International Journal Of Literature And Languages
32
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ijll
VOLUME
Vol.05 Issue07 2025
PAGE NO.
32-36
10.37547/ijll/Volume05Issue07-10
Expression of Lexical Units from Mahmud Kashgari's
'Divan' In the Speech of Dialect Representatives
Aralova Lobar Akbar qizi
Tashkent State University of Uzbek language and Literature named after Alisher Navoi, Doctoral student, Uzbekistan
Received:
16 May 2025;
Accepted:
12 June 2025;
Published:
14 July 2025
Abstract:
“Divan lughat at turk” is important in the study of the Turkic tribes and their language feuteres in the
11th century. As known, the main part of the language facts of the written monuments of the 11th century is
stable in the current Uzbek language and Uzb
ek folk dialects. For this reason, in this article some “Divan” words
preserved in the speech of dialect representatives were analyzed, their meaning changes were determined. The
spiritual closeness of some given examples with the words in the lexicon of the work, their change over time was
based on etymological dictionaries.
Keywords:
E
tymological analysis, dialect, oghuz, kipchak, karluk, “Divan lughat at turk”
.
Introduction:
In Uzbek dialects, many linguistic
differences, both those recorded and unrecorded in
ancient Turkish written monuments, have been
preserved, some of which are common to Turkic
languages and some are not [Ишаев, 1971: 64].
The lexicon of Uzbek dialects spread in the Khorezm,
Karakalpak, and Tashhauz regions is undoubtedly
primarily composed of layers specific to Turkic words.
In fact, if we take a look at the words used in
contemporary Uzbek literary language and dialects, we
can see the presence of words related to ancient layers.
Studying dialects from a historical perspective and
clarifying their past is essential for the history of
language and for linguistic-geographic research in the
compilation of a dialectological atlas [Решетов, 1960:
41].
Studying Mahmud Kashgari's work 'Divan lughat at
turk' and Uzbek dialects in a monographic manner will
help clarify
many abstract issues in linguistics [Ишаев,
1971: 67]. The prominent dialectologist Ahmad Ishayev
emphasized that a significant portion of the linguistic
facts in this work are more frequently found in the
dialects of the Uzbek language related to the Karluk,
Kipchak, and Oghuz groups compared to the modern
Uzbek literary language [Ишаев, 1971: 67].
In fact, the Oghuz groups in Khorezm, Tashhauz, and
Karakalpakstan are classified as Oghuz dialects of the
Uzbek language [Решетов, Шоабдураҳмонов, 1975:
81]. While reading the work 'Divan lughat at turk' we
witness that numerous examples of Oghuz words are
provided. The linguist Alijon Allaberdiyev mentions in
his research that there are 218 words presented in
'Divan lughat at turk' marked with a single Oghuz sign
[Аллабердиев, 2018: 239]. Our research on the
relationship of the lexicon of 'Divan lughat at turk' with
today's Uzbek dialects shows that there are similarities
and some differences between the words used in the
text and in the dialects. This can also be observed in the
comparative analysis conducted below.
Analyzes
In Mahmud Kashgari's work 'Divan lughat at turk' the
term ič ӭt refers to 'a delicate piece that clings to the
liver' [Кошғарий, 1960: I, 71]. In Khiva, the same word
is used with the meaning: ich
–
belly [Мадраҳимов,
1996: 93].
It can be observed that some words in written
monuments have undergone slight changes in their
meanings. For example, the meaning of the word jӭk in
the 'Divan' is 'devil': bilmiš jӭk bilmäzük kišidä(n) jig –
a
fami
liar devil from an unfamiliar person [Кошғарий,
1963: III, 175]. In the Khorezm Oghuz dialect, this word
has negative meanings, referring to something
unpleasant or deceitful: yek gɵrmək –
to dislike [ЎХШЛ,
1971: 131].
International Journal Of Literature And Languages
33
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ijll
International Journal Of Literature And Languages (ISSN: 2771-2834)
The term 'junaq' is explained in Mahmud Kashgari's
dictionary as 'the textiles placed under the load of
animals such as donkeys, bulls, and similar pack
animals' [Кошғарий, 1963: III, 36]. In the Khorezm
Oghuz dialect, there exists a phonetic form yӧnä, which
expresses 'the mat placed under the textile'
[Мадраҳимов, 1996: 100]. In the language of the
Hazara people, it means 'yɵnə kigiz –
a simple felt made
of wool' [ЎХШЛ, 1971: 136].
