MODERN EDUCATION AND DEVELOPMENT
Выпуск журнала №-20
Часть–4_ Февраль –2025
338
DIACHRONIC APPROACHES TO THE STUDY CONVERSATION
(ORIGIN)
Asqaraliyeva Aziza Uchqunbekovna,
Student of Andijan State Institute of Foreign Languages (Uzbekistan)
Supervisor: Kurbanov Muzaffar Abdumutalibovich,
Professor of Andijan State Institute of Foreign Languages (Uzbekistan)
Abstract: The article investigates conversion as a means of forming new
words without adding any derivative element when the basic form of the original and
the basic derived words are homonymous having the same morphological structure,
but belonging to different parts of speech. It is said that in the course of historical
development grammatical forms in English were lost and there exists no inflection
to distinguish the form of the verb from a noun and this is considered as widespread
word formation in English. It also studies conversion being a type of word-building
– not a pattern of structural relationship. Synchronically both types – a noun and a
verb must be treated together as cases of patterned homonymy, while studying
diachronically, it is essential to differentiate the cases of conversion and treat them
separately. It is emphasized that it is not easy to say definitely which of the members
was derived, the results of synchronic and diachronic analysis may not coincide.
That means that what is understood under conversion in Modern English does not
fully and necessarily coincide with earlier periods of the development of the
language
Keywords: linguistics, semantic meaning, conversion, grammatical forms,
syntactic functions, word formation, semantic relations, lexical.
ДИАХРОНИЧЕСКИЕ ПОДХОДЫ К УЧЕБНОМУ
РАЗГОВОРУ (ПРОИСХОЖДЕНИЕ)
MODERN EDUCATION AND DEVELOPMENT
Выпуск журнала №-20
Часть–4_ Февраль –2025
339
Аннотация: В статье исследуется преобразование как средство
образования новых слов без добавления какого-либо производного элемента,
когда основная форма исходного и базового производных слов являются
омонимичными, имеющими одинаковую морфологическую структуру, но
принадлежащими разным частям речи. Говорят, что в ходе исторического
развития грамматические формы в английском языке были утеряны и не
существует флексии, позволяющей отличить форму глагола от
существительного, и это считается широко распространенным
словообразованием в английском языке. Он также изучает конверсию как тип
словообразования, а не как образец структурных отношений. Синхронно оба
типа - существительное и глагол - должны рассматриваться вместе как
случаи шаблонной омонимии, при диахроническом изучении важно различать
случаи преобразования и рассматривать их отдельно. Подчеркивается, что
однозначно сказать, какой из членов был выведен, непросто, результаты
синхронного и диахронического анализа могут не совпадать. Это означает,
что то, что понимается под преобразованием в современном английском, не
полностью и не обязательно совпадает с более ранними периодами развития
языка.
Ключевые
слова:
лингвистика,
семантическое
значение,
преобразование,
грамматические
формы,
синтаксические
функции,
словообразование, семантические отношения, лексика
.
INTRODUCTION
The general agreement on higher scientific productivity of research based on
the integrated cognitive-and-discursive approach is overshadowed by a discussion
about period of discourse studies. The discourse is usually defined as a model of
online language usage, which means time and space limitation of the speech activity
associated with a certain type of social reality and verbal behavior [1, p. 137; 20; 38].
However, in the works of E.S. Kubryakova [25, p. 525–526], an alternative
argumentation was given, it motivates the possibility of referring methods and tools
of cognitive-and discursive analysis to discourse in historical perspective:
MODERN EDUCATION AND DEVELOPMENT
Выпуск журнала №-20
Часть–4_ Февраль –2025
340
«Discourse is a creation of a certain time period» [25, p. 526]. Fully supporting this
statement, we consider that any type of social activity is historically dependent; it is
mirrored in discourse practice that absorbs social and cultural imprints and represents
them in language signs chosen by a person to build texts and make them discourse
products. It allows us to take up linguistic studies of a group of texts (text family)
that perform common functions in communicative situations and reflect a definite
cultural and historical period in the evolution of a certain type of discourse.
