Topical issues of language training
in the globalized world
122
the presence of vowel and consonant sounds in speech, and the arrangement of words
to indicate grammatical relationships.
To conclude, in comparative linguistics, language universals shed light on the
underlying theories and frameworks of human language and communication. Through
an examination of the similarities and contrasts across languages belonging to different
geographical areas and linguistic families, scholars are able to acquire a more profound
comprehension of the universal characteristics of language and how these
characteristics influence intercultural communication. The subject of research on
language universals is still active and ever-evolving, providing important insights into
the complex and interesting structure of human language and the ways in which it
influences our identities, interactions, and societies.
References
1.
Bauer, L.
(2009). A typology of compounds. In R. Lieber & P. Štekauer (eds.), The Oxford
handbook of compounding. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 343-356.
2.
Gak V.G. O kontrastivnoy lingvistike. V sb. Novoye v zarubezhnoy lingvistike. Vyp. XXV.
Kontrastivnaya lingvistika. M.: Progress, 1989.
3.
Suleymanovna, Saidova Mamura, and Abdurakhmanova Aliya Yakubovna.
“
Functional
analysis of texts of official documents in English, Uzbek and Russian languages.
”
Journal of
new century innovations
51.1 (2024): 80-94.
4.
Mukhamedova, N. A. “The role of modality contamination and negation in the interrogative
sentence”. Novainfo. Ru, (130), 59
-61.
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF SYNTACTIC RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN WORDS IN
ENGLISH AND UZBEK
Fayziyev Abbos
Student
UzSWLU
Scientific advisor: Begizova Madina
Senior teacher
UzSWLU
Abstract
The article is concentrated on the syntactical level viewed in the comparative aspect.
Investigating such units of the given level, as phrases and sentences, the author compares their
linguistic properties on the material of English and Uzbek. The implemented analysis has made it
Topical issues of language training
in the globalized world
123
possible to reveal both isomorphic and allomorphic features between the targeted units of the
languages
Key words:
comparison, syntax, syntactical relationship, noun phrases, verb phrases,
sentence
The syntactic connection between words, forming basis of a language, determines
their relationships in a sentence. These connections, indicating how words are
connected in a sentence in terms of grammar, play a crucial role in effective
communication and provides insights into the structure and function of languages. This
relationship may be of various type including subordination, agreement, determination,
and so on. Studying the syntactic relationship between words is important because it
helps to understand how a sentence is constructed and what relationships exist between
its parts. This allows you to express your thoughts more clearly and accurately,
improves your reading and comprehension skills, and also helps you avoid mistakes
when writing. In addition, understanding syntactic relationships is useful when
learning foreign languages. The study of the syntactic relationship between words in a
comparative typological sense is important because it allows you to compare and
analyze different languages in terms of their grammatical structures and features. This
allows linguists to identify common patterns and differences between languages of
different types and families, which in turn contributes to a deeper understanding of
linguistic diversity and the foundations of linguistics. In this article, it is aimed to
examine the syntactic connections between English and Uzbek which come from
separate language families. Through a comparative analysis, linguists try to highlight
the distinctions and similarities in how these languages structure their syntax.
The syntax of a language deals with the units of linguistics which are far more
complicated compared to the word. These units include the phrase and the sentence,
their combinations, types and parts. The basic units for comparative typology are the
word combinations and the sentence. Since English and Uzbek belong to different
language families, with English being a Germanic language and Uzbek being a Turkic
language, there are several interesting points of comparison in the way syntactic
relationships between words are built.
Topical issues of language training
in the globalized world
124
Let
’
s take noun phrases. In order to modify nouns, in English prepositions are used
while in Uzbek postpositions are employed. For example:
The book is on the table
in English language;
Stol ustidagi kitob
in Uzbek language
Preposition “
on
” comes before the noun “
table
” which is modified in English, whereas
the postposition “
ustidagi
” comes after the modified noun “
stol
”.
Regarding verb phrases, unlike English which provides verb before noun, in Uzbek,
verb is used after noun or object. What
’
s more, English relies on auxiliary verbs to
convey tense, aspect, and mood, while Uzbek employs inflectional suffixes attached to
the verb root. For example:
Ali is reading a book
. Verb “read” comes before object “a
book”. However, in Uzbek the sentence “
Ali kitob
o‘
qiyapti
” shows the verb
“o‘qiyapti” after the object “kitob”.
Characterising syntactical connections, in Uzbek language, word combination
“
Alining kitobi
” is seen as an agreement type of syntactical connections, whilst in
English it is a government type. In Uzbek language two words need to agree in terms
of each other
’
s structure. There is a rule in Uzbek syntax that any word with the genitive
case inflection “
-
ning” is connected with a word with inflections referring to possessed
noun such as -(i)m, -(i)ng, -(si).
–
(lar)i, -(i)miz, -(i)ngiz. That means if there is an
a
djunct word with the inflection “
-
ning “, obviously there is a head word with one of
the inflections above which is connected with adjunct word. In English, government is
used to join two nouns together. For instance,
Ali
’
s book.
