Authors

  • Kamola Khamidova
    Kokand State University.
  • Movluda Melikuziyeva
    Kokand State University.

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.71337/inlibrary.uz.ijai.108037

Abstract

the article describes toponymic variability and other linguistic phenomena: synonymy, antonymy, homonymy and parallelism.


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 2149

UDC: 81`2

STUDY OF TOPONYMIC VARIABILITY AND LINGUISTIC PHENOMENA

Khamidova Kamola Mamirovna

Kokand State University of Languages and Literatures (PhD), Associate Professor.

ORCID: 0009-0007-3161-2164, Email:

kamolaxonhamidova@gmail.com,

Melikuziyeva Movluda Abdukhafizovna

Associate Professor of Kokand State University.

Annotatsiya:

maqolada toponimik variantlilik va boshqa lisoniy hodisalar: sinonimlik,

antonimlik, omonimlik va paralellik hodisalari yoritilgan.

Kalit so‘zlar:

toponim, polisonim, polindrom, variant, adabiy variant, fonetik, fonetik shakl.

Аннотация:

в статье описывается топонимическая изменчивость и другие языковые

явления: синонимия, антонимия, омонимия и параллелизм.

Ключевые слова:

топоним, полисоним, палиндром, вариант, литературный вариант,

фонетика, фонетическая форма.

Abstract:

the article describes toponymic variability and other linguistic phenomena:

synonymy, antonymy, homonymy and parallelism.

Key words:

toponym, polysonym, palindrome, variant, literary variant, phonetic, phonetic form.

INTRODUCTION. When discussing synonyms, antonyms and homonyms in scientific sources

on linguistics, proper nouns, that is, onomastic units, are usually ignored. According to R.

Khudoyberganov, this is done from two points of view:
1) proper nouns do not have a lexical meaning, and therefore it is difficult to determine similar

and opposite meanings in them;
2) it is considered that synonymous, antonymic and homonymous relations do not exist in the

system of proper nouns.
However, homonymy and synonymy are also observed in onomastic units.
LITERATURE ANALYSIS AND METHODS. As E. Begmatov shows, the issue of synonymy

of nouns requires taking into account two phenomena:
a) the relationship between the word on which the noun is based and the name formed from it

(jora - Jo'ra);
b) the relationship between synonymous names (Jora - Companion; Hamdam - Friend; Friend -

Friend; Jora - Hamdam; Yor - Friend).


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 2150

According to the author, the base word for a name and the name formed from it cannot be

synonymous, since in speech it is impossible to use one of them interchangeably. If the base

word for a name expresses a generalized meaning, the name means an individual, single

concept. In our opinion, the same considerations apply to toponyms.
DISCUSSION AND RESULTS. The phenomenon of variantness in the onomastic system is

close to the term "parallels". The lexical unit parallel is derived from the Latin word parallilos,

which means going side by side. This term refers to the fields of linguistics, geometry and

geography, and in linguistics it denotes sentences and phrases that have the same structure.
The term parallelism is used in linguistics in the sense of “the fact that adjacent sentences,

phrases have the same syntactic structure”.
Linguistic parallelism, its essence, synonyms, invariants and variants were specially studied by

R.M. Shukurov. The scientist defines the phenomenon of parallelism as follows: “Parallelisms,

that is, lexical-morphological and syntactic units that are close in function and meaning, but do

not have the same form, are a complex of effective and expressive methods that have formed in

the national language over several periods”.
Or: “Parallelism is two or more phenomena that repeat each other in form and content. It is a

method of poetic expression of thought through the juxtaposition of a state or thing”.
The author notes the following features characteristic of parallel means (parallels):
1. Parallels are close in function and meaning, but do not have the same form.
2. The concept of parallelism is broader and deeper than the concept of synonymy.
3. Parallelism occurs both within the content of expression and within the means of expression.
4. It is divided into parallelism and substantive (semantic) parallelism.

5. Syntactic parallelism (repetition of a sentence with the same pattern, a phrase) is manifested

in the form of parallelism and repetition of meaning, concept, thought.

6. Parallelism is the juxtaposition of two or more phenomena, situations that repeat each other

in form and content.

