American Journal Of Philological Sciences
313
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajps
VOLUME
Vol.05 Issue04 2025
PAGE NO.
313-317
10.37547/ajps/Volume05Issue04-78
Disproportion of Disproportion in Analytical Forms
Uralov Azamat Begnarovich Syrdarya
Regional Center for Pedagogical Skills, Doctor of Philological Sciences (DSc), Associate Professor, Uzbekistan
Received:
28 February 2025;
Accepted:
29 March 2025;
Published:
30 April 2025
Abstract:
The article examines the changes of complex-analytical forms between morpheme level units that
occurred as a result of historical development. Analytical forms are the most common among complex forms. In
the study, some of the analytical forms were analyzed and the imbalances occurring in them were scientifically
justified.
Keywords:
Disparity, analytical forms, compound affixes, complex forms, affix, expansion of meaning,
archaicization.
Introduction:
The imbalances of morpheme units
within the framework of complex forms have not yet
been fully proven in science. With the expansion of the
linguistic landscape of the world in social consciousness
and thought, the expressive possibilities of content are
also improving in accordance with the era at each
synchronous stage of the history of the language. In the
history of the Turkic languages and the Uzbek language,
the activation of analytical forms, especially auxiliary
verbs, instead of some synthetic forms, has given rise
to analytical forms, similar to compound affixes, but an
independent language unit.
METHODOLOGY
It is necessary to include in a certain sense the complex
forms formed on the basis of such changes in the
language and its three manifestations (analytical forms,
synthetic forms and expanded forms) in science, as well
as to determine their place and status. Analytical forms
are complex forms formed by the combination of forms
that are externally similar to the infinitive, adverb,
adjective, and independent word-like units (auxiliary
verbs, incomplete verbs). Because in the structure of
the analytical form, the adverb and adjective do not
fulfill their function and play the role of connecting the
form to the base. The independent word-like units
(auxiliary verbs, incomplete verbs), which are the
second part of the analytical form, have lost their
function as verbs, in general, as words. If we consider
the verb chıq (from the suffix
-
chıq) as an independent
word, it must fulfill the three requirements of an
independent word. Auxiliary verbs, on the other hand,
do not have an independent meaning, cannot answer
questions, and do not perform an independent
function in a sentence. Therefore, it is correct to
consider such units as functional auxiliaries. The second
aspect of the issue is that analytical forms are
integrated into the base in a single form, and it is
appropriate to call them morphological forms. Because
the auxiliary verbs in the analytical forms are now units
that are attached to the affix, similar to affixoids.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The form of -ings. In general, within the framework of
the study, we are not concerned with the naming,
expression, and determination of the current place of
analytical forms in the language system, but with
finding an answer to the question of whether they
create an imbalance as a morphological form.
The form of -gi kel. Since the language we know is a
modern system that adapts and enriches itself to the
needs of the development of human society, in its
synchronous system, units of the previous period also
continue to exist in various functions. The
diachronically active suffixes -gi, -gu (present-future
adjectives) in the Old Turkic language and Old Uzbek
lost their activity in later periods and were absorbed
into the structure of some forms. One of such forms is
the analytical form -gi kel- in the forms borgim keldi,
okigim keldi, aytigim keldi. The affix -gim
(-gum) complicated in word forms such as borgim,
okigim, aytigim - created a single unit. One of the
analytical forms - the weak part - can also appear from
complex forms. In this case, the future adjective is
American Journal Of Philological Sciences
314
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajps
American Journal Of Philological Sciences (ISSN
–
2771-2273)
simplified by person-number and, being integrated,
forms a complex form. As a result, the simplification of
the two forms passes into one form, while the content
remains
twofold,
creating
disproportion.
The
placement of other forms among the analytical forms
in the examples of "ayt+gu+m keldi" - "ayt+gim keldi",
"ayt+gu+si keldi" - "ayt+gisi keldi" first leads to
complexity, then to simplification.
A. Yuldashev points out that “the
-gi kel- form arises on
the basis of its similarity to noun formations in the form
of aşşıgi kel(moq) in the formation of sensory verbs” [1.
103]. The formation of involuntary verb forms
expressing desire (uyqusi kelmoq, aytgisi kelmoq) turns
the analytical form -gi kel- into a regular form. In fact,
the -gi kel- form also arises from the subsequent
reduction of the devices mentioned above in the form
of my debt kelmoq: the word in the accusative case
changes to the genitive case, and the possessor
changes to the participle with the following verb word.
