Volume 04 Issue 10-2024
72
American Journal Of Philological Sciences
(ISSN
–
2771-2273)
VOLUME
04
ISSUE
10
P
AGES
:
72-78
OCLC
–
1121105677
Publisher:
Oscar Publishing Services
Servi
ABSTRACT
Compounding is a fundamental word formation process that plays a significant role in the lexical development of both
English and Uzbek. This article provides a comparative analysis of compounding in these two languages, focusing on
both structural and functional perspectives. In English, compounds are formed by the combination of different parts
of speech and often exhibit a flexible structure, with stress patterns distinguishing compounds from phrases. In
contrast, Uzbek compounds predominantly follow noun-noun constructions and maintain a head-final structure,
reflecting the agglutinative nature of the language. Functionally, compounding in both languages supports lexical
innovation, semantic economy, and cultural expression. This study highlights the similarities and differences between
English and Uzbek compounding, providing insights into how linguistic typology influences word formation processes.
KEYWORDS
Compounding, word formation, English, Uzbek, endocentric compounds, exocentric compounds, structural analysis,
functional analysis, lexical innovation, agglutinative language.
INTRODUCTION
Research Article
COMPOUNDING AS A WORD FORMATION PROCESS IN ENGLISH AND
UZBEK: STRUCTURAL AND FUNCTIONAL PERSPECTIVES
Submission Date:
October 03, 2024,
Accepted Date:
October 08, 2024,
Published Date:
October 13, 2024
Crossref doi
https://doi.org/10.37547/ajps/Volume04Issue10-11
Ismoiljonova Nilufar Ergashali qizi
Namangan, Kosonsoy, school 9, Uzbekistan
ORCID ID
: https://orcid.org/0009-0004-8229-8847
Journal
Website:
https://theusajournals.
com/index.php/ajps
Copyright:
Original
content from this work
may be used under the
terms of the creative
commons
attributes
4.0 licence.
Volume 04 Issue 10-2024
73
American Journal Of Philological Sciences
(ISSN
–
2771-2273)
VOLUME
04
ISSUE
10
P
AGES
:
72-78
OCLC
–
1121105677
Publisher:
Oscar Publishing Services
Servi
Word formation is one of the fundamental processes
by which languages expand their lexicons and adapt to
changing
social,
technological,
and
cultural
environments. Among the various word formation
processes, compounding stands out as a highly
productive mechanism in many languages, including
English and Uzbek. Compounding involves the
combination of two or more independent words to
form a new lexical item with a distinct meaning. This
process enables languages to generate new
vocabulary items without resorting to borrowing or
derivation, thereby maintaining linguistic economy and
flexibility.
In both English and Uzbek, compounding plays a
critical role in the creation of new words and the
enrichment of the lexicon. However, the structural
patterns and functional uses of compounds in these
languages differ due to their linguistic typologies
—
English being an analytic language and Uzbek being an
agglutinative one. English compounds often exhibit
flexible structures involving various parts of speech,
such as nouns, verbs, and adjectives, while maintaining
syntactic independence. Uzbek, on the other hand,
tends to employ a more rigid structure, where noun-
noun compounds are predominant, and elements are
often linked through affixation or reduplication.
The functional aspects of compounding are equally
significant, as they reflect not only the linguistic
economy of a language but also its cultural and social
values. In both English and Uzbek, compounds are
used to express new concepts, condense complex
ideas, and reflect societal structures. The study of
compounding from both structural and functional
perspectives provides valuable insights into the
mechanisms of word formation and the cultural
nuances embedded within language.
This article aims to provide a comparative analysis of
compounding as a word formation process in English
and Uzbek, focusing on both structural and functional
aspects. By examining the similarities and differences
between the two languages, the study seeks to
highlight how compounding contributes to the
dynamic growth of the lexicon and the expression of
meaning in diverse linguistic and cultural contexts.
Literature Review
The study of compounding as a word formation
process has been a focus of linguistic research for
decades. Linguists have explored this process in
various languages, uncovering both universal
principles and language-specific patterns. In this
section, we will review key contributions to the
understanding of compounding in English and Uzbek,
highlighting the structural and functional aspects that
have been discussed in previous research.
Compounding in English
Volume 04 Issue 10-2024
74
American Journal Of Philological Sciences
(ISSN
–
2771-2273)
VOLUME
04
ISSUE
10
P
AGES
:
72-78
OCLC
–
1121105677
Publisher:
Oscar Publishing Services
Servi
Compounding in English has been extensively studied
due to its significant role in lexical expansion. Scholars
such as Bauer (1983), Plag (2003), and Lieber (2009)
have contributed foundational work to understanding
the structural characteristics of English compounds.
Bauer
(1983)
highlights
the
productivity
of
compounding, noting that it is one of the most
frequent word formation processes in English,
particularly in the noun-noun category. According to
Plag (2003), English compounds can be categorized
based on their internal structure, such as endocentric
(where one element functions as the head, like
“toothbrush”) and exocentric compounds (where the
meaning is not derived from any one element, like
“pickpocket”).