7. Substantive and formal parallelism are necessary tools for methodology, “If substantive

parallelisms create the possibility of choice, formal parallelism, firstly, makes speech

expressive and attractive, musical and melodious, and secondly, ensures that the language text

is impressive and memorable.”

1. Synonyms are also parallelism. However, not all synonyms are parallelism, parallelism is a

broader concept than the concept of synonymy.

2. Syntactic synonymy and syntactic variants, according to some generalization property, are

combined into a certain generality - invariant.

3. Syntactic synonymy and syntactic variants do not deny each other, they are combined into

one generality. Taking this into account, they can be called "parallel syntactic wholes".

According to R. Khudoyberganov, combining synonymy, variants and parallelism into one

generality is controversial, since the mentioned concepts are different phenomena in terms of

their source, reason for emergence, linguistic (material) material, functional-methodical, social


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 2151

communicative function and branching (differentiation) in the language system, as well as in

terms of their existence in one language and more than one language (sister languages). Such a

difference is especially clearly visible when synonymy, variants and parallelism are studied on

the basis of onomastic material.

Parallelism, parallelism are characteristic of all levels of language. For example, lexicology

talks about lexical parallels. For example, about the parallels inherent in the Uzbek and

Mongolian lexicon, E. Begmatov writes the following: “...there are words in the Uzbek lexicon

that are used in both languages. For example, the words syyreg (sparse), tailag (tailoq), tang

(tanglay), tomuu (tumov), elchin (elchi), ert (erta), xox (blue), khunjit (sesame) exist in both

Uzbek and Mongolian and are used in the same or similar meanings in these languages. If

Mongolian were understood as a Turkic language, a sister language, the words cited would

belong to the general Turkic lexical layer. However, in linguistics, Uzbek and Mongolian are

considered languages ​ ​ belonging to different systems. These words cannot be said to have

been adopted from Mongolian into Uzbek or, conversely, to have been adopted from Turkic

languages ​ ​ into Mongolian. For this reason, such words are called "companion words" in

linguistics, "Turkic-Mongolian lexical parallels."

In linguistics, a lot of work has been written about linguistic parallels in the field of lexicon,

terminology, especially geographical terms. There are also some such works on the example of

toponyms, anthroponyms, ethnonyms.

G.I. Meshadiev, speaking about “lexical parallels” in the toponymy of the Azerbaijani, Uzbek

and Kyrgyz languages, cites as examples the toponyms Agdash (Azerbaijani) // Oqtash (Uzbek),

Guba (Azerbaijani) // Kuva (Uzbek), Poladly (Azerbaijani) // Polatchi (Uzbek). Of the above,

the name Polatchi may be an example of a morphological, not a lexical, parallel. The scientist

does not explain the concept of “parallel”, calling the given toponyms “homonymous”

(“одноименные топонимы”).

S.A. Khapaev notes that a number of hydronyms in the territories inhabited by the Karachay-

Balkars are identical in form to hydronyms in Central Asia (Uzbekistan) and calls them

“Uzbek-Karachay-Balkar parallels”. According to his observations, such names as Kumariq,

Toshariq, Oktuproq, Tolbuloq, Qamishbulaq, Karasuv, Oksuv occur in the toponymic systems

of both languages ​ ​ and form a group of parallel hydronyms.

S.A. Khapaev classified such hydronyms according to their topography. The author did not

state the reasons for the emergence of these parallels, limiting himself to simply noting their

existence.

Y.B. Yusupov, S.K. Kerimov, reflecting on the toponymic parallels in the Azerbaijani and

Uzbek languages, explained the reasons for the emergence of toponymic parallels as follows:

1. Since the Azerbaijani and Uzbek languages ​ ​ belong to the same language - the Turkic

language family, it is natural that some objects are named the same, similar words, the same

way.

2. There is a commonality in the names of the tribes and peoples (ethnonyms) that are part of

the Azerbaijani and Uzbek people. Therefore, common ethnonyms, which form the lexical basis

of toponyms, gave rise to common ethnonyms in both languages.

3. The Arab invasion left its mark on the languages ​ ​ of both peoples. In Azerbaijani and

Uzbek toponymy, there are toponyms formed from Arabic or Mongolian words of the same

form: Ziyarat (mountain) - Ziyarat (village), etc.


