UNITS OF EXPRESSIVENESS AND EMOTIONALITY IN SOCIAL NETWORK DISCOURSE

Turdiyeva Iroda Komilovna

Authors

Turdiyeva Iroda Komilovna Teacher of Secondary School No. 42 in the Mirishkor District of the Kashkadarya Region

Keywords:

social network discourse, expressiveness, emotionality, linguistic units, pragmalinguistics, discourse analysis, emoji, digital communication, means of expressing emotions, Internet Linguistics.

Abstract

This article will explore the features, classification, and communicative-pragmatic functions of linguistic units that express expressiveness and emotionality in social network discourse. In modern digital communications, social networks (Telegram, Instagram, Facebook, X, etc.) have become the main field for the open and effective expression of users' emotional state, evaluative attitude, and communicative intention.

References

Turdiyeva Iroda Komilovna

Teacher of Secondary School No. 42 in the Mirishkor District of the Kashkadarya Region

imonatur2016@gmail.com

UNITS OF EXPRESSIVENESS AND EMOTIONALITY IN SOCIAL NETWORK DISCOURSE

Abstract

This article will explore the features, classification, and communicative-pragmatic functions of linguistic units that express expressiveness and emotionality in social network discourse. In modern digital communications, social networks (Telegram, Instagram, Facebook, X, etc.) have become the main field for the open and effective expression of users' emotional state, evaluative attitude, and communicative intention.

Keywords: social network discourse, expressiveness, emotionality, linguistic units, pragmalinguistics, discourse analysis, emoji, digital communication, means of expressing emotions, Internet Linguistics.

Turdiyeva Iroda Komilovna

Qashqadaryo viloyati Mirishkor tumani 42-umumta’lim maktabi o‘qituvchisi

imonatur2016@gmail.com

IJTIMOIY TARMOQLAR DISKURSIDA EKSPRESSIVLIK VA EMOTIVLIKNI IFODALOVCHI BIRLIKLAR

Annotatsiya

Ushbu maqolada ijtimoiy tarmoqlar diskursida ekspressivlik va emotivlikni ifodalovchi lingvistik birliklarning xususiyatlari, tasnifi va kommunikativ-pragmatik funksiyalari tadqiq etiladi. Zamonaviy raqamli kommunikatsiya sharoitida ijtimoiy tarmoqlar (Telegram, Instagram, Facebook, X va boshqalar) foydalanuvchilarning hissiy holati, baholash munosabati va kommunikativ niyatini ochiq va samarali ifodalashning asosiy maydoniga aylangan.

Kalit so‘zlar: ijtimoiy tarmoqlar diskursi, ekspressivlik, emotivlik, lingvistik birliklar, pragmalingvistika, diskurs tahlili, emoji, raqamli kommunikatsiya, emotiv ifoda vositalari, internet lingvistikasi.

Турдиева Ирода Комиловна

Учитель средней общеобразовательной школы № 42 миришкорского района Кашкадарьинской области

imonatur2016@gmail.com

ЕДИНИЦЫ ВЫРАЖЕНИЯ ВЫРАЗИТЕЛЬНОСТИ И ЭМОЦИОНАЛЬНОСТИ В ДИСКУРСЕ СОЦИАЛЬНЫХ СЕТЕЙ

Аннотация

В данной статье будут рассмотрены особенности, классификация и коммуникативно-прагматические функции языковых единиц, выражающих выразительность и эмоциональность в дискурсе социальных сетей. В современных цифровых коммуникациях социальные сети (Telegram, Instagram, Facebook, X и т.д.) стали основным полем для открытого и эффективного выражения эмоционального состояния, оценочного отношения и коммуникативного намерения пользователей.

Ключевые слова: дискурс социальных сетей, выразительность, эмоциональность, лингвистические единицы, прагмалингвистика, анализ дискурса, эмодзи, цифровая коммуникация, средства выражения эмоций, интернет-Лингвистика.

In the field of linguistics, the comprehensive study of units belonging to specific lexical-semantic groups at the intersection of semantics, cognitive linguistics, and discourse analysis constitutes one of the most theoretically complex and relevant issues. In particular, analyzing the semantic and pragmatic properties of abstract nouns within the distinctive conditions of the modern digital communication environment–namely, their usage in social networks, online discourses, digital texts, and virtual spaces–further intensifies this complexity. The primary reason lies in the fact that abstract nouns do not denote the direct, sensory-perceptible, concrete, and material features of an object or phenomenon; rather, they express states, qualities, processes, social relations, moral values, or conceptual categories formed through processes of generalization, abstraction, and conceptualization in human cognition. Consequently, although they function actively as nominative units within the language system, their semantic structure, referential properties, and pragmatic potential are considerably more complex, multi-layered, and context-dependent than those of concrete object names. Through abstract nouns, socio-cultural, moral, psychological, and intellectual concepts existing in the human mind are “transferred” into language. In other words, language does not express reality itself but rather conceptual representations of reality, cognitive models, frames, and mental structures [1,2].

