THE ROLE OF ANTHROPOCENTRIC PHRASEOLOGICAL UNITS RELATED TO BODY PARTS IN PRIMARY COMMUNICATION

72 Vol. 5, No. 11 – Special Issue (EJAR) ISSN: 2181-2020 LPTIENP International Scientific-Practice Conference on “Linguistics and Pedagogical Technologies: International Experience and National Practice” Denau, November 20, 2025 in-academy.uz/index.php/ejar THE ROLE OF ANTHROPOCENTRIC PHRASEOLOGICAL UNITS RELATED TO BODY PARTS IN PRIMARY COMMUNICATION Maktuba Khonsaidova Makhamadalievna [email protected] Chirchik State Pedagogical University, Department of Linguistics and English Language Teaching Methodology https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17627219 Annotation: This article analyses the role and functions of anthropocentric phraseological units (AFU) related to body parts in primary communication. Such units are an important language unit that reflects the relationship between language, thinking and the human body. They serve as an important tool for expressing a person’s emotional state, social attitude and sense of control. The analysis provides scientific foundations based on the conceptual metaphor theory of Lakoff and Johnson (1980), the emotional metaphor approach of Kövecses (2002), and the views of Hnatiuk (2020) on pragmatic functions. The results show that phraseological units related to body parts, as a cognitive model of a person, reflect not only the internal structure of the language system, but also the cultural values of society. With their help, the child acquires emotional and social competence at an early stage. Therefore, the anthropocentric approach is an important scientific method for revealing the inextricable link between language, thinking, and culture. Key words. Anthropocentric phraseological units, linguo-cultural phrases, social competence, phraseological formation, cognitive approach. Introduction. Language is a reflection of human thinking and worldview, it is inextricably linked with the human body and life activities, and is a central factor in the formation of culture, society and individual consciousness (Abdurahmonov, 2018). Through language, a person names real objects in the national environment, but also expresses his inner experiences, emotions and social status. Therefore, the language system serves as a “mirror” of human thinking. According to anthropocentric medicine, the main focus of language is the person himself, his body, emotional and social protection (Lakoff & Johnson, 1980). Phraseological formations based on the names of the body - head, hand, eye, tongue, foot, ear and others - exist in many languages, embodying universal and national diseases of human thinking (Piirainen, 2012). Such combinations are very rich in semantic support, through which they reflect human perception, emotions, moral character and relationships in society. For example, in English, such expressions as “to lend a hand” (yordam qo‘lini uzatdi), “heart of stone” (bag’ri tosh odam), or in Uzbek, such as “kongli keng” yoki “kozi achildı” (opened eyes) are metaphorical ones that express a person’s mental state, moral qualities and social behaviour. From the point of view of cognitive linguistics, phraseologies related to body parts determine the conceptual factors of a person. Through them, a person perceives the world, categorizes their personalities and forms them in harmony with cultural people (Kövecses, 2002). This system can be interpreted as a national communicative tool, as well as a cognitive model that forms a cultural code, social consciousness and national identity. Therefore, the process of mastering phrases related to body parts through childhood is one of the important stages of linguo-cognitive bonding. Through these units, the child is able to metaphorically perceive the world, express emotional reactions, and raise social norms (Vygotskiy, 1978). Therefore, such phraseologies also play an important role in the development of the emotional and social competencies of the individual in the process of education and upbringing. Free phraseological units for body parts illuminate the anthropocentric nature of language. They are a complex semantic system that combines the cognitive, emotional, and sociocultural aspects of the human mind. Therefore, their study is a scientific enterprise for not only national linguistics, but also for psychology, cultural studies, and education. 73 Vol. 5, No. 11 – Special Issue (EJAR) ISSN: 2181-2020 LPTIENP International Scientific-Practice Conference on “Linguistics and Pedagogical Technologies: International Experience and National Practice” Denau, November 20, 2025 in-academy.uz/index.php/ejar Theoretical foundations. Anthropocentric linguistics interprets language as a reflection of human consciousness, bodily perception, and social protection. According to the metaphor theory of Lakoff Johnson (1980 and Johnson, Kovacs’s (2002), abstract knowledge is formed through the body. For example, expressions such as keep a cool head or open one’s heart express a person’s mental state through the body. Burger (2010) defines phraseological units as units that have been taken into culture and have become absorbed into meaning. Hnatiuk (2020) examines the role of anthropocentric phraseologies in expressing social and pragmatic means of action, emotional attitude and etiquette. Related to this is the localization of human cognition, emotions and culture in the body. In children's language, phraseological units related to body parts appear very early. They are used in fairy tales and educational everyday conversation, fairy tales and educational forms, helping children to develop action, emotion and social behaviours. For example, such expressions in English as lend a hand, keep an eye on, learn by heart connect the concrete body with cognitive processes (Clark, 2009). There are similar expressions in the Uzbek language: combinations such as “qo‘l silkitmoq yoki qo‘l bermoq” (to greet), “ko‘ngli chog’ bo‘lmoq” (to be happy) express humanity and cultural culture (Ma'ripov, 2016). Through such expressions, the child not only loads the language, but also includes social norms. ➢ Cognitive and pragmatic functions. Phraseological units related to body parts create cognitive, social and cultural functions in one control: ➢ Cognitive (conceptual) function: Forms abstract factors based on the human body (head of the class - meh baho, heart of gold - ribbon). ➢ Social function: Teaches moral norms in society (keep your hands to yourself - the norm of behaviour). ➢ Emotional function: Provides expression of emotions (cold feet, broken heart). Development of metaphorical thinking: Such units make the child's thinking vague, symbolic meanings disappear. Thus, the body becomes a cognitive model of language and thinking, a person who is equal in age. ➢ Cross-linguistic similarities and differences. Studies show that phraseologies related to body parts, while being universal, are also culturally specific. For example, although the English expressions to lose one's head and the Uzbek expressions to get out of bed are synonymous, their emotional tone and usage context differ. As Piirainen (2012) noted, although such expressions have a common metaphorical basis in European languages, each nation adapts them according to their own cultural upbringing. Conclusion. Anthropocentric phraseological units related to body parts are one of the oldest and most natural layers of human language. They are a means of using national thought, but also of understanding a person's self, feelings and place in society. In additional communication, such units form metaphorical thinking, emotional expression and cultural identity in children who are supported. Therefore, an important methodology for managing the cognitive and cultural roots of anthropocentric systematic language in the human mind. References: 1. Abdurakhmonov, A. (2018). The relationship between language and thought. Tashkent: Fan. 2. Burger, H. (2010). Phraseologies: An Introduction to the Example of German. Berlin: Erich Schmidt Verlag. 3. Clark, E. (2009). First Language Acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 4. Hnatiuk, O. (2020). Functional and Pragmatic Peculiarities of Anthropocentric Phraseological Units. Journal of Linguistic Studies, 15(2), 35–46. 74 Vol. 5, No. 11 – Special Issue (EJAR) ISSN: 2181-2020 LPTIENP International Scientific-Practice Conference on “Linguistics and Pedagogical Technologies: International Experience and National Practice” Denau, November 20, 2025 in-academy.uz/index.php/ejar 5. Kövecses, Z. (2002). Metaphor: A Practical Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 6. Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 7. Ma’ripov, A. (2016). Frazeologizmlarning milliy-madaniy xususiyatlari. Toshkent: O‘zbekiston Milliy Universiteti. 8. Piirainen, E. (2012). Widespread Idioms in Europe and Beyond: Toward a Lexicon of Common Figurative Units. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 9. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Harvard University Press.