The Functions of the Invective Lexicon

. Invective vocabulary has recently been of interest to linguists, so we paid attention to the semantic development of this layer of language. The article aims to investigate this layer and how this layer is formed. The formation of invective vocabulary occurs mainly with the help of the following lexico-semantic methods: the transition of ordinary language into invective due to the means of linguistic expressiveness. Of particular interest is the communicative aspect of the use of invectives. Even though that many words are quite often used as abuses not only in live communication but also in many texts, this possible meaning is not always recorded in dictionaries.


INTRODUCTION
The words making up the lexical system of the language form semantic groups. One such semantic group consists of words with a negative meaning. The scope of word processing, frequencies of processing in different functional styles, functionality, as well as restrictions on the meaning expressed by the use of the word in language material, speech and communication process, and several other aspects and criteria do not fully allow us to determine the exact scope of the invective lexicon. Some words acquire a negative meaning within the context. The restrictions on the use of words, whether linguistic or extralinguistic, require research related to the communicative sphere in which these words are restricted use. Such studies play an essential role in determining the functions of the invective lexicon.
The invective lexicon is a set of words used to convey negative feelings and emotions, particularly anger, frustration, and disappointment. The functions of the invective dictionary can vary depending on the context and the speaker's intention, but some of the primary functions include: Expressing anger or frustration: Invective words and phrases often express strong negative emotions, particularly anger. They may be used to attack or criticise a person, group, or idea that the speaker disagrees with or finds frustrating.
Insulting or belittling others: Invective language can insult or belittle others, express dominance or superiority, or inflict emotional harm.
Creating a sense of solidarity: Invective language can also be used to develop an understanding of solidarity among people who share similar views or grievances. By using shared invective language, group members can feel more connected to one another and may be more likely to take collective action.
Establishing boundaries: Invective language can also be used to set boundaries and assert one's position in a conversation or debate. By using solid and forceful language, the speaker can establish themselves as a dominant voice in a given context.
Overall, the functions of invective language are complex and multifaceted, and the way that invective language is used can vary widely depending on the context and the speaker's intentions. While invective language can effectively express negative emotions and communicate one's position, it can also be divisive and harmful if used excessively or inappropriately.
The main goal of investigating the functions of the invective lexicon in linguistics is to understand better how language is used to express negative emotions and communicate positions of power and authority in social contexts. By analysing how invective language is used and its effects on those who hear it, linguists and other researchers can gain insights into how language shapes our social interactions and relationships.
In addition, understanding the functions of the invective lexicon can help us develop more effective strategies for communicating in difficult or emotionally charged situations and identify and challenge instances of harmful or prejudiced language. Ultimately, this research can help us create more inclusive and equitable social environments where individuals can express themselves fully without fear of attack or marginalisation.
There are different approaches to the functions of the invective lexicon. Depending on such systems, diversity is also observed in the number of functions. V. I. Zhelvis distinguished 27 functions of the invective lexicon. According to him, the invective lexicon is not only insulting. Its use also serves self-affirmation, strengthening emotionality and expressiveness, evaluation, and other functions. The author singled out 3 of the 27 functions as the main ones: 1) the function of separating the mortal from the higher and holy; 2) the cathartic function -alleviating the psychological condition; 3) the function of belittling the addresser's social status [7, p. 110]. Particular words are a powerful verbal tool in implementing all three functions.
Invective comes from the Latin word invectio (to attack, swear, etc.). Belonging to the pamphlet genre, it means an artistic work that humiliates individuals and groups of people and turns them into a laughing stock. At present, words, expressions, sayings, thoughts, and texts that insult or humiliate a person are verbal aggression -invective. Invective was formed in the form of genre and context in ancient literature. In Azerbaijani literature, satires correspond to this genre. As a cultural phenomenon, invective is verbalised information that insults and discredits a person. In exceptional cases, the verbal form can be expressed with gestures. What distinguishes invective from regular expression is that it is addressed to a specific person. An addressing can be explicit or implicit.

