RELATION OF MORPHEMA TO LEXEMA
Toychiyeva Zuleykha Khamrokulovna
Gulistan State University, Gulistan city, district 4. Uzbekistan.
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10439680
Keywords:
Morphemes, suffix, prefix, affix, lexical morpheme, lexeme, basis, grammatical meaning, analogy formant, connection
affix, semantic aspect.
Abstract:
Morpheme (Greek morphe – form) is a linguistic unit that has a certain form and meaning, is not divided into other parts
by meaning, and serves for the formation of a word (lexeme) or the formation of a word form. Morphemes in the Uzbek language
are mostly in the state of affix (see). For example-chi (kurashchi), -shunos (siyosatshunos), -q(qator), - ki(tepki), -
li(aqlli), chan(ishchan), -la(tuzla), -illa(taqilla), lar(bolalar), -roq(kattaroq), -mtir(qoramtir), etc.
Morphemes by their main function are divided into 2 types; word formers, word formers. Word-forming morphemes are
used to form new lexemes and play an important role in enriching the lexical layer of the Uzbek language. Word-forming
morphemes form an additional meaning-forming form of the word. For example, trees (the plural form of the word tree), higher
(the degree form of the word high), yellow (the diminutive form of the word yellow), came (the past tense form of the first person
singular of the verb to come) and others. Morphemes are not used independently, do not express a linguistic meaning, but serve
only to form lexical and grammatical meanings of the word. An affix is a morpheme that is not used independently, dependent,
attached to the nucleus, serving to express various meanings associated with the lexical and grammatical features of the nucleus.
The fact that a word is a whole formed by the unity of parts interconnected in meaning clearly shows that the meaning expressed
by it, arising from the meaning of morphemes of the same composition, from their totality, is very closely related to the meaning
of affixes.
INTRODUCTION
Some literatures divide morphemes into two:
basic morpheme, affixal morpheme. This is especially
true in traditional linguistics. “An affix is a morpheme
that is not used independently, but is attached to the
stem, and serves to express different meanings related
to the lexical and grammatical features of the stem.
The fact that a word is a whole formed from the unity
of interconnected semantic parts, that the meaning it
expresses is derived from the meaning of the
morphemes in that composition, from the sum of them,
is very closely connected with the core of affixes.
clearly shows that. Affixes have a number of features
in terms of external - formal aspects, meanings,
functions and applications ”[4.77]. This aspect is a
view that morphemes should be studied in relation to
the lexeme.
A morpheme, regardless of whether it means a
concept, has a definite form, while a lexeme should also
serve as a meaning to denote a concept. A morpheme is the
main post-lexeme unit of a linguistic construct that serves to
express grammatical meaning, unlike a lexeme. Because the
order of the language sections is based on this. While the
lexeme serves the dictionary as a linguistic term from the
outside, it is also an object of morphology when it comes to
the manifestation of the internal capabilities of the language.
On this basis, the lexeme performs the main function in the
representation of morphemes.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Uzbek theoretical linguistics, which began to
form on a scientific basis in the first quarter of the 20th
century, has become a component of world modern
linguistics. Uzbek linguistics has a long history as an
independent branch of Turkic linguistics. When
thinking about the historical stages of Uzbek
linguistics, great scientists such as Mahmud Kashgari,
Abu Nasr Farobi, Abu Rayhan Beruni, Ibn Sina,
Mahmud Zamakhshari, Abu Khayyan, Alisher Navoi,
who are both theoretical and practical sources for all-
Turkish linguistics. it is impossible not to remember
their work. At the beginning of the 20th century - the
period of formation of Uzbek scientific linguistics,
there are many authors who contributed to the
theoretical development of linguistics, such as Fitrat,
Elbek, Ghozi Olim Yunusov, Ashurali Zahiri, Abdulla
Avloni, Shorasul Zunnun. along with devoted Uzbek
scientists E.D. Polivanov, N.F. Katanov, V.V. Radlov,
P.G. Ivanov, S.E. Malov, Yu. Sokolov, V.A.
Gordlevsky, Sh.F. Baskakov, A.A. Yuldashev, A.M.
Herbak, A.K. Borovkov, A.N. Kononov, V.V.
