XXI CENTURY RENAISSANCE IN THE PARADIGM OF SCIENCE,
EDUCATION AND TECHNOLOGY INNOVATIONS
168
С-TYPE REDUPLICATION IN KARAKALPAK
Kdirbaeva B.K.
Nukus, Uzbekistan
PhD Student, Ajiniyaz Nukus State Pedagogical Institute
e-mail:
kdirbaevab@gmail.com
Annotation.
This article explores C-type reduplication in the Karakalpak language, which is a
partial reduplication. The article provides examples of C-type reduplication in Karakalpak
and discusses its morphological, semantic properties, and deviations.
Keywords:
C-type reduplication, Karakalpak language, truncated form, adjectives,
deviations.
C-type reduplication is a type of partial interfixed reduplication that is found in
most Turkic languages, including Karakalpak. “C-type reduplication” is defined by
Stachowski as “the doubling of the initial mora of a word and inserting a single or double
consonant in between” in his book “Standard Turkic C-type Reduplications” [1, p. 251].
Bekbergenov explains that reduplicative constructions of this type are formed by
repeating an adjective or adverb, and their first component is a truncated form of this
base. The author also states that intensive reduplication in Karakalpak is used to intensify
the degree of certain qualitative adjectives and adverbs [3, pp. 78-79].
Khamidov also notes that the intensive degree is formed by reduplication
(repetition) of adjectives. Reduplication can be total or partial. In the case of partial
reduplication, the initial adjective undergoes truncation by one syllable, and the truncated
form ends in a consonant (
asqar-asqar
‘high-high’,
jap-jas
‘very young’ and
qap-qara
‘pitch-black’) [6, p. 91].
However, Eshbaev’s statements and examples are ambiguous as the author notes
that certain compound adverbs are formed by pairing, which is not characteristic of
modern Karakalpak literary speech, but some of these incomprehensible components can
be used to intensify the adverbs. As an example, the author cites such words as
tup-tuwra
‘completely straight, very direct’,
tumlı-tusqa
‘to everywhere, to all sides’,
ján jaqqa
‘to
everywhere, to all sides’,
payu-piyada
‘on foot’ [4, p. 88]. The last three examples are not
C-type reduplications.
Baskakov states that the intensive degree is formed by reduplication of the
adjective and reduplication can be full or partial. Full reduplicative constructions are the
adjectives repeated twice (
uzın-uzın
‘very long’,
mayda-mayda
‘very small, tiny’,
qattı-qattı
‘hard, rough-rough’). The reduplication is partial when the first word is an
initial truncated syllable ending in a consonant, a few examples are provided in (1).
Usually, this consonant is a bilabial voiceless ‘
p
’ [2, p. 184].
(1)
góne
‘old’
góp-góne
‘very old’
jeńil
‘light’
jep-jeńil
‘very light’
jińishke
‘thin, narrow’
jip-jińishke
‘very thin, narrow’
jasıl
‘green’
jap-jasıl
‘very green’
muzday
‘cold’
mup-muzday
‘very cold’
Bekbergenov provides a detailed explanation of how an intensive form is formed
XXI CENTURY RENAISSANCE IN THE PARADIGM OF SCIENCE,
EDUCATION AND TECHNOLOGY INNOVATIONS
169
and suggests three patterns for truncating the initial syllable in C-type reduplication. If
the first syllable of a word ends in a consonant, this consonant is replaced by the sound
‘
p
’. This syllable becomes the initial intensifying component, and the second component
will have the full form, as shown in (2).
(2)
úlken
‘big’
úp-úlken
‘very big, huge’
kelte
‘short’
kep-kelte
‘very short’
muzday
‘cold’
mup-muzday
‘very cold’
mayda
‘small, tiny’
map-mayda
‘very small, tiny’
If a word starts with a vowel sound in the first syllable, the sound ‘
p
’ is added
before the vowel, and that becomes the first component of the word. The second
component of the word will remain in full form, as in (3).
(3)
iri
‘hefty’
ip-iri
‘hefty’
domalaq
‘round’
dop-domalaq
‘completely round’
Tegis
‘even, flat’
tep-tegis
‘very even, very flat’
Sopaq
‘convex’
sop-sopaq
‘convex’
semiz
‘fat’
sep-semiz
‘very fat’
When the first syllable of a word ends with two consonants, those two consonants
are removed and replaced by ‘
p
’:
shalt
‘agile; fast’ →
shap-shalt
‘agile; very fast’ [3, p.
79].
However, this framework is not universal for the formation of intensive degree of
adjectives, as there are deviations from it. Bekbergenov acknowledges that there may be
instances where certain words in the modern Karakalpak language show a violation of
these patterns [3, p. 79].
