334
3.
Раджабова М.А. Ономастик компонентли фразеологик бирликларнинг лингвомаданий
жиҳати ва таржима муаммолари (инглиз, ўзбек ва рус тиллари материалида) : Филол. фан.
бўйича фалсафа докт. (PhD) дисс. афтореф. – Буҳоро, 2020. – 56 б.
4.
Рахимова Ш.П. Инглиз тили идиоматик ибораларини ўзбек тилига ўгиришнинг
лисоний хусусиятлари: Филол. фан. бўйича фалс. докт. (PhD) афтореф. – Тошкент, 2019. –
48 б.
5.
Рашидова Ф.М. CEFR асосида чет тилларни ўрганиш, ўқитиш ва баҳолашда касб
маҳорати // Узлуксиз таълим журнали. – Т. 2016. - № 6. –Б. 70-71.
6.
Рискулова К.Д. Система формирования социолингвистической компетенции будущих
учителей английского языка: Автореф. дисс… доктора
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF VOWELS IN THE PHONOLOGICAL SYSTEM OF
ENGLISH, KARAKALPAK AND UZBEK
Kurbanbaev Dj., PhD, doc., Karakalpak State university,
Joldasbaeva R., MA student of Karakalpak State university
In this article we try to
explore the fundamental branch of linguistics that delves into the
intricate structure of speech sounds, syllables, stress patterns, and intonation within a language.
Phonetics is unique among linguistic disciplines as it not only investigates the linguistic function
but also delves into the physical aspects of speech production, including the workings of the
pronunciation apparatus and the acoustic properties of sound phenomena, as well as their
interpretation by native speakers. Unlike non-linguistic fields, phonetics regards sound phenomena
as integral components of a language system, essential for the transformation of words and
sentences into audible forms crucial for communication. Phonetics considers both the acoustic-
articulatory and functional-linguistic aspects of the sound system, thus distinguishing between
phonetics proper and phonology. In essence, phonetics serves as a bridge between the abstract
structures of language and their tangible manifestation in speech. It analyzes how sounds are
produced by the human vocal tract, how they are perceived by listeners, and how they contribute
to the overall meaning and communication process.
It is known that phonetics could explore various dimensions within this field, such as
acoustic analysis of speech sounds, studies on speech perception, investigations into cross-
linguistic phonologic variation, or applications of phonological principles in language teaching
and technology. Such research not only enhances our understanding of the intricate workings of
language but also has practical implications in fields ranging from linguistics and education to
speech therapy and communication technology.
Currently, there is a lack of research in
comparative linguistics concerning the phonological structure of the English, Karakalpak and
Uzbek languages. Specifically, the phonological structure of English, which is a crucial aspect of
its phonetic and phonological structure, poses challenges for language learners and remains
relatively unexplored.
The Karakalpak and English languages, originating from different language families,
exhibit significant disparities in their phonological structure, division, and formation. These
differences hold substantial importance for the development of effective foreign language teaching
methodologies. The relevance of investigating this lies in the considerable interest in
335
understanding standard English pronunciation, as well as the lack of comprehensive comparative
research on Karakalpak and Uzbek.
At present, the comparative analysis of language systems, whether they are related or
unrelated genetically, holds a position of utmost significance.
Interest in comparing languages stems from practical language learning needs and the
everyday use of native languages to facilitate the acquisition of a second language.
[2:94].
When
comparing languages, whether they belong to the same group or not, similarities and differences
inevitably emerge. The outcomes of comparative linguistic analysis enable us to anticipate
potential interferences that can hinder language acquisition and lead to misunderstandings. Many
scholars and researchers emphasize the theoretical and practical importance of comparing
languages that lack genetic connections. Professor J.B. Buranov emphasizes that the theoretical
importance of comparison lies in conducting typological analyses, particularly in examining the
structural characteristics of each language system, identifying taxonomic features of key system
units in terms of their expression and content, inventory, and morpheme division at each level.
Moreover, the practical significance of comparative language study lies in incorporating the
findings from these comparisons into educational practices.
[3:267].
Many researchers emphasize the importance of conducting comparative studies of
languages in the realm of phonetics. This is due to the fact that both lexical and grammatical
aspects of a language manifest through its sound system and rely solely on sounds for their
existence.
[2:94].
