On measures for further development of Higher Education System

CHAPTER 2. STRUCTURAL AND SEMANTIC FEATURES OF VULGARISMS IN ENGLISH
2.1 Vulgarism as one of colloquial layer of vocabulary
“Interpreting is an ancient human practice which clearly predates the invention of writing – and (written) translation.” It is clear from the characterization of any interpreted communication according to Wadensjö that all communication participants (speaker, interpreter, recipient/ s) contribute not only to the semantic but also formal aspects of communication, influence interactions with each other and the impact of those interactions.
Interpreting nowadays appears almost in every sphere of interpersonal interaction, where many linguistic and cultural worlds come to meet and mingle.
The interpreters often have to facilitate intercultural communication of a various, not necessarily just pleasant or harmonious, nature. Much attention is paid to interpretation at the official level but in relation to the subject of our work, which is represented by swearwords in relation to the interpreter, we will focus mainly on communication in the colloquial and semi–official spheres. Interpreting in these circles, as opposed to interpreting in official contacts, institutions, conferences, does not have clear rules set that the interpreter should follow in the exercise of the profession. [8, 103]
Swear words in the sphere of verbal expression have been given at least at marginal attention in the studies and analyses within the intercultural communication branch, but the phenomenon of taboo lexicon itself within the
interpreting theory and practice has not yet been adequately described and
subsequently processed in our country. At the same time, we aim to approach
swearwords as informally saturated cultural and linguistic components of
discourse from a linguistic and functional point of view, without a common
negative connotation that the very term “swearword" carries with it.
For this reason, we consider it necessary to perform a theoretical analysis of the vulgar language elements in their original language (English) in relation to their linguistic definition in English-language literature and its functionality, to compare it with the analogous phenomenon of vulgarisms in the target language as well as to summarize the contemporary interpreting strategies and solutions in the target language. We are also very much interested in the way this very language layer is being dealt with by interpreters in practice.
Although the informal and semi-official level does not regularly lead up to critical situations due to improper or inadequately mediated communication such
as is the matter with misinterpreting in the official sphere, it is essential to understand the speaker's intention and the content of his or her communication for a full-fledged experience on all sides nonetheless. In private and informal communication, the interpreter, in addition to his own internal “auto–censor", has nothing more to tell him how to deal with the situation when the swearwords appear on the side of the speaker.
"The extent of the interpreter's success and the successful course of mediated interlingual and intercultural communication depends to a large extent on the speaker himself."
Swearwords with no (at least preliminary) anticipation of their occurrence undoubtedly represent a significant stress factor in simultaneous but also consecutive interpreting. We believe that by thoroughly examining the functional potential of swearwords in the source language we can ultimately streamline strategies for their transposition into the target communication without significant meaningful shifts. [8, 105]
The definition of vulgarism (a more sophisticated name for a swearword) is not entirely unambiguous in English.
The English word vulgarism comes probably from the Latin vulgus, "ordinary people", especially in the pejorative meaning. The lexical meaning of this term determines vulgarism as a synonym of curse or obscenity, but from a linguistic point of view, the scope of this term extends to any case of nonstandard language use that has not necessarily have to be a term of abuse. Several researchers dealing with this theme have suggested the umbrella term “taboo words” for insulting and indecent words. Under this term we can include the terms as swearword, profanity, obscenity, vulgarity, slur etc. For the purpose of comparison we will use this group of taboo language within the English lexicon.
According to the Dictionary of Foreign Words, the definition of vulgarism narrows down to the socially unacceptable, rude or gross words or expressions. Vulgarisms habitually occupy the peripheral areas of the vocabulary and are used exclusively in colloquial style in private expressions. By their negative, insulting attitude to the designated component of objective reality, they come close to the elements of bad language and typically come from social taboo.
If we try to think of a single linguistic element that links vulgarisms and taboo lexicon in the broadest sense (in both languages) as stylistic devices of a language we come to the key element that is expressivity. In linguistics, we already
do recognize the expressive quality of an expression in contrast to a notional, intellectual and conceptual meaning of expression. Uličný claims that each language includes a subset of such means of expression and rules that can give neutral words and terms an expressive quality. The expressiveness of such a modified term is therefore constituted by the personal interest of the speaker in conjunction with an inherent (constant) and/or adherent (updated) expressive modifier.
Badiiy matnda muallif nutqiga xos haqorat va qarg’ishni ifodalovchi so’z va iboralar personaj nutqiga xos haqorat va qarg’ishni ifodalovchi so’z va iboralardan ancha kamligi bilan xarakterlanadi. Zero, badiiy nutq talabi shunday yo’l tutishni taqozo qiladi. Siyosiy nutqda esa haqorat va qarg’ishni ifodalovchi so’z va iboralarning qo’llanilishida buning aksini yoxud nisbatan miqdoriy mutanosiblikni kuzatish mumkin. Bu publitsistik nutqning badiiy nutqdan ayricha maqsad va vazifalarga egaligi bilan belgilanadi.
Haqorat va qarg’ishni ifodalovchi so’z va iboralar publitsistikada dushman va yot oqimlarni fosh etishda keng qo’llaniladi. Masalan, qora guruh, sariq iblis, irqchilar, banditlar, bosqinchilar, soxtalashtiruvchilar, shovinistlar, terroristlar, mahrifat dushmanlari kabi. Matnning emotsional-ekspressiv leksikadan foydalanish matnning umumiy stilistik maqsad va yo’nalishi bilan bog’lik.
Xususan, Abdulla Qodiriy asarlarida salbiy baxo ottenkasiga ega bo’lgan so’z va iboralar serqirra bo’lib, bu ularni har bir belgisi asosida turlicha tasnif qilish imkonini beradi.
Haqorat va qarg’ishni ifodalovchi so’z va iboralarning talablaridan biri o’quvchida salbiy taassurot uyg’otish bo’lsa, ikkinchi tomondan, personajlar ruhiyatidagi salbiy munosabatni namoyon qilishdir. Shuning uchun haqorat va qarg’ishni ifodalovchi so’z va iboralar muallif nutqiga yoki personaj nutqiga xos bo’lishi mumkin. Muallif nutqiga xos haqorat va qarg’ishni ifodalovchi so’z va iboralar ifodaning yorqin namunasini «Mehrobdan chayon» romani nomidagi chayon so’zi misolida ko’ramiz. Adib mulla Abdurahmonning fe’l-atvorini birgina ana shu haqorat va qarg’ishni ifodalovchi so’z va iboralarda to’laqonli aks ettiradi.
Badiiy matnda personajlar nutqiga xos haqorat va qarg’ishni ifodalovchi so’z va iboralar gohida faqat salbiy munosabatni, ba’zan esa ularning ma’naviy tubanliklarini salbiy munosabati bilan uyg’un ifodalash vazifasini bajaradi. Quyidagi gapda Otabekning faqat salbiy munosabati namoyon bo’lgan: