BXU Logo

Buxoro Xalqaro
Universiteti

11-tom, 1-son, b. 158–161, Nashr: 2026-11-05

PARTONIMIYA TUSHUNCHASI VA UNI TILSHUNOSLIKDA O‘RGANISH TARIXI

ПОНЯТИЕ ПАРТОНИМИИ И ИСТОРИЯ ЕГО ИЗУЧЕНИЯ В ЯЗЫКОЗНАНИИ

THE CONCEPT OF PARTONYMY AND THE HISTORY OF ITS STUDY IN LINGUISTICS

  • Haydarov Anvar Askarovich — BuxDU professori
  • Shamsullayeva Dildora Sunnatullo Qizi — BuxDU professori II bosqich magistr

DOI: 10.67780/buxoro-xalqaro-universiteti-ilmiy-axborotnomasi.2026.fc636f2b

To'liq matn (PDF)

Annotatsiya

Mazkur maqolada leksik birliklar o‘rtasidagi butun–bo‘lak munosabati - partonimiya tushunchasining shakllanishi va tilshunoslikda o‘rganilish tarixi yoritiladi. Tahlilda tarixiy-qiyosiy usul va kontent-tahlildan foydalanildi. Natijalar falsafiy, leksik-semantik, kognitiv, taksonomik va formal-ontologik bosqichlar bo‘yicha tizimlashtirilib, o‘zbek tilshunosligidagi holat bilan qiyoslandi. Muhokamada butun–bo‘lak munosabatining turlari, tranzitivlik chegaralari va uning kognitiv mohiyati haqidagi qarashlar solishtirildi.

Аннотация

В данной статье освещаются становление понятия партонимии - отношения «целое – часть» между лексическими единицами - и история его изучения в языкознании. В анализе использованы историко-сопоставительный метод и контент-анализ. Результаты систематизированы по философскому, лексико-семантическому, когнитивному, таксономическому и формально-онтологическому этапам и сопоставлены с состоянием вопроса в узбекском языкознании. В обсуждении сопоставлены взгляды на типы отношения «часть – целое», границы транзитивности и его когнитивную сущность.

Abstract

This article analyzes the concept of partonymy - part–whole relation between lexical units - and the history of its study in linguistics. The analysis uses the historical-comparative method and content analysis. The results are systematized into philosophical, lexico-semantic, cognitive, taxonomic and formal-ontological stages and compared with the state of research in Uzbek linguistics. The discussion compares views on the types of part–whole relations, the limits of transitivity and the cognitive nature of the relation.

Kalit so'zlar: butun–bo‘lak munosabati, mereologiya, meronimiya, partonomiya, tranzitivlik, taksonomiya, leksik semantika

Foydalanilgan adabiyotlar

  1. Русина Ю. Н. О меронимии и схожих с ней семантических отношениях [Электронныйресурс].URL:https://rep.polessu.by/bitstream/123456789/24650/1/O_meronimii.pdf
  2. Varzi A. C. Mereology. In: Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (archive, Fall 2003edition).URL:https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2003/entries/mereology/
  3. Gruszczyński R., Varzi A. C. Mereology then and now. Logic and Logical Philosophy, 2015, vol. 24, pp. 409–427. DOI: 10.12775/LLP.2015.024
  4. Cruse D. A. On the transitivity of the part-whole relation. Journal of Linguistics, 1979, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 29–38.
  5. Cruse D. A. Lexical Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986.
  6. Tversky B., Hemenway K. Objects, parts, and categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 1984, vol. 113, no. 2, pp. 169–193.
  7. Tversky B. Parts, partonomies, and taxonomies. Developmental Psychology, 1989, vol. 25, pp. 983–995.
  8. Murphy G. L. Parts in object concepts: Experiments with artificial categories. Memory & Cognition, 1991, vol. 19, no. 5, pp. 423–438. DOI: 10.3758/BF03199563
  9. Tversky B., Hemenway K. Parts and the basic level in natural categories and artificial stimuli: Comments on Murphy (1991). Memory & Cognition, 1991, vol. 19, no. 5, pp. 439–442. DOI: 10.3758/BF03199565
  10. Winston M. E., Chaffin R., Herrmann D. A taxonomy of part-whole relations. Cognitive Science, 1987, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 417–444. DOI: 10.1016/S0364-0213(87)80015-0
  11. Herrmann D. J., Chaffin R., Winston M. “Robins are a part of birds”: The confusion of semantic relations. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 1986, vol. 24, no. 6, pp. 413–415.
  12. Chaffin R., Herrmann D. J., Winston M. An empirical taxonomy of part-whole relations: Effects of part-whole relation type on relation identification. Language and Cognitive Processes, 1988, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 17–48. DOI: 10.1080/01690968808402080
  13. Gerstl P., Pribbenow S. Midwinters, end games, and body parts: A classification of part-whole relations. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 1995, vol. 43, pp. 865–889.
  14. Keet C. M., Artale A. Representing and reasoning over a taxonomy of part-whole relations. Applied Ontology, 2008, vol. 3, no. 1–2, pp. 91–110. DOI: 10.3233/AO-2008-0044
  15. Qilichev B. O‘zbek tilida partonimiya: Filol. fanlari nomz. ... diss. avtoreferati. Toshkent, 1997. (Ikkilamchi manba orqali: [19].)
  16. Сафарова Р. Гипонимия в узбекском языке (на материале общеупотребительных зоонимов): Автореф. дис. ... канд. филол. наук. Ташкент, 1990. (Ikkilamchi manba orqali: [19].)
  17. Bozorov O. O‘zbek tilida darajalanish: Filol. fanlari dokt. ... diss. avtoreferati. Toshkent, 1997. (Ikkilamchi manba orqali: [19].)
  18. Iskandarova Sh. O‘zbek tili leksikasini mazmuniy maydon sifatida o‘rganish (Shaxs mikromaydoni): Filol. fanlari dokt. ... diss. avtoreferati. Toshkent, 1998. (Ikkilamchi manba orqali: [19].)
  19. Saparova M. The problem of meaningful categorization of words relating to the noun group in the thesaurus of the Uzbek language. URL: https://journals.nuu.uz/index.php/1/article/view/2102
  20. Mustafaeva S. Meronymic phenomena between English and Uzbek languages. Xorijiy lingvistika va lingvodidaktika, 2024, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 282–290. DOI: 10.47689/2181-3701-vol2-iss2-pp282-290