche; Second, it has a conceptual understanding of grammar; thirdly, it asserts that language use leads to language knowledge. Cognitive linguists, on the other hand, argue that the mind lacks a distinct and independent module for language acquisition. This is in direct opposition to the position taken in the field of generative grammar. Cognitive linguists do not necessarily deny that some of a person's linguistic ability is innate; however, they do not deny that it is distinct from the rest of the brain's cognitive abilities. They subsequently reject a group of assessment in mental science which recommends that there is proof for the measured quality of language. They argue that understanding linguistic phenomena such as phonemes, morphemes, and syntax is primarily conceptual. However, they assert that the use of language in understanding requires cognitive abilities comparable to those utilized in other non-linguistic tasks and that the storage and retrieval of linguistic data is not significantly different from the storage and retrieval of other types of knowledge.
Leaving from the practice of truth-restrictive semantics, mental language specialists view importance regarding conceptualization. They view meaning in terms of mental spaces rather than in terms of world models.
Last but not least, cognitive linguistics contends that language is both embodied and situated in a particular setting. This is a moderate deviation from the Sapir–Whorf hypothesis because language and cognition both influence one another and are ingrained in the environments and experiences of their users.
Mental Semantics outgrew crafted by various analysts dynamic during the 1970s who were keen on the connection of language and brain, and who didn't follow the common inclination to clarify phonetic examples through allures for underlying properties inner to and well defined for language. Instead of attempting to separate syntax from the rest of language in a "syntactic component" governed by a set of principles and elements unique to that component, the research line looked at how language structure is related to things that aren't language: cognitive principles and mechanisms that are not specific to language, such as human categorization principles; sober minded and interactional standards; what's more, useful standards by and large, like iconicity and economy.
The most compelling etymologists working thusly and zeroing in halfway on mental standards and association were Wallace Scrape, Charles Fillmore, George Lakoff, Ronald Langacker, and Leonard Talmy. Every one of these etymologists started fostering their own way to deal with language portrayal and semantic hypothesis, fixated on a specific arrangement of peculiarities and concerns. All of these scholars agree that meaning must be the primary focus of study because it is so essential to language. This is an important assumption. The mappings between meaning and form are a major focus of linguistic analysis because linguistic structures are used to express meanings. According to this point of view, the semantic structures that linguistic forms are intended to convey are intimately linked to one another. All meaningful linguistic units' semantic structures can and should be studied.
These perspectives were contrary to the thoughts creating at the time inside Chomskyan etymology, wherein importance was 'interpretive' and fringe to the investigation of language. The focal object of interest in language was punctuation. According to this point of view, rather than being influenced by meaning, the structures of language were governed by principles that were essentially independent of meaning. Consequently, the semantics related with morphosyntactic structures didn't need examination; Explanatory constructs based on language-internal structural principles were the primary focus.
In the 1970s, linguists like Joan Bybee, Bernard Comrie, John Haiman, Paul Hopper, Sandra Thompson, and Tom Givon also made functional linguistics a field. Whether or not these explanatory principles directly relate to the structure of the mind, the primary focus of functional linguistics is on explanatory principles that derive from language as a communicative system. Discourse-functional linguistics and functional-typological linguistics grew out of functional linguistics, with slightly different focuses but broadly similar goals to Cognitive Linguistics. At the same time, a historical linguistics based on functional principles emerged, which led to research by Elizabeth Traugott and Bernd Heine on the principles of grammaticalization (grammaticization). These hypothetical flows hold that language is best contemplated and portrayed concerning its mental, experiential, and social settings, which go a long ways past the etymological framework legitimate.
In the 1970s, Sydney Lamb (Stratificational Linguistics, later Neurocognitive Linguistics) and Dick Hudson (Word Grammar) were two other cognitive linguists who were developing their own frameworks for linguistic description.
Much work in youngster language securing during the 1970s was impacted by Piaget and by the mental transformation in Brain research, so the field of language obtaining had major areas of strength for a/mental strand through this period that perseveres to the present. The foundation for contemporary cognitivist research was laid by Dan Slobin, Eve Clark, Melissa Bowerman, and Elizabeth Bates.
Also in the 1970s, Chomsky asserted strongly that language is innate, which sparked a significant acquisition debate that continues to this day. Functionally and cognitively oriented researchers, as well as those studying acquisition empirically as a whole, rejected his view of acquisition as a matter of minor parameter-setting operations on an innate set of rules. These researchers viewed the issue as one of learning that was not fundamentally distinct from other types of learning.
Even though the descriptive mechanisms suggested by Fillmore, Lakoff, Langacker, and Talmy's methods of linguistic theory development appeared to be vastly distinct, fundamental connections could be seen to exist between them by the late 1980s. Frame Semantics and Construction Grammar, both developed in collaboration with others, were based on Fillmore's concepts (Fillmore et al. 1988).
According to Lakoff 1981 and 1987, he was well-known for his work on metaphor and metonymy. According to Langacker (1988), Langacker's concepts had developed into an explicit theory that was first known as Space Grammar and then as Cognitive Grammar. Talmy had distributed various progressively compelling papers on phonetic imaging frameworks (Talmy 1985a,b and 1988).
