202 AMERICAN Journal of Language, Literacy and Learning in STEM Education www. grnjournal.us AMERICAN Journal of Language, Literacy and Learning in STEM Education Volume 01, Issue 09, 2023 ISSN (E): 2993-2769 Semantic-Pragmatic Analysis of Lexical Units Expressing Negative Intellectual Characteristics in English and Uzbek Languages Iminova Shakhnoza-Begim Bakhodirovna Assistant professor, Andijan State Institute of Foreign Languages Abstract in this article, on the example of the English and Uzbek languages, the combination of adjective lexemes characteristic of human character, their role in intercultural communication, functional- semantic features are analyzed, and the works of English and Uzbek writers, newspapers and magazines related to the socio-political sphere, explanatory dictionaries and the Internet are used as sources, quality lexemes taken from the materials of the human character. Keywords: human character, character, lexemes, adjective, antonym, synonym, word groups, subject, lexical semantic group. The various changes occurring in nature and society, the colorful image of life and the various relationships typical of people in it cannot but affect a person's character and psyche. As a result of such various external influences, various situations arise in the human psyche. The human psyche is very diverse and it reflects various opposite states such as joy, anger, sadness, indifference. As Russian linguist V. P. Belyanin noted, language is one of the most effective ways of expressing such human emotions. Based on this idea, in this research, we will consider one of the language units that express human emotions - phraseological expressions in English and some of their ways of describing the negative mentality of people. Any change in the human psyche, in particular, such as sadness, joy, fear, is first felt in the internal experiences of people, that is, internally, and then it is reflected in the external appearance of a person. For example, his knees tremble from fear, his color turns pale, he blushes from shame, he becomes depressed. Therefore, there are several means of expressing them in the language, and there are oppositional relations between such language units, and it is advisable to study them, always distinguishing them from each other. Similarly, the group of language units expressing human emotions is divided into lexical-semantic types expressing positive and negative emotions. Due to the fact that there are common semantic features that unite them, there is a possibility to call these features with a single word, such as mental image. If the separated lexical-semantic groups are part of another large group, it is natural that they have two or more common semantic features. Consequently, for words in the lexical-semantic group of negative emotion, the generalization of semantic features such as emotionality and negativity is equally appropriate. Just as the lexical units representing the mental state make up the majority of the language, there are countless such units among the phraseological units. However, they are distinguished from other lexical units by their specific characteristics. For example: In English, zoosemism "sheep" expresses negative 203 AMERICAN Journal of Language, Literacy and Learning in STEM Education www. grnjournal.us meanings such as "ignorant", "foolish": 1) Resembling sheep or their characteristics; 2) meek, innocent, simple, silly; 3) bashful or awkward in the presence of others. The term ―black sheep‖ has a very strong negative connotation. In Uzbek language, the character of the lexeme "sheep" is used to strengthen positive meanings such as "soft", "lamblike", "believer"). Zoosemism "sheep" has a positive meaning in Uzbek and a negative meaning in English. However, sometimes the lexeme "sheep" in the Uzbek language means "very gullible", "very naive", "so naive that he gives the bread in his mouth to others" can express negative meanings. From this point of view, it is appropriate to include this zoosemism in a partially compatible group. The evaluative component or lexical-semantic variant of the lexical meaning of a word is usually perceived as a positive and negative meaning. In linguistics, the positive meaning of a lexical unit is called ameliorative, and the negative meaning is derogative or pejorative. The evaluative attitude of the speaker towards the subject can vary from simple neutral to positive and negative. The positive-negative attitude of the subject is different from the approving-disapproving attitude towards the signs and qualities of the object, while the neutral attitude expresses indifference. This feature of the lexical meaning of the word can be interpreted as a three-element system: +, 0, -. In this case, the O (zero) component also acts as an evaluative indicator. Therefore, it is possible to think about the neutral component of the lexical meaning of the