[go: up one dir, main page]

0% found this document useful (0 votes)
26 views6 pages

Article

Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
26 views6 pages

Article

Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 6

A Comparative Typology of the Adjective, Adverb, Numeral, and Pronoun in Modern

English and Modern Uzbek

Malika Sharafiddinova,
Thesis Statement:

This paper aims to conduct a typological comparison of four essential parts of speech—

adjective, adverb, numeral, and pronoun—in Modern English and Modern Uzbek. Despite their

genealogical and typological differences—English being an analytic Germanic language and

Uzbek an agglutinative Turkic language—these categories share certain universal functions, while

diverging significantly in terms of morphological structure, word formation, and syntactic

behavior.

1. Adjectives in English and Uzbek

In Modern English, adjectives are primarily uninflected and appear before the nouns they

modify (e.g., a beautiful flower). They do not change for gender or number and serve either an

attributive (before a noun) or predicative (after a linking verb) function (Quirk et al., 1985). English

expresses comparison either synthetically (e.g., tall, taller, tallest) or analytically (more/most

beautiful).

In contrast, Uzbek adjectives, though also largely uninflected for gender and number, show

agglutinative features. The comparative is formed with the suffix -roq (e.g., katta → kattaroq,

"bigger"), and the superlative with eng (e.g., eng katta, "the biggest") (Sjoberg, 1963). Adjectives

precede nouns in standard order (goʻzal qiz – “beautiful girl”), but stylistic reversals are sometimes

allowed in poetry or emphasis.

Uzbek adjectives can also function independently as predicates without the use of a linking

verb: U chiroyli (She is beautiful), where chiroyli stands as the predicate without requiring a verb

equivalent to English "is".


2. Adverbs: Formation and Function

English adverbs often derive from adjectives using the suffix -ly (e.g., quick → quickly),

and they can modify verbs, adjectives, or entire clauses. Their positioning is flexible: adverbs of

frequency tend to appear between the subject and the main verb (e.g., She often reads), while

manner adverbs follow the verb (He spoke clearly) (Carter & McCarthy, 2006).

Uzbek adverbs are formed through a variety of processes, including direct lexical items

(tez – fast), suffixation (tezlik bilan – quickly, literally “with speed”), and reduplication (asta-sekin

– slowly, gradually) (Bozorov, 2004). Uzbek also commonly uses postpositions or case markers

to express adverbial meaning, often with the instrumental case (qalam bilan yozdi – "wrote with a

pen").

Moreover, Uzbek utilizes participial forms to express adverbial meaning, which differs

from English’s relatively fixed category of adverbs. For example, kulib (laughing) in U kulib

gapirdi (“He spoke while laughing”) functions adverbially.

3. Numerals: Types and Grammatical Behavior

Both English and Uzbek distinguish between cardinal and ordinal numerals. English

cardinals (one, two, three) do not inflect, and ordinals are marked either regularly (fourth, fifth) or

irregularly (first, second, third). Numerals precede the noun and do not require agreement (two

cats, not two cat-s) (Huddleston & Pullum, 2002).

Uzbek numerals also precede the noun (ikki bola – "two children") but differ in that the

plural suffix -lar is often omitted after numerals, a feature typical of Turkic languages. So, ikki
bola is standard rather than ikki bolalar. This omission is due to the idea that the numeral already

implies plurality (Kononov, 1960).

Additionally, Uzbek possesses collective numerals such as ikkovlari (“the two of them”),

which has no direct parallel in English. These forms are used to refer to specific groups acting

together and are marked with possessive or case suffixes.

4. Pronouns: Case, Number, and Politeness

English pronouns are divided into several types: personal (I, you, he), possessive (my, mine),

reflexive (myself), demonstrative (this, those), relative (who, that), and interrogative (who, what).

They show case distinction (subjective I, objective me) and possessive forms (my, mine), though

gender distinction is only marked in the third person singular (e.g., he, she, it) (Quirk et al., 1985).

Uzbek pronouns similarly include personal (men, sen, u), possessive (mening – my),

demonstrative (bu, shu), and interrogative (kim, nima). Unlike English, Uzbek pronouns do not

mark gender at all, reflecting the language’s overall gender neutrality.

Uzbek has a rich case system: pronouns are marked for nominative (men), accusative

(meni), dative (menga), genitive (mening), and more, through suffixation. For example, men (I),

menga (to me), mendan (from me). Additionally, Uzbek pronouns incorporate politeness

distinctions, a sociolinguistic layer absent in English. For instance, sen (informal "you") vs. siz

(formal/respectful "you") (Bozorov, 2004).

Conclusion

This comparative typology reveals that while Modern English and Uzbek share the basic

grammatical categories of adjective, adverb, numeral, and pronoun, they differ considerably in
morphology, syntactic flexibility, and the sociolinguistic features they encode. English tends to

rely on word order and auxiliary words due to its analytic nature, whereas Uzbek, as an

agglutinative language, conveys grammatical relationships through extensive suffixation and

inflection. Such analysis not only deepens our understanding of each language’s structure but also

informs second language instruction, translation studies, and typological theory.


References

Bozorov, M. (2004). Hozirgi o‘zbek adabiy tili. Toshkent: O‘zbekiston Milliy

Ensiklopediyasi.

Carter, R., & McCarthy, M. (2006). Cambridge Grammar of English: A Comprehensive

Guide. Cambridge University Press.

Huddleston, R., & Pullum, G. K. (2002). The Cambridge Grammar of the English

Language. Cambridge University Press.

Kononov, A. N. (1960). Grammatika sovremennogo uzbekskogo literaturnogo yazyka.

Moscow: Nauka.

Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., & Svartvik, J. (1985). A Comprehensive Grammar

of the English Language. Longman.

Sjoberg, A. (1963). Uzbek Structural Grammar. Uralic and Altaic Series. Indiana

University Press.

You might also like