A. Abduazizov highlights the significance of examining words at the
supersegmental level, which includes syllables, stress patterns, and intonation. This level of
analysis necessitates an integrated approach, as the phonemic and prosodic structure of words
cannot be fully understood without considering phonological rules and the syllabic and accentual
rhythms within them.
[1]. The selection of our topic is deliberate. English, Karakalpak
and Uzbek
languages differ significantly in their genealogical, areal-typological, and statistical aspects.
English belongs to the Germanic branch of the Indo-European language family, while Karakalpak
is part of the Kipchak group within the Turkic family. These languages being compared are
genetically and geographically distinct, thus not related or closely related. Morphologically, they
also exhibit differences. The English, like some other Indo-European languages, follows an
inflectional morphological type, whereas Turkic languages, including Karakalpak, adhere to an
agglutinative type. The division of words into syllables is a universal phenomenon across all
languages, with articulatory-auditory bases for syllabification being consistent. While articulatory
methods of syllabification may also be universal, the phonemic structure of syllables and the rules
governing syllabification can vary significantly across languages, particularly concerning word
morphology and stress patterns.
Hence, it appears fitting to contrast the structure of English
syllables with that of Karakalpak syllables. Beyond its evident theoretical importance, such a
comparison offers practical utility as well.
Various scholars and researchers in the fields of linguistics and comparative linguistics
have contributed to the understanding of phonological structure of languages. For example, S.F.
Leontev’s work "The Theory of English Phonetics," G.P. Torsuev's "Structure of the Syllable and
Allophones in the English Language," and S.V. Kovdzasov and O.V. Krivnova's "General
Phonetics" provide valuable insights into this topic. Additionally, H. Rogers' "The Sounds of
Language: An Introduction to Phonetics" offers comprehensive information on phonetic
principles. A.A. Abduazizov's "Phonology and Morphology of Uzbek Language" explores
336
relevant concepts, while M.I. Rasulova and Z.I. Shukurova's "Comparative Typology of English,
Uzbek, and Russian Languages" offers comparative analysis. A. Dаuletov's "Contemporary
Karakalpak Language: Phonetics" provides insights specifically into the phonetics of the
Karakalpak language.
As you can see from the list,
the comparative analysis the phonological
system of English, Karakalpak and Uzbek have not been investigated specially.
As has been mentioned above the system of English vowel phonemes consists of
monophthongs, diphthongized vowels and diphthongs. There are 21 vowel phonemes in English.
They are: [
ı
], [
e
], [
ε
], [
æ
], [ɒ], [
u
], [
Λ
], [
ə
], [α:], [ɔ:], [
з:
], [
i:
], [
u:
], [
eı
], [
зu
], [
aı
], [
au
], [ɒ
u
], [
ıə
],
[
εə
], [
uə
] There are 6 vowel phonemes in Uzbek. They are: [
a, o, y, ў e, i
(
и
)]. There are 9 vowel
phonemes in Karakalpak. They are: [
a, о, ө, y, ү, e, ə, и, ў
]
The main point of difference: similarly between the English monophthongs, diphthongizes
vowel of Uzbek and Karakalpak may be summed up as follows:
1.
The English, Uzbek and Karakalpak Vowel phonemes are characterized by the oral
formation. There are no nasal nasalized vowels in the languages compared.
2.
According to the part of the tongue in the formation of vowel phonemes there are no front-
retracted, central proper for mixed vowels in Uzbek and Karakalpak. Resembles may be found in
the pronunciation of the back vowels in English ,Uzbek and Karakalpak. The Uzbek [y] the
Karakalpak [y] and the English [ɒ] are back-advanced vowels. The Uzbek [o], the Karakalpak [o]
and the English [ɒ], also are back retracted vowels. Therefore, it is comparatively easy to teach the
Uzbeks and the Karakalpaks pronunciation of back English vowels.
3.
According to the height of the tongue in English there are vowels of the 6 levels. Uzbek
vowels belong to the narrow varieties of the 3 levels. In Uzbek there are no vowel phonemes like
the English [ æ, ә:, ә] and in Karakalpak there are no vowel phonemes like the English [ı:, α:
,
:,
u:].
These vowels are difficult for the student to master: especially the neutral vowel. But never the
less the neutral [
ə
] can be compared with Uzbek and Karakalpak unstressed in the words like:
Uzbek
Karakalpak
кетд
и
кетт
и
келд
и
келд
и
к
и
тоб
к
и
тап
4.