Although definitions of abstract nouns in linguistic literature are broadly similar, each emphasizes a particular semantic, cognitive, or functional aspect of these units. In the traditional lexicological approach, abstract nouns are characterized as nouns that express concepts not directly perceivable through the senses but comprehensible only through processes of thought and intellect. This approach takes the opposition between concreteness and abstractness as its primary criterion and relies on the fundamental distinction between an object and a concept. However, contemporary semantic and cognitive linguistic research demonstrates that defining an abstract noun merely as the “name of something imperceptible” is insufficient; such an approach fails to fully capture the gradational and dynamic nature of abstractness. The degree of abstractness is not uniform across all units: certain nouns directly encode purely conceptual content (for instance, units such as justice, freedom, and stability directly name conceptual categories), whereas others arise through secondary abstraction grounded in concrete empirical experience and specific processes (for example, nouns such as growth, movement, and change acquire abstract meaning through the generalization of a process or state) [3]. This characteristic is clearly observable not only in English but also in Uzbek abstract nouns and holds particular significance in their discursive usage, especially in digital texts and speech.

The semantic distinction between concrete and abstract lexical units is manifested first and foremost in their referential nature and in the mechanisms of meaning formation within the language system. Concrete nouns are typically linked directly to material objects, persons, or entities in existence, with a denotative semantic core. Such units can be verified and validated on the basis of empirical experience acquired through sensory organs such as sight, hearing, touch, and smell. Their referent is a specific, concrete object in external reality. In abstract nouns, by contrast, the concept is not an object but is understood through a meaning that has been formed and generalized in the human mind. As a result, conceptual components predominate in their semantic structure: meaning is oriented not toward an external object but toward mental constructions, cognitive models, and abstract categories. In other words, while units such as tree, house, and river directly name material objects, units such as hope, equality, and resistance express generalizations and conceptual categories that are products of human thought [4]. It should be particularly emphasized that concreteness and abstractness are not mutually exclusive or categorically opposed; in many cases they are complementary, transitional, and gradational in nature. From the perspective of modern cognitive semantics, these two phenomena are understood within the framework of prototype theory and the semantic continuum: certain lexical units are centrally (prototypically) concrete, while others occupy peripheral zones and may alter their interpretation under contextual influence. For example, experience may denote the sum of concrete events directly undergone by an individual in one context, yet in another it may manifest as general knowledge, life wisdom, and conceptual experience. Such semantic shifts indicate that abstractness is frequently correlated with the degree of semantic generalization. A higher degree of generalization intensifies the abstraction process and clearly reflects the cognitive nature of language–namely, that language does not merely reflect reality but processes, schematizes, and generates new conceptual structures from it. Overall, the conceptual nature of abstract nouns has been the subject of profound analysis in linguistics, particularly in cognitive linguistics and semantics, and research in this area is of considerable importance for elucidating the complex relationship between language and thought [5].

The conceptual property of abstract nouns occupies a particularly significant position within cognitive linguistics, as this approach interprets linguistic units in inseparable connection with the knowledge system in the human mind. From the cognitive linguistic perspective, every lexical unit is regarded as the verbal expression of a specific concept. Z. Popova and I. Sternin define the concept as a multi-layered, structural, and dynamic unit of meaning in the human mind and characterize language as the principal means of expressing this conceptual content [6]. Viewed from this standpoint, abstract nouns are precisely units operating at the conceptual level: they are not ready-made, direct names of reality but complex conceptual templates actively processed, categorized, and generalized by human cognition. For instance, units such as freedom or justice do not exist in reality as material objects; they are complex concepts shaped on the basis of social experience, historical consciousness, cultural values, and collective memory. In cognitive semantics, abstract nouns are frequently analyzed in close conjunction with conceptual structures, frames, schemas, and categories. L. Talmy demonstrates that semantic content is formed through various configurational, perspectival, and conceptual means, noting that linguistic units are the product of processes of classification and differentiation in human thought [6]. This approach proves especially effective with respect to abstract nouns, since they often isolate a particular aspect of an event, state, or relation and express it as an independent nominative unit. Thus, an abstract noun is not merely a representative of the grammatical class of nouns but a complex outcome of conceptual differentiation, semantic generalization, and categorization.

