"ZAMONAVIY TILSHUNOSLIK VA TARJIMASHUNOSLIKNING DOLZARB MUAMMOLARI"
mavzusidagi xalqaro ilmiy-amaliy anjuman
17
ANALYZING COMMENTARY: LINGUISTIC TOOLS AND SPORTS
DISCOURSE
National university of Uzbekistan
Department foreign language and literature
Doctor of science, professor
Sarimsokov Khurshid Abdimalikovich
Annotation
: This paper explores the concept of commentary (
sharh
) as a
cognitive and communicative phenomenon in both literary and journalistic contexts. It
highlights the historical development of commentary, its differentiation from related
notions such as analysis and description, and its role in public discourse. Particular
attention is given to the emergence of sports commentary in the UK and Uzbekistan,
emphasizing the linguistic competence required for effective live reporting.
Keywords:
commentary, analysis, description, rhetoric, sports media,
broadcasting, Uzbekistan, live speech,
Аннотация
: В данной статье рассматривается концепция комментария
(sharh) как когнитивного и коммуникативного феномена как в литературном, так
и в журналистском контексте. В ней освещается историческое развитие
комментария, его отличие от связанных понятий, таких как анализ и описание, и
его роль в публичном дискурсе. Особое внимание уделяется появлению
спортивного комментария в Великобритании и Узбекистане, подчеркивая
языковую компетенцию, необходимую для эффективного прямого репортажа.
Ключевые слова
: комментарий, анализ, описание, риторика, спортивные
СМИ, вещание, Узбекистан, прямая речь,
Annotatsiya
: Ushbu maqolada sharh (sharh) tushunchasi ham adabiy, ham
publitsistik kontekstda kognitiv va kommunikativ hodisa sifatida o‘rganiladi. Unda
sharhning tarixiy rivojlanishi, tahlil va tavsif kabi bir-biriga bog‘liq tushunchalardan
farqlanishi, ommaviy nutqda tutgan o‘rni yoritilgan. Buyuk Britaniya va O'zbekistonda
sport sharhlarining paydo bo'lishiga alohida e'tibor qaratilib, samarali jonli reportaj
uchun zarur bo'lgan lingvistik kompetentsiyaga urg'u beriladi.
Kalit so‘zlar:
sharh, tahlil, tavsif, ritorika, sport mediasi, translyatsiya,
O‘zbekiston, jonli nutq.
Introduction
. In today’s world, the exchange of information plays a critical role
in human cognitive development. Commentary (sharh) is considered an interpretive
reaction to an event or phenomenon, serving as a structured means to articulate
thoughts and evaluations. One of the natural abilities endowed to humans is the
capacity to express opinions and judgments about their surroundings in a coherent and
meaningful way. When such an expression is directed toward a specific purpose and
"ZAMONAVIY TILSHUNOSLIK VA TARJIMASHUNOSLIKNING DOLZARB MUAMMOLARI"
mavzusidagi xalqaro ilmiy-amaliy anjuman
18
situated within a defined timeframe, it is categorized as micro-commentary. The term
sharh
, derived from Arabic, denotes clarification or explanation and is generally
classified into two types. The first is textual commentary, which offers scientific and
explanatory insights into the content of written works such as books, documents, or
translations. This form of commentary is typically authored by experts like translators,
editors, or scholars and provides historical context, intertextual references, and clarifies
complex terms or allusions. It is frequently appended to the text or, in the case of
classical works, presented as a separate volume. The second type belongs to the field
of journalism and involves presenting timely explanatory material on socio-political or
cultural events via mass media [1]. It includes fact analysis, comparison,
argumentation, and conclusion, tailored for specific platforms like radio, television,
print, or digital media.
Before fully exploring the concept of commentary, it is important to distinguish
it from related notions such as analysis, explanation, description, and portrayal. While
commentary often overlaps with these terms in function, it maintains distinctive
features. For instance, though some scholars equate commentary with analysis,
theoretical inquiry reveals their specific boundaries. According to the
Explanatory
Dictionary of the Uzbek Language
, analysis includes the study of phenomena from
various perspectives-essence, structure, and contextual significance. In journalism and
sports, analysis often involves experts critically evaluating events or actions based on
both theoretical and practical grounds. Commentary is also closely related to the
concept of “explanation”, which is used when specific terms or events within a text
require clarification. The difference largely depends on context: when presented in
simpler terms, an explanation may function as commentary. Dictionaries define
“explanation” as a clarifying note or added remark, often accompanying texts to aid
comprehension.
In contemporary communication, commentary represents a vital cognitive
function, expressing interpretative judgments on events and phenomena. It is generally
classified into two types: textual commentary, often appended to written works to
clarify content or offer scholarly insights; and journalistic commentary, which analyzes
and contextualizes socio-political or cultural developments across media platforms.