Reshetov, Many other peoples, like S.N. Ivanov, are
Turkologists it is necessary to mention the names of
scientists. The main part of our scientists thought
about the issues related to the formation of words in
Uzbek linguistics. This situation has been the cause of
many discussions to this day. For this reason, we
accepted the aspects related to morpheme and
morphology
of
the
linguist
scientist
Sh.
Rakhmatullayev as the relevance of the topic.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Although a morpheme does not mean a
concept independently, it has a definite form, and a
lexeme must serve meaning as well as a concept. A
morpheme is the basic unit of language construction
after a lexeme and, unlike a lexeme, serves to
express grammatical meaning. Because the layout
of the linguistics
departments is based on this. Although a lexeme
externally serves as a linguistic term for a dictionary,
it is also an object of morphology in terms of
expressing the internal capabilities of a language. In
this case, the lexeme plays a key role in the
manifestation of morphemes.
Both a lexeme and a morpheme as a unit
of language are equivalent to a particular part and
serve to express a particular concept. It is only after
the lexeme has received a grammatical description
from the point of view of its class that it becomes
complete and begins to speak. A morpheme also
makes sense by
adding to its own lexeme. A lexeme appears as a
leading unit, while a morpheme appears as an adjunct.
In this sense, it is appropriate to consider a lexeme as
a wor d and a morpheme as an adjunct. The sign of the
independent use of a lexeme can also be distinguished
from the sign of the inability of a morpheme to be used
independently.
A morpheme, like a lexeme, is an abstract
unit: it is represented as a symbol in the linguistic
memory part of the brain, in which case it is called
a linguistic unit. As a linguistic unit, a morpheme
consists of a whole in terms of expression and content.
For example, the -m part at the end of the infinitive is
equal to the morpheme; the phoneme m is its
expression; and the content aspect means “attributing
the first person.
In linguistics, the content of a morpheme is
determined by the grammatical meaning it represents.
That is, a morpheme is attached to a specific lexeme
and then appears in the plan of expression. A
morpheme is always used with a lexeme, and it
adds additional meaning to the lexeme. Its content
aspect is also distinguished by the simplicity of the
lexeme in terms of content. A lexeme is the name of a
concept and has a nominative function, while a
morpheme has no nominative function, only a
signifier function: it expresses grammatical meaning.
In other words, a morpheme is not formed without a
lexeme.
The symbol of a morpheme in the form
of a linguistic unit contains information about its
aspect of expression and its characteristic features,
as well as about the content aspect and its
characteristic features. Each use of a morpheme is
made by copying the symbol from which this
information is
concentrated; a representative of a morpheme that
appears as a material unit as a result of such a process
is called a morph and is called a speech unit. Hence, it
is necessary to distinguish the state of the linguistic
unit in the linguistic memory part of the morpheme
and the state of the speech unit as a unit of
pronunciation [5.114]. For this reason, it is
observed that some linguists also consider a lexeme
as a morpheme. In fact, morphemes, like lexemes,
exist in our minds, and we form certain concepts with
their participation.
Observations show that there are some
similarities between a lexeme and a morpheme: in both
of them the phoneme serves as a form of expression,
both of which are equivalent to a part as a linguistic
unit, and both have a certain character in the mind.
appears as For example, we use the form "-s" in our
minds to form a plural. Lexemes and morphemes are
distinguished by other important features. It is also
incorrect to interpret a morpheme as a single linguistic
unit and a lexeme as a type of morpheme. We don't
think that's right. If we agree with this
misconception, we are in favor of the idea that
the lexical stage of language construction does not
have its own independent unit. This can lead to other
language errors. This view contradicts the study of the
stages of language construction as a system.
A lexeme is a unit belonging to the lexical
stage of language construction, a morpheme is a unit
belonging to the morpheme stage of language
construction; lexeme - lexical unit, morpheme -
grammatical unit. A morpheme is the smallest
linguistic unit that serves to express grammatical
meaning [5.114-115]. It should be noted that treating
a lexeme that gives rise to a morpheme as a
morpheme unit raises other problems with the term.
Therefore, in textbooks, it is appropriate to define the
basic term as a lexeme and the additional term as a
morpheme.
