CC BY
0COMPARATIVE TYPOLOGY OF SENTENCE STRUCTURES IN
ENGLISH AND UZBEK Tursunova Nurafshon Jurakul kizi 1st year Master's student of the Foreign languages and literature faculty University of Economics and Pedagogy E-mail: [email protected] Scientific advisor: Khushmonova Sh.I. Senior Lecturer of the Department of Foreign Languages at IPU NTM, University of Economics and Pedagogy, Tel: +998908909044 https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14769356
ARTICLE INFO
ABSTRACT
Received: 27th Janyary 2025 Accepted:29th January 2025 Published:30th January 2025 KEYWORDS Comparative linguistics, Typology, English language, Uzbek language, Morphological structure, Syntax, Word order, Analytic language, Agglutinative language, Case system, Linguistic universals.
This article examines the comparative typology of sentence structures in English and Uzbek, focusing on the syntactic and morphological differences between these languages. English, a Germanic, analytic language, heavily relies on word order and auxiliary verbs to express grammatical relationships, while Uzbek, a Turkic, agglutinative language, utilizes a complex system of affixes and word-order flexibility. By comparing simple, compound, and complex sentences, this paper highlights the linguistic structures of both languages. The study reveals how typological features such as inflection, word order, and syntactic markers contribute to differences in sentence formation, providing insights into language learning, translation, and computational
linguistics.
Introduction. Linguistic typology explores the systematic features of languages, categorizing them based on structural and functional traits. A key aspect of typology involves comparing sentence structures across languages to understand both universal patterns and language-specific features. English and Uzbek, though geographically distant and from different language families, offer a stark contrast in their syntactic systems. English, as an analytic language, uses fixed word order and auxiliary verbs to mark tense, aspect, and grammatical relationships, whereas Uzbek, being an agglutinative language, uses an extensive system of suffixes and allows greater flexibility in word order. This article delves into the sentence structures of both languages, comparing their typological features in terms of word order, inflection, case marking, and syntactic flexibility. By exploring simple, compound, and complex sentence constructions, the article aims to provide a detailed account of how English and Uzbek function syntactically and how these differences may affect language acquisition and translation processes.
Sentence Structures in English and Uzbek. 1.Simple Sentences. Simple sentences, the foundation of any language's syntactic structure, consist of a subject, verb, and complement (if needed). In English, the typical order is Subject-Verb-Object (SVO): She reads books.
CENTRAL ASIAN JOURNAL OF MULTIDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH AND MANAGEMENT STUDIES A
This SVO order is fixed, meaning that any variation in word order leads to ambiguity or incorrect sentences: Books she reads. (Incorrect) Reads she books. (Incorrect)
In contrast, Uzbek follows a Subject-Object-Verb (SOV) order, although word order is more flexible due to its rich case system: U kitoblarni o'qiydi. (She books reads.). Kitoblarni u o'qiydi. (Books she reads.)
Both sentences are syntactically correct, and the word order can change depending on the emphasis. Uzbek uses case markers like -ni (accusative) to mark the object of the sentence, allowing for more flexibility in word order. For example: Ukitobni o'qiydi. (She reads the book.) Kitobni u o'qiydi. (The book is read by her.)
English lacks such morphological markers, so word order must remain fixed to convey the correct meaning. This makes word order crucial in English, whereas in Uzbek, the presence of case markers and verb inflections reduces reliance on strict word order.
2. Compound Sentences. In both languages, compound sentences connect two or more independent clauses using coordinating conjunctions. In English, common conjunctions include and, but, or, and yet: She studies English, and he studies history. I wanted to go, but I was too tired.
In Uzbek, similar conjunctions are used, such as va (and), lekin (but), yoki (or): U ingliz tilini o'rganadi, va u tarixni o'rganadi. (She studies English, and he studies history). Men borishni xohladim, lekin juda charchagandim. (I wanted to go, but I was too tired)
However, Uzbek allows for greater flexibility in the use of conjunctions, as clauses can be linked with minimal connectors, relying instead on verb suffixes and case markers. For example: U kitobni o'qidi, insholaryozdi. (She read the book, wrote essays). Here, the lack of a conjunction suggests a coordination of actions without explicitly marking the relationship between clauses. This type of sentence construction is less common in English, which typically requires explicit conjunctions to maintain clarity.
