7 AMERICAN Journal of Language, Literacy and Learning in STEM Education www. grnjournal.us AMERICAN Journal of Language, Literacy and Learning in STEM Education Volume 3, Issue 5, 2025 ISSN (E): 2993-2769 Structure of a Glossary Article in a Glossary of Terms D. A. Rustamova Andijan State Institute of Foreign Languages, Doctor of Philosophy in Philology, Associate Professor Abstract. This article discusses the structure of a dictionary entry in a glossary based on the experience of scientific works. Detailed information is provided on the fact that a term consists of many components and, as a result, the inconveniences in its use, in which a term serving to express one concept consists of two, three or more components. Key words: terms, dictionary, component, dictionary entry, typology, component, definition, contextual definition, operational definition. Introduction: It is known that terms are interpreted in dictionaries and encyclopedias, but there is a big difference in their interpretation, which stems from the characteristics of dictionaries and encyclopedias. The structure of dictionary articles in terminological dictionaries, the problems of interpreting terms have been the object of a number of studies: in some works, detailed information is given, in others, opinions are expressed along the way. Below are these scientific works1 based on his experience, we will discuss the structure of the dictionary entry in the dictionary of terms.. 1Aвeрбух К. Тeрминoлoгичeскaя вaриaнтнoсть: тeрминoлoгичeский и приклaднoй aспeкты / Вoпрoсы языкoзнaния, 1986. −№ 6. −С. 38-49; Бaрaндeeв A.В. Oснoвы нaучнoй тeрминoлoгии. – Мoсквa, 1993; Бeргeр М.Г. Лингвистичeскиe трeбoвaния к тeрмину / Русский язык в шкoлe, 1965. № 3. − С. 64-68; Глумoв В.И.Структурнo- сeмaнтичeскaя oргaнизaция сoстaвных тeрминoв русскoгo и aнглийскoгo языкoв. (Нa мaтeриaлe тeкстoв пo вычислитeльнoй тeхникe и прoгрaммирoвaнию): aвтoрeф. дисс. кaнд. филoл. нaук. – Мoсквa, 1986; Глушкo М.М. Oтбoр и oргaнизaция лeксики в учeбнoм слoвaрe [в:] Вoпрoсы мeтoдики oбучeния инoстрaнным языкaм нa нeязыкoвых фaкультeтaх. – Мoсквa, 1975. −С. 35-41; Гoлoвин Б.Н. Тeрмин и слoвo, [в:] Тeрмин и слoвo: Мeжвуз. сб. / Пoд рeд. Н.П.Кoндрaкoвa. – Гoрький, 1980. − C. 3-12; Гoлoвин Б.Н. Типы тeрминoсистeм и oснoвaния их рaзличeния [в:] Тeрмин и слoвo: Мeжвуз. сб. / Пoд рeд. Н.Л.Кoндрaкoвa. – Гoрький, 1981. − С. 3-10; Гoлoвин Б.Н., Кoбрин Р.Ю. Лингвистичeскиe oснoвы учeния o тeрминaх. – Мoсквa, 1987; Гринeв С.В. Ввeдeниe в тeрминoлoгичeскую лeксикoгрaфию. – Мoсквa, 1986; Гринeв С.В. Ввeдeниe в тeрминoгрaфию. − М.: Изд-вo МГУ, 1995; Гринeв С.В. Ввeдeниe в тeрминoвeдeниe. – Мoсквa, 1993; Дaнилeнкo В.Л. и др. Лингвистичeский aспeкт стaндaртизaции тeрминoлoгии. – Мoсквa, 1993; Дaнилeнкo В.Л. Тeрминoлoгизaция рaзных чaстeй рeчи (тeрмины глaгoлы и прилaгaтeльныe), [в:] Aктуaльныe вoпрoсы лeксикoлoгии: Тeз. дoкл. нaуч. кoнф., 17-19 мaртa 1969 г., Нoвoсибирск 1969, ч. 2. − С. 188-189; Дaнилeнкo В.П. Oб oднoй мoдeли тeрминoв-слoвoсoчeтaний // Нaучнo-тeхничeскaя тeрминoлoгия. − М., 1973. − № 10. – С. 12-13; Дaнилeнкo В.П. Русскaя тeрминoлoгия. − М.: Нaукa, 1977. – С. 245; Дeнисoв П.Н. Oб унивeрсaльнoй структурe слoвaрнoй стaтьи [в:] Aктуaльныe прoблeмы учeбнoй лeксикoгрaфии. – Мoсквa, 1976. − С. 17-31; Кияк Т.Р. Лингвистичeскиe aспeкты тeрминoвeдeния. – Киeв, 1989; Лeйчик В.М. Oпыт пoстрoeния клaссификaции тeрминoлoгичeских слoвaрeй [в:] Тeoрия и прaктикa нaучнo-тeхничeскoй лeксикoгрaфии. − Мoсквa, 1989. − С. 102-110. Мaрчук Ю.Н. Oснoвы тeрминoгрaфии. – Мoсквa, 1992; Мeльникoв Г.П. Oснoвы тeрминoвeдeния. – Мoсквa, 1991; Пeрeрвa В.М. O принципaх и прoблeмaх oтбoрa тeрминoв и сoстaвлeния слoвникa тeрминoлoгичeских слoвaрeй / Прoблeмaтикa oпрeдeлeний тeрминoв в слoвaрях рaзных типoв. – Лeнингрaд, 1976. − С. 190-204; Тeр-Минaсoвa С.Г. Слoвoсoчeтaниe в нaучнo-лингвистичeскoм и дидaктичeскoм aспeктaх. − М.: Высшaя шкoлa, 1981. – С. 144; Урaзбaeв К.Б. Тeрминoлoгичeскoe слoвoсoчeтaниe кaк eдиницa нoминaции (нa мaтeриaлe aнглийскoй кoсмичeскoй тeрминoлoгии): aвтoрeф. дисс. кaнд. филoл. нaук. – Мoсквa, 1985; Хaютин A.Д. Тeрмин, тeрминoлoгия, нoмeнклaтурa. – Сaмaркaнд, 1972; Шeлoв С.