166
4.O'Neill, E. R., Parke, M. N., Kreft, H. A., & Oxenham, A. J. (2020). Development and validation
of sentences without semantic context to complement the basic English lexicon sentences.
Journal
of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research
,
63
(11), 3847-3854.
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF GRAMMATICAL SYSTEMS OF ADJECTIVES IN
THE ENGLISH AND KARAKALPAK LANGUAGES
Bakhytbaeva Sarbinaz Askabay qizi, Student of KSU
Scientific adviser: Musaev Abish Abilkazievich
Abstract:
The article presents a comparative analysis of the grammatical systems of adjectives in
English and Karakalpak, focusing on their structure, morphology, and syntactic functions. The
study aims to identify similarities and differences in the use of adjectives in these two languages,
which belong to different language families (Indo-European and Turkic), and to determine how
these features influence grammatical organization. The research employs methods of comparative
typological analysis and descriptive grammar. Key aspects of adjective morphology are examined,
including word formation, degrees of comparison, and the use of affixes. In English, adjectives
form degrees of comparison synthetically (using suffixes
-er
,
-est
) or analytically
(using
more
,
most
), while in Karakalpak, suffixes (
-рақ/-рек
) and analytical constructions (
ең +
adjective
) are used. Special attention is given to the morphological regularity of Karakalpak
adjectives compared to the irregular forms in English (e.g.,
good/better/best
). The syntactic
analysis focuses on the position of adjectives in sentences and their functions. In both languages,
adjectives typically precede nouns, but Karakalpak shows greater flexibility in their placement.
Differences in the use of adjectives as predicates and attributes are also explored. Contextual
analysis and transformational testing methods are used to examine syntactic functions. The results
demonstrate that, despite differences in grammatical organization, adjectives in both languages
play a crucial role in describing the attributes of objects and phenomena. The study is of interest
to linguists specializing in language typology, as well as to educators and students of English and
Karakalpak.
Key words:
Comparative analysis, Adjective grammar, Morphology, Syntactic functions, Degrees
of comparison, English language, Karakalpak language.
Introduction
Language typology studies reveal fascinating patterns in how different linguistic systems
express similar concepts. This article presents a comparative analysis of adjectives in English and
Karakalpak languages, offering insights into both their structural similarities and distinctive
grammatical mechanisms.
Adjectives serve as essential descriptive elements across languages, yet their morphological
behavior, syntactic position, and semantic nuances can vary significantly between language
families. The English language, representing the Indo-European family, and Karakalpak,
belonging to the Turkic group, demonstrate this linguistic diversity while simultaneously
exhibiting certain universal tendencies in adjectival systems.
Our analysis systematically examines the adjectival properties in both languages through
multiple dimensions: positional characteristics, comparative and superlative formations,
167
intensification strategies, diminution mechanisms, substantivation processes, semantic
categorizations, and word-formation patterns. Through this structured comparison, we highlight
how English often employs analytical constructions where Karakalpak utilizes agglutinative
morphology, particularly in expressing degrees of comparison and feature intensity.
The comparative table presented in this article serves as both a reference tool and a basis for
theoretical discussion. It illustrates how languages from different families can achieve similar
communicative goals through distinct grammatical mechanisms. For instance, while English uses
both synthetic and analytical forms for comparisons depending on word length, Karakalpak
consistently applies suffixation for comparative forms and analytical constructions for
superlatives.
This research contributes to our understanding of typological patterns in descriptive
language systems and offers practical applications for language teaching methodologies,
translation practices, and cross-linguistic studies. By examining these parallel yet distinct
adjectival systems, we gain valuable insights into the fundamental principles underlying human
language structure while appreciating the unique evolutionary paths of individual languages.
The Role of Adjectives in Enriching Language: How Descriptive Words Make Speech
Vivid and Expressive
Adjectives provide semantic enrichment by conveying information about properties such as
size, color, shape, quantity, emotional state, or other descriptive features, thereby enhancing the
precision and expressiveness of language. For instance, in the phrase
a beautiful flower
, the
adjective
beautiful
functions to characterize the noun
flower
, attributing a specific aesthetic quality
to it [3, 4].