The word 'kapsan', which refers to 'the fee collected by
officials from someone's grain harvest', 'the charity
given to the poor when the harvest is collected' and
'the fee from grain sold in the market' is noted to be
used in the Oghuz dialect in the phonetic form kӧvsän
[Мадраҳимов, 1996: 105]. In Old Turkic, the term
'kovsan' was used in the meaning of 'the gift of grain
given to a person after the grain harvest has been
threshed' [Кошғарий, 1963: III, 395].
Some lexemes from the work 'Divan lughat at turk' are
used in the Oghuz dialects in the same way. In
particular, the word qäyïr is mentioned in the 'Divan'
and is indicated to be Oghuz: 1) sand, sandy land; 2) soft
ground. It is noted that this word is frequently used in
the same meaning in the Khorezm Oghuz dialects
[Фазылов, 1966
-1971: 122]. Ahmad Ishayev, in his
book titled 'The Uzbek Dialects in Karakalpakstan'
presents three meanings of this word: 1) land formed
as a result of changes in the Amu Darya riverbed (land
where the river no longer flows); 2) the muddy bottom
mixed with sand of the river; 3) shallow places in the
Amu Darya [Ишаев, 1971: 124]. We
can see that the
second meaning in the language of the people of
Karakalpakstan is exactly the same as the meaning of
'sand, sandy land' in the 'Divan'.
The word 'angiz' is one of the terms that is widely used
in the present-day Turkmen language and in the
Khorezm dialects, referring to 'land where crops are
sown'. This lexeme is also used in a similar meaning in
the 'Divan'. It is characteristic that in the Uzbek,
Karakalpak, Kazakh, and Turkmen dialects spoken in
the districts of Qongirot, Qonlikol, Shumanoy, and
Xojayli in the Republic of Karakalpakstan, the lexemes
aƞiz (field freed from crops) and aƞ (sown) correspond
to the meaning of 'a field freed from agriculture'.
Examples include: 'Aƞniƞ suyrukleri (young hay) yote
yosipti' (in the Qongirot distri
ct). 'Aƞizda qoyan suylun
kameken' (in the Xojayli district) [Ишаев, 1971: 71].
In the dialect of the Kazakhs living in Southern
Kazakhstan, the lexemes aƞiz and aƞ are found with the
same meaning [Аманжолов, 1959: 360]. The derivative
aƞiz is used in the
form of 'angara' (a field where the
harvest has been collected [Аллабердиев, 2015: 110])
in the Oghuz dialects of Bukhara Province. This word is
also used in variants such as əngər / əngor / əƞƞən in
the Uzbek dialects of Tajikistan, meaning 'a field where
the harvest has been collected' [Шералиев, 1990: 54
-
56]. In the Uzbek dialects of the Republic of
Karakalpakstan, it takes the variant ang‘ar and refers to
a canal where the water no longer flows.
The word 'chanaq' is indicated to be a lexical unit
specific to the Oghuz in the 'Divan' used in the sense of
'vessels made of wood' [Кошғарий, 1960: I, 112]. In the
Bukhara Oghuz dialect, 'chonoq' is used not only in this
sense but also to refer to all types of vessels made from
materials such as aluminum, cast iron, lead, plastic,
etc., and its meaning has broadened. Nowadays,
wooden vessels
—
chanoqlar - are not being produced,
as it is more convenient and cheaper to make vessels
from other materials.
The lexeme 'čӧläq' has been conveyed in the 'Divan' as
meaning 'having a cut hand, crippled'. In the Bukhara
Oghuz dialect, the meaning of 'choloq' has broadened
to include, in addition to 'having a cut hand, crippled'
meanings such as 'having one leg missing or having one
leg amputated': 'Doyim bendǝ girmon urushda
bir el,
bir oyoqni Berlinǝ toshlop, choloq bolip gelǝn'
(Qorakol; Jigachi). In the Uzbek literary language,
'cho‘loq' is commonly used with the meanings: 1)
crippled in the leg, lame; 2) lacking a hand or leg;
handicapped, invalid [ЎТИЛ, II, 523]. This lex
eme also
shows a case of meaning expansion.