Analyzing linguistic representations of discourse categories in a text family
researchers may not only disclose facts and events from national history, collect
information on phonomorphological, lexical, and grammatical features of the
language at different periods, but also reconstruct the first threats of text type
formation, observe realizations of text categories in historical perspective,
distinguish vectors of discourse evolution in later stages of textual culture
development.
The purpose of this paper is to briefly explore and summarize the main
achievements of Western discourse analysis oriented at a historical approach and
give a comprehensive picture of studies in Russian schools of historical linguistics
that have various overtones and nuances with the accent on diachronically oriented
discourse analysis.
Considering the text to be a core constituent of discourse, linguists introduced
a historical perspective in its description. In European and American linguistics it
was not until the middle 1990s’ when historical linguists had reached well beyond
the sentence boundary, thus switching with some delay from studies of the language
system to research of language-in-use [18].
METHODS
Linguists working in the field mainly do it within two subfields. Firstly, we
will point to historical pragmatics, a brunch exploring the evolution of pragmatic
functions of language units in two directions:
1) from function to form, when changes in language mean employed in
functional units (speech acts) are studied;
MODERN EDUCATION AND DEVELOPMENT
Выпуск журнала №-20
Часть–4_ Февраль –2025
341
2) from form to function, when changes in the functional load and/or
functional repertoire of separate linguistic units are registered.
In fact, this trend is often viewed as a discourse-oriented historical linguistics,
the aim of which is to study pragmatic factors that influence historical language
changes in the text; discursive motivations are the focus of studies at any level of
language – phonological, morphological, syntactic, semantic [19].
Secondly, historical discourse linguistics is distinguished [4], it employs
various methodological approaches of historical linguistics but also uses its own set
of research tools for getting new goals and objectives while studying language
recourses and text peculiarities in a historical perspective, that is in a defined period.
It should be stated that historical discourse linguists deal mainly with texts of past
periods (historical texts, documents, and chronicles); they describe language and text
peculiarities on a synchronic layer [5].
In Western linguistics the following subdivision of the latter field is
suggested: historical discourse analysis proper, diachronic (ally-oriented) discourse
analysis, and diachronic discourse analysis [3, p. 139, 140], which clearly shows
differences in approaches to studies.
The first one is synchronically oriented studies of texts of past periods such
as chronicles, documents, and historical texts to discover their linguistic peculiarities
at a certain period.
The second one is focused on discourse functions, text categories, and their
language realizations from a historical perspective. The major goal of this subfield is
to describe and register the development of an entire discourse domain, which
requires extensive knowledge of the inventories of text types and genres at different
points in the history of language culture, and this – in turn – requires detailed
knowledge of specific historical text types [23].
At this point, researchers enter the subfields of diachronically-oriented text
linguistics or text-oriented historical linguistics. The former aims to study text types
and genres as the process of formation and evolution. Scholars working within the
framework of this approach make attempts to identify the repertoire of genres in
MODERN EDUCATION AND DEVELOPMENT
Выпуск журнала №-20
Часть–4_ Февраль –2025
342
some historical periods and describe oral and written genres as well as the
transformation process of oral genres into written ones.
RESULTS
Researchers engaged in this subfield as a rule trace the evolution of individual
genres or text types (see, e.g. [13]). The latter sets the goal to study the impact of
texts, genres, and discourses on the process of language change [23]. T. Köhnen sets
the main objectives of this subfield as follows:
1) description of texts and genres created in past historical periods,
2) identification of formal and functional language changes in texts and
genres that are needed to implement the communicative function at a certain time
period,
3) showing how a change like the text functional profile affects the employed
linguistic resources from a historical perspective.
According to the goal of the research, there was performed part speech
analysis of English monepic phonetic terminology in the diachronic aspect. The
percentage of phonetic terms expressed by different parts of speech, particularly, by
nouns, adjectives, and verbs with consideration of the chronological periodization is
shown in the table below.
