Keywords
How to Cite
Abstract
This thesis examines linguistic and stylistic issues related to the corpus-based identification and annotation of metaphors in Uzbek literary texts. The aim of the study is to develop consistent criteria for identifying the metaphorical use of a word or phrase in a literary text and to propose a procedure for creating an annotated corpus based on these criteria. In identifying metaphors, the meaning of a unit in the text is compared with its basic lexical meaning, while the basis of the semantic shift and the relationship of the expression to the broader context are examined. Such comparison is one of the key principles of the MIP and MIPVU approaches to metaphor identification.
The thesis describes the stages of selecting prose and poetic texts for inclusion in the corpus, correcting technical errors in electronic copies, determining the unit of analysis, and developing guidelines for annotators. It substantiates the need to distinguish conventional figurative expressions from author-specific imagery, as well as to differentiate metaphors from explicit similes, metonymy, and idiomatic expressions. The annotation is proposed to record the word or phrase containing the metaphor, its context, basic and figurative meanings, type of metaphor, and a brief explanation of the annotation decision. Due to the use of words in various forms through affixation in Uzbek, linking annotation to the lemma and grammatical features is also considered important. To assess annotation consistency, the same text excerpts are to be independently analyzed by at least two specialists, while cases involving divergent decisions are to be reconsidered through discussion. Thus, the proposed approach may contribute to the systematic study of metaphors in Uzbek literary texts and to the creation of a dataset for evaluating models for their automatic identification in the future. The thesis is methodological in nature: it does not present the size of a completed annotated corpus or experimental results of automatic metaphor identification.
References
1. Pragglejaz Group. MIP: A Method for Identifying Metaphorically Used Words in Discourse // Metaphor and Symbol. — 2007. — Vol. 22, № 1. — P. 1–39. DOI: 10.1080/10926480709336752. (www.tandfonline.com)
2. Steen G. J., Dorst A. G., Herrmann J. B., Kaal A. A., Krennmayr T., Pasma T. A Method for Linguistic Metaphor Identification: From MIP to MIPVU. — Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2010. DOI: 10.1075/celcr.14. (www.benjamins.com)
3. Leong C. W., Beigman Klebanov B., Shutova E. A Report on the 2018 VUA Metaphor Detection Shared Task // Proceedings of the Workshop on Figurative Language Processing. — 2018. — P. 56–66. DOI: 10.18653/v1/W18-0907. (aclanthology.org)
4. Leong C. W., Beigman Klebanov B., Hamill C., Stemle E., Ubale R., Chen X. A Report on the 2020 VUA and TOEFL Metaphor Detection Shared Task // Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Figurative Language Processing. — 2020. — P. 18–29. DOI: 10.18653/v1/2020.figlang-1.3. (aclanthology.org)
5. Li Y., Wang S., Lin C., Guerin F. Metaphor Detection via Explicit Basic Meanings Modelling // Proceedings of the 61st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics. Volume 2: Short Papers. — 2023. — P. 91–100. DOI: 10.18653/v1/2023.acl-short.9. (aclanthology.org)
6. Matlatipov S. G., Aripov M. UzUDT: Uzbek Universal Dependencies Treebank // Proceedings of the Fifteenth Language Resources and Evaluation Conference. — 2026. — P. 11642–11649. DOI: 10.63317/2uedjqezjxn5. (aclanthology.org)