Since the end of the 20th century, in Linguistics there has been a gradual transition from the structural paradigm to the anthropocentric paradigm, and the main factor in language research has become the person. The person begins to be considered the center of the Universe and language in modern linguistics since he is the only bearer of universal and nationally specific values. From the point of view of this paradigm, a person is not just a native speaker of a language, but a certain system according to which he understands language, cognizes, and perceives world information.

The new paradigm has led to a shift in linguistic views, and research methods, and led to the emergence of new interdisciplinary linguistic directions, which included cognitive linguistics.

According to the authors of the “Concise Dictionary of Cognitive Terms”, “cognitive linguistics is a linguistic direction that focuses on language as a general cognitive mechanism, as a cognitive tool of the sign system, playing a role in the information representation (coding) and transformation” (Кубрякова и другие, 1996; 53).

D.U. Ashurova and M.R. Galieva consider cognitive linguistics as “a branch of cognitive sciences that studies the connections between language choice and mental processes, human experience and its results - knowledge; considering language as a cognitive mechanism for organizing, representing, processing, storing and transmitting knowledge structures” (Ashurova, Galieva 2018; 12).

Based on opinions of foreign and national scientists, we can conclude that cognitive linguistics is a science at the intersection of several sciences, that is, an interdisciplinary science. Going beyond the boundaries of linguistic science is due to the fact that cognitive linguistics studies the relationship between language and mental processes in the human mind. To explain this or that language choice, how concepts and meanings are formed, stored, and transmitted, it is necessary to go beyond linguistics towards the human psyche, including areas of psychology, sociology, philosophy.

Scientists identify the following as the main problems of cognitive linguistics:

- the notion of knowledge structure and its verbalization, which includes issues of knowledge structures types, their linguistic representation mechanism, the correlation between language and knowledge structures;  the notion of concept and its verbalization, which includes issues of the concept structure and methods of its analysis, the concepts types and their associativity, and the notion of “conceptosphere”; problems of conceptualization as one of the main processes of human cognitive activity associated with compiling a knowledge structure based on text data and reference information; the problem of categorization, aimed at segmenting and systematizing objects, grouping them into larger general classes;  cognitive-discursive approach to the analysis of linguistic data, which involves the study of the cognitive foundations of linguistic expressions, that is, linguistic units are studied in the totality of their lexical, grammatical, pragmatic, and cognitive characteristics; study of the text within the framework of the cognitive paradigm, which clarifies the conceptual structure of the text; methods of cognitive modeling, including conceptual analysis aimed at determining the cognitive foundations of each linguistic unit, its conceptual structure, cluster of conceptual features, and their hierarchy.

One of the central problems of modern linguistics is the scientific understanding of the process of reflection of individual concepts in language, and the concept of "concept" itself has become one of the key concepts of modern linguistics.

So, let’s consider the meaning of «concept» in linguistics. E. Kubryakova, V. Demyankov, Y. Pankrats, L. Luzina in the “Concise Dictionary of Cognitive Terms” define the concept as “an operational unit of memory, mental lexicon, conceptual system and language of the brain, the entire world picture, knowledge quantum” (Кубрякова и другие, 1996; 90).

From the point of view of Sh. Safarov, a concept is “a unit of thought that contains the notion, image and linguistic meaning of the unit” (Safarov, 2006; 17).

M.R. Galieva identifies the distinctive feature of the concept as the fact that the concept can be expressed by all linguistic means: lexical, word-formative, phraseological, paremiological [Галиева, 2010; 24].

Thus, summarizing the above, we can conclude that the concept is a more voluminous product of human cognitive consciousness, in contrast to the meaning, which conveys only part of the concept content.

As a part of our research (Valieva, 2025), a social survey was conducted aimed at studying the interpretation of the concept Heart/Сердце/Yurak in society.

            The purpose of the survey is to study the meanings, associations, images associated with the concept Heart/Сердце/Yurak, as well as to compare the results obtained with data extracted from lexicographic sources. The study is aimed at identifying emotions, images and meanings associated with the concept Heart/Сердце/Yurak, as well as analyzing the use of phraseological units with the “heart” component in everyday speech.