ANALYSIS AND RESULTS
In some literatures the morpheme is
considered as a speech unit, while in others it is
interpreted as a linguistic unit. A morpheme is the
smallest meaningful part of a language because it is
considered to be a constituent unit of language
structure. As an example, the word "programmer" can
be divided into two morphemes. In this case,
"program" is considered as a basic morpheme. It
should be noted that the concept of "program" as a
basic morpheme is defined here in terms of its
relevance to this unit of speech, so the unit of
"program" as a speech unit should be considered as a
morpheme and a lexeme in lexicology and
morphemics. The morpheme -chi can serve as a
morpheme in any section.
Morphemics - in addition to teaching about
the composition of morphemes - morphs of the
language, the characteristic of the morpheme in the
meaning expression chain: root or affixal morpheme
(carrying lexical meaning or grammatical meaning),
types of affixal morphemes according to their function
: the division of word-forming or form-forming affixal
morphemes, as well as the teaching of certain changes
in the morpheme structure of a word.
It should also be said that the first doctrine
that words contain such minimally meaningful parts
and they are called morphemes was brought to the
science of linguistics by Baudouin de Courtenay, the
founder of the Kazan school of linguistics.
When we analyze the composition of the
word grammatically, we notice that it has parts that
have meaning and that these parts are interconnected.
In particular, both the root morpheme and the word
have a lexical meaning. But they cannot be considered
as one thing, that is, a morpheme and a word are not
one phenomenon.
There are differences between them as
follows:
1. The word is divided into morphemes.
2. A word interacts with other words in
speech.
3. The word comes as part of a sentence. 4.
Morpheme is not used independently in
speech.
5. A morpheme exists only within a word.
6. A morpheme is not divided into
meaningful parts.
A word can consist of only one morpheme:
stone, head, eyebrow, work. Such words with one
morpheme consist only of the stem and are considered
root words. Artificial words have two or more
morphemes.
When talking about the concept of
conditional and free stem in the structure of word
formation, it is taken into account that this
phenomenon is mainly characteristic of borrowed
words. Stems used in speech only (always) with
affixes are related (conditional): such as fash-izm,
atheist, and without affixal morphemes, such as car,
wagon, etc., which are used independently, are
considered free stems. Because wagon-soz, wagon-
chi, wagon-li; can be used like machine-li, machine-
soz.
It was mentioned above that in the morpheme
analysis of words, it is necessary to clearly demarcate
the issue of historicity and current status. Because the
words that are divided into parts become inseparable
with the passage of time, and this phenomenon is
called simplification (oproshenie) in linguistics. M:
intestine (in-ak, diminutive), heart (yur-ak, horse-
maker), neck (neck-in, diminutive), like today, eighty,
ninety, wait.
The second form of change in the
morphematic structure of a word is redistribution. In
redistribution, a word that previously had the same
division will later or now have a different form of
division: they are - ul-ar - u-lar, bitik - biti-k - bit-ik,
for example .
In our language, there are words that seem to
be divided into morphemes, but the parts of these
words do not have meaning at the moment. For
example, in the words Говла, емакла, тарашла,
одагайла, the affix -la is a verb-forming affixal
morpheme. But the meaning of their constituent base
(stem morpheme) is currently illegible. Also,
household, political, personality words cannot be
divided into morphemes. Also, the analysis of words
such as çindan, kunda, zorzha, which have become
lexicalized, completely hardened and turned into
idioms, into morphemes, leads to an unscientific
conclusion. Because the parts of these words, which
are considered to be the root and affix, are not used in
their meaning and function, they have lost their
meaning and function and have become completely
idioms.
In general, in the process of morpheme
analysis, when we divide any word into components,
it is a good idea to divide it into lexemes + morphemes
(s). Even if the lexeme does not contain a morpheme
(which may have zero form), this law holds.
In the paradigm, some forms of a word that
do not have a suffix - morpheme (form) are
distinguished by the fact that they do not have a special
suffix (form). This is the zero form: in the general
agreement, in the unit: noun (melon - melon, melon,
from melon ...); command verb in the second person
singular (stay - stay, stay, stay ...).
As with other phenomena of language, the
historical way of word forms shows some changes:
1. The ancient means of speech have been replaced by
the analytic form (autumn - with autumn); this
agreement is detached from its paradigm, which has
hardened with its own index, and some of the words
that come with this accent have moved into the
form (like summer-winter, morning-evening). Here
we see the phenomenon of lexicalization of the
grammatical form (compare: in some cases we see the
opposite: the word sari used to mean "side" and is
varied. then completely variable, the form becoming a
word. This is a phenomenon of grammaticalization).
