ISSN:
2181-3906
2024
International scientific journal
«MODERN SCIENCE АND RESEARCH»
VOLUME 3 / ISSUE 1 / UIF:8.2 / MODERNSCIENCE.UZ
632
CONTRASTIVE ANALYSIS OF PROPER NAMES IN ENGLISH AND UZBEK
LANGUAGES (IN THE MATERIALS OF HYDRONYMS, TOPONIMS AND
ANTROPONYMS)
G'aniyeva Dinara Panji qizi
Termiz state university Master's student
N.X.Mamataliyeva
f.f.f.d(PhD)
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10536007
Abstract.
The article deals with linguistic realization of proper names in English and
Uzbek. Proper nouns constitute a class of linguistic items sharing features with both noun and
deictic. Besides that it has been analyzed the semantic peculiarities of proper names, their
importance in speech and context.
Keywords:
declaratives, commercial products, approaches, linguistic items.
КОНТРАСТНЫЙ АНАЛИЗ ИМЕН СОБСТВЕННЫХ В АНГЛИЙСКОМ И
УЗБЕКСКОМ ЯЗЫКАХ (НА МАТЕРИАЛАХ ГИДРОНИМОВ, ТОПОНИМОВ И
АНТРОПОНИМОВ)
Аннотация.
В статье рассматривается лингвистическая реализация имен
собственных в английском и узбекском языках. Имена собственные представляют собой
класс лингвистических единиц, имеющих общие черты как с существительным, так и с
дейктикой. Кроме того, проанализированы семантические особенности имен
собственных, их значение в речи и контексте.
Ключевые слова:
декларативы, коммерческие продукты, подходы, лингвистические
объекты.
Naming a single entity is one of the basic speed, acts, included by the class of
declaratives, alongside declaring war, dismissing and be questing. People and peaces,
pets and hurricanes, and festivities, institution and commercial products, works of art and
shops are given a name. Naming serves to highlight entities that play a role in people’s
daily life, and to establish and maintain an individually in a society. Objects of analysis
of onomastic people’s names, proper nouns have been investigated by philosophers,
logicians, anthropologists and psychologists, but only sporadically by linguists: e.g. with
different approaches and concerns, Sloat[1,26-30] , Gary – Prieur[2, 47-53]. It is generally
agreed among linguists that proper nouns are a universal linguists category [3, 88-95].
Their status and function is theoretical issue debated by many scholars, whose views are
discussed in Van Langendock [4, 112-132]. The topic is complex and controversial and
the account given will be brief and schematic; this means that some aspects will be
consideredoper Nouns (PNs) constitute a system organized according to criteria
varying across cultures, and provide an interpretation of the society of which they are
the expression. They are linguistic items fulfilling a referential function, they refer to
single entities existing in the real world. Like deictic, they are not dependent on the
immediate situational context.
ISSN:
2181-3906
2024
International scientific journal
«MODERN SCIENCE АND RESEARCH»
VOLUME 3 / ISSUE 1 / UIF:8.2 / MODERNSCIENCE.UZ
633
Like nouns, PNs, constitute an open class of words and, hence, are lexical
rather than grammatical; but, unlike nouns, they lack lexical meaning. Proper nouns ( also
called proper nouns) are the words which name specific people, organizations or
places. They always start with a capital letter.meaning, human activities Linguists repeatedly
turn to the phenomenon of the nominative value of a word as one of the means of forming linguistic
worldviews in a given language. In connection with the expansion of the areas of application of
the English language in our republic, binary comparisons of the Uzbek language with English, as
well as typologically extremely important triple comparisons (Uzbek - English) are gaining
importance. The aspect of the study chosen in this article is closely related to the category of certain
uncertainty, which is certainly present in every language, but not in every language that receives
the status of a grammatical category and about which English and Uzbek are significantly
underrepresented Languages. English is a language with a grammatically formed category of
certainty-uncertainty (determinative), and this category is well studied (see the works of L.
Bloomfield, O. Espersen, V.D. Arakin, etc.). However, concerning anthroponyms, which we
consider to be complex personal names with proper nouns, the category of determinative needs to
be refined and detailed. The concept of signals (signs of anthroponyms mainly in the text) was
introduced by V.I. Bolotov considering a word, morpheme, or phrase as signals of anthroponyms
in micro text and contributing to the introduction of a personal name into the anthroponymic field.