            The survey was conducted among 4th year students of the 3rd Faculty of English Language at the Uzbekistan State World Languages University. A total of 101 respondents participated in the study, among which 82 respondents (81.2%) were native Uzbek speakers and 19 (18.8%) were native Russian speakers. It is important to note that among the survey participants, 15 (14.9%) were men, and 86 (85.1%) were women. The main group of participants consisted of students aged 20 to 22 years, which allowed to focus on the perception of the concept of Heart/Сердце/Yurak among a youth audience.

            The survey was conducted in an online format using the Google Forms platform(https://docs.google.com/forms/d/12dWg4zLNIX6K5Hh_znEmQmkW-XI5e5aNPeljRHkst6M/edit#responses) which provided convenience and accessibility for the participants. The time required to fill out the questionnaire was about 5-7 minutes. All participants were informed in advance about the objectives of the study, the anonymity of the responses and the confidentiality of the data. Participation in the survey was voluntary, all respondents filled out the form anonymously, and their answers were used exclusively for scientific purposes. The survey was available to students for two weeks, which allowed to attract the maximum number of participants.

            The survey was conducted during the period of scientific and pedagogical practice, the purpose of which was not only to carry out teaching activities, but also to integrate the results of dissertation research into the educational process. The survey was available to students for two weeks, when the lexicology course explored topics related to phraseology as a subsystem of language, as well as linguocultural and pragmatic characteristics of phraseological units. It created optimal conditions for the integration of students’ theoretical knowledge with practical research and the collection of empirical data necessary for further analysis.

            The questions included both closed and open options, which allowed respondents not only to choose from the suggested options, but also to express their personal associations with the concept of Heart/Сердце/Yurak, which allowed to obtain both quantitative and qualitative data.

1. The question about the respondent’s native language (What is your native language?) is aimed at clarifying the linguistic affiliation of the survey participants to identify the linguistic specifics of the perception of the concept in Russian and Uzbek.
2. The question about the respondent’s gender (What is your gender?)

            The purpose of clarifying the gender identity of the survey participants is possible differences in the perception of the concept depending on gender.

3. The question about the meanings of the word "heart" (What meanings of the word "heart" do you know?)

            The purpose of the question is to determine the meanings of the word "heart" that are known to respondents and used by them in their daily speech, followed by a comparison of the data with the meanings presented in lexicographic sources.

4. Question about the symbolism of the concept of Heart /Сердце/Yurak (What do you think "heart" symbolizes?)

            The purpose of the question is to determine which symbolic meanings are attributed to the concept of Heart/Сердце/Yurak more in the minds of respondents and compare with the data obtained by us from lexicographic sources.

5. The question of phraseological units with the "heart" component (What phraseological units with the word "heart" do you know?)

            The purpose of the question is to identify phraseological units with the "heart" component known to respondents and to assess their awareness and knowledge of phraseological units.

6. The question of the phraseological units usage frequency with a component of "heart" (Do you use phraseological units with a component of "heart" in your everyday speech?)

            The purpose of the question is to determine the phraseological units usage frequency with a component of "heart" in everyday discourse and to assess the degree of implementation of phraseological units in practical speech in a foreign language.

7. The question about discourses that the concept of Heart/Сердце/Yurak is used (In what content do you most often encounter expressions related to the concept of Heart/Heart/Yurak?)

            The purpose of the question is to identify the areas of the concept of Heart/Heart/Yurak usage according to respondents and compare the data with data from language corpora.

8. The question of agreeing with the statement "The concept of Heart/Сердце/Yurak has similar interpretations in different cultures" (To what extent do you agree with the statement: "The concept of Heart/Heart/Yurak has similar interpretations in different cultures"?)

            The purpose of the question is to evaluate the respondents’ opinion on the universality of interpretation of the concept of Heart/Сердце/Yurak in different cultures and compare the data with data obtained from lexicographic sources.          The survey results will be presented in the following categories: the meaning of the word "heart"; associations related to the concept of "hearts"; phraseological units with the "heart" component; frequency of use of phraseological units with the "heart" component; discourses of the concept of Heart/Сердце/Yurak usage; comparison of the concept of Heart/Сердце/Yurak perception in different cultures.

            Each category will be analyzed based on the data obtained from the survey and compared with data from lexicographic sources collected as part of the dissertation research.