2. Fortunately, we see the solidification of the forms
of agreement and possession in modal words and
forms, such as forward, apparently, really,
suddenly, and the specialization of the word in this
form. In this case, they are no longer a form of
paradigm. 3. The use of the possessive affix as a
predicative affix (which is found in the old Uzbek
language) by adding it to the nouns of the character
type is completely contrary to the norms of the modern
Uzbek language (compare: in the future tense: your -
«yours). »In the sense of).
The concepts of word and morpheme or
lexeme and morpheme are often controversial.
Examining the morphological structure of a word
involves phenomena such as determining the
relationship between a word and a morpheme (stem
morpheme and affix morpheme in some literatures),
stem and base, and the
structure and classification of morphemes in different
languages. In Turkic languages, including Uzbek,
lexemes and morphemes are always
interchangeable. When we look at the grammatical
structure of a word, we see that it has parts that
have a certain meaning, that these parts are
interconnected. The morphological structure of a
word is that it is made up of such grammatical
elements that have some meaning - the division into
grammatical parts. Such an indivisible, sma llest part
of a word is recognized as a morpheme. The
morphological structure of a word, the nature of
its division into morphemes, suggests that these
elements between it consist of a lexeme and a
morpheme.
A morpheme, one of the most important units
of language, is the minimal, smallest part of a word.
For example, our children. This morphological unit
cannot be divided into parts without losing its
meaning: the subsequent division (separation into
syllables and some phonemes) shows a phonetic
feature rat her than a morphological structure: when
sounds serve to differentiate the meaning of a word
both, but not directly related to meaning. It follows
that the smallest part of a morpheme is the one
that directly expresses the connection of linguistic
phenomena with meaning - the one that gives
meaning, the one that
shows the boundaries of connection.
It is more accurate to describe a
morpheme as "the smallest semantic unit of a
language" than as a "smallest semantic unit of a
word"; but it is also incorrect to include the lexical
unit as "least meaningful unit." It should be noted that
the main feature of a morpheme is the unit of
grammatical meaning. Then the concepts and terms
"lexical morpheme" and "core morpheme" are
abandoned, and the term lexeme itself is used instead.
At the same time, of the "additional (generalized,
affixal, grammatical) morpheme" comments, only the
"grammatical" comment is sufficient [5.115]. It is
therefore logical to call a
morpheme the smallest unit of grammatical meaning
in the construction of a language.
Morphemes come in many forms and
shapes. The first type is pure morphemes-affixes in
the form of additional from the outside (in Uzbek
affixes are used instead of suffixes); the second type is
affixoids, which are shifted from independent words
to affixes, used both as independent words and as
affixes; the
third type is recognized as a lexeme, but they are
lexical morphemes that do not have an independent
meaning like an affix, but serve to express a
grammatical meaning like an affix, even though
their appearance is like a word. In general, we can
divide morphemes into affix, affixoid, lexical
nature morpheme kabu types.
1. An affix is a morpheme that is used in
conjunction with a part, including a lexeme (base,
base, word). The affix is derived from Latin and
means "affixus" - "attached". Affixes are added to a
specific lexeme. A lexeme with an affix is called a
base. For example, there are 4 units in the word
woodcutters: woodcutters. The morphemes -chi, -lar,
-ni in this word are equal to the affix and are added to
the base one after another. The -chi morpheme is
added directly to the wood
lexeme, the -s morpheme to the woody word, and the
-ni morpheme directly to the woody part[6.144; 7.52].
There are different types of affixes,
depending on which part of the lexeme they are added
to. These are called suffixes and prefixes.
If an affix is added after a lexeme, that is,
after a base, it is called a suffix. The suffix is derived
from Latin and means "suffixus" - "attached". The
affixes -chi, -lar, -ni mentioned above are suffixes.
If a morpheme (affix) is added before a
lexeme, that is, before a base, such an affix is called a
prefix. The term prefix is derived from Latin,
"praefixum" - "prae" means "before", "fixus" means
"attached". For example, no-, be-, ser- prefixes are
added from the front in the words wrong, bad,
lucrative. Prefixes are
not inherent in the Uzbek language. Most of the
prefixes are in Tajik. Initially, it was added to
Tajik words, but as a result, it was added to Uzbek and
other languages.