'Yongichqa' refers to 'a type of div'. In ancient Turkic
language, this word also had the same meaning and
was pronounced as 'yurinchg‘a' [Кошғарий, 1963: III,
439]. The form arrived in the Uzbek language through
the following phonetic changes: to facilitate the
pronunciation of the series of consecutive 'nchq'
consonants, the vowel 'i' was added in between the
'nch' consonants, after which the sounds 'ri' ceased to
be pronounced. The 'n' consonant changed to 'ng'
which in turn changed the 'ng' consonant to 'ng‘' and
the vowel 'a' was replaced by the vowel 'ӓ'. The
hardness mark of the vowel 'i' disappeared: yorinchqa
> yoringichqa > yongichqa > yong‘ichqa > yong‘ichqӓ.
We can observe that this word is used as 'yo
‘mushqa'
in Khorezm, 'yo‘ngichqa' and 'yo‘ngushqa' in the
Qarnoq and Qoramurt dialects, and as 'yo‘ng‘ichqa' and
'beda' in the Tulkibosh and Chimkent dialects [ЎХШЛ,
1971: 135].
The work 'Divan lughat at turk' provides important
information about the etymology of words existing in
the modern Uzbek language, shedding light on their
original sources. For example, the etymology of the
verb 'emaklamoq' used in contemporary Uzbek literary
language and dialects, can be traced back to the word
'o‘mgan': o‘mganla >
o‘mgakla (where n changes to l) >
International Journal Of Literature And Languages
34
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ijll
International Journal Of Literature And Languages (ISSN: 2771-2834)
emgakla > emakla, meaning 'to move like an o‘mgan
(caterpillar)'. In the written monuments of the XI-XII
centuries, words such as 'qayg‘iq' [Кошғарий, 1963: III,
90], 'tamg‘aq' [Кошғарий, 1960: I, 69], and 'ko‘rgak'
[Кошғарий, 1961: II, 335) had the consonants 'g' and
'g‘' between them, which later dropped out. Just as the
words became 'qayiq,' 'tamaq,' 'ko‘rak,' the 'g' in
'emgakla' also fell away.
The word 'paqir,' which embodies the meaning of 'a
container used for transporting and storing water and
other liquids, with a tapered, cylindrical shape' is
considered a dialectal word, while in literary language,
it is used as 'chelak' (bucket). The lexeme 'paqir'
developed from the ancient Turkic word 'baqir' which
meant 'cop
per' [Кошғарий, 1960: I, 341]; the semantic
evolution is as follows: 'copper' -> 'a container made of
copper' [ЭСТЯ, II, 46]. This word is used in the dialects
of Tashkent, Kashkadarya, and Pop as 'paqir' [ЎХШЛ,
211], while in regions such as Qoramurt, Qarnoq, and
Iqon, it is used as 'baqir' [ЎХШЛ, 42].
In ancient Turkic, the word 'qïrtïšlamoq' is explained as
'to scrape and clean the surface of the skin' and 'the
surface of the earth': 'ol saǧrïnï qïrtïšladï' –
he scraped
the surface of the skin [Кошғарий,
1963: III, 362]; 'jer
qïrtïšï' –
the crust or surface of the earth. Additionally,
Mahmud Kashgari emphasized that this word is not
used in relation to every surface. However, in Navoi’s
works, this word is even applied to trees.
Seems to be a pastime, think about your passion,
In whose abode did something not get scraped away.
(Your devotion to the tree was so intense that there
was nothing left worthy to scrape in place of the tree).
In contemporary Uzbek, the meaning of this word has
narrowed, being used in the senses of 'to scrape clean'
and 'to thoroughly clean out, leaving nothing behind'
[Abdiraimov, 2019]. From the explanation, it can be
seen that the meaning of 'the surface of the earth' has
fallen out of use in the present day.
One of the words whose meaning has expanded as a
result of language development is 'kerilmoq'. Various
forms of this word exist in the dialect of the Kipchak
speakers: 'keriguv'
–
to stretch its wings, to extend its
div; 'keriluv'
–
to stretch its neck, to spread out, to
shudder; 'kerildi'
–
stretched, expanded, yawned and
spread its wings, etc. It is evident that all these words
share the semantic component of 'to stretch': 'The
eagle, after getting up from the nest, slowly stretched
out its wings toward the threshold; it stopped short at
the beak of the chick that was coming up behind'
[Назаров, 2019: 125]. This word appears in the 'Divan'
as 'esnab kerishish' (to yawn and stretch): 'Here, this
person always yawns and stretches' [Кошғарий, 1960:
I, 477]. The analysis of these words shows that
'kerilmoq' expresses a broader meaning today
compared to its meaning described in 'Divan'.
