ACADEMIC RESEARCH IN MODERN SCIENCE
International scientific-online conference
8
THE PHRASEOLOGICAL UNITS IN ECONOMIC TEXTS IN ENGLISH
AND KARAKALPAK LANGUAGES
Baxbergenova Akerke
Trainee- teacher of English Language and Literature department of KSU
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.16757498
Abstract.
This article explores the role and function of phraseological units
(PUs) in economic texts, with a comparative analysis of their usage in English
and Karakalpak languages. It examines the stylistic, cognitive, and cultural
aspects of PUs, illustrating how they enrich economic discourse, enhance
metaphorical expressions, and reflect national worldviews. By comparing and
classifying economic idioms and set expressions in both languages, the study
reveals both universal and culturally specific features, contributing to the field of
contrastive linguistics and specialized translation.
Keywords:
phraseological units, economic texts, idioms, metaphor, English,
Karakalpak, contrastive analysis, economic discourse.
Introduction.
Phraseological units are fixed, idiomatic expressions that are
widely used in various domains of human activity, including the field of
economics. In economic discourse, they serve as powerful linguistic tools that
help to convey complex ideas, attitudes, and evaluations in a concise and vivid
way. Hence, this article focuses on analyzing the types, structures, and functions
of PUs in English and Karakalpak economic texts and draws comparisons
between them.
English economic texts abound with phraseological units that are both
metaphorical and culture-bound. Such units serve not only a communicative but
also a cognitive function, allowing speakers to understand abstract economic
phenomena through concrete imagery. For example, expressions like “bear
market” and “bull market” personify investor behavior using animal metaphors.
The “bull” represents aggressive buying and optimism, while the “bear”
symbolizes pessimism and market decline. Another common PU in English
economics is “tighten one’s belt,” meaning to reduce expenditures. This idiom is
often used in periods of economic recession or austerity. Moreover, expressions
like “to break even,” “in the red,” and “to cut losses” are widely used in financial
reporting and business communication. What is particularly notable about
English economic phraseology is its frequent use of metaphorical frameworks
such as warfare (e.g., “price war,” “hostile takeover”), sports (e.g., “game
changer,” “score a profit”), and nature (e.g., “economic climate,” “green
economy”). These metaphors are not randomly chosen; they reflect the cultural
ACADEMIC RESEARCH IN MODERN SCIENCE
International scientific-online conference
9
tendencies to conceptualize economics in terms of competition, struggle, and
natural processes [4, 64-70].
In Karakalpak, the use of phraseological units in economics is less
idiomatically dense than in English but still significant. PUs in Karakalpak
economic discourse often reflect traditional views on wealth, labor, and
prosperity. For example, the phrase “pul tabıw ańsat, abıray tabıw qıyın”
conveys a moral standpoint on wealth management, emphasizing prudence over
accumulation. Similarly, metaphors rooted in agriculture and livestock are
common due to the historically agrarian nature of Karakalpak society.
Expressions like "pul qoldıń kiri” connect economic and educational values. This
contrasts with the more aggressive market metaphors of English, reflecting
cultural attitudes that prioritize balance and harmony over competition.
However, globalization and the influence of Russian and English have
introduced new phraseological units into the Karakalpak lexicon [1]. Loan
translations and hybrid expressions such as “investiciya kirgiziw” (investment
input) or “tapqanı tapqanına jetpew” (financial difficulty) are now commonly
used in academic and journalistic texts.
When comparing the two languages, several similarities and differences
become evident. On the one hand, both English and Karakalpak use
metaphorical phraseology to describe economic processes. Both languages
employ idioms that express growth, decline, risk, and value, although the images
used may differ. For instance, the English phrase “a cash cow” (a profitable
asset) finds its rough equivalent in Karakalpak as “qazanı bàrqulla qaynap
turatuģın biznes”. While the image is similar, the expression in Karakalpak is
more descriptive and less idiomatic in form, which may be due to the more
literal and explanatory nature of Turkic languages. On the other hand, there are
clear differences in cultural conceptualization. English economic idioms tend to
reflect a capitalist, competitive worldview, whereas Karakalpak expressions are
often rooted in ethical, communal, and ecological perspectives. Additionally, the
density of PUs in English economic texts is much higher, partially due to the
maturity of the English-language economic discourse and the presence of idioms
in business English training.
Phraseological units perform several functions in economic texts.
Stylistically, they make the text more engaging and expressive. They also serve
as tools for evaluation, often indicating approval or disapproval of economic
decisions. Functionally, they provide shorthand for complex processes and allow
for shared understanding between experts and the general public. In both
ACADEMIC RESEARCH IN MODERN SCIENCE
International scientific-online conference
10
English and Karakalpak, the stylistic tone of economic writing can be influenced
by the use of PUs. In journalism, idioms often serve to simplify and dramatize
economic trends. For example, headlines such as “The market takes a hit” or
“Stocks soar” are idiomatic and figurative. Similarly, in Karakalpak, the phrase
“Bazar qaynaw" adds emotional nuance to otherwise technical reporting.
Conclusion.
To conclude, phraseological units in economic texts are not
mere stylistic ornaments but essential linguistic tools that encapsulate cultural,
cognitive, and communicative values. The comparative analysis of English and
Karakalpak economic idioms reveals both universality in conceptual metaphors
and cultural specificity in imagery and moral undertones. While English employs
a wide range of competitive and technical idioms, Karakalpak tends to focus on
ethical values and socio-cultural traditions, though it is gradually incorporating
global economic terminology. Therefore, the study of PUs across languages
enhances cross-cultural communication and translation competence in the field
of economics.
References:
1.
Eshbaev J. Qaraqalpaq tiliniń qısqasha frazeologiyalıq sózligi. Nókis:
Qaraqalpaqstan: 1985.
2.
Khoshimzhanovna, N. N. (2023). Structural-Semantic Study of Economic
Terms in English and Uzbek Languages. International journal of advanced
research in education, technology and management, 2(3).
3.
Muxiddinova, H., & Mannonova, S. (2025). Linguistic characteristics of
phraseological units related to the field of economics in English and Uzbek.
Journal of science-innovative research in Uzbekistan, 3(4), 342-347.
4.
Nodira, M. (2025). PHRASEOLOGICAL TERMS IN THE ENGLISH ECONOMIC
DISCOURSE. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence, 1(1), 64-70.
5.
Rizakulovich, I. I. Economic Relations in the Terminological System.
Linguistics and Culture Review, 5(S1), 1623-1631.
6.
Salayevna, A. Z. (2025). Linguistic Analysis of English and Uzbek
Economical Lexical Units. International Journal of Scientific Trends, 4(1), 42-44.
