"ZAMONAVIY TILSHUNOSLIK VA TARJIMASHUNOSLIKNING DOLZARB MUAMMOLARI"
mavzusidagi xalqaro ilmiy-amaliy anjuman
289
A THEORETICAL AND COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF VERB VALENCY
IN ENGLISH AND RUSSIAN
Kodirov Abdukayumjon Gafurjon Ugli
First-year Master’s student at the National University of Uzbekistan
named after Mirzo Ulugbek
Jalolova Shakhnoza Mukhamedjanovna
PhD, associate professor.
+998935715661
Annotatsiya
: Ushbu maqola fe’lning valentligi tushunchasini o‘rganadi; bu fe’l
olishi mumkin bo‘lgan dalillar soniga ishora qiladi. Ushbu maqola 1959-yilda Lyusen
Tesner tomonidan taqdim etilgan valentlik nazariyasi tarixini bayon qiladi.
Shuningdek, maqolada ingliz va rus tillarining valentlik tizimlari qarama-qarshi
qo‘yilgan boʻlib, bu ikki til oʻrtasidagi strukturaviy va tipologik tafovutlarga eʼtibor
qaratiladi.
Kalit so’zlar:
fe’l valentligi, aktantlar va holatlar, valentlik nazariyasi, qiyosiy
tilshunoslik.
Annotation:
This article explores the concept of verb valency, which refers to
the number of arguments a verb can take. It outlines the history of valency theory
presented by Lucien Tesnière in 1959. The article also contrasts the valency systems
of English and Russian, highlighting the structural and typological distinctions between
the two languages.
Keywords:
verb valency, actants and circumstants, valency theory,
comparative linguistics
Аннотация
: В этой статье рассматривается концепция валентности
глагола, которая относится к числу аргументов, которые может иметь глагол. В
ней излагается история теории валентности, представленной Люсьеном
Тесньером в 1959 году. Также в статье сопоставляются системы валентности
английского и русского языков, подчеркивая структурные и типологические
различия между двумя языками.
Ключевые слова:
валентность глагола, актанты и обстоятельства, теория
валентности, сравнительная лингвистика.
Verb valency is a fundamental concept in linguistic theory, referring to the
number of arguments a verb can take. Valency was first examined in the context of
"ZAMONAVIY TILSHUNOSLIK VA TARJIMASHUNOSLIKNING DOLZARB MUAMMOLARI"
mavzusidagi xalqaro ilmiy-amaliy anjuman
290
dependency grammar by Tesnière in 1959. Lucien Tesnière was the first to introduce
the concept of valency, which defines the verb as the centre of sentence structure and
its capacity to govern a specific number of arguments, known as actants [1]. Tesnière
claimed that verbs work similarly, calculating the number of actants required for a
grammatically complete sentence [1]. Based on this, he classified verbs into three main
types:
1.
Monovalent verbs, which require only one actant, typically the subject
(e.g.,
“He sleeps”
) [1].
2.
Bivalent verbs, which require two actants, typically a subject and a direct
object (e.g.,
“She reads a book”
) [1].
3.
Trivalent verbs, which require three actants, such as a subject, a direct
object, and an indirect object (e.g.,
“He gave her a gift”
) [1].
Tesnière made a distinction between circumstants, which are optional parts that
contribute information but are not controlled by the verb, and actants, which are
necessary participants that the verb requires [1]. In the sentence
"She gave him a book
yesterday,"
for example, the verb "gave" governs three actants: "She" as the subject,
"him" as the indirect object, and "a book" as the direct object. Yesterday, on the other
hand, is a circumstant that adds temporal information without changing the sentence’s
grammaticality.
Valency theory has been developed differently in English and Russian linguistics
due to structural and typological differences between the two languages. While both
traditions recognize valency as the capacity of a verb to govern a specific number of
arguments, they differ in their theoretical approaches, syntactic realization, and
classification of valency types [2], [3], [4].
In English linguistics, valency theory is influenced by Tesnière’s structuralist
framework and later developments by Helbig and Schenkel and Herbst [2], [5]. The
focus is on distinguishing arguments, which are required by the verb, from adjuncts,
which provide optional information. Argument structure theories in generative
grammar and subcategorization frames in lexicography and computational linguistics
are intimately related to English valency [6].
In contrast, Russian linguistics integrates valency theory with case government
and semantic roles [3], [4]. Since Russian is an inflectional language with a rich case
system, valency classification often centers on which cases verbs require for their
arguments, rather than strict word order [7]. Russian linguistic traditions also consider
lexical functions within Meaning-Text Theory, which emphasizes the interaction
between syntax and semantics [4].
"ZAMONAVIY TILSHUNOSLIK VA TARJIMASHUNOSLIKNING DOLZARB MUAMMOLARI"
mavzusidagi xalqaro ilmiy-amaliy anjuman
291
A key distinction between English and Russian verb valency lies in how verb
arguments are marked:
1. English relies on word order and prepositions, making syntactic structure
central to valency classification [2]. For example,
“She gave him a book”
(fixed SVO
order, indirect object precedes direct object).
2. Russian relies on morphological case endings, meaning case government is
crucial for valency [3]. For example,
“Она дала ему книгу”
(She gave him a book.) –
Dative (ему) and Accusative (книгу) mark the object roles.
Since Russian allows greater word order flexibility, verbs are classified based on
case-marked dependents rather than positional constraints [4].
Verb valency, which connects syntax, semantics, and cognitive linguistics, is
still a crucial topic in linguistic research. Both universal principles and language-
specific variances are revealed by comparing valency across languages. Future
research should continue to integrate theoretical and empirical insights to refine our
understanding of how valency shapes sentence structure.
REFERENCES
1.
Tesnière L. Éléments de syntaxe structurale. Klincksieck, 1959, pp. 239-
243.
2.
Herbst T. Valency: Theoretical, descriptive and cognitive issues. –
Berlin: De Gruyter, 2014, p. 78.
3.
Apresjan J. D. Leksicheskaya semantika: Sinonimicheskie sredstva
yazyka. - Moscow: Nauka, 1974, pp. 45-46.
4.
Mel’čuk I. Dependency syntax: Theory and practice. - Albany, NY:
SUNY Press, 1988, p. 92, 151, 265.
5.
Helbig G., Schenkel W. Wörterbuch zur Valenz und Distribution
deutscher Verben. – Enzyklopädie, 1973, p. 513.
6.
Chomsky N. Lectures on Government and Binding. - Foris Publications,
1981, p. 371
7.
Apresjan J. D. Russkij semantičeskij slovarʹ. - Moscow: Jazyki
slavjanskoj kul’tury, 2009, pp. 102, 210