The morphological structure of the word consists of
components that participate in the formation of the
word form. For example, the morphological structure
of the word ish-lar-imiz-ni. In this case, work is the
basis of forming the form, -lar - forming the plural
form, -imiz - forming the possessive form, -ni -
forming the agreement form; in the verb keldik, kel is
the basis of forming the form, - di - the form of the
tense form, -k - the form of the person-number form.
In the words "workmen" and "work", "workman" and
"work" are the basis of form formation, and their last
parts are form-forming affixes. So, the morphological
(form formation) structure of the word consists of the
part that is the basis for the formation of the form and
the form-forming part (affix or auxiliary word).
The part that forms the basis of the formation can be a
compound word or a simple artificial word. But word-
forming parts (parts involved in word formation) are
not included in the morphological structure of the
word. Accordingly, from the point of view of the
morphological structure, the word pickers is divided
into such parts as pickers-lar.
The base of the word form can be equal to the phrase:
as in the Republic of Uzbekistan. The morphological
structure of a word can be complex, that is, one word
can have more than one form-forming parts (affixes or
auxiliary words). But each (specific) form of the word
consists of two parts:
1) the part that forms the basis of this form, 2) the part
that forms this form (affix or auxiliary word). For
example, in the word pickers, the part that forms the
basis for the formation of the accusative form is
"pickers", and - is the tool (affix) that forms the
accusative form. So, the declension form of the noun
"pickers" consists of these two parts: 1) the base of the
agreement form is "pickers", 2) the affix forming the
agreement form -ni. In this word, the part that is the
basis for the plural form is "picker", and -lar is the tool
(affix) that forms the plural form. Therefore, two
components are involved in the formation of the
number form of this noun: 1) the base ("picker"),
which participates in the formation of the number
form, 2) the tool (-s affix) that forms the number form.
Also, in the word used, the basis of forming the
person-number form is used, and the means of forming
the person-number form is the affix -k; the basis of the
formation of the tense form is use, -di is the forming
tool of the tense form (affix); The base of the degree
form is work, -t is the tool (affix) that forms the degree
form.
The word-formation structure of a word differs from
both the morpheme structure and the morphological
structure. The word formation structure of a word
consists of its constituent parts. In the analysis of word
formation, the constituent parts of a made-up word are
studied and the way of expressing the meaning of a
made-up word based on these components is studied.
For example, terim: ter is a formative base, -im is a
formative affix; terimchi: terim is a formative base, -
chi is a formative affix.
So, in the analysis of word formation, first of all, only
word-forming tools are studied. In this case, form-
creating means (checked by morphological analysis)
are neglected. Secondly, in this analysis, it is not
studied how many stems and how many formative
affixes are in the composition of the artificial word
(the word is not analyzed from this point of view), but
the components that created the artificial word are
determined. For example, if the word picker is divided
into three parts according to the composition of the
morpheme (ter-im-chi), from the point of view of the
constituent components of this word, it (the word
picker) is divided into two (terim-chi). the word picker
is not formed from the word ter, but is formed using
the constituent components terim and -chi. The
morpheme structure and word formation structure of
the word Pakhtakorlik also differ. Morpheme
structure: cotton-kor, word formation structure:
cotton-kor.
The base of the artificial word (the basis of word
formation) can also be equal to a compound word or
phrase: belbog'li ( belbog'-li), temir-yolchi (railway-
chi), like five-year (five-year-old).
It seems that in the morpheme analysis of the word,
each morpheme (the smallest part of the word that
conveys meaning) is checked and determined. There
can be several such morphemes in a word: ter-im-chi-
lar-imiz-niki-da. In the analysis of word formation, the
constituent components of a fictitious word are
determined. There are no more than two such
components in each fictitious word (although the word
contains more than one stem and more than one affix
that makes the word). For example, bichiq: bich is a
formative base, -iq is a formative affix; bichichi:
bichik is a formative base, -chi is a formative affix;
unum: un - formative base, -um - formative affix;
unumdor: unum - formative base, -dor - formative
affix; fertility: fertile - formative base, -lik - formative
affix, etc.
A small unit of speech is a word form, which, in
addition to the lexical meaning, also has a grammatical
meaning. The word form is divided into meaningful
parts depending on this feature.