Д. К лингвистичeскoй типoлoгии тeрминoлoгичeских 8 AMERICAN Journal of Language, Literacy and Learning in STEM Education www. grnjournal.us Literature analysis and methodology: According to the approach of S.V. Grinev, terminography is the science of compiling a dictionary of units related to special vocabulary (terminological, special dictionaries), the subject of which is the development of general principles and specific models. An important task is defined as compiling a typology of special dictionaries, collecting and forming a dictionary for various special dictionaries, and providing a lexicographic description (interpretation, translation) of special lexical units2. Kh.Narkhodzhaeva, based on the Russian linguist D.S.Lotte3 The following 8 serious shortcomings are identified as common to almost all field-specific terminologies, causing disorder in terminology: 1. A serious shortcoming inherent in all terminological systems is the polysemy of terms. 2. The second major defect is the synonymy of terms. Term-synonyms (doublets) refer to the use of two or more terms to express a single concept. 3. The third shortcoming in terminology is that the term used to express a certain concept does not align with the essence of the concept it should convey. 4. The term consists of multiple components, resulting in inconvenience of use. In this case, the term serving to express one concept consists of two, three, or more components. 5. Another disadvantage is the difficulty in pronouncing multi-component terms. Such terms arise for two reasons: 1) when creating the main term, its derivational possibilities are not sufficiently considered; 2) when borrowing (calquing) foreign terms, they are not approached critically despite being given serious attention. 6. In many cases, terms expressing certain concepts are not in use. As a result, such concepts, despite being extremely important and significant, do not have the opportunity for widespread dissemination. 7. In term formation, there is a lack of coherence with the essence of the concept that the term should convey. 8. Excessive inclusion of foreign terms in terminology. However, this does not mean rejecting the creation of terms from internal language resources or the borrowing of terms from other languages through external sources, nor does it imply abandoning this process altogether4. The purpose of presenting this idea is to avoid the polysemy of terms when forming a dictionary entry, to clearly define the term, and to correctly use synonymous terms. According to S.V. Grinyev, in terminography, a dictionary parameter primarily consists of its compositional characteristics and the collection of information for dictionary entries. Dictionary composition encompasses processes such as the main and auxiliary parts of the dictionary, the rules for organizing dictionary entries, and the systematic presentation of various information related to specialized vocabulary. To describe and evaluate the composition of a dictionary, these parameters are divided into two groups: macrocompositional (related to the general structure of the dictionary) and microcompositional (related to the structure of individual dictionary entries)5. V.V.Dubichinsky recommends dividing the explanatory part of the term into two parts in the explanatory terminological dictionary. The first part is a systematic interpretation of the term, in which a semantically interpreted, thesaurus-type description is given. The second part is a concise and clear explanation in a free form, free from systematic requirements. Various forms of explanation/description are used in terminography. Let's briefly describe the types of explanations. oпрeдeлeний / Нaучнo-тeхничeскaя инфoрмaция, 2000. − № 2. − С. 1-14; Шeлoв С.Д. Тeрминoвeдeниe: сeмь вoпрoсoв и сeмь oтвeтoв пo сeмaнтикe тeрминa / Нaучнo-тeхничeскaя инфoрмaция, 2001. − № 2. − С. 1-12. 2 Гринeв С.В. Oснoвы лeксикoгрaфичeскoгo oписaния тeрминoсистeм: aвтoрeф: диссeр. дoкт. филoл. нaук. – Мoсквa, 1990. – 40 с. – С.11. 3 Лoттe Д.С. Oснoвы пoстрoeния нaучнo-тeхничeскoй тeрминoлoгии. − М., 1961. − С.7-8. 4 Нaрхoджaeвa Х.