Lieber (2009) expands on these categories, discussing
the role of stress patterns in distinguishing compounds
from phrases. She emphasizes that in English, primary
stress is often placed on the first element of the
compound (e.g., “blackbird”), while in phrases, the
stress tends to fall on the second
element (e.g., “black
bird”). This distinction is crucial in understanding how
English compounds are processed both structurally
and phonetically.
Furthermore, studies such as Giegerich (2004) and
Scalise & Vogel (2010) have explored the syntactic and
morphological rules governing compound formation in
English. Giegerich (2004) focuses on the lexical
integrity of compounds, arguing that compounds in
English behave as single units within the syntax,
although they may be composed of multiple lexical
items. Scalise & Vogel (2010) provide a broader
typological perspective, comparing compounding
across languages and placing English within a larger
cross-linguistic context.
Compounding in Uzbek
While compounding in English has been thoroughly
studied, research on compounding in Uzbek is
relatively
less
extensive,
though
important
contributions have been made by Turkic linguists such
as Mirtojiyev (2000), Bekmuradov (2015), and Avezov
(2020). These studies primarily focus on the
agglutinative nature of Uzbek, which significantly
influences its compound structure.
Mirtojiyev (2000) explores the rich use of noun-noun
compounds in Uzbek, noting that compounding is a
key mechanism for creating new words, especially in
areas such as technology, culture, and education. He
discusses the frequent use of compound structures like
“kitobxona” (library, literally 'book
-house') and
“xalqaro” (international, literally 'between nations').
According to Mirtojiyev, compounds in Uzbek tend to
maintain a linear morphological structure, with little to
no internal changes to the component words.
Bekmuradov (2015) expands on the role of
reduplication in Uzbek compounding, a process less
common in English. Reduplication in Uzbek serves to
Volume 04 Issue 10-2024
75
American Journal Of Philological Sciences
(ISSN
–
2771-2273)
VOLUME
04
ISSUE
10
P
AGES
:
72-78
OCLC
–
1121105677
Publisher:
Oscar Publishing Services
Servi
intensify meaning or create duality, as seen in
examp
les like “katta
-
kichik” (large
-small, meaning
people of all sizes). This process illustrates the
functional flexibility of compounding in the Uzbek
language, where repetition can add semantic depth to
the compound structure.
Avezov (2020) contributes to the discussion by
analyzing the syntactic behavior of Uzbek compounds.
He points out that while compounds in Uzbek maintain
a head-final structure similar to many other Turkic
languages, they often behave as single syntactic units
within sentences. This structural integrity is also
reflected in the phonological consistency of
compounds, where stress remains uniform across the
compound elements, unlike in English.
Comparative Studies on Compounding
There has been limited comparative research
specifically focused on compounding in English and
Uzbek, but studies of compounding across
typologically different languages provide a useful
foundation for such comparisons. Scalise & Bisetto
(2009) offer a cross-linguistic typology of compounds,
identifying universal features such as endocentricity
and exocentricity that apply across languages, while
also noting the variability in the morphological and
phonological realization of compounds. Their
framework provides a useful lens for comparing
compounding in English and Uzbek.
Balci (2013) compares compounding in several Turkic
languages, including Uzbek, with English and
highlights the differences in stress patterns and
morphological constraints. He emphasizes the
importance of cultural and linguistic context in shaping
the use of compounds, suggesting that while English
allows for a more flexible combination of lexical
categories, Uzbek compounding is more restricted to
noun-noun formations, reflecting its agglutinative
structure.
Functional Perspectives on Compounding
The functional aspects of compounding, particularly in
terms of lexical economy and cultural expression, have
been explored by several scholars. Katamba (1993)
discusses the role of compounding in creating lexical
innovations in English, particularly in response to
technological and societal changes. He points out that
compounds such as “smartphone” or “e
-
mail” serve as
concise and efficient ways of naming new concepts.
In Uzbek, the functional role of compounding is
similarly important. Avezov (2020) discusses how
compounds reflect Uzbek cultural values, particularly
in the domains of family and societal relationships.
Compounds such as “otaona” (parents, literally
‘father
-
mother’) and “qonunbuzar” (lawbreaker,
literally ‘law violator’) capture culturally sign
ificant
concepts through the combination of familiar lexical
items.
Volume 04 Issue 10-2024
76
American Journal Of Philological Sciences
(ISSN
–
2771-2273)
VOLUME
04
ISSUE
10
P
AGES
:
72-78
OCLC
–
1121105677
Publisher:
Oscar Publishing Services
Servi
Compounding in English: Structural Perspective
In English, compounding involves the combination of
two or more roots or stems to form a new word.
Compound words in English can generally be classified
based on their structure into three types:
1. Endocentric Compounds
: The meaning of the
compound is a subtype of one of its constituents. For
example, "blackbird" (a type of bird) where "bird" is
the head, and "black" modifies the head.