The limit of meaningful parts in word forms is
determined by combining word forms. For example,
based on the mutual comparison of word forms such
as search, search, and searched, one common meaning
part is search and its selection, selection, selection; By
mixing with words such as "beginning", "beginning",
"started", meaningful parts such as -n, -moq, -di are
separated. (also, word-la, work-la) meaningful parts
are determined. Thus, the form of the word sought is
divided into four meaningful parts in the form of iz-la-
n-di. These parts are not further divided into
meaningful parts. Such smallest meaningful parts
separated into word forms are called morphs (from
Greek morphe - "form").
Morphs are divided into two types: 1) root morphs, 2)
affixal morphs. For example, word forms such as
workers, in the cotton field, kokardi, kuylagan each
have three morphs, the first (ish, cotton, blue, tune) is
the root morph, and the following ones are (-chi,-lar.-
zor,-da, -ar,-di,-la,-gan) belong to the affixal morph.
Root morphs are an inevitable part of every word form
and represent the lexical meaning. If the word form
consists of one morph, it is a root morph. Even when
various affixes are added to the word, the meaning of
the root morph does not disappear. The meaning of
new words made from it - formations is always
connected with the meaning of the root morph, based
on this meaning. For example, the meaning of artificial
words such as bil, heavy, head, work, knowledge made
from the original root morphs, knowledgeable, weight,
boss, start, worker, beekeeper, beekeeper are the
meaning of the above root morphs is based on.
Affixal morphs (Latin affixus - "attached", "attached")
give various additional meanings to the content of the
root morph. Affixal morph is not used independently,
it only serves to convey a certain meaning in the word
form. The meaning of the new formation comes from
the unity of the meaning of the root morph and the
affixal morph. Therefore, when dividing a word form
into a root morph and an affixal morph, the root morph
has an independent lexical meaning, the meaning of
the artificial word is connected with it, and the affixal
morph is added to other root morphs. is taken as a
basis. For example, word forms such as worker,
worker, from work, cotton garden, friend are divided
into stem morphs and affixes, because the parts of
work, cotton, friend, -chi, -chan, -dan, -zor, -im affixes
can also participate as an independent part of another
word form.
Affixal morphs are divided into suffixal and prefixal
morphs. The morphs added after the root morph in the
word form are suffixal morphs, and the morphs added
before the root morph are prefixal morphs. In
particular, the suffixal morphs -like, -rok, and be-no-
are included as prefixal morphs in the composition of
more ambiguous word forms.
As in words, the relations of form and meaning are
systematized
in
affixes,
and
phenomena
of
grammatical polysemy, homonymy, synonymy, and
antonymy apply.
Affixal
polysemy.
Affixal
polysemy
is
the
phenomenon of word-forming affixal morphemes
being able to form words with different meanings
belonging to the same category. For example, swim,
fold, fry (nouns of food), slide, move, return (nouns of
food, treatment), pull, divide, suppress (nouns of
place) fever, sweat, itch (nouns of disease) in words
such as -ma suffix serves to make words with different
meanings belonging to the same category (making a
noun from a verb). Also, the suffix -chilik has a
polysemantic nature: 1) it forms the noun of the field
in which the thing understood from the base is
cultivated: such as cotton growing, viticulture, cattle
breeding, seed breeding; 2) it forms an action (state)
noun related to the concept understood from the base:
such as arrogance, curiosity; 3) the noun of the
existence of the thing-phenomenon understood from
the base: such as abundance, abundance, cheapness,
expensiveness.
Affixal homonymy. Affixal morphemes that form or
form words of the same form but different in meaning
are called homonymous affixal morphemes. Although
these affixes are equivalent in form, but are not related
to each other in terms of meaning, it is a phenomenon
of homonymy between other affixes.
There are the following forms of inter-affix
homonymy:
1. Word-forming affixes have a homonymous
relationship with each other: -qi: -chop-qi, kick, push
(noun); autumn, evening, summer, winter (adjective);
-gin: massacre, flood, wave (noun); thin, pale, bright,
lively (adjective).
2. Form-forming affixes have a homonymous
relationship: (i)sh affix:
1) forms the noun form of an action: reading (to read),
to speak (to speak);
2) forms the conjunctive form of the verb: to wash, to
see, to increase.
3. Word-forming and form-forming affixes are in the
homonymic state:
-ma affix:
1) makes a horse: swimming, exhibition, gaslama
(horse),
2) the infinitive form of the verb: say, say.