Baskakov implies that on some occasions the closer may be a nasal ‘
m
’ or a
“whistling” ‘
s
’:
jım-jırt
‘quiet(ly), silence’,
qum-quwıt
‘excitation, commotion, agitation’,
tım-taraqay
‘in disarray, disorderly, in all directions’,
tım-tırıs
‘complete silence,
completely silent, completely mute’,
nám-náhán
‘very big, huge’,
bes-beter
‘more so,
very; worst of all’ [2, p. 184]. Stachowski examines three words from these examples in a
separate subsection of “Karakalpak” section in his work mentioned above. The author
assumes that
qum-quwıt
and
jım-jırt
, which are closed by ‘
m
’, may be borrowings.
However,
qum-quwıt
could also be “merely an apparent reduplication” and ‘
m
’ in
jım-jırt
could be a closer, “which suggests an Oghuz origin […] and thus further complicates the
issue”. The only intensive reduplicative word
bes-beter
, which is closed by ‘
s
’, could be a
borrowing from Turkmen. Stachowski points out that the three words “go against” the
general pattern for the Kipchak languages in which “‘
p’
and ‘
pp’
are the only possible
closing consonants” [1, pp. 81-83, 210]. It is worth observing that Karakalpak has only
one instance of a double
pp
:
aq
‘white’ →
ap-appaq
‘snow-white’.
In conclusion, Karakalpak partial reduplication that intensifies adjectives is
formed by doubling the initial CV of the base and adding ‘
p
’ or ‘
pp’
(only
appaq
is
attested) to the initial CV as a closer. The closer may rarely be ‘
m
’ or ‘
s
’ (only
besbeter
is
attested). This study has raised questions to the framework of Bekbergenov, which need
to be discussed in further studies. Moreover, more cases with ‘
p
’, ‘
m
’
,
‘
s
’
as a closer
should be collected and analyzed.
XXI CENTURY RENAISSANCE IN THE PARADIGM OF SCIENCE,
EDUCATION AND TECHNOLOGY INNOVATIONS
170
REFERENCES:
1.
Stachowski K. Standard Turkic C-type Reduplications. Jagiellonian University
Press. 2014.
2.
Баскаков Н.А. Каракалпакский язык. М., 1952.
3.
Бекбергенов А. Қарақалпақ тилинде сөзлердиң жасалыўы. Нөкис,
“Қарақалпақстан”, 1979.
4.
Ешбаев Ж. Қарақалпақ тилинде рәўиш. Нөкис, «Қарақалпақстан», 1976.
5.
Нажимов А. Қарақалпақ тилиндеги жуп ҳәм тәкирар сөзлер. Нөкис,
«Қарақалпақстан», 1979.
6.
Хамидов Х. Каракалпакский язык XIX-начала XX в. по данным письменных
памятников. Ташкент, «Фан», 1986.
7.
Seytniyazova, G., & Atashova, F. (2022). THE CATEGORY OF PLURALITY IN
RUSSIAN AND ENGLISH LANGUAGES. Educational Research in Universal Sciences,
1(1), 74–78. Retrieved from http://erus.uz/index.php/er/article/view/477
8.
Atashova F. D., Seytniyazova G. M. DEVELOPING COMMUNICATIVE
COMPETENCE
OF
ESP
LEARNERS
ESP
ЎҚУВЧИЛАРИНИНГ
КОММУНИКАТИВ
КОМПЕТЕНЦИЯСИНИ
РИВОЖЛАНТИРИШ
//Mental
Enlightenment Scientific-Methodological Journal. – 2022. – Т. 2022. – №. 2. – С. 38-50.
9.
Atashova F. D., Konisov G. U. THE CONCEPT OF COMPETENCE
APPROACH IN TEACHING A FOREIGN LANGUAGE ЧЕТ ТИЛИНИ
ЎҚИТИШДА
КОМПЕТЕНЦИЯ
ЁНДАШУВИ
ТУШУНЧАСИ
//Mental
Enlightenment Scientific-Methodological Journal. – 2022. – Т. 2022. – №. 2. – С. 24-37.
10.
Atashova F., Konratbaeva E. CULTURE SHOCK AS THE BARRIER OF
PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT IMPACTS PSYCHOLOGY OF PEOPLE //WORLD
SCIENCE: PROBLEMS AND INNOVATIONS. – 2019. – С. 172-174.
11.
Садуллаева Альфия Низамаддиновна СТИЛИСТИЧЕСКИЙ АНАЛИЗ
КОНЦЕПТА «МУҲАББАТ» (ЛЮБОВЬ) В ПРОИЗВЕДЕНИИ «ТЕРБЕНБЕС» //
European
journal
of
literature
and
linguistics.
2023.
№2.
URL:
https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/stilisticheskiy-analiz-kontsepta-mu-abbat-lyubov-v-
proizvedenii-terbenbes (дата обращения: 16.11.2023).
12.
Садулаева А. Til va madaniyatning lingvomadaniy aloqalari //Развитие
лингвистики и литературоведения и образовательных технологий в эпоху
глобализации. – 2022. – Т. 1. – №. 1. – С. 62-64.