The linguistic expression of abstract concepts is inextricably linked to processes of semantic generalization and conceptual categorization. In semantic generalization, an individual integrates diverse concrete and specific experiences into a single, generalized meaning template. For example, experiences of individual just or unjust situations are formed in the mind as the general conceptual category justice/adolat; similarly, numerous specific situations involving support, joint action, mutual agreement, and resource distribution are unified under the concept of cooperation/hamkorlik. Language names this generalized concept in nominal form and enables its active use in communicative processes [7]. A crucial point here is that abstract concepts frequently rely, at a primary level, on concrete experience. Cognitive research indicates that humans extensively employ metaphorical and analogical patterns when comprehending abstract content. Concepts such as time, progress, decline, pressure, and crisis, for instance, are often verbalized on the basis of experiential domains involving spatial movement, physical force, or material objects (e.g., “time is passing,” “pressure is mounting,” “the crisis has bottomed out”). In this manner, abstract semantics emerges as the result of secondary conceptual processing and metaphorical mapping of concrete perceptual experience [8]. This phenomenon clearly demonstrates that abstract nouns are not entirely “immaterial” or “purely mental”; rather, they are formed through the cognitive reconstruction, schematization, and generalization of human experience.

From a lexicological perspective, abstract nouns belong to the open lexical stratum of language and constitute its most active and productive domain. These units are frequently formed through derivational means–that is, word-formation patterns–and ensure language’s capacity to express new concepts. In English, suffixes such as -ness, -ity, -tion, -ment, and -ance actively participate in forming names of qualities and processes (e.g., happiness, stability, information, development), while in Uzbek the forms -lik, -ish, -iyat, -uv, and -ma fulfill the same function (e.g., baxtlilik, barqarorlik, axborot, rivojlanish, harakat). This indicates that abstract expression possesses not merely an accidental but a systematic and rule-governed character: language possesses the capacity to generate new abstract units continuously through specific grammatical-semantic models. In this respect, derivation reinforces the position of abstract nouns within the lexical layer and serves as a key mechanism for the conceptual enrichment of language. Nevertheless, the essence of abstract nouns is not exhausted by their morphological formation or derivational shape; their primary significance resides in their semantic function and conceptual capacity. Linguists particularly emphasize that units formed according to the same word-formation pattern do not necessarily exhibit the same degree of abstractness [9]. For example, the Uzbek suffix -lik sometimes encodes a high degree of purely conceptual abstractness (adolatlilik, erkinlik), while in other cases it produces secondary abstractness grounded in more concrete experience (kuchlilik, tezlik). Similarly, the English suffix -ness does not invariably signal the same level of abstraction. Therefore, a comprehensive analysis of abstract nouns must consider, alongside derivational form, their conceptual capacity, referential properties, and cognitive load. This approach enables the integration of lexicological analysis with the achievements of semantics and cognitive linguistics, thereby providing a fuller account of the complex position of abstract nouns within the language system.

REFERENCES:

Halliday M.A.K., Teubert W., Yallop C., Cermáková A. Lexicology and Corpus Linguistics: An Introduction. – London, New York: Continuum, 2004. – 256 p.

Chafe W. Discourse, Consciousness, and Time: The Flow and Displacement of Conscious Experience in Speaking and Writing. – Chicago – London: The University of Chicago Press, 1994. – 327 p.

Quirk R., GreenbaumS., LeechG., SvartvikJ. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. – London: Longman, 1985. – 1779 p.

Crystal D. The Cambridge Encyclopedia of the English Language. – Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003. – 506 p.

Biber D., Johansson S., Leech G., Conrad S., Finegan E. Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. – Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2021. – 1220 p.

Попова З.Д., Стернин И.А. Когнитивная лингвистика. – Москва: АСТ, Восток-Запад, 2007. – 314 с.

Talmy L. A Taxonomy of Cognitive Semantics. – Leiden – Boston: Brill, 2025. – 106 p.

Chafe W. Discourse, Consciousness, and Time: The Flow and Displacement of Conscious Experience in Speaking and Writing. – Chicago, London: The University of Chicago Press, 1994. – 327 p.

Leech G.N. Principles of Pragmatics. – London: Longman, 1983. – 250 p.