It is also important that the possessive suffixes in the
structures
–
borgim kel-, borging kel-, borgisi kel-,
borgimiz kel-, borgizin kel-, borgilari kel- are added to
the middle of the analytical form (-gi kel-), these
suffixes lose their characteristics as nouns and take on
the status of verb forms
–
inflections. At this point, it is
also necessary to clarify the position of the -adi form in
the second part of the analytical form. In almost all
grammatical and scientific works, the -adi form is
indicated as the form of the third person singular of the
verb (explained in the previous section). In this
structure, the possessive suffixes perform the function
of inflections and also create the corresponding
person-number meaning. In this case, -a in the -adi
form denotes the present-future tense, while -di is
actually a residual form of the verb of the state and
does not seem to be related to the person-number
category in any way. Compare: borgisi kela turur>
borgisi keladur> borgisi keldi. Thus, in the third person,
the personal number is expressed by the zero
morpheme. In other Turkic languages, the contraction
of the form of turur is even more profound: in Kyrgyz,
bargisi kelet. In Tatar, it is completely dropped: bargisi
kela. It should be noted that all the forms of kelā turur,
kelet, kelā (also the form kelādi) actually express the
3rd person, like -di (a shortened form of turur): bor, kel
–
sen (2nd person); bordi, keldi
–
u (3rd person). The
features of the -di affix, such as expressing the mood of
the report and expressing the third person, require
separate research.
-(i)b ot-. The analytical form -(i)b ot-, which actively
particip
ates in syntagmas such as aytīb ot
-
tidi, korīb ot
-
tidi, gabarib ot-tidi, consists of two parts: the parts -(i)b
and ot-moq. From the point of view of formation, it is
formed from the adverb -(i)b and the verb ot-moq. In
the analytical form, the adverb has completely lost its
meaning and function, and has become a means of
attaching the second part to the base. The verb ot-moq,
which is considered the second part of the form, also
means movement, walking (a direction from one point
to another) completely lost its meaning, as a result, the
existing form became a meaningless value expression.
This created a 1:0 imbalance in relation to the verb to
go. The analytical integration of the two forms reached
the stage of expressing one meaning in the syntagm
(which means that an imbalance occurred in the ratio
of 2:1) and turned into a unit that gives emphasis to the
word (base), connecting the continuation of the
syntagm to the base. As a result, the two forms became
more complex (through simplification), and one
complex form was formed - the analytical form. The
formation of such forms did not appear today, just as
development found its expression in the language,
morpheme units also went through their stages of
development. (In the previous section, we talked about
the development of morphemes.)
Analytical forms have long been a widespread
phenomenon in Turkic languages, as well as in Uzbek.
B.A. Serebrennikov, I.Z. Gadzhiyeva note that the
formation of auxiliary verbs, which are also used as a
noun of style, mood, and tone, coincides with the
period of the division (differentiation) of the Turkic
language into separate languages [2. 444]. This fact
indicates that these forms existed even during the
Turkic language. Thus, analytical forms have existed
historically and are still used in practice today.
Considering that analytical forms of verbs have been
widespread in Turkic languages since ancient times,
starting with O. Byotling, the term periphrastic forms of
verbs was applied to these forms, and with the
publication
of A.A. Yuldashev’s book “Аналитические
формы глагола” in 1965, the second term (analytical
form) also began to be widely used. Verbs that form
analytical forms vary in quantity in Turkic languages.
D.M. Nasilov, based on special research, analysis of
dictionaries and grammars, noted twenty auxiliary
verbs in ancient Turkic language monuments, twenty-
seven in Uzbek and Karakalpak languages, twenty-nine
in Tatar, about twenty in Tuva and Yakut languages, and
fifteen in Turkish [3. 444].
In 1963, two major conferences were held in St.
Petersburg (Leningrad). This conference was devoted
to the word and its structure, grammatical forms of the
word and their relationship. The first session was called
“Analytical constructions in different types of
languages”, and the second was called “Morphological
structure of the word in different types of languages”
[4.]. After these conferences, in the direction of general
linguistics, the terms and concepts of analysis,
American Journal Of Philological Sciences
315
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajps
American Journal Of Philological Sciences (ISSN
–
2771-2273)
analyticism, synthesis and synthetism, analytical and
synthetic forms were applied to the materials of
different languages. In particular, considerable work
was done in this regard in the Uzbek language.
The publication of A. Hojiyev’s books “Helpful verbs in
Uzbek language” (1966), “Incomplete verbs in Uzbek
language” (1970), and “Verb” (1973) as fundamental
research in Uzbek linguistics was an important event. In
these works, the meanings and functions of auxiliary
verbs and the incomplete verb "to be" within the verb
word group were covered in detail in a synchronic
manner. The scientist noted that there are more than
thirty auxiliary verbs in the Uzbek language and showed
their differences in meaning.