Syntactically, adjectives can occupy distinct positions within a sentence, fulfilling either
attributive or predicative roles. In the attributive position, adjectives precede the noun they modify
(e.g.,
a tall building
), while in the predicative position, they follow a copular or linking verb
(e.g.,
The building is tall
). Additionally, adjectives can express gradation through morphological
or analytical means, forming degrees of comparison to indicate variations in intensity or quality,
such as
big
,
bigger
, and
biggest
.
In summary, adjectives constitute a fundamental component of linguistic systems, playing a
critical role in enriching communication by adding descriptive detail and specificity to nominal
elements. Their syntactic flexibility and semantic versatility make them indispensable for
constructing nuanced and contextually appropriate utterances.
Adjectives in the Karakalpak Language
Adjectives in the Karakalpak language describe various attributes of objects and do not
change with affixes related to number, case, or possession. They function as modifiers in
sentences, expressing attributive meanings. Adjectives in Karakalpak have unique semantic and
morphological characteristics, with a distinctive feature being the presence of intensifying forms,
such as
үп-үлкен
(very big),
кип-кишкене
(very small), and
жап-жақсы
(very good).
Types and Functions of Adjectives in the Karakalpak Language
Adjectives in Karakalpak are divided into qualitative and relative types. Qualitative
adjectives describe attributes such as color, size, shape, and other properties, for
example,
ақ
(white),
қара
(black), and
қызыл
(red). They can form degrees of comparison using
affixes like
-рақ/-рек
(e.g.,
ағырақ
— whiter) and intensifying forms (
жап-жақсы
— very
good). Relative adjectives, on the other hand, express attributes through relationships to other
168
objects or phenomena, such as
сусыз
(without water) and
шыдамсыз
(impatient). Unlike
qualitative adjectives, relative adjectives typically do not form intensifying forms or combine with
affixes indicating degrees of comparison.
Degrees of Comparison and Intensifying Forms in the Karakalpak Languag
Adjectives in Karakalpak can express four degrees of comparison: positive, comparative,
superlative, and diminutive [6, pp. 139-146]. The positive degree denotes a quality without
comparison, such as
үлкен
(big). The comparative degree expresses an increase in quality using
affixes like
-рақ/-рек
(e.g.,
үлкенирек
— bigger). The superlative degree indicates the highest
degree of a quality, often using intensifying forms like
үп-үлкен
(very big). The diminutive degree
expresses a reduction in quality using affixes like
-ғыш/-гиш
and
-шыл/-шил
(e.g.,
қызғыш
—
reddish). Intensifying forms of adjectives are created by repeating the root or adding intensifying
particles, such as
қап-қара
(very black) and
сап-сары
(very yellow), which emphasize the
intensity of the attribute [6, pp. 139-146].
Adjectives in the Karakalpak language play a crucial role in describing the attributes of
objects and phenomena [5, 7]. Their flexibility in forming degrees of comparison and intensifying
forms allows for precise expression of nuances, making the language rich and expressive. Whether
describing colors, sizes, shapes, or relationships, adjectives in Karakalpak provide a versatile tool
for detailed and vivid communication.
Unlike Karakalpak language, adjectives in the English language do not agree with nouns in
gender, number, or case. This significantly simplifies the grammatical structure of sentences, as
the form of the adjective remains unchanged regardless of the noun's characteristics. English
primarily uses qualitative adjectives, which describe properties, characteristics, or states of objects,
such as
big
,
happy
, and
beautiful
. Relative adjectives, which indicate a relationship to something,
are less common and are mainly used in scientific, technical, or specialized vocabulary, for
example,
chemical
or
biological
.
Possessive adjectives, which in some languages express possession, are absent in English.
Instead, possessive pronouns like
my
,
your
, and
his
are used to serve a similar function.
Regarding degrees of comparison, English forms them in two main ways: synthetically and
analytically. The synthetic method involves adding the suffixes
-er
and
-est
to form the
comparative and superlative degrees, for example,
big – bigger – biggest
. The analytical method
uses the words
more
and
most
for the same purpose, for example,
beautiful – more beautiful –
most beautiful
. The choice of method depends on the length and structure of the adjective: short
adjectives typically form degrees of comparison synthetically, while longer ones do so
analytically.