Table. Parts of speech analysis of the English phonetic terminology
Period
Total amount
of terms
Terminology, expressedby
nouns (S)
adjectives (A) verbs (V)
X-XII century
75 (100%)
54 (72%)
14 (18,66%)
7 (9,33%)
XIII century
40 (100%)
28 (70%)
5 (12,5%)
7 (17,5%)
XIV century
131 (100%)
90 (68,7%)
20 (15,26%)
21 (16,03%)
XV century
65 (100%)
43 (66,15%)
12 (18,46%)
10 (15,38%)
XVI century
179 (100%)
128 (71,5%)
33 (18,43%)
18 (10,05%)
XVII century
162 (100%)
95 (58,64%)
50 (30,86%)
17 (10,49%)
XVIII century
80 (100%)
45 (56,25%)
25 (31,25%)
10 (12,5%)
XIX century
206 (100%)
131 (63,59%)
55 (26,69%)
20 (9,7%)
XX century
319 (100%)
167 (52,35%)
139 (43,57%) 13 (4,07%)
MODERN EDUCATION AND DEVELOPMENT
Выпуск журнала №-20
Часть–4_ Февраль –2025
343
Total
1257 (100%) 781 (62,13 %)
353 (28,08 %) 123 (9,78 %)
As it is seen in the table, during the period of X-XIII centuries, the main part
of the English terminological div (on average 70%) is represented by terms-nouns.
The segment of terms-adjectives is consequently 12-18%, and the segment of terms-
verbs is 9-17%. From XIV to XVI centuries, the segment of terms-nouns almost did
not change and composed on average 68-71% of the total number of terms of this
chronological interval. As it is represented, this denotes the stabilization of the
number of objects of research in this field of science and the limited set of integral
qualities during the described period. Circumstantially, these characteristics can
witness the lack of dynamics in the development of the science of phonetics (more
correctly (orthoepy) in this chronological interval.
Examples of nouns in the terminology of this period:
XIV century – accent (Maruzo, 368; Trahterov, 12; Matthews, 4), closure
(Maruzo, 370; Trahterov, 47; Matthews, 57), mutation (Maruzo, 377; Trahterov, 182;
Matthews, 236), uvula (Trahterov, 297; Matthews, 393).
XVcentury – articulation (Maruzo, 369; Trahterov, 25; Matthews, 26), curve
(Trahterov, 55), pause (Maruzo, 378; Trahterov, 209; Matthews, 270), slope
(Trahterov, 259).
XVI century – audition (Trahterov, 29), cavity (Trahterov, 42; Matthews, 49),
elision (Maruzo, 372; Trahterov, 74; Matthews, 111), glottis (Maruzo, 374;
Trahterov, 103; Matthews, 147).
In the period XIV to XVI centuries, it is noted some kind of increase in the
segment of terms-adjectives as part of the terminological div on the average from
15 to 18%, which, undoubtedly, is related to the increasing need for terminological
nomination in connection with the development of scientific knowledge and
expansion of the set of objects of research and their main features.
Examples of adjectives in the terminology of this period:
XIV century – acute (Maruzo, 368; Trahterov, 14), coronal (Maruzo, 371;
Trahterov, 54], liquid (Maruzo, 376; Trahterov, 154), pliant (Trahterov, 220).
MODERN EDUCATION AND DEVELOPMENT
Выпуск журнала №-20
Часть–4_ Февраль –2025
344
XV century – concave (Trahterov, 150), diphthongal (Trahterov, 65), dorsal
(Maruzo, 372; Trahterov, 68; Matthews, 104), hoarse (Trahterov, 117).
XVI century – audible (Trahterov, 29), convex (Trahterov, 153), neutral
(Maruzo, 377; Matthews, 242).
