Authors

  • N. Sharafutdinova

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.71337/inlibrary.uz.ijai.102792

Abstract

This article presents a structural analysis of theonyms historically used in the Uzbek language and throughout Turkic languages, such as Bayat//Bayot, Ugan//Ugon, and Tangri, as well as borrowed theonyms like Alloh and Parvardigor. It explains the simple and compound structures of both usual and occasional (figurative) theonyms with illustrative examples.

 

background image

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE

ISSN: 2692-5206, Impact Factor: 12,23

American Academic publishers, volume 05, issue 05,2025

Journal:

https://www.academicpublishers.org/journals/index.php/ijai

page 1270

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS OF THEONYMUS USED IN TURKIC LANGUAGES

N Sharafutdinova

Lecturer at the Department of Uzbek Language and Literature, FarSU, PhD

Abstract:

This article presents a structural analysis of theonyms historically used in the Uzbek

language and throughout Turkic languages, such as Bayat//Bayot, Ugan//Ugon, and Tangri, as

well as borrowed theonyms like Alloh and Parvardigor. It explains the simple and compound

structures of both usual and occasional (figurative) theonyms with illustrative examples.

Keywords:

Bayat//Bayot, Ugan//Ugon, Tangri, Alloh, Parvardigor, beauty, peri, laylivash.

The theonyms Bayat//Bayot, Ugan//Ugon, and Tangri, historically used in Uzbek and other

Turkic languages, along with borrowed theonyms Alloh and Parvardigor, are structurally

simple. Even today, Ega and Tangri, belonging to the native lexicon, and borrowed forms like

Alloh and Parvardigor remain structurally simple theonyms.

Occasional theonyms, which are based on figurative usage, are structurally categorized as

either simple or compound.

Theonyms formed from simple words are divided into single-base (simple root) and

double-base (simple derived) forms. Single-base theonyms consist of one morpheme, while

double-base theonyms consist of a root and affixal morphemes. However, not all figuratively

used theonyms in speech possess derivational potential. For example, words like oy (moon),

tabib (healer), hakim (sage), habib (beloved), sulton, ayyor (cunning), oshik (lover), and

ma’shuq (beloved) are not derivational bases.

Mythonyms that convey the meaning of "creator" such as pari (fairy), hur (houris), and

malak (angel) are considered active theonyms with derivational potential.

"Junun ichra majnun emas, ey pari,

Yo‘lingda bu oshufta xolingcha xo‘b."
Munis
"To ul pariliqo mangadur iltifotsiz,

Bo‘ldim nechukki telba qaroru sabotsiz."
Ogahiy
"Ul parivash ishqidin, nosiq, meni man’ etmakim,

Telbalik vaqtiyu oshiqlik zamonidur manga."
Navoiy
In the first couplet, pari serves as a figurative simple root noun representing the Creator. In the

following verses, pariliqo and parivash are simple derived forms expressing attributes such as

"like a fairy" or "fairy-like," functioning as adjectival epithets for the concept of Creator, even

though the word Yaratguvchi (Creator) is not explicitly used.


background image

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE

ISSN: 2692-5206, Impact Factor: 12,23

American Academic publishers, volume 05, issue 05,2025

Journal:

https://www.academicpublishers.org/journals/index.php/ijai

page 1271

The word Parizod denotes origin from the fairy lineage, implying descent from beauty, thus

becoming a speech-based theonym:
"Ul husnu jamoling o‘ti Mashrabga tushubdur,

Parvona sifat kuydi, parizod, eshigingda."
Mashrab
The root pari symbolizes beauty and functions as a base for word formation, modifying and

linking to the implied Creator. It also functions as an epithet for other figurative theonyms, used

in phrases such as pari yuz (fairy face), ruxsor (cheek), and chehra (face):
"Ey pari yuzluk begim, jonlar fido bo‘lsun sanga,

Dunyoda husni oti bor erkan, baqo bo‘lsun sanga."
Lutfiy
Similarly, the mythonym hur acts as a derivational base:
"Ey hurvashki, pokdur asru senga sirisht,

Rang aylar iktisob yuzungdin guli bihisht."
Munis
Proper names with symbolic meanings also function as speech-based theonyms, such as Layli:
"Ayo laylivashim, bir g‘amzayu noz birla o‘ldurding,