4. Affixal homonymy also exists in more complex
forms:
-chi affix:
1) worker, waterman (personal noun),
2) dragonfly, fisher (insect and bird horse),
3) tell me, what about you, what about the others
(interrogative load). It can be seen from the examples
that the homonymic condition is also found in affixes
within the same word group.
Affixal synonymy. Affixal synonymy is the fact that
affixes are different in form but have the same general
meaning. Affixal synonymy mainly occurs within a
word group. At the same time, its function occurs
within the framework of the same affixes, that is,
between word-formers and form-formers: out of place
and out of place, zealous and ser-zealous (word
between Yasovchilars); like change-t and change-tir
(between form makers).
Synonymous affixes are added to different bases
to create new words. For example, this is clearly
visible when we compare the personal noun formative
-chi affix with the personal noun formative -schonos
suffix with such a meaning: although it is used in the
style of literati - literary scholar, linguist - linguist, but
servant, the words "service expert", "paint expert",
orientalist,
The words "orientalist" and "soiler" cannot be used.
Affixal antonymy. Affixes with the opposite meaning
cause affixal antonymy. In our language, affixal
antonymy occurs mainly in the context of word-
forming affixes: -li - you: smart-smart; -li - be-: patient
- impatient; be- ba-: poor - wealthy. The given affixal
pairs are not always antonyms in all cases. M: we don't
use headless - headless.
Form-forming affixal morphemes are divided into two
types according to their relationship to general
categorical and categorical features of words:
1) affixal morphemes forming a categorical form;
2)
non-categorical
form-forming
affixal
morphemes.
Affixal morphemes forming a categorical form
are a form specific to a grammatical category of a
certain word group. M: noun
affixes forming the form of my possessive, plural, and
agreement categories.
CONCLUSION
1. An affixoid (as mentioned above) is
essentially a lexical unit, which then serves to express
grammatical meaning, such as an affix, and has the
property of joining several lexemes, such as an affix.
Affixoids can also be lexemes. Affixoid is derived
from the Latin word "affixoid" meaning "affix-like".
For example, there is both the lexeme "bek" and
the morpheme -bek: Amir Temur was originally from
the family of beks. Ozodbek sang the people's pain.
Another
feature of the affixoid is that it can be added to many
words.
2. A morpheme of lexical nature differs sharply from
an affix (as well as an affixoid): it is not closely
attached to the lexeme to which it belongs, but retains
some of it, and the lexeme-like feature is manifested
in this feature. But grammatical meaning is equivalent
to an affix. Such a unit can be called a morpheme
of lexical nature on the basis of its content
(grammatical meaning) rather than its external (non-
dense attachment to the lexeme) [5.116]. Such lexical
morphemes include -ber-, -ol-, -bol-, -chiq-, -koy-
, -sol-, -yoz-, -kor-… units of the verb family. . By
joining a lexeme that externally resembles an
independent verb, we can obtain analytical forms of
the same type that appear as morphemes. This
feature is evident in analytical forms, but it must be
distinguished from the compound affix.
The analytic formant consists of an auxiliary
word that looks like an independent word with a means
of attaching it to the base of the verb: - (i) b send-
(laugh-), -a sol- (say) sol-), -a yoz- (yiqila yoz-), -a
chiq-(ayta chiq-) ... Analytical formants differ from
compound affixes. A compound affix can consist of
two or more parts: -gar + chi + lik: precipitation, - (i)
n + qi + ra: invasion. The analytical formant is always
in two parts: -sa edi (read), -y kör (ask blind).
Although it consists of more than two units, it is
usually divided into two parts. Like I said.
While the compound affix can occur in
certain syntags in different - strong, weak positions,
the second part of the analytic formant comes in a
strong position as a closing member of the syntagm: -
(i) b çık -(read), - (i ) b send (tell-). Compound
affixes can be derived from analytic forms (-makta
turur-> -maktadur-> -makta-> -cud), in turn,
compound affixes become the first part of analytic
forms: -makdi, was standing.
This means that any analytical formant acts as
a morpheme in language, expressing a specific
meaning. The morphemes that make up the analytic
formant are not independent, they are semantically
abstracted and form a meaning due to idiomatization.
This meaning, formed in the process of language
development, is expressed by the formant as a whole,
and not by the individual parts that make up the
analytic formant. The semantic contribution of the
second part of the syntagm is clearly readable in this
holistic meaning.