The segment of terms-verbs in the period from XIV to XVI centuries
composed on the average from 10 to 16%, at that, there is observed a tendency to
some decrease of their segment in the total amount of terminological units. It should
be noted that the most terms-verbs, in percent, about the total amount of the exposed
terminology are documented in the period from XIII to XV centuries (on the average
15-17%) when the necessity to nominate actions grew wider, performed by
orthoepists and phonetists as well as actions, characterizing behavior of objects of
orthoepy and phonetics.
Examples of verbs in the terminology of this period:
XIII century – descend (Trahterov, 60), overlap (Trahterov, 203), release
(Trahterov, 242), remove (Trahterov, 242).
XIV century – exhale (Trahterov, 82), expire (Trahterov, 82), hiss (Trahterov,
117), inspire (Trahterov, 128).
XV century – assimilate (Trahterov, 27), block (Trahterov, 35), intone
(Trahterov, 135), recede (Trahterov, 239).
In the centuries XVII-XIX the segment of terms-adjectives increases on the
average up to 30%, and the segment of terms-nouns decreases and composes on the
average from 56 to 63%.
Examples of nouns in the terminology of this period:
XVII century – accommodation (Maruzo, 368; Trahterov, 13; Matthews, 5),
apex (Trahterov, 22), epiglottis (Maruzo, 372; Trahterov, 79), suction (Trahterov,
274; Matthews, 362).
XVIII century – alveolus (Trahterov, 19), dorsum (Trahterov, 69; Matthews,
104), syllabication (Maruzo, 381; Trahterov, 277), velum (Maruzo, 382; Trahterov,
301; Matthews, 395).
MODERN EDUCATION AND DEVELOPMENT
Выпуск журнала №-20
Часть–4_ Февраль –2025
345
XIX century – ablaut (Trahterov, 10; Matthews, 2), dentalization (Trahterov,
59), loudness (Trahterov, 159; Matthews, 213), nasalization (Maruzo, 377;
Trahterov, 189; Matthews, 238).
Examples of adjectives in the terminology of this period:
XVII century – accentual (Trahterov, 12), epiglottal (Trahterov, 78;
Matthews, 115), mandibular (Trahterov, 164), nasal (Maruzo, 377; Trahterov, 186).
XVIII century – alveolar (Trahterov, 18; Matthews, 15), consonantal
(Trahterov, 51; Matthews, 70), laryngeal (Maruzo, 375; Trahterov, 145; Matthews,
200), velar (Maruzo, 382; Trahterov, 299; Matthews, 395).
XIX century – apical (Maruzo, 369; Trahterov, 23; Matthews, 21), glottal
(Maruzo, 373; Trahterov, 102; Matthews, 147), palatal (Maruzo, 377; Trahterov,
204; Matthews, 262), spirant (Maruzo, 380; Trahterov, 265; Matthews, 350).
The amount of term-verbs in the period of from XVII to XIX centuries is
more stable in comparison with other parts of speech and varies within the interval
of from 10 to 12%, accordingly. This stable amount of terms-verbs can be explained
by the fact that the set of actions, performed by both researchers in the sphere of
phonetics and phonology and objects of these fields of knowledge, has a limited and
repeated character.
Examples of verbs in the terminology of this period:
XVII century – catenate (Trahterov, 42), emit (Trahterov, 75), flatten
(Trahterov, 89), obstruct (Trahterov, 195).
XVIII century – accentuate (Trahterov, 12), constrict (Trahterov, 51), inhale
(Trahterov, 127), intonate (Trahterov, 133).
XIX century – dentalize (Trahterov, 59), labialize (Trahterov, 144), mutate
(Trahterov, 182), phonate (Trahterov, 213).
In the XX century, there is documented a kind of decrease in the number of
terms-nouns, accompanied by a pronounced increase in the segment of terms-
adjectives. So, in the XX century, the segment of terms-nouns composed on an
average 52% оfrom the total amount of involved terms, the segment of terms-
MODERN EDUCATION AND DEVELOPMENT
Выпуск журнала №-20
Часть–4_ Февраль –2025
346
adjectives, accordingly, composes about 43%, and the segment of terms-verbs –
about 4%.