MATERIALS AND METHODS
There are a variety of ways that can be used in researching the functions of the invective lexicon. Researchers may conduct experiments in which participants are exposed to different types of invective language to understand how language affects their emotional states and social behaviours. This may involve measuring physiological responses, such as heart rate and brain activity, and asking participants to report their emotional experiences and attitudes towards others. Ultimately, the choice of research method will depend on the specific research question being asked and the available resources and data. However, by using a variety of ways, researchers can gain a more comprehensive understanding of the functions of the invective lexicon. But during our research, the descriptive and comparative methods of linguistics are used in the article. Linguistic materials were tools for this research.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
In linguistics, abuse has been studied in various research studies. In Kusov's research work, an attempt was made to determine the concepts of invective lexicon and phraseology. According to the author, there are three forms of rants: 1) literary swearing; 2) householdconversational invectives; 3) general invectives [4, p. 12-13].
One function of invective vocabulary is to insult and humiliate the addressee. In general, words with an expressive tone in their semantics and insult the addressee belong to the invective lexicon. However, when taken separately, the comments included in the invective lexical group are lexemes. Although their meaning in isolation is negative, the range of functionality of such lexicon changes in the absence of specific addressing. Therefore, addressing the invective lexicon to the addressee in a rude, humiliating, indecent form plays a unique role in its assessment.
Addressing a speech act creates a double effect. The main impact arises from the thought expressed in the speech process being directly addressed to a specific addressee or addresser. The second effect is related to the communicator, who participates in the communication, but the meaning derived from the invective lexicon does not belong to him. Both the first and the second influences have a linguistic-cultural character. The composition of the invective dictionary includes various rude, indecent and unethical words. Some of these words are taboos, violating the accepted social norms when voiced in society and addressed to someone. Such words are not included in standard dictionaries; in some languages, they are not in any dictionary. Of course, the negative meaning is not formed only with the help of taboos. Many words in the language's vocabulary can become invective in the speech process or abuse in the context.
The speech effect realises the insulting function of invectives. Sometimes the speaker deliberately brings this function to the fore, and during the communication process, the changes in the participants' emotional state create tension. Communicative tension affects the speaker's choice of language tools, especially lexical units, and leaves its mark on the addresser's perception of the content of the speech act. Interpreting the thoughts of the addresser and searching for an implicit meaning causes a conflict in the communication process. A conflicting speech situation creates a factual basis for the use of invectives. An insult is the result of a particular phase of the communicative approach. To understand abuse, the participants know its meaning. This is because a person who does not know the meaning of abuse cannot appreciate its negativity. For example, there may be a speech situation in which the addressee calls the addressee "sick" for some reason. If the addressee's speech act or specific action caused this naming, the word sick will have meanings such as mental deficiency, stupidity, or mental illness. As a result, when the addresser addresses such a word to the addressee, he insults him. Not knowing that the word "patient" is invective in the mentioned sense makes the invective not used implicitly. "For a person who does not know the meaning of invective, the word used in that sense does not exist as an invective" [8, p. 38].
The use of invectives is related to speech behaviour, speech habit and the level of the individual. The tendency to use rants is an indicator of the everyday vocabulary of the individual.
In the present, particular importance is attached to studying language, language materials, and units, as well as speech and speech acts in the communicative-pragmatic, cognitive, sociocultural, and ethnocultural plan. The anthropocentric approach to language has increased the importance of studying language tools' characteristics, principles and norms in interpersonal relations, especially communication. Etiquette norms and patterns, communications, and specific vocatives have been widely studied in linguistics. In contrast, gross violations of etiquette norms, verbalisation of negative emotion through language, and nonverbal expression of negative attitude have not been sufficiently investigated. In communication, it is essential to study interpersonal relations and interactions, the characteristics and types of people's responses to stimuli through speech from different aspects. As human society develops, the honour and dignity of the individual, self-esteem, reputation, and society's attitude towards the person also gain special attention and importance. The increased dissemination and transmission of information on a broader scale requires a careful approach to providing information addressed to a person, related to him, and expressed through language. When obscene words belonging to the invective lexicon are used among society members, and these words are not explicitly addressed to any of these members, in this case, those who hear and listen are not counted; they are disrespected. Otherwise, if an obscene word addressed to someone is uttered in the presence of others, outsiders, then the person to whom that word is addressed is insulted, and the outsiders who participated in this process are disrespected. Thus, processing the invective lexicon in speech is confirmed by the fact that it plays a role in evaluating this lexicon. Some authors distinguish nine functions of the invective dictionary. This includes the following: 1) the function of insulting and humiliating the addressee; 2) the cryptographic function; 3) the function of reaction to the totalitarian prohibition system; 4) self-satisfaction or the function of showing oneself; 5) the function of the addresser trying to make his speech more emotional; 6) the function of reducing the individual's psychological tension; 7) the function of showing language in the literary text; 8) word game tool function (play words); 9) the linguistic naming of the subject of conversation, the function of filling the pause [1, p. 29].