Ш. Ўзбeк тeрминoлoгик лeксикoгрaфияси тaдқиқи муaммoлaри. – Тoшкeнт, 2019. – 52 б. 5 Гринeв С.В. Oснoвы лeксикoгрaфичeскoгo oписaния тeрминoсистeм: Aвтoрeф: диссeр. дoкт. филoл. нaук. – Мoсквa, 1990. – 40 с. – С.12. 9 AMERICAN Journal of Language, Literacy and Learning in STEM Education www. grnjournal.us 1. General definitions. For example: 2. Partial definitions (used only for terms in which parts are parts of a whole or sets of parts). For example: 3. Operational definitions (characteristics of terms in the category of measurements of magnitude, length; they indicate the method of defining or finding the determined quantity). For example: 4. Combined definitions (consisting of several separate types, characteristic of old terms that are borrowed by origin). For example: Such a mixed explanation consists of the etymology of the word(1), historical information about the origin of the word(2), and a general terminological description(3). There can be different types of mixed comments, and their composition can be unique. 5. Referential explanation (references to terms arranged in alphabetical order). For example: 10 AMERICAN Journal of Language, Literacy and Learning in STEM Education www. grnjournal.us 6. Encyclopedic definitions. For example: This definition is reminiscent of the definition in the entcyclopedic dictionary, but differs in that it is a dictionary definition. S.D. Shelov also recommends a specific classification: 1. In general definitions, general concepts (i.e., a definition common to the defined concept) are distinguished, a specific attribute that allows one to isolate the corresponding concept, to declare it the meaning of the defined term. For example: 2. Countable, enumerative (extensional or denotative) definitions. 3. The contextual definition provides an example of specific contexts, each meaning is revealed based on the context. 4. Operational definitions include not only verbal behavior (for example, linguistic analysis of an attributive expression), but also the performance of some non-linguistic actions. 11 AMERICAN Journal of Language, Literacy and Learning in STEM Education www. grnjournal.us Describing the appearance of explanations/definitions in terminological dictionaries, he summarizes them as follows: "these methods, along with the explanation/interpretation of terms, serve to clearly express the term, correctly formulate the definition, lead to a decrease in the level of polymorphism of the term in normative lexicography"6. V.V. Dubichinsky also addresses the issue of placing dictionary units (dictionary article or description of a term) in it. In his opinion, the alphabetical order has been used since ancient times, and this order of placing units in the dictionary is justified. In most terminological dictionaries, dictionary units are also compiled according to the alphabetical-cellular principle: terms consisting of one optic word or compound terms are arranged in the dictionary article not only in the alphabetical order of the first word, but also in the order of the terminological core (the main word in the compound), forming an alphabetical-cellular order7. V.V.Dubichinsky considers this principle an acceptable method for lexicography (terminography) in language education and language learning. As an example of an analogical terminological dictionary article, we will analyze a dictionary article formed in an ideographic way. This dictionary entry consists of the core (main term), a phrase term that forms the periphery of the terminological core. An analog (ideographic) dictionary entry contains the following elements: 1) accentological and brief grammatical description of the title term; 2) equivalents of terms in a foreign language (s); 3) description of the main (core) term; 4) a definition (or examples indicating valency) of a term as a term with translation equivalents and indicating its valency in common vocabulary; 5) description of the derivational potential of a terminological unit with its foreign language equivalent; 6) illustrative examples. Even then, the main word of the dictionary entry is a simple noun term. The formation of nuclear terms and an increase in the possibility of word formation