Examples of nouns in the terminology of this period: are adaptability
(Trahterov, 15), coalescence (Maruzo, 370; Trahterov, 47), debuccalization (Crystal,
124), and feedback (Crystal, 178).
Examples of adjectives in the terminology of this period: are approximant
(Crystal, 30), diaphonic (Trahterov, 63), frictionless (Trahterov, 93), and junctural
(Crystal, 248).
Examples of verbs in the terminology of this period: are mispronounce
(Trahterov, 176), monotonize (Trahterov, 179), resonate (Crystal, 397), notice
(Trahterov, 315).
DISCUSSION
The considerable increase in the segment of terms-adjectives in the XX
century can be explained by the further development of science, the appearance of
new scientific fields, and the necessity to nominate new notions not exist before. An
increase in the number of adjectives derives from the background of increasing the
amount of compound terminology (term-groups), which allows the conclusion that
terms-adjectives, having featuring nominatives, play the role of "building material"
for compound terminology.
The segment of terms-nouns in the described period slightly decreases
generally remaining stable during several chronological periods, which shows the
formedness of terminology, nominating the main realities of phonetics and
phonology.
The analysis of the proportion of terms expressed by different parts of speech
makes it possible to conclude that terms-nouns compose the basis of the
terminological div of English phonetics at all stages of its development (62% from
the total amount of research counting 2465 terminological units), which lends
evidence of the special status of this part of speech, maximally expressing one of the
main functions of the term, namely, nominative function.
REFERENCES:
MODERN EDUCATION AND DEVELOPMENT
Выпуск журнала №-20
Часть–4_ Февраль –2025
347
1.
Arutyunova
N.D.
Discourse.
Linguistic
Encyclopedic
Dictionary.
1990, pp. 136-137.
2. Beal J., Corrigan K., Moisl H. Creating and Digitizing Language
Corpora, Diachronic Databases. Houndmills, Palgrave, 2007. 250 p.
3.
Brinton
L.J.
Historical
discourse
analysis.
In:
Schiffrin
D.,
Tannen D., Hamilton H.E., eds. The Handbook of Discourse Analysis.
Oxford, Blackwell, 2001, pp. 138-160.
4. Carroll R., Hiltunen R., Peikola M., Skaffari J., Tanskanen S-K.,
Valle, E., Wеrvik B. Introduction. In: Hiltunen R., Skaffari J., eds.
Discourse Perspectives on English: Medieval to Modern (Pragmatics &
Beyond New Series 119). Amsterdam, Philadelphia, John Benjamins,
2003, pp. 1-12.
5. Collins D. Speech reporting and the suppression of orality in
seventeenth-century
Russian
trial
dossiers.
Historical
Courtroom
Discourse. Special issue of Journal of Historical Pragmatics, 2006, vol. 7,
no. 2, pp. 265-292.
6.
Van
Dijk
T.
Language.
Knowledge.
Communication.
Moscow,
Progress Publishers, 1989. 312 p.
7.
Demyankov
V.Z.
Cognitivism,
Cognition,
Language
and
Linguistic Theory. Language and Structure of Knowledge Presentation.
Moscow, INION RAN Publishers, 1991, pp. 39-77.
8.
Dmitrieva
E.G.
Composition
Properties
and
Lexical
Peculiarities
of Formal Replies of the early 17th Century. Science Journal of
Volgograd State University. Linguistics, 2016, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 81-88.
http://dx.doi.org/10.15688/jvolsu2.2016.2.10
9. Ishanjanova, M. S. (2021). DEIXIS AS AN ASPECT OF
PRAGMATICS.
Scientific Bulletin of Namangan State University
,
2
(2), 239-245.
10.
Munosib, I., & Madina, A. (2023). Linguaculturology: Exploring The
Interplay Of Language And Culture.
Fan, Jamiyat Va Innovatsiyalar
,
1
(2), 19-21.