Closely related to commentary are the concepts of analysis, explanation, and
description, yet each bears distinctive features. Analysis involves examining the
essence and structure of a subject, whereas explanation clarifies specific terms or facts
within a context. Description (tavsif), in contrast, focuses on conveying the specific
attributes of a single element-such as a player or an object in a game-rather than
interpreting the entire process as commentary does[2]. Commentary often demands not
only academic insight but also rhetorical skill, neutrality, and linguistic agility,
"ZAMONAVIY TILSHUNOSLIK VA TARJIMASHUNOSLIKNING DOLZARB MUAMMOLARI"
mavzusidagi xalqaro ilmiy-amaliy anjuman
19
especially in fields like broadcasting or public speech, where figures might deliver
commentary during military events or read decrees aloud to the public.
The concept of commentary in the sports domain has a less extensive historical
record compared to fields like law or economics, though its roots can be traced to
military traditions. The term
commentary
itself emerged in the early 15th century,
according to English etymological sources, deriving from the Medieval Latin
commentarius
(“notebook, annotation”) and ultimately from
commentum
(“interpretation, statement”). This evolution reflects its function as a sequence or
collection of observations. As defined in the Oxford English Dictionary,
commentary
refers to “a spoken description of an event that is given while it is happening, especially
on the radio or television,” underlining its real-time explanatory role. Overall,
commentary stands at the intersection of interpretation, public discourse, and
information delivery, adapting across historical, linguistic, and functional contexts.
The scholar I.Yu. Bokatina, who analyzed the historical features of
commentaries, rightly stated that “from a historical perspective, the study of
commentary led to the scholarly examination of the art of rhetoric.”
In contemporary discourse, commentary plays a key role in the transmission and
interpretation of information, serving as a cognitive mechanism that connects
individuals with their environment. Defined as an explanatory or interpretative reaction
to events, the term
commentary
(sharh), derived from Arabic, includes both written and
spoken forms. It traditionally comprises two main types: literary commentary, which
provides scholarly clarifications in texts—offered by authors, translators, or editors—
and journalistic commentary, which explains socio-cultural and political developments
through mass media. Closely associated with, but distinct from, analysis, explanation,
and description, commentary carries unique attributes. Description (
tavsif
), for
instance, captures the traits of a particular subject or moment within a larger event,
whereas commentary encompasses a more comprehensive narrative. As I.Yu. Bokatina
notes, “from a historical perspective, the study of commentary led to the scholarly
examination of the art of rhetoric,” affirming its foundational role in discourse
traditions [3,19].
The practice of live commentary particularly advanced with the rise of mass
broadcasting. In the UK, the first sports commentary was delivered on January 15,
1927, during an international rugby match between England and Wales, aired live by
the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC). The main commentator, Teddy Wakelam-
a former military man and rugby player-was supported by secondary commentator
Cecil Arthur Lewis, who read out players’ numbers. Television broadcasting began in
1937, with the first live sports commentary provided by former middleweight boxing
champion and Olympic gold medalist Harry Mallin[4,320]. In Uzbekistan, the first
major radiophonic infrastructure appeared in 1915, but regular sports commentary was
"ZAMONAVIY TILSHUNOSLIK VA TARJIMASHUNOSLIKNING DOLZARB MUAMMOLARI"
mavzusidagi xalqaro ilmiy-amaliy anjuman
20
not introduced until decades later. It wasn't until 1960 that the first live football report
was aired by Uzbek radio. Initially, Soviet-era television sports commentary in
Uzbekistan was conducted in Russian. Notable progress came with the emergence of
Uzbek-language commentators such as Axbor Imomxo‘jayev and sports journalist
Abduxakim Turg‘unov.
Live commentary entails a dynamic, real-time interaction between the
commentator and the audience, characterized by spontaneous, fluent speech. As G.A.
Tezekboyeva emphasizes, “spontaneous (live) speech occurs under constantly
changing communicative conditions, and is therefore an indicator of the speaker’s
language proficiency.”[5] This insight suggests that an effective commentator must
possess a high command of their native language to convey events clearly, accurately,
and engagingly in the moment. The evolution of commentary, particularly in sports,
thus not only reflects technological and historical developments but also demands a
refined mastery of language and rhetorical skill.
THE LIST OF USED LITERATURE
1.
https://qomus.info/encyclopedia/cat-sh/sharh-uz
2.
https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=commentary
3.
Бокатина Ю.И. Историческое комментирование в системе
методической подготовки студентов-филологов. Автореф. дисс. ... канд. филол.
наук. – Москва, 2006. – 19 с.
4.
Barclay P., The Definitive Story of the Father of Modern Football, Herbert
Chapman. W&N publisher. 2015. 320 p.
5.
Belitskаyа А.А. Оn the rоle оf hesitаtiоn pаuses in spоntаneоus speech //
Philоlоgy аnd literаry criticism. 2014. Nо. 2. URL:http://bit.ly/2XBhоОe
(Аccessed:05/12/2019)