Firoqing dashtida Majnun ila hamxona yig‘larman."
Mashrab
Here, laylivash is a derived word made of layli (root) and -vash (affix), functioning as a

figurative name for the Creator.
Words like barno, zebo, nigor (beauty-related terms) lack derivational potential, functioning

only as epithets. Dilbar, dilrabo, and nozanin also lack this capacity, while moh and layli serve

as derivational bases:
"Yuz ochib kelgil, ey mahvash, quyosh yanglig‘ xirom aylab,

Boshimg‘a soldi savdo firqating subhimni shom aylab."
Ogahiy
In this couplet, moh (moon) functions as an attributive component for the Creator, and its

compound with -liqo further emphasizes beauty:
"Sen yaqo chek otlanib, ag‘yor ila, ey mahliqo,

Men yiroqdin rashk ilgi birla yirtarmen yaqo."
Munis


background image

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE

ISSN: 2692-5206, Impact Factor: 12,23

American Academic publishers, volume 05, issue 05,2025

Journal:

https://www.academicpublishers.org/journals/index.php/ijai

page 1272

Words conveying character traits like ayyor, sho‘x, makkor may imply the Creator but lack

derivational function. The word mehribon (kind) has derivational potential:
"Jonim ichra otashi mehring bo‘lubdur shu’la zan,

Ko‘rguzub bir mehr, ey nomehribon, kelmasmusen."
Munis
Here, the prefix no- forms an antonym without changing the word class. In derived theonyms,

the root itself often implies the Creator concept independently. In some cases, the root alone

does not denote a theonym but functions as a base for new formations, such as madad (aid)

forming madadkor (helper):

"Madad qilg‘il, madakorim."

Mashrab

Similarly, nomdor (famous, name-bearing) may express the Creator:
"...Jumla shohlarni ulug‘i, nomdorim kelsano,

Dilni zangorin ochurg‘a oinaro‘ kelmadi."
Mashrab
Words like sitamgar, zulmgar (oppressor) contain root and affix components, but their roots

(sitam, zulm) do not individually denote the Creator:
"Qilursan noz, agar man har necha arzi niyoz etsam,

Sitamkor mahvasho, bu nav’ atvoringga sallamno."
Feruz
The word nuktadon (wise, witty) similarly consists of root and affix, but the root alone does not

imply divinity:
"Kimdin o‘rganding buncha jafoni,

Ey nuktadonim, ishqingda o‘ldum."
Mashrab
The word vafo (loyalty), though not a theonym by itself, becomes so in its derived form:
"Men unga dardi zor aytib-eshitib, yig‘layin derman,

Ko‘ray deb ul vafodorim yurub jo‘yona Mashrabman."
"Ki sensiz naylayin ushbu jahonni, ey vafodorim,

Azobi qabr-hijron dardidin albatta osondur."
Mashrab
This affixation-based derivation creates speech-based theonyms.


background image

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE

ISSN: 2692-5206, Impact Factor: 12,23

American Academic publishers, volume 05, issue 05,2025

Journal:

https://www.academicpublishers.org/journals/index.php/ijai

page 1273

References:

1. Boborahim Mashrab. Gul yuzingga banda bo‘loyin. Tashkent: G‘afur G‘ulom Publishing

House, 2016.
2. Lutfiy. Devon. Tashkent: Badiiy adabiyot, 1965.
3. Ogahiy. Selected Works. Tashkent: O‘zDavNashr, 1958.
4. Sharafutdinova N. Tangri – A Common Turkic Theonym. Khorezm Ma’mun Academy,

2024.
5. Sharafutdinova N. Mythological Images Representing Theonymic Concepts. FarDU

Scientific Bulletin, 2024.
6. Sharafutdinova N. Lexical Bases of Speech-Based Theonyms. Journal of Interdisciplinary

Innovations and Scientific Research in Uzbekistan, 2025.

References

Boborahim Mashrab. Gul yuzingga banda bo‘loyin. Tashkent: G‘afur G‘ulom Publishing House, 2016.

Lutfiy. Devon. Tashkent: Badiiy adabiyot, 1965.

Ogahiy. Selected Works. Tashkent: O‘zDavNashr, 1958.

Sharafutdinova N. Tangri – A Common Turkic Theonym. Khorezm Ma’mun Academy, 2024.

Sharafutdinova N. Mythological Images Representing Theonymic Concepts. FarDU Scientific Bulletin, 2024.

Sharafutdinova N. Lexical Bases of Speech-Based Theonyms. Journal of Interdisciplinary Innovations and Scientific Research in Uzbekistan, 2025.