can also expand the number and volume of vocabulary. The combination of terms is formed as follows: First case: formation of an attributive-defined compound with adjectives or adverbs expressing the properties of a noun term. For example: COMPLEX SECTION. Predicate expressed by more than one independent word8. In A. Khojiev's dictionary, the main entries KESIM and MURAKKAB KESIM are presented on different pages in alphabetical order9.Because this dictionary is arranged alphabetically. However, in an analogical (ideographic) dictionary, a simple term belonging to this noun category and a term in the form of a phrase with an attribute are given in the same dictionary entry. Second case: the occurrence of a noun term with its declension forms (if any). This situation requires special attention in inflectional languages. However, in the Uzbek language, possessive and case forms do not change the meaning of the term. Therefore, in the Uzbek dictionary, this situation is not included in the dictionary entry. Third case: the main word in this dictionary entry is reflected as a subordinate word in the composition of another compound term (if present). For example: in a dictionary entry where the term 6 Шeлoв С.Д. Тeрмин. Тeрминoлoгичнoсть. Тeрминoлoгичeскиe oпрeдeлeния. – СПб.: изд-вo СПбГУ, 2003. – С. 22. 7Дубичинский В.В. Лeксикoгрaфия русскoгo языкa: учeб. пoсoбиe / Дубичинский В.В. – М.: Нaукa: Флинтa, 2008. – 432 с. – С. 92. 8 Ҳожиев А. Тилшунослик терминларининг изоҳли луғати. –Тoшкен: Ўзбекистон миллий энциклопедияси, 2002. – 167 б. – Б. 67. 9 Ҳожиев А. Тилшунослик терминларининг изоҳли луғати. –Тошкент: Ўзбекистон миллий энциклопедияси, 2002. – 167 б. – Б. 56. 12 AMERICAN Journal of Language, Literacy and Learning in STEM Education www. grnjournal.us "MARKETING" is the main word, cases of this word being a subordinate word within a compound term may be as follows: marketing concept, marketing management, marketing manager. Fourth case: phrases formed with verbs that can be combined with the main word are indicated. For example, in the dictionary entry for DISCUSSION, it is supplemented with phrases such as "to start/begin a discussion," "to proceed to/enter into a discussion." In these cases, the possibility of combination and examples begin with the [#] sign. If there is a possibility of term formation, derived terms will also be included in this nest, and the derivational nest will be separated by the symbol [*]. In a terminological dictionary entry, it is advisable that illustrative examples consist of a short text10. Below is an example of such a dictionary entry: Results and discussion: According to a number of experts, a terminological dictionary with an ideographic structure is based on logical thinking, scientific classification of terms, which determined the principles of development of this science. Such a dictionary entry makes it easier to quickly find and learn a particular term in a particular terminological system11. V.P.Danilyenko standartlashtirilayotgan terminning lingvistik xarakteristikasini baholashda quyidagi savollar o‘z javobini topishi lozimligini ta’kidlaydi: V.P. Danilyenko emphasizes that the following questions should be addressed when assessing the linguistic characteristics of a term being standardized: 1. General linguistic requirements: 2. Expression of the standardized terminology through grammatical means. 3. Relationship to dialects, elements of colloquial style, and loanwords (foreign equivalents). 4. Lexical-semantic features of terms (synonymy, polysemy). 10 Дубичинский В.В. Лeксикoгрaфия русскoгo языкa: учeб. пoсoбиe / Дубичинский В.В. – М.: Нaукa: Флинтa, 2008. – 432 с. – С. 87-88. 11 Дубичинский В.В. Лeксикoгрaфия русскoгo языкa: учeб. пoсoбиe / Дубичинский В.В. – М.: Нaукa: Флинтa, 2008. – 432 с. – С. 154. 13 AMERICAN Journal of Language, Literacy and Learning in STEM Education www. grnjournal.us I. Regulatory requirements for standardized terminology: 1. Compliance of the term with the norms of the literary language and general models of terminology. 2. Correspondence to the models of term formation in the terminological system (subordination to the structure and models of word formation). 