-y ket- form. The analytical form of complex forms is
quite widespread in the system of morphological forms
of the Uzbek language. Among them, there is the
analytical form -y ket-
in the syntagmas оылай кеты,
оқиқ кеты, зозлай кеты. The structure of this analytical
form, which serves to express the duration of the
action, the fact that it is being performed without
stopping, consists of two parts (the structure of any
analytical form always consists of two parts). The first
part is the adverbial form -y, the form of the imperative
mood, and the second part is the form that gives the
meaning of the verb кетымок.
In the -y form, which lost
its adverbial function in the first part, the imperative
mood has retained its position. It has passed from
multi-functionality to monosemanticity. As a result, the
meaning-denoting aspect of the form has weakened,
and an imbalance has arisen in relation to the meaning:
from the 1:2 form it has become 1:1. A form that
previously served two meanings now expresses one
meaning. The second part is expressed by the verb
кетымок. In the analytic form, the content of the verb
to go has completely disappeared, becoming a part that
does not convey content, and has become a unit that
performs the main function of the analytic form. As a
result, the form, which has lost its function of
conveying meaning, has become a meaningless part
with a v
alue of 1:0. Therefore, the fact that the verb “to
go” exists in terms of form but has no value in terms of
content indicates a disproportion between form and
content. As a result, the two units (the adverb -y and
the verb to go) have been rounded off to form an
analytic form: -y ket-
–
as in students went to work on
tests, and the teacher went to read the lecture. Now
the
resulting
analytic
form
has
become
disproportionate to the contents it previously
expressed. Also, the two forms, serving the same
content, create a new disproportion in the form of 2:1.
N.A. Baskakov described analytical and synthetic
grammatical forms as stages in the morphological
development of a word: “The processes of
morphological development of a word in Turkic
languages reflect a tendency associated with the
continuous
grammaticalization
of
free
word
combinations:
the
meaning
of
the
second
(postpositional)
part
in
the
combination of
independent words becomes abstract; then the
independent word is combined with a helper word in
another place, preserving its independent meaning; at
the next stage, the second part loses its independent
meaning and turns into an analytical grammatical form,
and finally, the postpositional component turns into a
morpheme - an affix expressing a certain grammatical
meaning” [5. 18
-19]. The emergence of complex forms
is associated with the process of morphological
development. As a result of the weakening of the
meaning of the first part, the need for the second part
increases. Later, both parts become more complex in
order to express the same meaning and show a
disproportion of meaning to form.
-a ol- form. A distinctive feature of analytical forms is
that they can be directly attached to the base. They also
enrich the content understood from the base. In
syntagmas such as "gapiramoq", "saytamolok",
"explain" the analytical form -a ol- is used, and it is
directly attached to the verb "to speak". The analytical
form -a ol- also consists of two parts, in the first part
the adverb -a has lost its function and can now be the
first part of analytical forms: -a ol-, -a ber-, -a basla-, -a
kel-, -a ket-, -a kor-, -a qol-, -a tur-, -a chiq-, -a bil-, -a
yaz-, -a sol-. The second part is expressed by the verb
"olmoq", as a result of which the verb loses its meaning
and is attached to the structure of the form. Now the
form that gives the meaning of the verb олмок has to
perform the function of an auxiliary. Both parts of the
analytical form have lost their meaning and have
become meaningless forms that look disproportionate
from 1:1 to 1:0. The loss of meaning of the verb олмок,
that is, its acquisition of the status of an auxiliary verb,
allows it to be used in other analytical forms: such as
борид олмок, эта олмок. The fact that the analytical
form -a ol- consists of two parts and serves one
meaning
expresses
the
appearance
of
the
disproportion in the ratio of 2:1.
Analytical forms have their own position and role in the
language. Analytical forms formed on the basis of
certain orders in the structure of words arise on the
basis of a certain pattern. The order of placement of
morphemes in the Turkic languages, Uzbek, is also
unique,
and
they
form
certain
types
of
morphosyntagms. Their combination is similar to
syntagmatic units - word combinations and sentence
structures, and has the property of isomorphism: units
expressing a specific meaning are placed in the
preposition, while units expressing a relatively abstract
American Journal Of Philological Sciences
316
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajps
American Journal Of Philological Sciences (ISSN
–
2771-2273)
meaning are placed in the postposition: according to
this law, the root morpheme is placed before the word-
forming morphemes, in turn, the word-forming
morphemes are placed before the functional word-
forming ones, and the functional word-forming ones
before the word-
modifying affixes”[6. 71]. So, in this
placement, morphemes expressing a specific meaning
are placed from the beginning of the word to the end
in a ratio based on the opposition “specificity
-
abstractness”. In this respect, the last of the placed
morphemes is relatively stronger and more important.
The fact that analytical forms are added not at the end
of the word form, but as the first form after the base, is
the basis for their “serious” placement in the
syntagmatic structure.
