O‘zmu xabarlari Вестник нууз acta nuuz

Discussion.
Naturally, researchers disagree on the 
concept of “proximity” and “identity” of meaning, as well as: 
- in establishing criteria for highlighting the synonymy 
of words: some take into account the correlation with the 
subject of speech5, others - correlate synonymy with the unity 
of the expressed concept6, others - consider the expression of 
different, but similar in meaning, concepts to be the main one. 
Despite a large number of studies on lexical synonymy, 
understanding the essence and boundaries of this phenomenon 
remains unclear. The variety of definitions of synonymy is 
explained by the peculiarities of the very subject of 
consideration, the presence of various types of semantic 
similarities and differences, which, accordingly, is reflected in 
various approaches. 
Thus, despite the close attention of structural-systemic 
linguistics to the problems of synonymy, there is no 
unambiguous answer to the questions about which units of the 
language are synonymous, what criteria are the basis for 
identifying synonymous rows and which word is considered 
dominant in a synonymous row - does not exist. Due to the 
fact that structural-system linguistics did not consider 
O‘ZBEKISTON MILLIY 
UNIVERSITETI
XABARLARI, 2023, [1/4/1]
ISSN 2181-7324 
 
FILOLOGIYA 
https://science.nuu.uz/
 
Social sciences 

---

O‘zMU xabarlari Вестник НУУз ACTA NUUz
 
FILOLOGIYA 
1/4/1 2023 
- 270 -
synonymy as a mental-linguistic category, but only as a purely 
linguistic phenomenon, studying synonyms in a language as a 
frozen system, an adequate definition of synonymy was not 
formulated that would correspond to their natural functioning 
in speech. 
The objectivist theory of knowledge assumes thinking 
with abstract symbols that get their meaning through 
correlation with entities and categories in the world, 
knowledge is presented as a correct, clear categorization and 
conceptualization of things and a reflection of the objective 
connections between these things. At the same time, the world 
is completely independent of the subject who knows it, it 
exists independently, regardless of human knowledge. 
Linguistic meanings are based on the correspondence between 
words and the world, either directly referring to the objects of 
reality, or through concepts as symbols used in thinking. 
Such an idea of the relationship between language and 
the world explains the attempt of linguists to create an ideal 
category, absolute, not allowing discrepancies, not allowing 
synonymy. The desire to present a language as a set of 
algorithmic rules and schemes, without resorting to any 
cognitive ability, seems implausible, since the language cannot 
ignore the general cognitive apparatus, and the mind and 
language cannot use different types of categorization. 
Therefore, the classical theory of categories is recognized as 
untenable, first of all, in the study of natural language, and 
mainly in the study of mental and linguistic activity. 
At the basis of synonymy, as well as at the basis of 
human cognition of the world, there is a process of 
categorization, since it is natural for a person to compare 
everything with everything, respectively, the similarity and 
difference between objects is established in the process of 
comparison. In the process of nominative activity of one or 
another object of reality, a person identifies certain properties 
and signs in it, while comparing with other objects already 
known to him, i.e., trying to attribute him to some category. 
In speech, words that are close in meaning appear on 
the basis of the categorization process, and, according to S. V. 
Lebedeva, one can speak both of collective categorization, 
carried out on the basis of highlighting more significant 
features developed by public consciousness, and of individual 
- highlighting signs that are significant for each individual 
person. “In the human lexicon, there is undoubtedly a specific 
scale of commonality and difference, which differs from the 
usual understanding from the point of view of the language 
system”. This explains the discrepancy between the members 
of the synonymic series, fixed by the dictionary, and the 
selection of words as synonymous in the mind of the 
individual. For example, the synonymic row for the word lazy 
in Evgeniev’s dictionary: sloth, loafer, couch potato, bobak, 
loafer, and the individual, taken from our experiment, looks 
like this: mattress, loafer, amoeba, blockhead, loafer, inert, 
lack of initiative, slob, parasite. 
Synonymous connections arise in the area of 
intersection of several categories, in the zone of semantic 
proximity. Thanks to the main cognitive mechanisms for the 
generation and perception of knowledge, including the 
processes of categorization, lexicalization (linking concepts 
with verbal means of expression and fixing in memory the 
results obtained through the categorization process) and the 
actualization process (retrieving the right words, meanings and 
knowledge from memory), the word is able to not only replace 
or represent real objects, create associations, but also analyze 
the properties of an object, introduce them into a system of 
complex relationships. 
Highlighting the corresponding properties of the 
designated object, the word refers them to already known 
categories. “Such a distracting or abstracting, generalizing and 
analyzing function of the word we call categorical meaning”. 
So, for example, the words thin, tall, skinny, overscraper, 
strawberry, gaunt, dry-fly, emaciated, attenuate, denoting a 
thin person, are built on the basis of associations of various 
categories. These words will intersect according to the features 
underlying the nomination: in form, in quality, in the 
properties of the characterized object, and which category this 
feature will be associated with depends on the characteristics 
of the individual's consciousness. 
In speech, we do not operate with the meanings of 
words as a stable system of generalized meanings that are the 
same for all people of a certain nation, but use "meaning" as 
an individual meaning of a word that is related to the moment 
of speech, to a certain situation. L. Wittgenstein's theory of the 
organization of natural categories according to the principle of 
"family resemblance" allows us to conclude that the concept 
of language and its reality is a fiction. Language activity in 
any natural area resembles a game, which in different 
situations is built according to different rules. “Language 
games” mainly use the same language, but to achieve a variety 
of subjective goals, therefore they differ on the basis of lexical 
meanings (lexical meanings acquire different meanings 
depending on the situation and context), but at the same time 
they are built according to the general grammatical laws of a