THE SEMANTIC SCOPE OF TOPONYMIC UNITS

Annotasiya

This article analyzes the semantic scope of toponymic units, their lexical-semantic features, and cultural-spiritual load from a linguocultural perspective. The internal form, external appearance, and historical-spiritual content of toponyms in English and Uzbek languages are studied. The article demonstrates that toponyms are products of cultural thinking, closely related to the worldview, customs, and socio-legal relations of the people.

Manba turi: Jurnallar
Yildan beri qamrab olingan yillar 2022
inLibrary
Google Scholar
Chiqarish:
Bilim sohasi

Кўчирилди

Кўчирилганлиги хақида маълумот йук.
Ulashish
Usmonova , M. . (2025). THE SEMANTIC SCOPE OF TOPONYMIC UNITS. Zamonaviy Fan Va Tadqiqotlar, 4(5), 891–893. Retrieved from https://www.inlibrary.uz/index.php/science-research/article/view/97928
Crossref
Сrossref
Scopus
Scopus

Annotasiya

This article analyzes the semantic scope of toponymic units, their lexical-semantic features, and cultural-spiritual load from a linguocultural perspective. The internal form, external appearance, and historical-spiritual content of toponyms in English and Uzbek languages are studied. The article demonstrates that toponyms are products of cultural thinking, closely related to the worldview, customs, and socio-legal relations of the people.


background image

2025

MAY

NEW RENAISSANCE

INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC AND PRACTICAL CONFERENCE

VOLUME 2

|

ISSUE 5

891

THE SEMANTIC SCOPE OF TOPONYMIC UNITS

Usmonova Mohinir Bahtiyorovna

Senior Lecturer at Qarshi University of Economics and Pedagogy

E-mail:

M.M.M.U@mail.ru

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15536435

Abstract. This article analyzes the semantic scope of toponymic units, their lexical-

semantic features, and cultural-spiritual load from a linguocultural perspective. The internal
form, external appearance, and historical-spiritual content of toponyms in English and Uzbek
languages are studied. The article demonstrates that toponyms are products of cultural
thinking, closely related to the worldview, customs, and socio-legal relations of the people.

Keywords: Toponym, semantics, cultural semantics, linguoculturology, geographic

names, lexical layer, historical motivation, ethnotoponymy.

INTRODUCTION

Toponymic units are directly connected with the historical memory, cultural mindset,

and language of each nation. Through the semantic scope of these units, one can determine the
customs, religious beliefs, and lifestyle of a people. Semantic analysis allows us to identify the
deep meanings of toponyms, their naming motivations, and their place in collective memory.

MAIN PART

The semantic scope of toponymic units is closely tied to their internal structure,

historical roots, linguocultural connotations, and the imagery present in public consciousness.
Each toponym is not merely a means of naming a geographical object, but also serves as an
expression of historical memory, national identity, and ethnocultural heritage. In linguistic
analysis, when examining the semantic aspects of such units, it is important to consider not only
their dictionary meanings but also their symbolic, connotative, and associative dimensions.

The semantic analysis of toponyms begins with their structural composition. In the

Uzbek language, toponyms are generally formed based on two main factors—natural-
geographical and socio-cultural elements. For example, the toponym

Chust

consists of the parts

chu

(lowland) and

ust

(highland), reflecting the area's relief features. The toponym

Termiz

is

said to originate from the ancient Greek

Demetria

, showing how toponyms reflect historical

connections and cultural changes. English toponyms such as

Newcastle

,

Oxford

, and

Cambridge

are named based on the function or location of a geographical object—e.g.,

ox

(ox)

and

ford

(river crossing)—and retain relevance in the modern language system.

Toponyms can be semantically categorized as follows:

Descriptive toponyms

(indicating characteristics of a place):

Qizilqum

,

Greenland

(green land).

Memorial toponyms

(associated with historical figures or events):

Washington

,

Amir Temur Park

.

Ethnotoponyms

(related to ethnic groups):

Qo‘ng‘irot

,

Tatarstan

.

Topographic toponyms

(related to terrain):

Tog‘kent

,

Lake District

.

The semantic scope of toponyms is also evident in their meaning types. Semantically,

toponyms can be classified into the following main groups: descriptive, memorial, transference-
based, eponymic (derived from personal names), and metaphoric units. For example, the Uzbek
toponym

Qo‘qon

is descriptive, meaning "a place where cuckoo birds are plentiful." The


background image

2025

MAY

NEW RENAISSANCE

INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC AND PRACTICAL CONFERENCE

VOLUME 2

|

ISSUE 5

892

English

Stratford-upon-Avon

combines a town name with a river, giving it both descriptive and

locational character.

Furthermore, through linguocultural components, toponyms reflect national culture,

worldview, customs, and beliefs. In Uzbek toponyms, words such as

obod

(prosperous),

ota

(father),

bobo

(grandfather),

hazrat

(saint), and

pir

(spiritual guide) are common and tied to

spiritual and moral values. Such components turn a geographical name into a source of
ideological and cultural information. Similarly, English toponyms such as

Saint Albans

and

St.

Andrews

are linked to religious or historical figures, indicating spiritual-cultural layers.