Gilles Fauconnier had also developed a theory of Mental Spaces by this point, influenced by Oswald Ducrot's views. Later, in collaboration with Mark Turner, this theory was turned into a theory of Conceptual Blending. This theory is interestingly compatible with both Lakoff's theory of Metaphor and Langacker's Cognitive Grammar.
The 1980s likewise saw the improvement of connectionist models of language handling, for example, those created by Jeff Elman and Brian MacWhinney, in which the attention was on displaying learning, explicitly language securing, utilizing connectionist organizations. This work tied normally in to the obtaining issue, and with the exploration program of Elizabeth Bates who had shown the learned idea of kids' etymological information, and its establishing in mental and social turn of events. The flaws of linguistic nativism were gradually exposed by a coherent conceptual framework that placed experiential learning at the center of understanding how children acquire language. Michael Tomasello's research program was built on this idea, and in the 1990s, he started to take the lead in studying acquisition in its social, cognitive, and cultural contexts.
Particularly the works of Lakoff and Langacker began to gain a following during the 1980s. In this decade, researchers in Poland, Belgium, Germany, and Japan started looking at linguistic issues from a cognitive perspective, specifically citing the work of Lakoff and Langacker. Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things, written by Lakoff, was published in 1987, almost simultaneously with Langacker's 1987 Foundations of Cognitive Grammar Vol. 1, which had been circling section by part starting around 1984.
The collection Topics in Cognitive Linguistics, ed. marked the next significant milestone in publishing. by Brygida Rudzka-Ostyn, which Mouton published in 1988. Several seminal papers by Langacker, Talmy, and others are included in this substantial volume, making it widely influential and still influential today.
Rene Dirven organized the first Cognitive Linguistics conference in 1989 in Duisburg, Germany. At that conference, it was decided to start a new organization called the International Cognitive Linguistic Association. This organization would hold conferences every two years to bring together cognitive linguistics researchers. See ICLA Organization History to learn when the Duisburg conference became the first International Cognitive Linguistics Conference.

The idea for the journal Cognitive Linguistics also came around in the middle of the 1980s. Its first issue, edited by Dirk Geeraerts, was published in 1990 under the Mouton de Gruyter imprint.

Rene Dirven suggested a new book series called Cognitive Linguistics Research at the Duisburg conference as a way to publish the growing field. In 1990, Ronald Langacker's articles were compiled into the first CLR volume, which was titled Concept, Image, and Symbol. Volume 2 of Langacker's Foundations of Cognitive Grammar was published the following year.
In addition to the biennial ICLC meetings, numerous conferences emerged as a result of the widespread recognition of Cognitive Linguistics as an important specialization within Linguistics in the 1990s. The theory was based on the work of Lakoff, Langacker, and Talmy. However, many working cognitive linguists, who tended to adopt representational eclecticism while still adhering to the fundamental tenets of cognitivism, made connections with related theories like Construction Grammar. Several nations began hosting cognitive linguistic research and activities, including Korea, Hungary, Thailand, and Croatia. The journal Cognitive Linguistics, which had become the ICLA's official journal, demonstrated the breadth of research. The journal entered its second phase under the direction of editor Arie Verhagen.
By the middle of the 1990s, Cognitive Linguistics as a field was defined by a specific set of intellectual pursuits pursued by its adherents, which were summarized in the Handbook of Pragmatics under the entry for Cognitive Linguistics.
Since mental etymology sees language as implanted in the generally speaking mental limits of man, subjects of extraordinary interest for mental semantics include: the primary attributes of normal language arrangement (like prototypicality, methodical polysemy, mental models, mental symbolism and allegory); the functional principles of language organization, like naturalness and iconicity; the conceptual connection between syntax and semantics, as investigated by construction grammar and cognitive grammar; the experiential and practical foundation of language-being used; what's more, the connection among language and thought, including inquiries concerning relativism and applied universals.
The strong ties that exist between Cognitive Linguistics and the fields of study of discourse studies, psycholinguistics, pragmatics, functional linguistics, and linguistic description are highlighted in this summary.
The fact that CL provides a more grounded approach to and set of theoretical assumptions for syntactic and semantic theory than generative linguistics does is the primary reason that many cognitive linguists are interested in CL. However, the possibility to link the study of language and the mind to the study of the brain is a significant draw for others.
ICLA-affiliated regional and language-topical Cognitive Linguistics Associations first began to emerge in the 2000s. Spain, Finland, and a Slavic-language CLA were framed, and afterward Poland, Russia and Germany turned into the locales of recently subsidiary CLAs. These were trailed by Korea, France, Japan, North America, the U.K., Sweden (which before long extended to a Scandinavian affiliation), and, most as of late, China and Belgium. Some of these associations were formed specifically as regional affiliates, while others were already in existence prior to affiliation.
A survey diary, the Yearly Survey of Mental Semantics started its spat 2003, and other new diaries followed after accordingly. After being edited by Dirk Geeraerts and Arie Verhagen, Cognitive Linguistics was taken over by editor Adele Goldberg in 2003. The current editor, Ewa Dabrowska, took over in 2006. The journal has maintained its growing stature and prominence in linguistics throughout.