Proper noun signals can be semantically empty (pure) and semantically filled. We call pure
anthroponymic signals that fulfill only one function: they indicate the presence of anthroponymics
in the micro text [3].According to W.I. Bolotov, pure signals of anthroponymics do not exist in
many Indo-European languages. Such signals exist in some Indic languages in which the articles
of generic and proper nouns differ [5]. According to G. Sweet and L.Bloomfield, one might assume
that the absence of an article before anthroponymes in the language is their mere signal. However,
the analysis of specific language material does not allow us to agree with this opinion [4]. In most
theoretical works dealing with the proper noun, it is pointed out that the proper noun is not used
with the article. However, various authors cite numerous exceptions to the above provision,
namely cases of using an article with a personal proper noun. Among the signs of anthroponyms
that have retained their lexical meaning is V.I. Bolotov refers to common nouns denoting a person
or collective nouns denoting a group of people, as well as verbs characterizing human activities.
All of these words and the adjectives and adverbs derived from them that identify the anthroponym
within the micro text retain their meaning, and most of them can be used independently. We
consider such signals to be semantically filled. However, this group includes several signals from
anthroponymics, some of which have lost their lexical meaning and cannot be used independently
(without anthroponyms). We call them Ms., Mrs., Dr. (Doctor), and partly Miss. But we cannot
regard them as mere signals of anthroponotic, since the change from Mr. Brown to Brown by the
same speaker in the same social field undoubtedly implies a change in the label's evaluative
features on the speaker's part [3]. Anthroponymous signals can change in that the proper noun is
not always linguistically limited and does not always show the name known to the members of the
communication situation. When using an anthroponym as a language object, the following
situations are possible:
ISSN:
2181-3906
2024
International scientific journal
«MODERN SCIENCE АND RESEARCH»
VOLUME 3 / ISSUE 1 / UIF:8.2 / MODERNSCIENCE.UZ
634
1. If the designation of an anthroponym belongs to the same social field as the members of
the communicative situation, then the article is not used before the anthroponym: the context and
the speech situation specify the anthroponym. For example, we meet our old friend Romey
Thompson in Sydney.
2. If the designation of the anthroponym does not belong to the social field of one of the
members of the communication situation, then it is possible to use: a) a definite article, if the
anthroponym is associated with one of the members of the communication situation multi-person
communication situation, then serves the definite article as an additional means of
individualization; b) an indefinite article, if one of the participants in the communication situation
does not know anything about the meaning of the anthroponym, for example, A Rose Gwinn has
saved the train (Some (some) Rose Gwynne saved the train. We only know the person's proper
name, but not their designation).
Another situation arises in the conversation of parents, when it is impossible to make a
mistake in determining the designation, for example, John came late last night again. The different
semantic load of anthroponyms affects the translation of articles from English into Uzbek. If the
bearer of the proper name is somediv, someone then the indefinite article is usually translated
into English by pronouns some, some, into Uzbek - bir kimsa, allakim, bir kishi, birov. If the
articles indicate that the denominations of anthroponyms do not belong to the same social field as
the members of the communicative situation, then they are translated as follows: a) a definite
article is the same, the same; b) an indefinite article is a definite, a definite. When the articles
indicate the constitutive transition of a proper noun into a common name, the definite article must
not be translated at all, and the indefinite article is replaced by the words one of, one of; in the
Uzbek language through the corresponding semantic lexemes bir, bitta. There is a tendency
among English-speaking people to simplify naming formulas and switch to addressing them
primarily by their names. The universal naming formula is currently a surname, and the social
function of the surname interacts with its intrinsic linguistic nature. Modern onomastic subsystems
of language and anthroponymic formulas that have formed over many centuries are part of the
linguistic worldview. The same parameters apply to their study as to the appellative vocabulary:
semantics, syntactic, and pragmatics.
REFERENCES
1.
Hewings M. Advanced grammar in use. London: Cambridge University Press, 2003. 340
p.
2.
Kononov A. N. Grammatika sovremennogo uzbekskogo literaturnogo yazыka. M.: AN,
1960. 446 s.
3.
Bolotov V. I. Teoriya imen sobstvennix. Tashkent: NUUz, 2003. 98 s.
4.
Blumfild L. Yazыk. M.: Progress, 1968. 606 s.