Toponymic units also preserve meanings associated with oral folklore, historical events,

and migration processes. This makes toponyms a sociolinguistic phenomenon, allowing for an
expanded semantic interpretation. For instance, the toponym

Jizzakh

derives from the ancient

Persian word

Dizak

(fortress), indicating the area’s historical function as a military settlement.

Or

Tashkent

is a combination of

to‘sh

(plain) and

kent

(city), showing a blend of geographical

and urban characteristics in its semantic structure.

Renowned Uzbek linguist B. Khudoyorov has thoroughly studied the semantic and

historical layers of toponymic units in his scholarly works. In articles and monographs such as

“Semantic-Historical Features of Toponymic Units”

(2011) and

“Language and Territory:

Semantic Layers in Toponymic Systems”

(2017), he explores the interconnection between

language and thought, and language and culture, through toponyms. According to him,
toponyms are not limited to naming objects but also serve as carriers of vital information in the
conceptual system of language. In Khudoyorov’s works, the relationship between language and
space is analyzed through an anthropocentric approach, which allows the semantic scope of
toponyms to be studied in connection with national worldview, historical thought, and culture.

In modern linguoculturology, the concept of

"semantic layering"

is particularly

relevant in toponym analysis. This concept refers to the coexistence of several cultural,
historical, religious, or ethnic meanings under a single place name. For example, the name

Bukhara

represents not only a geographical location but also an image of Islamic culture, a

center of science, and a symbol of the historic Silk Road.

English and Uzbek toponyms have both similarities and differences from a semantic

perspective. Both languages widely use names related to geographical features, historical
figures, and natural elements. For example, Uzbek toponyms like

Qiziltepa

,

Sho‘rchi

and

English toponyms like

Blackpool

,

Oxford

are physical-geographical names;

Amir Temur

,

Ulug‘bek

,

Washington

, and

Lincoln

are memorial toponyms tied to historical figures. Names

like

Qoratepa

,

Tog‘lik

,

Riverdale

, and

Hilltown

are based on natural features. However, English

toponyms often contain generic components such as

hill

,

dale

,

town

, which serve as

categorizing elements, whereas descriptive elements are more commonly used in Uzbek
toponyms.

The semantic scope of toponyms expands and enriches over time. Several factors

influence this process. First, historical changes are reflected in toponyms—for example, with
political system changes, names are updated, such as the renaming of

Leninobod

to

Khujand

.

Second, globalization introduces English-based names and transliterated new toponyms such
as

New City

or

Business Town

. Third, urbanization brings about the formation of new

neighborhoods and districts, named with modern semantic meanings that often reflect social or
economic imagery.


background image

2025

MAY

NEW RENAISSANCE

INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC AND PRACTICAL CONFERENCE

VOLUME 2

|

ISSUE 5

893

In summary, the semantic scope of toponymic units shows how deeply layered they are

with connotative, historical, and linguocultural meanings. This necessitates their study not just
as linguistic units, but as social and cultural codes.

REFENRENCES

1.

Суперанская А.В.

Общая топонимика

. — М.: Наука, 1985. — 246 с.

2.

Худояров М.

O‘zbek toponimikasining lingvokulturologik xususiyatlari

. — Toshkent:

O‘zMU, 2018. — 94 b.

3.

Рахматуллаева Г.

Toponimlar semantikasi va ularning ijtimoiy mohiyati

. — Toshkent:

Fan, 2014.

4.

Crystal D.

The Cambridge Encyclopedia of the English Language

. — Cambridge: CUP,

2003.

5.

Tent J., Blair D.

Motivations for naming: The development of a toponymic typology for

Australian placenames

. —

Names

, 52(1), 2004, pp. 1–34.

6.

Usmonova M.B. (2022). Development of methodology and its types. Current research
journal of philological sciences,3(12), 50–54.

https://doi.org/10.37547/philological-

crjps-03-12-11

7.

Usmonova Mohinur Bakhtiyarovna. (2024). Derivative processes in the system of
units: a linguistic exploration// International Multidisciplinary Journal for Research &
Development, 11(05).

http://www.ijmrd.in/index.php/imjrd/article/view/1547

Bibliografik manbalar

Суперанская А.В. Общая топонимика. — М.: Наука, 1985. — 246 с.

Худояров М. O‘zbek toponimikasining lingvokulturologik xususiyatlari. — Toshkent: O‘zMU, 2018. — 94 b.

Рахматуллаева Г. Toponimlar semantikasi va ularning ijtimoiy mohiyati. — Toshkent: Fan, 2014.

Crystal D. The Cambridge Encyclopedia of the English Language. — Cambridge: CUP, 2003.

Tent J., Blair D. Motivations for naming: The development of a toponymic typology for Australian placenames. — Names, 52(1), 2004, pp. 1–34.

Usmonova M.B. (2022). Development of methodology and its types. Current research journal of philological sciences,3(12), 50–54. https://doi.org/10.37547/philological-crjps-03-12-11

Usmonova Mohinur Bakhtiyarovna. (2024). Derivative processes in the system of units: a linguistic exploration// International Multidisciplinary Journal for Research & Development, 11(05). http://www.ijmrd.in/index.php/imjrd/article/view/1547