3. Complex Sentences. Complex sentences consist of one main (independent) clause and one or more subordinate (dependent) clauses. In English, complex sentences are introduced by subordinating conjunctions such as because, if, when, and although:
She stayed home because it was raining. If I see him, I will talk to him.
In Uzbek, subordinate clauses are often introduced by subordinating particles such as chunki (because), agar (if), qachonki (when), and verb suffixes:
U uyda qoldi, chunki yomg'ir yog'ayotgan edi. (She stayed home because it was raining). Agar men uni ko'rsam, gaplashaman. (If I see him, I will talk to him).
What distinguishes Uzbek is its ability to form complex sentences using a combination of verb suffixes to indicate subordination. For example: Yomg'ir yog'ayotgani uchun u uyda qoldi. (Because it was raining, she stayed home)
This structure, with its use of suffixes for subordination, contrasts with the English preference for explicit subordinating conjunctions. The greater syntactic flexibility in Uzbek allows for shorter and more compact sentences, whereas English often requires more words and clearer demarcations between clauses.
Morphosyntactic Differences. 1.The Role of Inflection. Inflectional morphology in English is relatively simple. The language uses auxiliary verbs and word order to mark tense, aspect, number, and case. For instance, auxiliary verbs like is, are, was, and were mark tense and aspect:
She is reading a book. (present continuous) They have read the book. (present perfect)
In Uzbek, on the other hand, tense, aspect, and mood are encoded through verb suffixes: U
kitobni o'qiyapti. (She is reading the book). U kitobni o'qigan. (She has read the book).
Uzbek verbs are highly inflected and can carry multiple morphemes simultaneously, encoding
not only tense but also aspect, number, person, and mood in a single word. This feature of
Uzbek allows it to express more information with fewer words compared to English.
2. Articles and Case Markers. English relies on definite and indefinite articles (the, a, an) to
specify the definiteness and number of a noun:
She saw a dog.
She saw the dog.
In contrast, Uzbek does not use articles but instead employs case markers to indicate
grammatical relations. For example:
U itni ko'rdi. (She saw the dog).
Itni u ko'rdi. (The dog was seen by her).
The case system in Uzbek allows for greater flexibility in sentence structure, as it is the case markers (-ni, -ga, -da) that signal the grammatical role of a noun. This makes Uzbek more dependent on morphological markers than English, where articles and word order perform the same function.
Implications for Language Learning. The structural differences between English and Uzbek present challenges for learners of both languages. English learners need to become familiar with the fixed SVO word order, the use of auxiliary verbs, and the correct application of articles. On the other hand, Uzbek learners must master the complex system of verb suffixes, the flexible word order, and the use of case markers. The rich inflectional system of Uzbek, where a single word can carry multiple morphemes, requires learners to recognize how suffixes alter the meaning of words and sentences.
In translation between the two languages, these differences pose significant challenges. English speakers translating into Uzbek must adjust to a more flexible syntax and a lack of articles, while Uzbek speakers must navigate the rigid SVO structure of English, ensuring that the right word order and auxiliary verbs are used.
Conclusion. This paper has provided a comparative analysis of the sentence structures in English and Uzbek. The typological differences between these two languages reflect their distinct linguistic heritages. English's reliance on word order and auxiliary verbs contrasts with Uzbek's agglutinative nature, where inflectional suffixes and flexible word order play a central role. Understanding these differences enhances our knowledge of language structure and offers valuable insights for language learners, linguists, and translators.