word. This sign, which expresses the indifferent attitude of the speaker towards the object, is considered a semantic component of the meaning of the word and acts as a basic sign used to express a positive or negative attitude to the subject in various communicative situations. According to I.A.Sternin, the existence of a neutral evaluative component in the lexical meaning of a word can be explained by the presence of special words expressing such a zero-valued evaluative meaning in the system of different languages. In addition to the words that explicitly express the evaluative component in word semantics, there are also words that implicitly express the evaluation. Such implicitness is clearly visible when comparing such words with their component synonyms that evaluate positively and negatively. For example, in English infant (O) - kid(+), offspring (-); rebyonok(0), detka(+), otrode(-); child(0), boy(+), pet(-); face(0), image(+), face(0), face(+), aft, bashara(-). Various suffixes added to the base of the word can also give it the characteristic of a positive, negative, neutral evaluative component. For example, in English child –laddie, bola(0) –laddie(+). As can be seen from the examples, the evaluative components in languages of different systems are expressed using different morphemes. Any lexical unit used in the speech process, regardless of whether they are predicative or subject words, have a positive or negative semantic meaning and have a certain evaluative charge. In this case, the zero charge occasionally acts as a basis for positive or negative evaluation. Positive, negative, neutral relations of the subject, linguistic collective, social group are based on predicative personal names with evaluative signs. A positive or negative evaluative component in the meaning of a lexical unit can be different in essence. Its semantic specificity depends on the character of the evaluative qualifications. From this point of view, lexical units evaluating the predicative negative characteristics of a person can be divided into the following types: 1. Lexical units related to the negative evaluation of the referent based on social origin according to its intellectual and logical characteristics: English: Uzbek: thief; O‗g‘ri traitor; sotqin, xiyonatkor; Liar Aldamchi Criminal Jinoyatchi 2. Negative evaluative lexical units used in more colloquial speech, aimed at exaggerating qualities that are not characteristic of the subject due to emotions and mental experiences: 204 AMERICAN Journal of Language, Literacy and Learning in STEM Education www. grnjournal.us English: Uzbek: scoundrel razil, qabih, yaramas, ablah, nobakor hangeron, stooge qurimsoq twaddler mahmadona, vaysaqi blockhead kaltafahm greedy-guts ziqna, xasis It is worth noting that the evaluative classification of lexical units into three types is based on language norms formed in national, social groups and thus expresses the subject's belonging to different political and social groups. Belonging to a social group of the evaluative component of the lexical unit leads to the use of the evaluative scale in different evaluative meanings. So, all the national-cultural features of the English people are expressed in the semantic structure of the word. The strong expression of a person's beauty or ugliness, happy and sad states directly depends on extralinguistic factors. References 1. Ashurova D.U. Stilistika i lingvokulturologiya // Til va milliy madaniyat. Samarqand davlat chet tillar institutining 10 yilligi yubileyiga bag‗ishlab o‗tkazilgan xalqaro ilmiy-nazariy konferensiya materiallari. - Samarqand, 2004. - S. 204-206. 2. Бабушкин А.П. Консепты разных типов в лекцике и фразеологии и методика их выявления // Методологические проблемы когнитивной лингвистики. Воронеж, 2001. С. 52–58. 3. Беляевская Э.Г. Семантика слова: Учебн. Пособие. – М.: Всшая школа, 1987. – 128с. 4. Воркачев С. Г. Лингвоконсептология и межкултурная коммуникация: истоки и сели // Филологические науки, 2005. – №4. 5. Воробёв В.В. Лингвокультурологическая парадиг-ма личности. - М., Рос. Ун -т. Дружбы Народов, 1-996. - 170 с. 6. Гак В.Г. Новый большой французско-русский фразеологический словарь. — М., 2005. — 1625 с. 7. Карасик В.И. О категориях лингвокультурологии // Языковая личность: проблемы коммуникативной деятельности. - Волгоград: Изд - во ВГПИ, 2001. - С. 3 -16. 8. Iminova, S. B. B. (2022). Ingliz Va O‘zbek Tillarida Inson Feʼl-Atvorini Ifodalovchi Birliklarning Leksik-Semantik Maydoni. Zamonaviy Taraqqiyotda Ilm-fan va Madaniyatning o ‗rni, 2(24), 8-11. 9. Нортоева Угилой Махаматалиевна (2023). Приемы Воссоздания Национально- Культурного Колорита В Переводе (На Материале Перевода Романа Джейна Остина «Гордость И Предубеждение»). European Journal Of Literature And Linguistics, (1), 49- 54. 10. Абдувалиев, М. А. (2023). Концептлар Тадқиқида Лингвистик Контекстнинг Ўрни. Международный Журнал Искусство Слова, 6(1).