Thus, the system of adjectives in English is characterized by simplicity and universality,
making it accessible for learners while maintaining sufficient flexibility to express various shades
of meaning.
Бибер, Д.
Student Grammar of Spoken and Written English / Д. Бибер, С. Конрад, Дж.
Лич. – Harlow : Longman, 2002. – 487 p.
С. 191-192
The Process of Adjective Formation through Suffixation in the English language
According to D. Biber, S. Conrad, and G. Leech [2, pp.191-192], many adjectives are formed
by adding a suffix to a noun or verb. For example, from the noun
cord
with the suffix
-less
, the
adjective
cordless
is derived, while from the verb
continue
with the suffix
-ous
, the
169
adjective
continuous
is formed. Adjectives can also be derived from other adjectives using
negative prefixes such as
un-
,
in-
, and
non-
, as in the words
unhappy
,
insensitive
,
and
nonstandard
.
Derived adjectives are most commonly found in academic texts, whereas they are rarely used
in fiction and conversational speech. Among the suffixes,
-al
is the most productive, forming many
specialized
adjectives
such
as
adrenocortical
or
tubulointerstitial
,
although
some,
like
central
or
general
, are widely used across all registers.
The suffixes
-ent
,
-ive
, and
-ous
are also relatively common. Adjectives with
-ent
, such
as
different
or
persistent
, are often derived from verbs, while adjectives with
-ive
can originate
from both verbs (e.g.,
active
) and nouns (e.g.,
instinctive
). Adjectives with
-ous
, such
as
serious
or
obvious
, although sometimes highly specialized, also include a number of commonly
used words [2, pp.191-192].
Thus, derived adjectives play an important role in enriching the language, particularly in
academic contexts, where precision and specialization are required.
Structure and Functions of Adjectives and Adverbs
Angela Downing and Philip Locke highlight the following key characteristics of adjectives
in the English language [1, pp.498-517]:
Adjectives (AdiGs) and adverbs (AdvGs) share a similar structure: they consist of a head, a
pre-modifier, and a post-modifier. For example,
clear
(head),
very clear
(with a pre-modifier),
and
very clear indeed
(with a post-modifier). Both types of groups are often realized by the head
alone, as in the examples
a fast train
(adjective) and
drive fast
(adverb). However, their functions
differ: adjectives describe people, places, and things, while adverbs characterize actions expressed
by verbs.
Formally, adjectives can be simple (
tall
), prefixed (
unhappy
), suffixed (
beautiful
), participial
(
interesting
), or compound (
home-made
). They function syntactically as attributives (
hot water
)
or predicatives (
the water is hot
), and can also express states (
lonely
), qualities (
narrow
),
subclasses (
northern
), or properties (
creative
). Many adjectives can take post-head complements,
such as
good at chess
.
Comparison, Intensification, and Description
Adjectives form degrees of comparison using the suffixes
-er
and
-est
or the
words
more
and
most
, and also have irregular forms (
better
,
worse
). Intensification can be high
(
very
,
extremely
), medium (
quite
,
rather
), or attenuated (
slightly
,
a bit
). Quantification can be
exact (
one-mile
) or non-exact (
not that long
). Description can be achieved using adjectives (
dark
blue
), adverbs (
strangely silent
), or nouns (
pitch black
) [1, pp.498-517].
Thus, adjectives and adverbs in English possess a flexible structure and a wide range of
functions, allowing for precise expression of various shades of meaning.
The comparison of adjectives in English and Karakalpak reveals both striking similarities
and notable differences, reflecting the unique linguistic features of each language. Both languages
share remarkable structural parallels in their adjectival systems. This can be seen in Table 1.
Тable 1. Key Differences and Structural Similarities Between English
and Karakalpak Adjectives
170
Category
English
Karakalpak
Position in a sentence
Usually before the noun:
"a big
house"
Usually before the noun:
"үлкен
үй"
Gender and number
Do not change according to gender
and number:
"big house, big
houses"
Do not change according to gender
and number:
"үлкен үй, үлкен
үйлер"
Degrees of
comparison
Positive:
big.