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 2152

According to F.G. Garipova, in the Volga region (Povolzhye) there are toponyms that are

identical and similar in form to names in other languages, and these constitute toponymic

parallels, but the author did not cite any toponyms as evidence for this.

Writing about parallels in the field of geographical terms, S.A. Khapaev analyzed geographical

terms and toponyms formed on their basis in the Bashkir and Karachay-Balkar languages. He

cited more than 70 topoparallels found in the languages ​ ​ ​ ​ mentioned in the article. The

scientist considers the reason for the emergence of parallels to be the similarity of the

geographical environment, common places in farming, animal husbandry, and historical reasons.

According to R. Navruzov, about 100 toponyms found in the Azerbaijani language are found in

the Omsk and Tyumen regions of Russia (18), Ukraine and Moldova (14), and the Krasnodar

Territory (9). It is important to study such proximity and parallels in toponymy. The author

cites 7 types of such parallels, and seeks to reveal the reasons for the emergence of some of

them.

T. Jonuzakov identifies ethnonyms such as Naiman, Kerey, Jaloyir, Mangit, Tulengut, which

are found in the Kazakh and Mongolian languages, as “parallels”.

CONCLUSION. From the ideas expressed in the above-analyzed works on toponymic parallels,

the following conclusions can be drawn:

1. Onomastic parallels are the simultaneous occurrence of names that are identical or similar in

form in different languages.

2. Languages ​ ​ in which parallel names occur can be sister languages ​ ​ belonging to the

same system or languages ​ ​ belonging to different systems.

3. Parallel names are names formed from the material of their own layer (for example, a name

belonging to the Turkic layer found in two Turkic languages), words borrowed from other

languages: they are found in Uzbek and Kazakh.

4. Parallel names live independently in the onomastic environment of two or more languages

​ ​ and are considered to be their own onomastic unity for each language.

5. Onomastic parallels are an independent interlingual phenomenon. However, parallel names

can also exist within the dialects and dialects of one language.

6. The form of the name that appeared in ancient times in the Turkic language was equally

preserved in the onomastic system of independent Turkic languages ​ ​ ​ ​ (Uzbek, Kazakh,

Kyrgyz, Turkmen, etc.) after their formation.

7. If parallel names are interlingual, the linguistic material of the name is similar in form,

identical. For example, the names Turdi, Tursun in Kazakh, Kyrgyz, Uzbek, if a parallel name

occurs in languages ​ ​ with different systems, the linguistic material of the name may be

different; for example, Oqsuv (Uzbek) - Belaya voda (Russian). Such names can be called

spiritual (semantic) parallels.

Onomastic, including toponymic parallels, are one of the laws that express the peculiar way of

life of the system of proper names.

REFERENCES:

1. Худойберганов Р.Ю. Ўзбек антропонимияси тизимининг вариантдорлиги: Филол.

фан. ном. ... дисс. – Тошкент, 2008. – Б. 31.

2. Бегматов Э. Ўзбек тили антропонимикаси: Филол. фан. ном. … дисс. – Тошкент,

1965. – Б. 484.

3. Словарь иностранных слов. – М.: СЭ, 1964. – С. 472.


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 2153

4. Ахманова О.С.Словарь лингвистических терминов. – М.: СЭ, 1969. – С. 309.

5. Ўзбек тилининг изоҳли луғати. – Тошкент: Ўзбекистон миллий энциклопедияси,

2020. – 3-ж. – Б. 217.

6. Шукуров Р. Параллел синтактик бутунликлар: Филол. фан. ном. … дисс. – Фарғона,

2005. – Б. 13.

7. Бегматов Э. Ҳозирги ўзбек адабий тилининг лексик қатламлари. –Тошкент: Фан,

1985. – Б. 55.

8. Керимов С.К. Этноним минг в топонимии Азербайджана//Ономастика Узбекистана. -

Ташкент, 1989. – С. 45-46; Нуриев Э.Б. Азербайджанские географические термины и

их параллели в Средней Азии //Ономастика Узбекистана. –Ташкент, 1987. - С. 16-17;

Абдурахманов А.Этимологическое исследование некоторых этнонимов общих для

узбекского и казакского народов// Материалы конференции по ономастике

Узбекистана. –Джизак, 1985. –С. 20-21; Мамедов М.А. Среднеазиатские этнонимы в

Азербайджане. Там же. – С. 23-24; Ахметьянов Р.Г. Некоторые чувашско-татарские

диалектные лексические параллелы и их этимологии // Диалекты и топонимия

Поволжья. – Чебаксары, 1978. - С. 79-89.