(We'll talk about that later.)
Professor Shavkat Rakhmatullayev also
introduces auxiliary verbs from the lexical nature of
morphemes, such as, for adjectives.
REFERENCES
[1.]
Bahriddinova B.M. Modern Uzbek literary
language (educational-methodical complex) -
Tashkent, 2016.
[2.]
Hodjiev A. Morphology, morphemics and
theoretical issues of word formation of the
Uzbek language. - T .: Fan, 2010. 256 b.
[3.]
Mengliyev B., Bahriddinova B. Vocabulary of the
Uzbek language. - T .: Yangi asr avlodi, 2007.
142-b.
[4.]
Grammar of the Uzbek language. I skin. - T., 1975.
[5.]
Rahmatullayev Sh. Modern literary Uzbek
language. - T .: Universitet, 2006.
[6.]
Sayfullayeva R. and others. Modern Uzbek
language. Textbook. - T .: 2007. 200-b.
[7.]
Tojiev Y. Morphemics of the Uzbek language. -
T., 1992. 250-b.
[8.]
Abdurahmonov H., Rafiyev A., Shodmonkulova
D. Practical grammar of the Uzbek language. -
Tashkent, Teacher. 1992. -256 p.
[9.]
Abdurahmanov N. Ancient Turkic language. -
Tashkent, Teacher. 1989. -161 p.
[10.]
Berdialiyev A. Modern Uzbek literary language.
- Khojand, 2015. -136 p.
[11.]
Hajiyev A. Explanatory dictionary of linguistic
terms. - T., 2002. -166 p.
[12.]
Madrahimov O. On the issue of adjectives and
newly formed adjectives in the Uzbek language. //
News of UzFA, social science series // -Tashkent,
1957. -p. 41-47.
[13.]
Mahmud Koshgari. The dictionary is Turkish.
Three roofs. Volume I. 1960-1963. -500 b.
[14.]
Mahmud Koshgari. The dictionary is Turkish.
Three roofs. Volume II. 1960-1963. -428 p.
[15.]
Nematullaevna, T. D. (2022). THE WRITER'S
WORLD VIEW AND ARTISTIC IDEA. Open
Access Repository, 9(12), 163-174.
[16.]
Mahmud Koshgari. A dictionary of Turkish.
Three volumes. Volume III. 1960-1963. -468 p.
[17.]
MarufovZ. Word formation. Noun and adjective.
FA of Uzbekistan SSR, -T., 1956. -64 p.
[18.]
Mengliyev B., Bahriddinova B. Vocabulary of the
Uzbek language. - Tashkent, 2006. -67 p.
[19.]
Mirzayev M., Usmanov S., Rasulov I. The Uzbek
language. - T., 1966.
[20.]
Nurmonov A., Sobirov A., Yusupov Sh. Modern
Uzbek literary language. Eastern publishing
house. -Tashkent, 2002.
[21.]
Turaeva,
D.
PROCESS
OF
FICTION
CREATIVITY AND WRITER’S SKILL. Zbiór
artykułów naukowych recenzowanych, 70.
[22.]
Nematullaevna, T. D. (2019). THE PROCESS OF
LITERARY CREATIVITY AND AESTHETIC
INTERPRETATION. ANGLISTICUM. Journal
of the Association-Institute for English Language
and American Studies, 8(3), 49-53.
[23.]
Yerjanova, S., & Turayeva, D. (2023).
CREATIVE LABORATORY AND ARTISTIC
INTERPRETATION
ISSUE.
International
Bulletin of Applied Science and Technology, 3(6),
832-841.
[24.]
Sayfullayeva R., Mengliyev B. et al. Modern
Uzbek literary language. -Tashkent, 2009. -391 p.
[25.]
Mamatqulov, M. (2020). SAYQALIYNING
“BAHROM VA GULANDOM” DOSTONIDA
IRSOL UL-MASAL SAN‟ ATI. Filologik ta‟
limni takomillashtirish muammolari, 176.
[26.]
Mamatqulov, M. (2021). SAYYADI–GHAZAL
WRITER. Bulletin of Gulistan State University,
2021(1), 46-50.
[27.]
Rahmatullayev Sh. Current Uzbek literary
language. Part 2. Textbook. -T., Classic word.
2010.