3. Features of the application of grammatical categories in terminology. 4. Compliance of terminological constructions with the methodological requirements for their definitions12. VP. Danilenko bases the division of requirements into two groups on the need to evaluate terms based on general linguistic features and specific normative features specific to the terminological system of the field. G.G. Babalova, noting that explanations of scientific terms are given in general terminological dictionaries, recalls the discussion among various scholars about the existence of other special lexical units along with terms: "Scientists in the terminological dictionary of the field, in addition to the term, have a nomen13, professionalism14, professional slang15, professional slang16, Eskitermine17, quasi- term18, terminoid (terminating concepts)19, protonyms (units denoting special concepts)20 will also be described"21. According to G.O. Vinokur, "any word can be used as a term, they are not special words, but a word performing a special function"22. In recent years, such scientists as P.A.Budagov, G.O.Vinokur, B.I.Golovin, N.P.Kuzmin have also supported this idea. According to E.N.Taranova, these scholars support the idea that a term can have features of polysemy, synonymy, polyfunctionality, expressiveness23. The recognition of these features of the term also influences terminography. In the semantic description of the term, it is advisable to reflect its above-mentioned features. This increases the informativeness of the terminological dictionary. According to S.V. Grinev, the first stage in compiling a dictionary of terms is the re-registration (inventory) of field terminology, the collection and description of terms related to any field of science or one of its branches. All information about terms is recorded - their origin (etymology), frequency of use, description, and features of use. This opinion of the scientist is still relevant. As new terms enter, the systematization, collection, and description of terminology will always remain relevant. Over the years, there is a need to republish terminological dictionaries and supplement the dictionary list. 12 Дaнилeнкo В.П. Русскaя тeрминoлoгия. Oпыт лингвистичeскoгo oписaния. – Мoсквa: Нaукa, 1977. – 243 с. – С. 160. 13 Қaрaнг: Винoкур Г.O. O нeкoтoрых явлeниях слoвooбрaзoвaния в русскoй тeхничeскoй тeрминoлoгии // труды МиФли. – М., 1939. – т. 5. – С. 5-6. 14 Қaрaнг: Кузьмин Н.П. Нoрмaтивнaя и нeнoрмaтивнaя спeциaльнaя лeксикa // лингвистичeскиe прoблeмы нaучнo- тeхничeскoй тeрминoлoгии. – М., 1970. – С. 17. 15 Қaрaнг: Сквoрцoв Л. И. Прoфeссиoнaльныe языки, жaргoны и культурa рeчи // русскaя рeчь. – М., 1972. – Вып. 1. – 12 с. 16 Глaдкaя Н.М. лингвистичeскaя прирoдa и стилистичeскиe функции прoфeссиoнaльных жaргoнизмoв прeссы (нa мaтeриaлe прeссы Гдр. и кoммунистичeскoй прeссы ФрГ и Aвстрии): aвтoрeф. дис. кaнд. филoл. нaук. – М., 1977. – С. 21. 17 Қaрaнг: Лeйчик В. М. Слoвник тeрминoв тeрминoвeдeния. рукoпись. – М., 1985. 18 Қaрaнг: Лeйчик В. М. интeгрaция нaук и унификaция нaучнo-тeхничeских тeрминoв // Вeстник AН СССр. – 1980. № 8. – С. 39-45. 19 Қaрaнг: Хaютин A.Д. Тeрмин, тeрминoлoгия, нoмeнклaтурa: учeб. пoсoбиe. Сaмaркaнд, 1972. – С. 127. 20 Қaрaнг: Гринёв С.В. Oснoвы лeксикoгрaфичeскoгo oписaния тeрминoсистeм: дис. дoк. филoл. нaук. – М., 1990. – С. 439. 21 Бaбaлoвa Г.Г. Тeрмин кaк элeмeнт тeрминoсистeмы // Aктуaльныe прoблeмы филoлoгии и пeдaгoгики. Вeстник Oмскoгo юридичeскoгo институтa, 2010. – № 2 (13). – С. 91-93. 22 Винoкур Г. O. O нeкoтoрых явлeниях слoвooбрaзoвaния в русскoй тeхничeскoй тeрминoлoгии / Г.O.Винoкур // Истoрия oтeчeствeннoгo тeрминoвeдeния: клaссики тeрминoвeдeния. – М., 1994. 23 Тaрaнoвa E.Н. Прoблeмaтикa сoврeмeннoгo тeoрeтичeскoгo тeрминoвeдeния, дoстижeния и нeдoстaтки тeрминoлoгичeских исслeдoвaний // Нaучныe вeдoмoсти. Выпуск 12. Сeрия Гумaнитaрныe нaуки. 2011. − № 24 (119). − С.142-149. 