According to the position of the lips in the formation of vowels English vowels are rounded
without protractions. Uzbek vowels [
a
], [
о
], [
у
], [
ў
] are more closely rounded and protruded and
Karakalpak vowels [
о
], [
ө
], [
ү
],[
у
], [
ў
] are more closely rounded and protruded where as the
English [
ɒ
,
ɔ
,
u
,
ə:
] are slightly rounded and [
α:
], [
u:
] are closely rounded without protrusion. All
the front and central vowels in English, Uzbek and Karakalpak vowels are ungrounded. In
articulating the English vowels [
i:
,
i
,
e
,
ε
], the Uzbek vowels [i(и), e] and Karakalpak vowels [
e
,
ə
,
и
,] the lips are neutral. In articulating the Uzbek [?, (e)] the lips may be either neutral or spread.
In teaching the Uzbeks and the Karakalpaks to pronounce the rounded English vowels care should
be taken not to protrude the lips.
a, о, ө, y, ү, e, ə, и, ў.
5.
Besides considerable
qualitative
difference there is a
quantitative
difference between
vowel phonemes of English, Uzbek and Karakalpak. Traditionally all English vowels are divided
into short and long:
337
short
–
[ı
,
e, æ,
ɒ,
u
,
Λ, ə]
long
– [
ı:, α:, ɔ, u:, ə:
]
a
,
o
,
y
,
ў
,
e
,
i
(
и
)
But at present the quantitative features of the English vowel phonemes have become their main
property and quality must be regarded as additional. The Uzbek vowel phonemes may only be
differentiated by their quality. Phonologically there is quantity difference in the Uzbek vowel
phonemes. They are typical «middle sounds», neither long nor shorter. Sometimes English vowels,
[
u:
] may sound like the Uzbek [
o
] «and when they are pronounced short. This acoustic
resemblance makes it possible to compare the vowels in question v
6.
The English Vowels are usually neutralized and may be substituted by [] in unstressed
position. The Uzbek vowels may be used either in stressed or unstressed position. Thus there is
little difference between stressed and unstressed vowels in Uzbek. It is better to pronounce the
correct pronunciation of the English without trying to find any parallels in the native tongue.
REFERNCES:
1.
Абдуазизов А.А. «К проблеме фонологии и морфологии» М.,1975, с.14.
2.
Аракин В.Д. «Сравнительная типология английского и русского языков». Ленинград.
«Просвещение». 1979. стр. 94
3.
Буранов, Д.Б. «Сравнительная типолгия английского и тюркских языков»: [Учеб.
пособие для пед. ин-тов] / Дж. Буранов. - Москва : Высш. шк., 1983. - 267 с.
4.
Даулетов А. «Ҳәзирги қарақалпақ тили. Фонетика». Нөкис. «Билим». 2005.
5.
Rаsulоvа M.I., Shukurоvа Z.I. Cоmраrаtivе tуроlоgу оf English, Uzbеk аnd Russiаn
lаnguаgеs. Tаshkеnt-2017.
6.
Teschner,R.V. & M.S.Whitley.
Pronouncing English: a stress-based approach
.
Washington,D.C.: Georgetown University Press 2004.
BORROWINGS OF ENGLISH SPORTS TERMS IN THE KARAKALPAK
LANGUAGE: A LINGUISTIC ANALYSIS
Kurbanbaev Dj., PhD, doc., Karakalpak State university,
Jumamuratova M., MA student of Karakalpak State university
Abstract:
The phenomenon of lexical borrowing is a significant aspect of language
evolution, reflecting the cultural and societal interactions between communities. This study
examines the borrowings of English sports terms in the Karakalpak language, focusing on the
linguistic adaptations and semantic shifts that occur during the process. Through a comprehensive
analysis of borrowed terms, their usage patterns, and socio-cultural contexts, this research sheds
light on the dynamics of language contact and the influence of global sporting culture on minority
languages such as Karakalpak. Data was collected from various sources including sports events,
media, and interviews with native speakers. The findings reveal intriguing linguistic phenomena
and contribute to our understanding of language contact and lexical innovation in multilingual
environments.
Keywords:
Language contact, Borrowing, Sports terminology, Karakalpak language,
Linguistic adaptation, Semantic shift, Phonological adaptation, Minority languages.
Language contact and borrowing have been integral to the development and enrichment of
languages throughout history. In contemporary societies, globalization and advancements in