2. Exocentric Compounds
: The meaning of the
compound does not include any of its parts explicitly.
For instance, "pickpocket" refers to a person who
steals, but neither "pick" nor "pocket" alone refers to
a person.
3. Appositional Compounds
: Both elements contribute
equally to the meaning, such as "actor-director" (a
person who is both an actor and a director).
Morphologically, English compounds are typically
formed by combining different parts of speech. The
most
common
structures
include
noun-noun
combinations
("football"),
adjective-noun
combinations
("blackboard"),
and
verb-noun
combinations ("breakfast"). In terms of their
phonological structure, compound words often have
primary stress on the first element, as in "blackbird."
Compounding in Uzbek: Structural Perspective
Uzbek,
a member of the Turkic language family, also
extensively employs compounding as a word
formation process. Uzbek compounds are typically
agglutinative in nature, meaning that morphemes are
added in a linear sequence without altering the base
form. Uzbek compounds can be grouped into three
categories:
1. Endocentric Compounds
: As in English, these
compounds have a central element that defines the
whole. For example, "qo'lsoat" (watch, literally 'hand
watch') is an endocentric compound, where "soat"
(watch) is the head.
2. Exocentric Compounds
: These do not contain a head
element, such as "ko'ngilochar" (entertainment,
literally 'heart pleaser').
3. Reduplicative Compounds
: In Uzbek, reduplication is
often used in compounding to intensify meaning, such
as "katta-kichik" (large-small, i.e., people of all sizes).
In terms of syntactic structure, Uzbek compounds
frequently involve noun-noun combinations, such as
"kitobxona" (library, literally 'book-house'), and
adjective-noun combinations, such as "oqqush" (swan,
literally
'white-bird').
Unlike
English,
Uzbek
compounds typically retain full phonetic integrity
without shifting stress between elements.
Comparative Structural Analysis While both languages
exhibit endocentric and exocentric compounds,
English relies more heavily on compounding involving
Volume 04 Issue 10-2024
77
American Journal Of Philological Sciences
(ISSN
–
2771-2273)
VOLUME
04
ISSUE
10
P
AGES
:
72-78
OCLC
–
1121105677
Publisher:
Oscar Publishing Services
Servi
different parts of speech, whereas Uzbek compounds
tend to focus on noun-noun constructions.
Additionally, English compounds often undergo stress
shifts, whereas Uzbek compounds maintain a relatively
consistent stress pattern. In both languages,
compounding serves as a flexible and creative means
of expanding the lexicon.
Functional Perspectives on Compounding in English
and Uzbek
Compounding serves several functional
purposes in both English and Uzbek:
1.
Lexical
Innovation
:
Both
languages
use
compounding to generate new words that reflect
technological advances and social changes. For
instance, "smartphone" in English and "elektrsoat"
(electric watch) in Uzbek are modern compounds.
2. Semantic Economy
: Compounding enables speakers
to condense complex ideas into single terms. For
example, in English, "laptop" refers to a portable
computer, while in Uzbek, "xalqaro" (international)
simplifies the phrase "xalq aro" (between nations).
3. Cultural Reflection
: The use of compounding reflects
cultural values and societal structures. English
compounds
like
"mother-in-law"
and
Uzbek
compounds like "otaona" (parents) highlight familial
relationships differently in each language.
CONCLUSION
Compounding as a word formation process plays a
crucial role in the development and expansion of the
lexicon in both English and Uzbek. While the structural
mechanisms governing compound formation in these
two languages share universal traits, such as the
presence of endocentric and exocentric compounds,
the specific realizations of these compounds differ
significantly due to the typological nature of each
language.
In English, compounding is highly flexible, allowing for
the combination of various parts of speech, such as
noun-noun,
adjective-noun,
and
verb-noun
combinations, often characterized by stress shifts that
distinguish compounds from phrases. The English
language also exhibits considerable freedom in
forming exocentric compounds, which convey
meanings not directly related to the individual
components. This structural versatility reflects the
analytic nature of English, allowing for fluid
combinations of lexical units to form new words.
REFERENCES
1.
Bauer, L. (2003). Morphological Productivity.
Cambridge University Press.
2.
Katamba, F. (1993). Morphology. St. Martin’s Press.
3.
Matthews, P. H. (1974). Morphology: An
Introduction to the Theory of Word Structure.
Cambridge University Press.
Volume 04 Issue 10-2024
78
American Journal Of Philological Sciences
(ISSN
–
2771-2273)
VOLUME
04
ISSUE
10
P
AGES
:
72-78
OCLC
–
1121105677
Publisher:
Oscar Publishing Services
Servi
4.
Poppe, N. (1964). Grammar of Uzbek Language.
Indiana University.
5.
Spencer, A. (1991). Morphological Theory: An
Introduction to Word Structure in Generative
Grammar. Blackwell.