Compound affixes formed in morphemics on the basis
of disproportion, expanded forms, and analytical and
synthetic
forms
have
historically
manifested
themselves in different ways in “dualism”
- the
opposition of binary. Compound affixes arose from the
functional-semantic integration of two or more
constituents (o’qi+yəmən, ayt+iniz); expanded forms,
on the other hand, underwent the process of
transformation of the parts of the compound affix into
new units (boribon - bor+ibon - borib+on: the -on
morpheme was, as it were, morphologically redivided);
in analytical forms, the second of the two units is not
used as an analytical form in an independent state, but
is expressed by an independent form: the formant -a
yaz-
in the combination yıqila yazdi also does not have
the ability to be used independently syntagmatically. If
the second part is used independently, it is used in the
position of the original content, not in the position of
the analytical form.
Analytical forms are created on the basis of a certain
model: adverb + auxiliary verb, adjective + auxiliary
verb. In analytical forms, the meaning of the second
part of the constituent parts is actual, and although the
first part has lost its semantic value, it has retained its
functional value as affixing, connecting the base and
auxiliary morpheme: -a qol-: stay; -a tur: look; -(i)b chiq:
read chiq, the affixes -a, -(i)b of the adverb have
reached the level of losing their main semantic value in
the analytical form. We can also observe this in the
above and following examples. Modeling of this type of
forms is carried out, first of all, on the basis of the
functional-meaning value of the constituent parts they
contain, and then on the basis of generalizing their
external
side
-
phonetic-phonological,
morphophonemic signs, identifying invariant units. For
this reason, the concept of a model can be described as
a theory of language structure, a mechanism of
language functioning in a narrow sense, or a semiotic
analogue of a structure (structure)” [7. 257].
In descriptive linguistics, the discreteness of words and
morphemes was determined on the basis of the binary
principle. One of the founders of structural linguistics,
L. Bloomfield, noted that in languages with a complex
morphological structure, a hierarchy of constructions
can be observed: in a complexly structured - multi-
morpheme word, its components, affixes, modifiers are
added in a certain order, and the division of multi-
layered devices into parts should proceed on the basis
of a simple, binary principle. This binary should reflect
the appearance of a specific model within a given
language and model” [8. 200]. In this re
gard, the model
of analytical forms is quite active among morphological
forms and works on the basis of this existing model.
Another prominent representative of structural
linguistics, Y. Nayda, wrote that “when determining the
order of stratification of directly constituent parts, one
should always take into account the basic models of the
language system” [9. 200]. If binary structures define
paradigmatic series - invariant units, then the speech
occurrence - syntagmatic arrangement of the elements
in these structures can be determined as the main part
and the companion part, the contrast of central and
marginal positions (Y. Kurilovich), the constant part and
the variable part [10. 207].
Functional-semantic
shifts,
phonomorphological
changes that constantly occur at different levels of the
language system lead to a change, redefinition of the
boundary between morphemes. As a result, the
imbalance allows for the formation of new
morphemes, new language units. In this regard, the
correct determination of the functional-semantic
boundaries operating in the system of morphemes is of
great scientific and practical importance. Analytical
forms in verbs have such a limit, and the formation of
some units is much more ancient: -gudek kyl- analytical
form.
CONCLUSION
Each analytical form, no matter how many morphemes
it consists of, is always divided into two parts.
Disproportion is also observed in analytical forms. If in
terms of formation it is disproportionate to the content
in the ratio of 2:1, 3:1, then in terms of meaning the
ratio of 2:1 always creates a disproportion in
appearance. In other words, regardless of how many
parts the forms consist of, they serve the same content
in a proportional state. A deep and thorough scientific
study of analytical forms in the Uzbek language and the
disproportions occurring in them enriches linguistics
with new scientific and theoretical sources.
REFERENCES
Юлдашев А.А. Аналитические формы глагола в
тюркских языках. –М.: Наука, 1965.
American Journal Of Philological Sciences
317
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajps
American Journal Of Philological Sciences (ISSN
–
2771-2273)
Сравнителъно
-
историческая грамматика тюркских
языков. Морфология. –М., 1988.
Щербак А.М. Очерки по сравнителной морфологии
тюркских языков (Глагол). –
Л., 1981.
Аналитические конструкции в языках различных
типов. –
Л., 1963;
Морфологическая структура слова в языках
различных типов. –М. –
Л., 1963.
Баскаков Н.А. Аналитические и синтетические
грамматические формы
-
ступени морфологического
развития слова (на материале тюркских языков)
/Аналитические конструкции в языках различных
типов. –Л.,1963.
Баскаков
Н.А.
Историко
-
типологическая
морфология тюркских языков. –М., 1979.
Засорина Л.Н. Введение в структурную лингвистику.
–М., 1974.
Общее языкознание. Методы лингвистических
исследований. –М., 1973.
