LEXICAL-SEMANTIC AND PRAGMATIC FEATURES OF AGRARIAN TEXTS IN THE KARAKALPAK AND ENGLISH LANGUAGES
Keywords:
agrarian texts, Karakalpak language, English language, lexical-semantic analysis, pragmaticsAbstract
Agrarian texts constitute an important component of professional communication,
serving as a means of transmitting agricultural knowledge, scientific innovations, and practical
information. The linguistic characteristics of such texts are determined by their lexical, semantic,
and pragmatic properties, which reflect both professional requirements and cultural traditions. This
study aims to investigate the lexical-semantic and pragmatic features of agrarian texts in the
Karakalpak and English languages through a comparative linguistic approach. The research focuses
on the analysis of agricultural vocabulary, semantic relationships, contextual meanings, and
communicative functions in scientific, educational, and informational agricultural texts.
Comparative, descriptive, semantic, and pragmatic methods were employed to identify similarities
and differences between the two languages. The findings indicate that English agrarian texts are
characterized by standardized terminology, semantic precision, and formal communicative
structures, whereas Karakalpak agrarian texts preserve culturally specific lexical units, traditional
expressions, and context-dependent pragmatic meanings. The study contributes to comparative
linguistics, discourse analysis, terminology studies, translation research, and intercultural
communication within the agricultural domain.
References
1. Crystal, D. (2010). The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language (3rd ed.). Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
2. Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London: Longman.
3. Levinson, S. C. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
4. Lyons, J. (1995). Linguistic Semantics: An Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
5. Yule, G. (2020). The Study of Language (7th ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
6. Wodak, R., & Meyer, M. (2016). Methods of Critical Discourse Studies (3rd ed.). London: Sage
Publications.
7. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). (2023). The State of Food and
Agriculture 2023. Rome: FAO.
8. Richards, J. C., & Schmidt, R. (2010). Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied
Linguistics (4th ed.). Harlow: Pearson Education.
9. Oxford University Press. (2024). Oxford English Dictionary. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
10. Cambridge University Press. (2024). Cambridge Dictionary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