Comparative:
bigger.
Superlative:
the biggest. For
polysyllabic: more beautiful, most
beautiful
Positive:
үлкен (big).
Comparative:
үлкенирек
(bigger).
Superlative:
ең үлкен (biggest)
Formation of
comparative degree
1. One-, two-syllable: suffix -er.
2. Polysyllabic: more + adjective
Suffixes -рақ/-рек, -ырақ/-ирек:
жақсы → жақсырақ (better).
үлкен → үлкенирек (bigger)
Formation of
superlative degree
1. One-, two-syllable: suffix -est.
2. Polysyllabic: most + adjective
Analytical method: word "ең" +
adjective: ең жақсы (the best)
Irregular forms
good → better → best,
bad → worse → worst many/much
→ more → most
No irregular forms
Intensification of
feature
Adverbs: very, extremely, really +
adjective:
very big
1. Intensifying adverbs:
жүдә,
күтә, дым, оғада
+
adjective
.
2. p-form repetition:
қап-қара
(very black)
Diminution of feature
Adverbs:
slightly, somewhat
,
a bit
+ adjective: slightly red
Suffix -лаў/-леў:
қызыллаў
(reddish)
Substantivation
With article "the":
the rich
Adding noun affixes:
жақсы+лар
(the good ones)
Semantic categories
1. Qualitative:
big, small.
2. Relative:
wooden, daily.
3. Possessive:
my, your
1. Сапалық (qualitative):
үлкен,
киши.
2. Қатнаслық (relative):
ағаштан,
күнделикли
Word formation
1. Affixation:
help → helpful
.
2. Compounding:
dark + blue →
dark-blue
1. Affixation:
күш → күшли
.
2. Compounding:
қара + көк →
қара-көк
Adjectives in English and Karakalpak occupy similar syntactic positions, primarily
appearing before nouns, and do not inflect for gender or number. They also share comparable
semantic categorizations, distinguishing between qualitative and relative adjectives, and utilize
similar word-formation patterns, particularly through affixation and compounding. These
similarities highlight universal tendencies in how languages express descriptive qualities, despite
English belonging to the Indo-European family and Karakalpak to the Turkic family.
171
However, significant differences emerge in the systems of comparison and morphological
complexity. English employs a hybrid approach to forming degrees of comparison, using synthetic
methods (
-er
,
-est
) for shorter words and analytical methods (
more
,
most
) for longer ones. In
contrast, Karakalpak consistently uses suffixes (
-рақ/-рек
) for the comparative degree and an
analytical construction (
ең + adjective
) for the superlative. Additionally, Karakalpak demonstrates
greater morphological richness, particularly in its system for expressing degrees of intensity
through specialized suffixes and reduplication (e.g.,
қап-қара
— very black). English, on the other
hand, contains numerous irregular comparative forms (e.g.,
good/better/best
), while Karakalpak
maintains morphological regularity across its adjectival system. Another key difference lies in the
expression of feature diminution: Karakalpak uses a dedicated morphological marker (
-лаў/-леў
),
whereas English relies on adverbial modifiers like
slightly
or
somewhat
.
These differences reflect broader typological distinctions between the two languages.
English exhibits characteristics of an analytical language, increasingly relying on word order and
helper words, while Karakalpak showcases typical agglutinative features of Turkic languages,
using consistent suffixation patterns. For language learners, understanding these parallels and
differences provides a structured approach to mastering adjectives in either language. Translators,
too, can better preserve semantic nuances by recognizing the unique expressive capabilities of each
system. This comparative analysis not only enriches linguistic understanding but also offers
practical insights for language education and translation work.
Conclusion
Adjectives in Karakalpak and English serve a similar function—they describe the attributes
of objects, phenomena, and people, making speech more expressive and precise. However, there
are significant differences in grammar, word formation, and usage between these languages,
reflecting the unique characteristics of each.
In Karakalpak, adjectives do not change according to number, case, or possession, which
simplifies their use compared to Russian, where adjectives agree with nouns. For example, in
Karakalpak, the adjective
ақ
(white) remains unchanged when paired with different nouns:
ақ
үй
(white house),
ақ үйлер
(white houses). In English, adjectives also remain unchanged, as in
a
white house
and
white houses
. However, in English, adjectives can only occupy specific positions
in a sentence (before a noun or after a linking verb), whereas in Karakalpak, their position is more
flexible.