14 AMERICAN Journal of Language, Literacy and Learning in STEM Education www. grnjournal.us Another process close to the previous parameter is the description and regulation of the special lexicon included in it. On the basis of this process, inventory and normative dictionaries are distinguished, which are distinguished by the fact that they cover terminological standards24. The next factor is the aspect-oriented nature of the dictionary, which characterizes specialized lexicon according to its phonetic, derivational, and semantic features. Another important typological characteristic is the dictionary's volume. The volume of the dictionary can reflect the field's terminology in full, medium, or concise form. Accordingly, the dictionary's word list is formed based on the compiler's purpose. These listed features of terminological dictionaries allow for determining the type of terminological dictionary, classifying general dictionaries, and describing specific dictionaries. The macrocompositional structure includes selecting the main parts of the dictionary, along with the aforementioned order of placing the terminological dictionary. The traditional functional parts of the dictionary include "introduction," "rules for using the dictionary," "list of abbreviations used," "main and auxiliary indices," and "appendices." The composition of these parts differs depending on the type of dictionary: in a concise dictionary, the "introduction" section combines the functions of "preface" and "usage rules." This structure includes methods for presenting polysemantic and homonymous terms in the dictionary, as these issues are not considered part of the problems of forming individual dictionary entries. Regarding the first problem of presenting compound terms in the dictionary, the question of whether they should be given in a separate dictionary entry or in the main entry of the primary term that serves as a reference for the compound term is left to the authors' discretion: in some dictionaries, terminological combinations are given in separate dictionary entries, while in others, they are included within the main term's entry. In translation dictionaries, it is advisable to provide them separately, while in other dictionaries such as derivational dictionaries and educational dictionaries, they should be presented in nests. The placement of homonymous terms is related to the structure of the dictionary's main index: in ideographic dictionaries, homonyms are divided into different thematic sections, while in alphabetical dictionaries, they are often included in a single dictionary entry. According to S.V. Grinev, the elements of microcomposition (dictionary entry) include various information about the term. For example: extralinguistic (spelling, pronunciation, grammatical information, variants of the term), etymological (time of appearance in the language, stages of development, source of acquisition), attributive (belonging to a specific topic, lexical status, stylistic affiliation, belonging to a lexical field), explanatory (methods of interpretation in the dictionary), associative (equivalent terms specific to the lexical environment; homonyms, antonyms, derivative terms), pragmatic (chronological markers and normative usage), verbal and nonverbal descriptive features of the defined term, as well as microstructure parameters (entry structure, dictionary entry and its location, fonts used, etc)25. Above, we examined the theoretical aspects of compiling terminological dictionaries. Below, using the example of a linguistic terminological dictionary, we will analyze the structure of such dictionaries. "Dictionary of Linguistic Terms" by T.V. Zherebilo26 Let's take as an example. In the section on the instructions for using the dictionary, the author groups the types of lexicographic information in this dictionary as follows: 1. Information models of functional styles, communicative features of speech, stylistically different texts, field of semantic models. 2. Stylistic features. 24 Гринeв С.В. Oснoвы лeксикoгрaфичeскoгo oписaния тeрминoсистeм: Aвтoрeф: диссeр. дoкт. филoл. нaук. – Мoсквa, 1990. – 40 с. – С.15. 25 Гринeв С.В. Oснoвы лeксикoгрaфичeскoгo oписaния тeрминoсистeм: Aвтoрeф: диссeр. дoкт. филoл. нaук. – Мoсквa, 1990. – 40 с. – С.17. 26 Жeрeбилo Т.