There is a specific speech situation for each of the mentioned functions. However, it isn't easy to prove that a particular speech situation is directly related to the part of the invective lexicon. Invectives perform their primary function, insult, mostly in conflict speech situations. Invective lexis can also appear as the realisation of several functions. In the scientific literature, narrow and broad approaches to the definition of the invective lexicon are observed, and different classifications of invectives are made. Invective lexis is called a type of insult. In a broad sense, rants are verbal aggression [5; 6]. The concepts of insult and verbal aggression cannot be limited to the linguistic level because the existence of any word in itself is not related to insult or verbal aggression. Both cases are related to addressability as well as uncountability. If the invective lexicon is addressed to someone and is animated by a predicative construction, the facts of insult and impudence are revealed.
In a particular communicative environment, when the addresser describes a specific addressee as a person wanted by the police and says that Interpol wants him, it creates an invective. If the negative meaning of the phrase "wanted" is revealed in the context, "wanted by Interpol" has a direct negative meaning and creates a negative opinion about the wanted person. Because Interpol is the name of the international criminal police organisation, this is an accepted abbreviation of the compound "The International Criminal Police Organization". An acronym is a renomination unit created by combining the first word of the organisation name -"International" -"Inter" and the third word "Police", replacing the full name of the organisation. Being searched by an international criminal police organisation creates an opinion; opinion about a person being a criminal. It is known that a person can be wanted in Interpol on circulars of different colours. A red circular search indicates that a person has committed a dangerous crime, fled abroad, and is treated as an internationally valid arrest warrant.
Circulars of other colours indicate the person is dangerous but do not require arrest. Interpol may also want missing persons. What has been mentioned is related to the legal aspects of the issue. That is, the fact that the name is on the Interpol list cannot be considered a complete confirmation that the person is a criminal. Nevertheless, the phrase "being wanted by Interpol" in Azerbaijani and other languages evokes a negative opinion in the speaker of the respective language. In the social environment, among people, the fact that Interpol wants a person creates a statement that he is a criminal. Thus, the expression "to be wanted by Interpol" in the Azerbaijani language establishes that the addressed person is a criminal and is perceived as spreading negative information about the person. At the same time, realising the offensive function of invective requires thorough research in each specific case. Being wanted by Interpol can have other meanings depending on the speech situation. The expression can be used jokingly. Therefore, this or that function of the invective lexicon is clarified after analysis, depending on the context and speech situation.
Classification of the invective lexicon at the word level is also essential. This is the grouping of words that make up the invective lexical layer according to certain principles. In Russian linguistics, the following groups of invectives are distinguished: 1) swear words, obscene words; 2) stylistic negative words (slang, jargon, vulgarisms, dialectisms); 3) rude, cursing, swear words; 4) literary lexicon with the modality of negative evaluation and hatred [5, p. 132].
Slang is used as a means of oral communication in various social-speech styles of national colloquial speech.
Colloquial belongs to the group of expressiveemotional words. They can be divided into two groups: particular swear words and vulgar words. It should be noted that specific colloquial terms do not carry expressiveness and are not included in the group of rude comments. Rudeness and violation of ethics are intense in vulgar words. The use of slang words in household speech is not an indicator of the disrespect of this type of speech. Emotionality and expressiveness are more potent in spoken language. The communicators' attitude in the communication process, the conversation topic, and the parties' interests affect the pronunciation of words. In such cases, the communicators violate the rules of politeness and include words expressing a negative emotional assessment of each other in their speech acts. The speech situation can be such that the participants of the communication utter insults and curses that are not typical for the literary language and insult each other. In vulgar words, rudeness, incivility, abuse, and humiliating attitude are expressed.