The formation of adjectives in both languages involves the use of suffixes and prefixes. In
Karakalpak, suffixes are actively used to form degrees of comparison, such as
-рақ/-
рек
(e.g.,
ағырақ
— whiter) and intensifying forms (
жап-жақсы
— very good). In English,
degrees of comparison are formed using suffixes
-er
and
-est
(e.g.,
bigger
,
biggest
) or the
words
more
and
most
(e.g.,
more beautiful
,
most beautiful
). Intensifying forms in Karakalpak are
created by repeating the root or adding particles (
қап-қара
— very black), while in English,
adverbs are used for this purpose (
very black
).
Another important difference lies in the semantics of adjectives. In Karakalpak, adjectives
are often used to describe specific attributes, such as color, size, or shape, as well as to express
relationships between objects (e.g.,
сусыз
— without water). In English, adjectives can be both
qualitative (
big
,
happy
) and relative (
chemical
,
biological
), making them more versatile in usage.
Thus, adjectives in Karakalpak and English, despite differences in grammar and word
formation, play a key role in enriching the language. They allow for precise descriptions of the
172
attributes of objects and phenomena, making speech more expressive and clear. Understanding
these differences helps to explore the features of each language more deeply and use adjectives
more effectively in various contexts.
References
1.
Downing, A., & Locke, P. (2006). English grammar: A university course (2nd ed.). London and
New York: Routledge.
2.
Biber, D., Conrad, S., & Leech, G. (2002). Student grammar of spoken and written English.
Harlow: Longman.
3.
Khodzhaniyazova, U. (2021). Comparison of grammatical features in English and Karakalpak
languages in the field of written speech. Society and Innovation, 2, 272–280.
https://doi.org/10.47689/2181-1415-vol2-iss9/S-pp272-280
4.
Norkulova, M. B. (2022). Stages of Karakalpak and English grammar development, their
differences and the phenomenon of interference. Education and Innovative Research, 12, 183–
187.
5.
Ismailov, K. A., & Otegenov, K. K. (1990). Russian-Karakalpak-English phrasebook. Nukus:
Karakalpakstan.
6.
Ҳәзирги қарақалпақ әдебий тилиниң грамматикасы. Сөз жасалыў ҳәм морфология/
Нөкис: Билим, 1994. — 451 б.
7.
Ҳәзирги қарақалпақ тили. Морфология. Нөкис: Қарақалпақстан баспасы, 1981. — 264 б.
THE HERITAGE OF THE STEPPE: KARAKALPAK
CHILDREN'S FOLKLORE
Bazarbaeva Miyassar, Student of KSU
Annotation:
This article examines Karakalpak children's folklore, focusing on lullabies, songs,
and games. It explores lullabies as expressions of maternal love and cultural values, while also
analyzing the educational and developmental roles of songs and rhymes. The study highlights the
unique characteristics of these traditions, their historical context, and their contribution to
language skills and cognitive growth. The research underscores the lasting importance of this
folklore in cultural preservation and children's development.
Key words:
Child folklore, lullabies, poetry, children’s games, songs , question-and-answer.
Popular oral tradition, as it appears in various literary forms and genres, is a highly
functional form of verbal art, holding both social and aesthetic importance in human history. Child
folklore is a distinct branch of this tradition, having developed into a comprehensive system of
games, songs, and musical-poetic genres that have come about through the interaction between the
world of children and the world of adults.
Lullabies.
The upbringing of a child begins in the cradle. A mother, dividing her night’s
sleep into four parts and rocking the cradle, had all sorts of hopes for the future of her young
baby.Any mother could perform this song. Although the young newborn did not understand it, the
rocking of the cradle and the pleasantness of the mother’s voice would completely soothe it,
compelling it to sleep peacefully. As Robert Graves, poet and mythologist notes in “The White
Goddess”, “The lullaby is the most ancient of all poetic forms, and is still living and evolving.”