            Meaning of the word "heart"

Question «What meanings of the word "heart" do you know?» revealed a wide variety of meanings, which respondents attributed to the word "heart". The results showed that the majority of respondents associate the "heart" with positive emotional states, personal qualities, and other important concepts such as courage, happiness, and feelings.

            In general, the respondents identified the following main categories of meanings:

1. Emotional and symbolic meanings are the most numerous category, including associations such as: feelings, kindness;
2. Connection with life and inner state: courage, happiness, soul;
3. physical meaning - comparatively fewer respondents named one of the main meanings of the "heart" related to its physical function: human organ, part of the body;
4. Concepts related to relationships and social significance: beloved person ;
5. Less mentioned meanings: fear, sadness, center of something, emoji, home of Allah.

            Having compared the respondents’ answers with the data obtained from lexicographic sources, we can conclude that the survey revealed additional meanings of "heart" that were not recorded in lexicographic sources. Such meanings include: «beloved person», «emoji», «home of Allah».

            These values reflect both the individual associations of the respondents, as well as the cultural and social peculiarities of the concept of Heart/Сердце/Yurak perception in different languages and cultures. For example, the meaning of «emoji» is a modern, digital interpretation, and «home of Allah» indicates the religious significance of the concept in Muslim cultures. «Beloved person» emphasizes a more intimate and personal perception of the heart, which may be related to emotional and social relationships.

            There are no significant differences in the meaning of the word "heart" perception between the respondents with native Russian and Uzbek languages. However, it should be noted that a unique cultural significance was mentioned among Uzbek respondents  –  the meaning «home of Allah», which reflects the religious perception of the concept of Heart/Сердце/Yurak in Muslim culture.

            Significant differences in the perception of the meaing of "heart" between men and women were also not identified.

2. Symbols and associations related to the concept of Heart/Сердце/Yurak

            The analysis of respondents’ answers to the question about the symbolism of the concept of Heart/Сердце/Yurak revealed a number of symbols most often associated with the "heart". The largest number of respondents (92.1%) associate the "heart" with «love», which confirms the stable symbolism of the heart as an emblem of romantic, as well as family and interpersonal relationships. A significant number of respondents (66.3%) consider the "heart" as a symbol of «kindness», which emphasizes its association with moral and ethical values, with the inner state of a person aimed at showing empathy and altruism. Equally important is the symbol of «courage» (47.5%), which indicates the perception of the heart as an organ embodying willpower, determination and the ability to overcome difficulties. In some cases, the "heart" is associated with emotions such as «joy» (29.7%) and «compassion» (25.7%), which also supports the symbolic function of the heart as a source of positive feelings that strengthen social bonds and humanism.

            On the other hand, not all associations with the concept of Heart/Сердце/Yurak were exclusively positive. Thus, the symbols of «fear» (21.8%) and «sadness» (17.8%) indicate the perception of the heart as an object through which not only joyful but also painful experiences pass, which is also consistent with the cultural tradition of depicting the heart as an organ vulnerable to various emotional and psychological influences. Rare associations such as the «organism» (1%), «sincerity» (1%), as well as «faith» (2%) and «disease» (1%) reveal more specific and individualized interpretations of the concept. In particular, the mention of "organism" may be related to the biological function of the heart as a physical organ, and "sincerity" emphasizes the intimate and personal aspect of the perception of the heart as a symbol of the inner world of man.

            One of the more rare but significant meanings identified in the respondents’ responses was the mention of the concept of Heart/Сердце/Yurak as a symbol of «faith». This aspect is of particular importance in the context of Muslim culture, where the heart is traditionally associated with a place where faith and connection with God reside. For example, among Uzbek respondents, the meaning "house of Allah" was mentioned, which emphasizes the religious symbolism of the heart as an organ in which a person feels the presence of the divine principle. In Islamic culture, the heart is often perceived as the center of spiritual perception, the place where true faith lies.

            In general, the differences in the perception of the symbolism of the concept between men and women were not significant, however, there are differences in some aspects. Women are more likely to associate the heart with kindness, compassion, and negative emotions, which may be due to both social and cultural factors. Men, on the other hand, associate the heart with courage and inner strength to a greater extent. Nevertheless, love as the main meaning of the concept of was a common symbol for both genders, which emphasizes the universality and importance of this concept in human perception.

            There are no significant differences in the perception of the concept of between respondents with native Russian and Uzbek languages.

