METAKOGNITSIYA VA EPISTEMIK TAFAKKUR O‘RTASIDAGI O‘ZARO BOG‘LIQLIK

Kirish: ushbu maqolada metakognitsiya va epistemik tafakkur o‘rtasidagi o‘zaro bog‘liqlik psixologik hamda ta’limiy nuqtai nazardan tahlil qilinadi. Tadqiqotning maqsadi metakognitsiyani bilish jarayonini kuzatish va boshqarish mexanizmi, epistemik tafakkurni esa bilimning manbai, ishonchliligi, murakkabligi va asoslanganligini baholashga yo‘naltirilgan tafakkur shakli sifatida izohlab, ular orasidagi integrativ munosabatni ochib berishdan iborat. Tadqiqot nazariy-tahliliy, qiyosiy-konseptual va interpretativ sintez usullariga tayangan holda olib borildi. Natijalar shuni ko‘rsatdiki, metakognitsiya talabaning o‘z fikrlashini nazorat qilishi va strategik boshqarishini ta’minlasa, epistemik tafakkur shu boshqaruvga bilimning epistemik mezonlarini kiritadi. Shu bois epistemik tafakkur metakognitsiyaning maxsus, mazmunan chuqurlashgan ko‘rinishi sifatida namoyon bo‘ladi. Metakognitiv monitoring, refleksiya, o‘z-o‘zini boshqarish va epistemik baholashning uyg‘unligi akademik o‘qish, manbalarni tekshirish, argumentlarni solishtirish va dalillarga asoslangan xulosa chiqarishda ayniqsa muhim ekani asoslandi. Xulosa sifatida oliy ta’lim jarayonida metakognitsiya va epistemik tafakkurni birgalikda rivojlantirish mustaqil fikrlash, ilmiy savodxonlik va tanqidiy tahlilning psixologik poydevorini kuchaytirishi ta’kidlandi. Maqsad: realliklarning semantik va etimologik xususiyatlarini tahlil qilish, ularni neologizm, arxaizm va tarixiylikka ajratish hamda ularning milliy madaniyat bilan bog‘liqligini ko‘rsatish. Materiallar va metodlar: tavsifiy lingvistik tahlil, etimologik tasnif va madaniy izoh metodlari qo‘llanildi. sumalak, chuchvara, xonim kabi misollar milliy realliklarni yoritishda ishlatildi. Natijalar va muhokama: neologizmlar yangi madaniy unsurlarni ifodalasa, arxaizmlar milliy hayotning tarixiy shakllarini saqlaydi, tarixiylik esa muayyan davrga xos realliklarni aks ettiradi. sinxron tahlil ularning hozirgi qo‘llanilishini, diaxron tahlil esa vaqt davomida rivojlanishini ko‘rsatadi. Xulosa: realliklar madaniyatdan ajralmas bo‘lib, milliy o‘zlikning lingvistik belgisi sifatida xizmat qiladi. ularni neologizm, arxaizm va tarixiylikka ajratish til, tarix va jamiyat o‘rtasidagi dinamik munosabatni yoritadi.

Introduction: this article examines the interrelationship between metacognition and epistemic thinking from psychological and educational perspectives. The aim of the study is to interpret metacognition as a mechanism for monitoring and regulating cognitive processes and epistemic thinking as a form of thinking directed toward evaluating the source, credibility, complexity, and justification of knowledge, and on this basis to reveal their integrative connection. The research relies on theoretical-analytical, comparative-conceptual, and interpretive-synthetic approaches. The findings indicate that metacognition enables students to monitor and strategically regulate their thinking, whereas epistemic thinking introduces criteria for evaluating knowledge into that regulatory process. Therefore, epistemic thinking can be understood as a specialized and conceptually deepened form of metacognition. The study further shows that the integration of metacognitive monitoring, reflection, self-regulation, and epistemic evaluation is especially important in academic reading, source evaluation, comparison of arguments, and evidence-based reasoning. The article concludes that developing metacognition and epistemic thinking together in higher education strengthens the psychological foundation of independent thinking, scientific literacy, and critical analysis. Purpose: to analyze the semantic and etymological features of realities, focusing on their classification into neologisms, archaisms, and historicisms, and to demonstrate their connection with national culture. Materials and Methods: descriptive linguistic analysis, etymological classification, and cultural interpretation were applied. examples such as sumalak, chuchvara, and khanim illustrate the national characteristics of realities. Results and Discussion: findings show that neologisms represent newly introduced cultural elements, archaisms preserve historical forms of national life, and historicisms reflect realities tied to specific epochs. synchronic study reveals their current usage, while diachronic analysis highlights their evolution across time. Conclusion: realities are inseparable from culture, serving as linguistic markers of national identity. their classification into neologisms, archaisms, and historicisms provides insight into the dynamic relationship between language, history, and society.