The ministry of higher and secondary special education of the republic of uzbekistan termiz state university the faculty of foreign philology the department of foreign language teaching methdology course work theme

CONCLUSION
As can be seen, the stylistic analysis component of this initial training course focused on giving the student teachers some practice in analyzing the language of poems by benefiting from techniques of stylistic analysis. This was followed by practice in preparing language activities around the distinctive features of the language of the poem they analyzed to help EFL learners develop an awareness of how language is used to produce a particular meaning, as well as gain confidence in reaching and accounting for their own interpretations. The student teachers reported that stylistic
analysis was a great help in preparing engaging activities for EFL learners.
My analysis of Poem has focused in detail on the way in which the language of the poem conveys the impression of a particular speaking voice in a specific setting, a particular non-literary written register, and, potentially, an ironic voice in the last two lines of the poem. I have also tried to show how a stylistic analysis can account for a range of potential effects of the poem, and I have focused specifically on the linguistic basis for my claim that the poem is double-voiced in sense.
Although stylistics has not traditionally been concerned with issues of artistic value , readers may have noticed throughout the discussion some more or less implicit acknowledgements of Duffy‟s achievement in the poem. Indeed, I would claim that my systematic analysis has highlighted Duffy‟s skill in realistically conveying the impression of non-literary varieties within a prototypically poetic form, and of projecting a speaker who is implicitly criticised but not reduced to a caricature. More generally, the text has amply rewarded the effort involved in close linguistic analysis, thanks to its richness in terms of the range of linguistic features Duffy exploits and of the complexity of the interaction between different linguistic levels.


THE LIST OF USED LITERATURE
1 I.R. Galperin. Stylistics. M. “Higher school” 1977.
2 V.A. Kukharenko. A Book of Practice in Stylistics. M.”Высшая школа”1987
3 V.A. Kukharenko. Seminar in style. M. 1971
4 I.V. Arnold. The English Word. M. 1973.
5 L.T. Boboxonova, Ingliz tili stilistikasi.
6 I.Mukarramov. Xozirgi o`zbek audacity tilining ilmiy stili. T.Fan. 1984.
7 I.Toshaliev. O`zbek tili stilistikasi. T. Tash.G.U. 1988.
8 U.E. Qilichev. O`zbek tilining praktik stilistikasi T.O`qituvchi. 1985.
9 Х. Қ. Қаршибоев Битирув малакавий ишларни бажариш ва ҳимоя қилишга доир услубий кўрсатмалар. Гулистон 2003.
10 Турсунов, Мухторов Ш, Раҳматуллаев.
Ҳозирги ўзбек адабий тили. Т. “Ўзбекистон”. 1992. 216 б
11 E. Nida. Morphology University of Michigan. Press. 1976.
12 Т.М. Беляева «Вопросы английского языка в синхронии и диахронии». Л. 1967. стр. 89.
13 Мюллер. В.К. «Англо — Русский словарь» М. 1962.
14 The World Book Encyclopedia. USA. 1994. №. G.G. Volume p/ 905/
15 М. Эшниёзова Қўшма сўз Микросинтагматик муносататига доир. 2004. №1 24-26 бб
16 Internet. Khan M.A. Liggt. Privacy Policy. Terms of Use. www.amjbot.org. 2003. № 90 р
17 Адмони В. Г. Типологня тфедложення.— В сб.: Исследованяя по обшсй кюрнн грамматики. М., 1968.
18 Азнаурова Э. С. Очерки по стилистике слова. Ташкент, 1973.
19 Арнольд И. В. Стилистика современного английского язьша. Л., 1973.
20 Арутюнова Н. Д. Некоторне типн дналогических реакций н «почему» -репликн в русском язьше. «Филологические науки», 1970, № 3.