            When analyzing all the layers of the concept based on lexicographic sources, all the mentioned associations, with the exception of the symbolism of «faith», were fixed as cognitive-conceptual characteristics of the concept "Heart/Сердце/Yurak. This confirms that most associations with the "heart" are universal and widespread in different cultures, as well as fixed in lexicographic sources. The only exception is the association with faith, which represents a specific cultural significance characteristic of the Muslim tradition.

3. Phraseological units with the "heart" component

            The respondents’ answers to the question about the knowledge of phraseological units with the "heart" component showed that most of the participants are familiar with a fairly limited number of phraseological units. A total of 12 phraseological units were named out of 101 respondents. However, it is worth noting that a significant number of participants could not provide a single example. This may indicate that phraseological units with the "heart" component are not always part of students’ daily speech, and their knowledge is limited. The list of phraseological units mentioned by the respondents: learn by heart; broken heart; break someone’s heart; follow your heart; have a heart; a heart of gold; lose heart; set one’s heart on something; heart of oak; eat one’s heart out; from the bottom of one’s heart; a heart of stoneю.

            It is important to note that all the phraseological units mentioned by the respondents, with the exception of the expression "follow your heart", were fixed in lexicographic sources and analyzed by us during all layers of the concept analysis.

4. Frequency of use of phraseological units with the "heart" component

            The results of the answer to the question about the frequency of use of phraseological units with the "heart" component in everyday speech showed the following data:

- 13% of respondents indicated that they often use phraseological units with this component.

- 58% of respondents reported that they use such expressions from time to time.

- 26% of respondents said that they rarely use phraseological units with a "heart" in their speech.

- 3% of respondents do not use phraseological units with this component in everyday speech at all.

            The majority of respondents (58%) use phraseological units with the "heart" component from time to time, which indicates their presence in everyday speech, however in a limited context. Only a small part of the respondents use these expressions often, and 3% do not use them at all. This confirms that phraseological units with the "heart" component are not the main element of everyday speech among students, and their use depends on the context and knowledge of the participants.

5. Discourses of using the concept of Heart/Heart/Yurak

            Respondents’ answers to the question about discourses in which expressions related to the concept of Heart/Сердце/Yurak are more common show that the most popular areas of concept usage are literature and spoken language, which corresponds to its emotional and symbolic significance. It was also noted that the concept is actively found in informal communication, such as blogs and television programs. Fewer respondents note its use in more formal contexts, such as news, magazines, and academic discourse.

            A comparative analysis of the corpus data and the survey results shows their full compliance. The concept of Heart/Сердце/Yurak is most often used in fiction, spoken language, blogs and television programs, which is explained by its emotional and symbolic significance. At the same time, in formal contexts (news, magazines, academic texts) its use is less common, which indicates a greater rationality and objectivity of these discourses. This analysis confirms that the linguistic representation of the concept of Heart/Сердце/Yurak depends on the nature of the discourse and communicative attitudes.

6. 
   Comparison of perception of the concept of Heart/Сердце/Yurak in different cultures

            The results of the answer to the question show that the majority of respondents perceive the concept as similar in different cultures. The respondents’ answers can be divided into several groups, which allows us to draw conclusions about the perception of the concept in the context of cultural differences and similarities. Almost half of the respondents Heart/Сердце/Yurak has similar interpretations in different cultures. This indicates the perception of the concept as a universal symbol that is associated with emotions, feelings and personal experiences in many cultures. Perhaps, for these respondents, the concept of Heart/Сердце/Yurak is not limited only to local traditions and symbols, but is perceived as something universal that can be found in various languages and cultures.

            However, despite the high degree of agreement, there is also an awareness that in different cultural contexts this symbol may acquire additional or slightly modified meanings. This highlights the importance of taking cultural differences into account when analyzing concepts in linguoculturology and sociolinguistics.

            The conducted social research aimed at studying the perception of the concept of Heart/Сердце/Yurak in the youth audience of students of the Uzbekistan State World Languages University has provided valuable empirical data on the meaning, associations with this concept. The survey showed that the perception of the concept of Heart/Сердце/Yurak is multifaceted and multidimensional, including both universal and culturally specific interpretations.

A comparative analysis of the data obtained during the survey with materials from lexicographic sources allowed us to conclude that these data are highly consistent, which confirms the reliability and validity of the results obtained.