Another word that has undergone a broadening of
meaning in the Kipchak dialect is 'bejal.' In the speech
of Kipchak speakers, this word is used in two different
senses: 1. lively, restless: 'Your lively child doesn't know
any bounds' [Назаров, 2019: 125]. 2. A stray horse or
donkey: 'Don’t feed the stray donkey, just let it be!’ In
the 'Divan' however, we can only find the first meaning
of this lexeme. In the work, 'bejal' is presented
[Кошғарий, 1960: I, 373] as an adjective that is
interpreted as stronger, more robust, or healthier for
men, women, and all animals.
Yag‘ir refers to 'a purulent wound that occurs as a result
of being crushed under a load on a work animal'. The
saying goes, 'A horse from a thick donkey is good if it is
yag‘ir' (proverb). This word exists in ancient Turkic and
seems to be derived from the verb 'yag‘
-', which means
'to form' or 'to make deep,' combined with the suffix -
(i
)r to form an adjective [Кошғарий, 1963: III, 16]. In
Uzbek, the 'a' vowel has been replaced by the 'ӓ' vowel,
and the hardness marker of the 'i' vowel has
disappeared: yag‘
-
+ ir = yag‘ir > yӓg‘ir. Due to its use
without being modified, this word has transitioned
from denoting a quality to denoting an object: yag‘ir jay
-
> yag‘ir. Currently, in the speech of dialect speakers,
the meaning of this word has expanded. Yag‘ir is used
in the sense of 'dirty': 'Yag‘iring chiqib ketibdi' means
'You have become dirty'.
The language of the Laqais belongs to the Kipchak
dialect, and we can observe variants of words whose
meanings have changed from those found in 'Divan
lughat at turk'. For instance, 'mendoruq' is an archaic
Turkic word that is used in the Laqai dialect in the sense
of 'feast'. In the past, people with means would prepare
various dishes from wheat and hold a feast that was
given to the community once in a lifetime (xudoyi)
[Назаров, 2019: 145]. This word is mentioned in
Mahmud Kashgari's 'Divan lughat a
t turk' as 'məndiri'
[Кошғарий, 1960: I, 454], where it has a different
meaning, namely 'the term for the gathering held at
night with the participation of the bride and groom,
where money is scattered over them (chigilcha)'.
Subsequently, this custom has transformed and has
lost its significance in contemporary times.
When studying the lexicon of the Kipchak dialect, we
have observed that there are words that have retained
the same meanings as seen in the 'Divan' meaning they
are still used in the current context. In fact, some of the
words in the dialect are directly reflected in this
dictionary. For example, we often hear phrases like
'wrapped in a cradle' or 'cradling a baby'. The root of
International Journal Of Literature And Languages
35
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ijll
International Journal Of Literature And Languages (ISSN: 2771-2834)
the word 'yo‘rgaklamoq' exists in the 'Divan': jӧrgadi –
'to wrap'. In Nasriddin Nazarov's book, the term
'jo‘rgek' is used for the soft fabric that wraps around a
baby.
In the Laqai dialect, the lexemes 'irg‘a' and 'irg‘at' are
used to mean 'to shake gently, to move softly, to sway'
[Назаров, 2019: 116]. This word is fo
und in 'Divan
lughat at turk' in the form 'ïrǧattï': ol jïǧač ïrǧattï –
'he
shook the tree' [Кошғарий, 1960: I, 262]. Alisher Navoi
uses it in his work 'Khamsa,' specifically in the poem
'Sab’ai Sayyor': 'There, Anushirvan was looking, shaking
his head and tapping his fingers'.