The colloquial lexicon is diverse according to its function and stylistic nuance. Some are words used within the framework of politeness, and the other group are words that go beyond it. Using polite words in a literary language is a joyous event because they enrich its lexical composition. Poor lexicon outside of politeness is seen as an adverse event for the academic language because it can damage the literary language's beauty, fluency, and harmony. Vulgar words or vulgarisms are not widely used in literary language. They express obscene words, sometimes curses. Nasty words in English are considered a type of taboo words. Vulgar words form the lowest stylistic layer of the language. If poeticisms make speech beautiful, offensive comments make speech tasteless. It should be noted that vulgar words are more effective than poeticisms because a person is more affected by swearing or obscene words than praise. The official source of offensive comments is narrow, lives in the people's language, and is reflected in dictionaries.
In literary language, vulgarisms are used only in those considered acceptable for society. They are used not in the author's language but to reveal the inner world of the artistic image. Vulgarisms usually find their way into the speaker's speech unexpectedly, involuntarily.
Unfortunately, vulgarisms are more widely used as a stylistic device in recent literary works. However, despite all this, vulgarisms have never been included in the norms of academic language and have always existed outside the literary language.
The use of words that make up the language's vocabulary in the communication process differs. The difference in frequency characteristics is due to various reasons. The functionality of words within speech and text is related to their meaning, belonging to the general linguistic layer of the language or the passive background. The terms are divided into active and passive. Inactive words are used in a limited way.
Words are divided into groups according to the scope of use. A. Demirchizade divided the words that make up the vocabulary into two parts: common words and particular words. He included terms, slang and vulgarisms, dialectisms, archaic words, and neologisms in certain words [2, p. 78-79]. This division is based on different criteria. For example, suppose dialectisms are words defined by belonging to a dialect. In that case, archaic words are characterised by the loss of functionality and obsolescence of the language in modern times. Archaicization is characteristic of the denotation of a word becoming obsolete. There are other groups of words in the vocabulary of the language. For example, S.Jafarov, while giving a division according to the scope of development, assigned a place to vulgar words and vulgarisms [3, p. 66].
It is determined by analysis whether the vulgar words recorded in the speech acts of the addressee perform the function of the invective lexicon. At this time, the speech situation is taken into account. One of the urgent issues is to study the invective dictionary and its development features in English and Azerbaijani and to determine the criteria for determining the invective lexicon. The conducted analysis shows that in the research process in this direction, there is a need to solve issues such as collecting the invective assessment lexicon in English and Azerbaijani languages, determining the conditions and the place of invectives among other categories of communication, studying the characteristics of the invective speech act. Although expressiveness is considered a linguistic phenomenon, the methods of its determination go beyond the framework of system-structural linguistics due to its connection with psychological influence. Some researchers note that it is necessary to distinguish whether the invective lexicon expresses emotion or insult. It can be accepted that the invective lexicon insults the addressee and negatively characterises the speaker, more precisely, who uses the invective lexicon. Here, using the invective dictionary in society is considered an adverse event. Another issue is that there must be specific reasons for the emergence of expressiveness. In other words, the expression does not appear independently but is based on a particular influence. Presentation depends on the communicative situation. The intention of the speaker/listener, their initial knowledge and ideas in the process of engaging in communication, and the linguistic and extralinguistic context of the communication act, have a role in the creation of expression.

CONCLUSIONS
As a result, the function of creating expressiveness and emotionality of the invective lexicon is implemented in parallel with other parts. At the same time, a speech act containing invective vocabulary can always be considered expressive. Another exciting aspect of using invective language is that utilising this vocabulary directly relates to the speaker's psychological state. In addition, it is essential to consider that the reason for using an invective lexicon is associated with the speech behaviour of the addressee.