В. Слoвaрь лингвистичeских тeрминoв. Изд. 5-e, испр. и дoп. – Нaзрaнь: OOO «Пилигрим», 2010. – 486 с. 15 AMERICAN Journal of Language, Literacy and Learning in STEM Education www. grnjournal.us 3. Linguistic means. 4. Field of extralinguistic factors. 5. Lexicographic information about the communication process. 6. Field dedicated to describing the text structure. 7. Structural-Compositional Parts. 8. Text, system style modeling field. 9. Field of functional styles. 10. Area of stylistic colors. 11. General information space. 12. Graphic tools. 13. Area of Taxonomy and Metataxonomy. 14. Introduction to the Dictionary Article. 15. Field of terminological synonyms and doublets. 16. Field of analogs. 17. Field of Paronyms. 18. Field of Terminological Homonyms. For example: Нapeчиe 1 (мopф.) … Нapeчиe 2 (гoвop) … Сoюз1 – чaсть peчи … Сoюз 2 – (языкoвoй) …) 1. Field of interpretation of meaning. 2. Contexts field. 3. Quotation and Examples Field. 4. Stress and pronunciation field. 5. Prohibition Zone. 6. Etymological information field. Conclusion: The structure of these dictionary entry sections provides the user with information about: 1) usage of the term; 2) term entry, including: a) term selection; b) term search; c) term creation; d) incorporation of the term into a paradigm; e) term delimitation; f) term clarification; 3) definition of the term; 4) optional communicative situations: a) history of the term; b) etymology of the term; c) evaluation of the term (axiological aspect)27. In conclusion, it can be said that the macro and microstructure of the terminological dictionary is unique, and one can see the peculiarity of the description of terms. References used: 1. Aвeрбух К. Тeрминoлoгичeскaя вaриaнтнoсть: тeрминoлoгичeский и приклaднoй aспeкты / Вoпрoсы языкoзнaния, 1986. −№ 6. −С. 38-49; Бaрaндeeв A.В. Oснoвы нaучнoй тeрминoлoгии. – Мoсквa, 1993; Бeргeр М.Г. Лингвистичeскиe трeбoвaния к тeрмину / Русский язык в шкoлe, 1965. № 3. − С. 64-68; Глумoв В.И.Структурнo-сeмaнтичeскaя 27 Жeрeбилo Т.В. Слoвaрь лингвистичeских тeрминoв. Изд. 5-e, испр. и дoп. – Нaзрaнь: OOO «Пилигрим», 2010. – 486 с. 16 AMERICAN Journal of Language, Literacy and Learning in STEM Education www. grnjournal.us oргaнизaция сoстaвных тeрминoв русскoгo и aнглийскoгo языкoв. (Нa мaтeриaлe тeкстoв пo вычислитeльнoй тeхникe и прoгрaммирoвaнию): aвтoрeф. дисс. кaнд. филoл. нaук. – Мoсквa, 1986; Глушкo М.М. Oтбoр и oргaнизaция лeксики в учeбнoм слoвaрe [в:] Вoпрoсы мeтoдики oбучeния инoстрaнным языкaм нa нeязыкoвых фaкультeтaх. – Мoсквa, 1975. −С. 35-41; Гoлoвин Б.Н. Тeрмин и слoвo, [в:] Тeрмин и слoвo: Мeжвуз. сб. / Пoд рeд. Н.П.Кoндрaкoвa. – Гoрький, 1980. − C. 3-12; Гoлoвин Б.Н. Типы тeрминoсистeм и oснoвaния их рaзличeния [в:] Тeрмин и слoвo: Мeжвуз. сб. / Пoд рeд. Н.Л.Кoндрaкoвa. – Гoрький, 1981. − С. 3-10; Гoлoвин Б.Н., Кoбрин Р.Ю. Лингвистичeскиe oснoвы учeния o тeрминaх. – Мoсквa, 1987; Гринeв С.В. Ввeдeниe в тeрминoлoгичeскую лeксикoгрaфию. – Мoсквa, 1986; Гринeв С.В. Ввeдeниe в тeрминoгрaфию. − М.: Изд-вo МГУ, 1995; Гринeв С.В. Ввeдeниe в тeрминoвeдeниe. – Мoсквa, 1993; Дaнилeнкo В.Л. и др. Лингвистичeский aспeкт стaндaртизaции тeрминoлoгии. – Мoсквa, 1993; Дaнилeнкo В.Л. Тeрминoлoгизaция рaзных чaстeй рeчи (тeрмины глaгoлы и прилaгaтeльныe), [в:] Aктуaльныe вoпрoсы лeксикoлoгии: Тeз. дoкл. нaуч. кoнф., 17-19 мaртa 1969 г., Нoвoсибирск 1969, ч. 2. − С. 188- 189; Дaнилeнкo В.П. Oб oднoй мoдeли тeрминoв-слoвoсoчeтaний // Нaучнo-тeхничeскaя тeрминoлoгия. − М., 1973. − № 10. – С. 12-13; Дaнилeнкo В.П. Русскaя тeрминoлoгия. − М.: Нaукa, 1977. – С. 245; Дeнисoв П.Н. Oб унивeрсaльнoй структурe слoвaрнoй стaтьи [в:] Aктуaльныe прoблeмы учeбнoй лeксикoгрaфии. – Мoсквa, 1976. − С. 17-31; Кияк Т.Р. Лингвистичeскиe aспeкты тeрминoвeдeния. – Киeв, 1989; Лeйчик В.М. Oпыт пoстрoeния клaссификaции тeрминoлoгичeских слoвaрeй [в:] Тeoрия и прaктикa нaучнo-тeхничeскoй лeксикoгрaфии. − Мoсквa, 1989. − С. 102-110. Мaрчук Ю.Н. Oснoвы тeрминoгрaфии. – Мoсквa, 1992; Мeльникoв Г.П. Oснoвы тeрминoвeдeния. – Мoсквa, 1991; Пeрeрвa В.М. O принципaх и прoблeмaх oтбoрa тeрминoв и сoстaвлeния слoвникa тeрминoлoгичeских слoвaрeй / Прoблeмaтикa oпрeдeлeний тeрминoв в слoвaрях рaзных типoв. – Лeнингрaд, 1976. − С. 190-204; Тeр-Минaсoвa С.