The word 'hidlamoq' is used in parallel with the lexeme
'iskamoq' [Назаров, 2019: 116], which is also employed
in the same meaning in 'Divan' [Кошғарий, 1960: I,
281]. Representatives of the Kipchak dialect use the
word 'minggeshti' to mean 'to ride together on one
horse, donkey, or vehicle': 'piyada jireseme, eshsheke
chaliƞniƞ arqasig‘a mingesh' [Назаров, 2019: 146]. In
'Divan' it has the same meaning: 'ol mening birlä
miƞašti' –
'he rode with me on the horse' [Кошғарий,
1960: III, 408].
When studying 'Divan lughat at turk' and Uzbek folk
dialects, we can observe that several words were also
used in ancient Turkic, with some undergoing phonetic
changes that are present in the dialectal words. For
example, the word 'lagan' which means 'a large flat dish
intended for placing thick foods' was used in ancient
Turkic in the form 'lag‘un'. In Mahmud Kashgari’s work
'Divan lughat at turk,' the word 'lag‘un' is used, which
means 'a wooden dish made with a deep interior'
[Кошғарий, 1960: I, 389]. In
contemporary Uzbek, its
meaning has changed, and phonetic alterations have
taken place, with the original 'g' sound being
exchanged for 'ğ'. Subsequently, the vowel 'a' in the
first syllable changed to 'ӓ' and then the vowel 'u' in the
second syllable als
o changed to 'ӓ': lag‘un > lagun >
lӓgun > lӓgӓn. According to the 'Divan' lagan is a dish
used for drinking milk, yogurt, and similar substances.
It is also used in the Bukhara and Andijan dialects to
refer to pottery [ЎХШЛ, 1971: 167]. However, in the
Qashqadaryo dialect, particularly among speakers of
the Karluk dialect, this word is used to mean 'a bowl
intended for washing clothes'. Representatives of the
Kipchak dialect call this item 'tog‘ora' when used for
washing clothes.
The word 'o‘ngimoq' is use
d in relation to clothing.
According to the explanatory dictionary, 'o‘ngimoq' has
meanings such as losing color, changing its original
color, and fading. For example,
'A fabric dyed with such paint does not lose its color.'
(from 'Fan va turmush').
'His gym uniform got wet in the rain and faded while
drying in the sun.' (I. Rahim, 'Chin muhabbat').
We can clarify the origin and basis of this word through
'Divan lughat at turk.' The lexeme 'ӧƞdi' is mentioned
in the work to mean 'changed, color faded, dulled'
[Кошғарий, 1960: I, 185]: 'Barčïn buduǧï ӧƞdi' –
'the
color of the silk garment faded.' This word is also used
for others. It is noted that there is a pronunciation
variant 'ӧƞüqti'. Nowadays, in the Tashkent dialect, this
word is used in the form 'unniqti.'
If we pay attention to the etymology of the word, it is
derived from the ancient Turkic verb 'oƞ
-
// ӧƞ
-' which
means 'to change color' [ЭСТЯ, I, 460; Девон, I, 185;
ДС, 367, 386], and it was formed with the intensifying
suffix
–(u)q [Кошғарий, 19
60: I, 185]. Originally, it
meant 'to change color significantly,' considering the
negative change of color, it eventually narrowed down
to mean 'to darken'. After the addition of the
–
(u)q
suffix, the initial vowel 'o' changed to 'u' [Кошғарий,
1960: I, 4
03], and then the consonant 'ƞ' was replaced
by 'n' resulting in the combination of consonants: oƞ +
uq = oƞuq > onnuq > unnuq.
In ancient times, when knots were tied or threads were
tangled, it was referred to as 'chigildi.' Thus, the phrase
'ishlar chigallashdi' means 'the knots that need to be
unraveled in the work have increased'. In the sentence
'U oyog‘ining chigilini yozdi,' there is an indication that
if one sits in one place for too long, the veins can
become knotted.
In Alisher Navoi's works, the word 'chigil' refers to one
of the ancient Turkic tribes, meaning 'the union of
chigils' or 'the land of chigils'. Mahmud Kashgari notes
in his 'Divan lughat at turk' that the term 'čigildi'
[Кошғарий, 1960: II, 153] is used in relation to the
linking of something, as well as to the tangling of
threads.
The existence of words like 'chigin' and 'chigal' in
various dialects further emphasizes the roots of these
terms in the ancient Turkic language and intensifies
interest in studying the history of the language.
