PROBLEMS OF TRANSLATION OF FRENCH AND UZBEK DEOPOETONYMS

Abstract

Introduction. In world onomatology, the weight of research devoted to the study of the lexicon of the French language, including the basics of the origin of deopoetonyms, structural and semantic conditioning, the scope of use in comparison with other languages is growing. As a logical consequence, the comparison of linguistic-stylistic, poetonymic, gender features of the French and Uzbek deopoetonyms in the language lexical-semantic, national-cultural, literary text has gained priority and relevance in the field of linguistics. Indeed, the definition of the semantic and stylistic potential of these units, the interpretation of general and differential motivational aspects of naming within different systematic languages serve to improve the system of representation of deopoetonyms in dictionaries, to determine the laws of functional equivalence and adequacy in the translation process. Research methods. In the use of words expressing the names of natural phenomena in literary texts, their special reliance on linguocognitive and linguocultural semantics is more clearly understood in the process of translation. In particular, reliance on denotative semaphores rather than expressive semaphores of deemoetonyms in artistic texts is one of the important aspects of the poetic skill of creators. This is especially the case in poetic texts. The translation process should take into account the etymology, methodological features, derivational properties, semantics (synonymy), formality (homonymy), ambiguity (polysemantic), hierarchy (graduonymic), semantic contradiction (antonymicity), etc. will be. When direct and indirect translations of some poetic texts written in French are observed, it becomes clear that deopoetonyms are preserved and expressed at different levels in them. Results and discussion. In dictionaries deopoetonyms are given in the system of el-yagyn names, but in the dictionaries compiled later their etymology, linguistic meanings, lexical-semantic semantics, formality, antonyms, hyphenation, hierarchical formation, methodological features, derivational properties, diachronic and synchronous forms, vital giving features such as denotative, connotative expression on the basis of concepts is necessary to achieve perfection of lexicographic interpretation. Conclusion. It is natural that there are still some problems with the lexicographic interpretation of deopoetonyms, which will cause some problems in the smooth implementation of translation work in this regard. Such problems are especially evident in the presentation of lexical graduonomic series related to them, in the expression of close concepts, connotative and denotative meanings