Adjunct word “Ali” is
dependant on head word “book”.
Relating to word order, English typically follows a Subject-Verb-Object (SVO)
word order, whereas Uzbek follows a Subject-Object-Verb (SOV) word order. For
example
Ali eats apples.
SVO word order;
Ali olmalarni yeydi
. SOV word order
Adverbial clauses, prepositional phrases are mostly used either at the end or beginning
of a sentence in English, while they can be placed in the middle of the sentence in
Uzbek. For example:
I live in Uzbekistan
;
Men
O‘
zbekistonda yashayman.
Speaking about grammatical structure and syntactic rules, it is necessary to
underline that English makes use of articles, prepositions to convey grammatical
Topical issues of language training
in the globalized world
125
relationships, such as “
the boy in the room
”. At the same time Uzbek relies heavily
on agglutination, where affixes are widely added to root words to show grammatical
relationships, like “
xonamda
” which is translated into English “
in my room
”.
Additionally, tense in English is expressed with auxiliary verbs, while in Uzbek
suffixes or postpositions expressing tense are used:
Men kecha kelmagan edim
. Suffix
“
-
gan
” and postposition “edi” expresses past simple.
I didn
’
t come yesterday.
Auxiliary verb “did” shows past tense of the sentence.
Focusing on Adjective-Noun agreement, it is interesting to point out that in English
and Uzbek word combinations, adjectives are placed before noun all the time.
However, if they change their places in Uzbek, it becomes a sentence while it is not in
English. For example:
chiroyli uy-
word combination,
uy chiroyli
–
sentence.
A
beautiful house
- word combination, a house beautiful- not a sentence if used without
“to be”.
As for question forms, English typically employs auxiliary verbs or inversion to
form questions, while Uzbek often uses inflections referring question or intonation
changes. For example: English:
Is she coming?
Auxiliary verb “
is
” expresses
questioning; Uzbek:
U kelyaptimi?
Suffix “
-
mi
” indicates questioning.
Coming to characterizing word order, in English, word it is more stable and hardly
any parts of speech is omitted whereas in Uzbek, word order seems more changeable
and omission is more prevalent. For example:
I came. He was playing outside
;
Keldim. Tashqarida
o‘
ynayotgan edi u.
Despite these distinctive features of Uzbek and English languages owing to belonging
to different types of languages, one being analytical and the other being synthetic, there
can be observed cases of isomorphism in terms of syntactical level of language. A good
illustration would be Subject-Verb agreement which is found in both languages:
He
plays football
. Here subject “
he
” needs to agree with verb “
play
” used with inflection
“
-
s
”;
U futbol
o‘
ynaydi.
subject “
U”
agrees with verb “
o‘
yna
” and inflection “di”.
Furthermore, both languages utilize prepositional phrases, complex sentences to
convey meaning. Conjunctions are used widely to connect two or more sentences. For
Topical issues of language training
in the globalized world
126
example:
Since he plays well, I wanted him to join us
;
U yaxshi
o‘
ynashi sababli,
men uni bizga q
o‘
shilishini xohladim.
In conclusion, in order to provide language users and learners with effective cross-
linguistic communication and acquire productive ways of learning languages,
understanding these syntactic relationships is crucial. It enables learners to grasp the
nuances of sentence structure, grammatical rules and word order, facilitating clearer
expression and comprehension in learning both languages.
Further studies in comparative syntax might explore numerous languages apart from
English and Uzbek, investigating syntactic patterns and typological features across
diverse language families. Through further research on syntactic relationships,
linguists can contribute to the broader field of linguistics and improve language
learning and cross-cultural communication.
References
1.
Arakin V.D. Comparative typology of English and Russian languages. Leningrad, 1979.
2.
Buranov Dj..B. Comparative typology of English and Turkic languages. M, 1983.
3.
Rozhdestvensky Yu.V. Typology of the word. M, 1969.
4.
Arnold I.V. The English Word. M, 1973.
5.
Rasulova M.I. Shukurova Z.I. Comparative typology of English, Uzbek and Russian
languages Tashkent 2017
6.
Satibaldiyev, E. K. (2022). LANGUAGE INTERACTION RESULTING IN SPEECH
INTERFERENCE AND FACILITATION.
7.
Satibaldieva, N. (2024). DYNAMICS OF LINGUISTIC EVOLUTION IN THE
TECHNOLOGICAL EPOCH.
Western European Journal of Linguistics and
Education
,
2
(1), 9-11.
8.
Рахмонов, А. Б. (2022, February). КРЕАТИВНАЯ КОМПЕТЕНЦИЯ КАК ОДНА ИЗ
КЛЮЧЕВЫХ КОМПЕТЕНЦИЙ ПРЕПОДАВАТЕЛЯ.
In
The 7 th International scientific
and practical conference “Science, innovations and education: problems and
prospects”(February 9
-11, 2022) CPN Publishing Group, Tokyo, Japan. 2022. 842 p.
(p.
469).
FUNCTIONS OF METAPHOR IN LANGUAGE
Pirnazarova Nargiza
MA student
Uzbek state world languages university