9. Мешадиев Г.И. Лексические параллели в топонимической системе азербайджанского,

узбекского и киргизского языков // Ономастика Узбекистана. – 1989. – С. 57-58.

10. Хапаев С.А. Узбекско-карачаево-балкарские параллели гидронимов Средней Азии и

Северного Кавказа // Ономастика Узбекистана. – 1989. – С. 85-86.

11. Юсупов Ю.Б., Каримов С.К. Азербайджанские и узбекские топонимические

параллели // Материалы конференции по ономастике Узбекистана. – Джизак, 1985. –

С. 11-12.

12. Гарипова Ф.Г. Некоторые параллели в топонимии Поволжья // Шестая конференция

по ономастике Поволжья. – Волгоград, 1989. – С. 74.

13. Наврузов Р. Азэрбаjчан топонимлэринин параллеллари hагында // Азэрбаjчан

ононмастикасы проблемэлэри. III. – Бакы, 1990. – Б. 294-297.

14. Джанузаков Т.Дж. Основные проблемы ономастики казахского языка: Автореф.

дисс. … д-ра филол. наук. – Алма-Ата, 1976. – С. 37-38.

References

Худойберганов Р.Ю. Ўзбек антропонимияси тизимининг вариантдорлиги: Филол. фан. ном. ... дисс. – Тошкент, 2008. – Б. 31.

Бегматов Э. Ўзбек тили антропонимикаси: Филол. фан. ном. … дисс. – Тошкент, 1965. – Б. 484.

Словарь иностранных слов. – М.: СЭ, 1964. – С. 472.

Ахманова О.С.Словарь лингвистических терминов. – М.: СЭ, 1969. – С. 309.

Ўзбек тилининг изоҳли луғати. – Тошкент: Ўзбекистон миллий энциклопедияси, 2020. – 3-ж. – Б. 217.

Шукуров Р. Параллел синтактик бутунликлар: Филол. фан. ном. … дисс. – Фарғона, 2005. – Б. 13.

Бегматов Э. Ҳозирги ўзбек адабий тилининг лексик қатламлари. –Тошкент: Фан, 1985. – Б. 55.

Керимов С.К. Этноним минг в топонимии Азербайджана//Ономастика Узбекистана. - Ташкент, 1989. – С. 45-46; Нуриев Э.Б. Азербайджанские географические термины и их параллели в Средней Азии //Ономастика Узбекистана. –Ташкент, 1987. - С. 16-17; Абдурахманов А.Этимологическое исследование некоторых этнонимов общих для узбекского и казакского народов// Материалы конференции по ономастике Узбекистана. –Джизак, 1985. –С. 20-21; Мамедов М.А. Среднеазиатские этнонимы в Азербайджане. Там же. – С. 23-24; Ахметьянов Р.Г. Некоторые чувашско-татарские диалектные лексические параллелы и их этимологии // Диалекты и топонимия Поволжья. – Чебаксары, 1978. - С. 79-89.

Мешадиев Г.И. Лексические параллели в топонимической системе азербайджанского, узбекского и киргизского языков // Ономастика Узбекистана. – 1989. – С. 57-58.

Хапаев С.А. Узбекско-карачаево-балкарские параллели гидронимов Средней Азии и Северного Кавказа // Ономастика Узбекистана. – 1989. – С. 85-86.

Юсупов Ю.Б., Каримов С.К. Азербайджанские и узбекские топонимические параллели // Материалы конференции по ономастике Узбекистана. – Джизак, 1985. – С. 11-12.

Гарипова Ф.Г. Некоторые параллели в топонимии Поволжья // Шестая конференция по ономастике Поволжья. – Волгоград, 1989. – С. 74.

Наврузов Р. Азэрбаjчан топонимлэринин параллеллари hагында // Азэрбаjчан ононмастикасы проблемэлэри. III. – Бакы, 1990. – Б. 294-297.

Джанузаков Т.Дж. Основные проблемы ономастики казахского языка: Автореф. дисс. … д-ра филол. наук. – Алма-Ата, 1976. – С. 37-38.