In contemporary Uzbek literary language, the word
'sariyog‘' means 'fat obtained from separating milk'
[Abdiraimov, 2019]. This word was used in ancient
times as a compound 'sağ yoğ' [Кошғарий, 1963: III,
168]. In 'At-tuhfa,' we see the phonetic form 'sari yav'
which expressed 'sariyog‘.' In this case, we can observe
that the vowel 'i' was added between the components
of the compound, and over the course of language
development, this compound became a single word.
Originally, 'sariyog‘' would have be
en yellow in color,
and considering its hue, the old Turkic term might have
been 'sağ yoğ.' We can also see that in the speech of
some representatives of Kipchak dialects, this word is
International Journal Of Literature And Languages
36
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ijll
International Journal Of Literature And Languages (ISSN: 2771-2834)
pronounced as 'sari moy' or 'sori moy'.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, it should be noted that these dialect
words constitute our spiritual heritage. Comparing and
studying them with the language of written
monuments shows that the roots of the Uzbek dialect
lexicon were already expressed in the 11th century.
Such research plays a significant role in conducting
areological studies, creating areal maps, and
determining the genesis of words.
REFERENCES
Abdiraimov Sh. O‘zbek tilining universal lug‘ati. 2019.
Аллабердиев А. Бухоро ўзбек шеваларидаги асл
туркий лексик қатламлар // Ўзбек тили ва адабиёти,
2015. № 2. –Б. 110.
Аллабердиев А. Бухоро ўзбек шевалари лексикаси.
Фалс.фан. док(PhD)...дисс. –Тошкент, 2018. –Б. 239.
Аманжолов С. Вопросы диалектологии и истории
казахского языка. –Алма
-
Ата: Ғылым, 1959.–
C. 360.
Ишаев А. Қорақалпоғистондаги ўзбек шевалари. –
Тошкент, 1977.
Ишаев А.“Девону луғотит турк” ва ўзбек шевалари //
Ўзбек тили ва адабиёти. –
1971. -
№5. –Б. 63
-68.
Мадраҳимов О. Ўзбек тили ўғуз лаҳжасининг Хива
шеваси. –
Урганч: “Хоразм”, 1996. –Б.192.
Муталлибов С.М. Маҳмуд Кошғарий. Туркий сўзлар
девони /Девону луғотит турк/. Таржимон ва нашрга
тайёрловчи Муталлибов С.М. –Т.1. –Тошкент: ЎзССР
ФА, 1960. –Б. 499.
Муталлибов С.М. Маҳмуд Кошғарий. Туркий сўзлар
девони /Девону луғотит турк/. Таржимон ва нашрга
тайёрловчи Муталлибов С.М. –Т.2. –Тошкент: ЎзССР
ФА, 1961. –Б.427.
Муталлибов С.М. Маҳмуд Кошғарий. Туркий сўзлар
девони /Девону луғотит турк/. Таржимон ва нашрга
тайёрловчи Муталлибов С.М. –Т.3. –Тошкент: ЎзССР
ФА, 1963. –Б.466.
Назаров Н. Лақайлар: диалектал луғат. –Тошкент,
2019.
Решетов В В Ўзбек диалектларини монографик
ўрганиш // Ўзбек тили ва адабиёти масалалари. –
1960. -
№1. –Б. 41.
Решетов
В.,
Шоабдураҳмонов
Ш.
Ўзбек
диалектологияси. –
Б. 79 –
86.
Севортян Э.В. Этимологические словарь тюркских
языков: Обшетюркские и межтюркские основа на
букву “Б”. –М.: Наука, 1978.
Севортян Э.В. Этимологический словарь тюркских
языков: Обшетюркские и межтюркские основы на
гласные. –М.: Наука, 1974
-.
Ўзбек тилининг изоҳли луғати. 5 жилдли. II жилд. –
Тошкент: “Ўзбекистон миллий энциклопедияси”
Давлат илмий нашриёт. 2006. –Б.672.
Ўзбек халқ шевалари луғати. –
Тошкент: ФАН, 1971.
ХШ –
Кутб. Хосров и Ширин // Фазылов Э.
Староузбекский язык. Хорезмийские памятники ХIV
века. Т. I
-
II. Ташкент: ФАН, 1966
-1971.
Шералиев Э. Шевалардаги умумтуркий сўзлар //
Ўзбек тили ва адабиёти, 1990. № 2. –Б. 54
-56.
.