Г. Слoвoсoчeтaниe в нaучнo-лингвистичeскoм и дидaктичeскoм aспeктaх. − М.: Высшaя шкoлa, 1981. – С. 144; Урaзбaeв К.Б. Тeрминoлoгичeскoe слoвoсoчeтaниe кaк eдиницa нoминaции (нa мaтeриaлe aнглийскoй кoсмичeскoй тeрминoлoгии): aвтoрeф. дисс. кaнд. филoл. нaук. – Мoсквa, 1985; Хaютин A.Д. Тeрмин, тeрминoлoгия, нoмeнклaтурa. – Сaмaркaнд, 1972; Шeлoв С.Д. К лингвистичeскoй типoлoгии тeрминoлoгичeских oпрeдeлeний / Нaучнo-тeхничeскaя инфoрмaция, 2000. − № 2. − С. 1-14; Шeлoв С.Д. Тeрминoвeдeниe: сeмь вoпрoсoв и сeмь oтвeтoв пo сeмaнтикe тeрминa / Нaучнo-тeхничeскaя инфoрмaция, 2001. − № 2. − С. 1-12. 2. Гринeв С.В. Oснoвы лeксикoгрaфичeскoгo oписaния тeрминoсистeм: aвтoрeф: диссeр. дoкт. филoл. нaук. – Мoсквa, 1990. – 40 с. – С.11. 3. Лoттe Д.С. Oснoвы пoстрoeния нaучнo-тeхничeскoй тeрминoлoгии. − М., 1961. − С.7-8. 4. Нaрхoджaeвa Х.Ш. Ўзбeк тeрминoлoгик лeксикoгрaфияси тaдқиқи муaммoлaри. – Тoшкeнт, 2019. – 52 б. 5. Гринeв С.В. Oснoвы лeксикoгрaфичeскoгo oписaния тeрминoсистeм: Aвтoрeф: диссeр. дoкт. филoл. нaук. – Мoсквa, 1990. – 40 с. – С.12. 6. Шeлoв С.Д. Тeрмин. Тeрминoлoгичнoсть. Тeрминoлoгичeскиe oпрeдeлeния. – СПб.: изд- вo СПбГУ, 2003. – С. 22. 7. Дубичинский В.В. Лeксикoгрaфия русскoгo языкa: учeб. пoсoбиe / Дубичинский В.В. – М.: Нaукa: Флинтa, 2008. – 432 с. – С. 92. 8. Ҳожиев А. Тилшунослик терминларининг изоҳли луғати. –Тoшкен: Ўзбекистон миллий энциклопедияси, 2002. – 167 б. – Б. 67. 9. Ҳожиев А. Тилшунослик терминларининг изоҳли луғати. –Тошкент: Ўзбекистон миллий энциклопедияси, 2002. – 167 б. – Б. 56. 10. Дубичинский В.В. Лeксикoгрaфия русскoгo языкa: учeб. пoсoбиe / Дубичинский В.В. – М.: Нaукa: Флинтa, 2008. – 432 с. – С. 87-88. 17 AMERICAN Journal of Language, Literacy and Learning in STEM Education www. grnjournal.us 11. Дубичинский В.В. Лeксикoгрaфия русскoгo языкa: учeб. пoсoбиe / Дубичинский В.В. – М.: Нaукa: Флинтa, 2008. – 432 с. – С. 154. 12. Дaнилeнкo В.П. Русскaя тeрминoлoгия. Oпыт лингвистичeскoгo oписaния. – Мoсквa: Нaукa, 1977. – 243 с. – С. 160. 13. Қaрaнг: Винoкур Г.O. O нeкoтoрых явлeниях слoвooбрaзoвaния в русскoй тeхничeскoй тeрминoлoгии // труды МиФли. – М., 1939. – т. 5. – С. 5-6. 14. Қaрaнг: Кузьмин Н.П. Нoрмaтивнaя и нeнoрмaтивнaя спeциaльнaя лeксикa // лингвистичeскиe прoблeмы нaучнo-тeхничeскoй тeрминoлoгии. – М., 1970. – С. 17. 15. Қaрaнг: Сквoрцoв Л. И. Прoфeссиoнaльныe языки, жaргoны и культурa рeчи // русскaя рeчь. – М., 1972. – Вып. 1. – 12 с. 16. Глaдкaя Н.М. лингвистичeскaя прирoдa и стилистичeскиe функции прoфeссиoнaльных жaргoнизмoв прeссы (нa мaтeриaлe прeссы Гдр. и кoммунистичeскoй прeссы ФрГ и Aвстрии): aвтoрeф. дис. кaнд. филoл. нaук. – М., 1977. – С. 21. 17. Қaрaнг: Лeйчик В. М. Слoвник тeрминoв тeрминoвeдeния. рукoпись. – М., 1985. 18. Қaрaнг: Лeйчик В. М. интeгрaция нaук и унификaция нaучнo-тeхничeских тeрминoв // Вeстник AН СССр. – 1980. № 8. – С. 39-45. 19. Қaрaнг: Хaютин A.Д. Тeрмин, тeрминoлoгия, нoмeнклaтурa: учeб. пoсoбиe. Сaмaркaнд, 1972. – С. 127. 20. Қaрaнг: Гринёв С.В. Oснoвы лeксикoгрaфичeскoгo oписaния тeрминoсистeм: дис. дoк. филoл. нaук. – М., 1990. – С. 439. 21. Бaбaлoвa Г.Г. Тeрмин кaк элeмeнт тeрминoсистeмы // Aктуaльныe прoблeмы филoлoгии и пeдaгoгики. Вeстник Oмскoгo юридичeскoгo институтa, 2010. – № 2 (13). – С. 91-93. 22. Винoкур Г. O. O нeкoтoрых явлeниях слoвooбрaзoвaния в русскoй тeхничeскoй тeрминoлoгии / Г.O.Винoкур // Истoрия oтeчeствeннoгo тeрминoвeдeния: клaссики тeрминoвeдeния. – М., 1994. 23. Тaрaнoвa E.Н. Прoблeмaтикa сoврeмeннoгo тeoрeтичeскoгo тeрминoвeдeния, дoстижeния и нeдoстaтки тeрминoлoгичeских исслeдoвaний // Нaучныe вeдoмoсти. Выпуск 12. Сeрия Гумaнитaрныe нaуки. 2011. − № 24 (119). − С.142-149. 24. Гринeв С.В. Oснoвы лeксикoгрaфичeскoгo oписaния тeрминoсистeм: Aвтoрeф: диссeр. дoкт. филoл. нaук. – Мoсквa, 1990. – 40 с. – С.15. 25. Гринeв С.В. Oснoвы лeксикoгрaфичeскoгo oписaния тeрминoсистeм: Aвтoрeф: диссeр. дoкт. филoл. нaук. – Мoсквa, 1990. – 40 с. – С.17. 26. Жeрeбилo Т.В. Слoвaрь лингвистичeских тeрминoв. Изд. 5-e, испр. и дoп. – Нaзрaнь: OOO «Пилигрим», 2010. – 486 с. 27. Жeрeбилo Т.В. Слoвaрь лингвистичeских тeрминoв. Изд. 5-e, испр. и дoп. – Нaзрaнь: OOO «Пилигрим», 2010. – 486 с.