List of references:
1. Comrie, B. (1989). Language Universals and Linguistic Typology. University of Chicago Press.
2. Tomlin, R. S. (1986). Basic Word Order: Functional Principles.
3. Kornfilt, J. (1997). Turkish Grammar. Routledge.
4. Mamadiyorova Mariyam Kosim kizi, & Bakhtiyorova Maftuna Bakhtiyorovna. (2025). PRAGMATIC AND STYLISTIC ASPECTS OF NEOLOGISMS IN CONTEMPORARY MEDIA AND THEIR IMPLICATIONS FOR VOCABULARY TEACHING. Journal of Universal Science Research, 3(1), 89-95. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14674390 https://universalpublishings.com/index.php/jusr/article/view/9454
5. Mamadiyorova, M.., & Bakhtiyorova, M.. (2025). PRAGMATIC AND STYLISTIC ASPECTS OF NEOLOGISMS IN MODERN ENGLISH (BASED ON MEDIA MATERIALS) AND THEIR ROLE IN TEACHING VOCABULARY. Центральноазиатский журнал междисциплинарных исследований и исследований в области управления, 2(1), 187-191. извлечено от https://in-academy.uz/index.php/cajmrms/article/view/43009
6. Mamadiyorova, M.., & Bakhtiyorova, M.. (2025). PRAGMATIC AND STYLISTIC ASPECTS OF NEOLOGISMS IN MODERN ENGLISH (BASED ON MEDIA MATERIALS) AND THEIR ROLE IN TEACHING VOCABULARY. (2025). Journal of Science-Innovative Research in
CENTRAL ASIAN JOURNAL OF MULTIDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH AND MANAGEMENT STUDIES à
Uzbekistan, 3(1),217-221.
https://universalpublishings.com/index.php/jsiru/article/view/9503
7. Sadullaeva, N., & Bakhtiyorova, M. (2021). Reflection of Onomastic Principles in Naming. Annals of the Romanian Society for Cell Biology, 3001-3007.
8. Бахтиёрова, М. (2024). Atoqli otlarning umumnazariy muammolari. Зарубежная лингвистика и лингводидактика, 2(6), 40-45.
9. Ismoilov, A., & Bakhtiyorova, M. (2024). THE PROBLEM OF COMPONENTIAL ANALYSIS OF MEANING IN PRESENT DAY LEXICOLOGY. Current approaches and new research in modern sciences, 3(7), 26-29.
10. Alisher o'g'li, I. A., & Bakhtiyorovna, B. M. (2024, May). THE PROBLEM OF COMPONENTIAL ANALYSIS OF MEANING IN PRESENT DAY LEXICOLOGY. In Konferensiyalarl Conferences (Vol. 1, No. 10, pp. 748-752).
11. BAXTIYOROVA, M. (2024). ONOMASTIK KONSEPT TUSHUNCHASI. UzMUxabarlari, 1(1.4), 288-292.
12. Камолова, Р. Ш., & Бахтиярова, М. (2024). ЭМОЦИОНАЛЬНЫЕ КОННОТАЦИИ ПРИЛАГАТЕЛЬНЫХ, ОПИСЫВАЮЩИХ ПОГОДУ. TA'LIM VA RIVOJLANISH TAHLILI ONLAYN ILMIYJURNALI, 4(1), 30-33.
13. Baxtiyorova, M. (2023). ONOMASTIKONLARNING LINGVOMADANIY XUSUSIYATLARI. Namangan davlat universiteti Ilmiy axborotnomasi, (9), 464-469.
14. Baxtiyorovna, B. M. (2023). INGLIZ VA O 'ZBEK BADIIY ADABIYOTIDA ONOMASTIKONLARNING CHOG 'ISHTIRMA SEMANTIK TAHLILI. " GERMANY" MODERN SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH: ACHIEVEMENTS, INNOVATIONS AND DEVELOPMENT PROSPECTS, 9(1).
15. Baxtiyorova, M. (2023). INGLIZ VA O 'ZBEK BADIIY ADABIYOTIDA ASAR QAHRAMONLARI NOMLARINING MATN YARATISHDAGI ISHTIROKI. Namangan davlat universiteti Ilmiy axborotnomasi, (10), 268-273.
16. Bakhtiyorovna, B. M. (2022). Discursive-pragmatic nature of anthroponyms. Asian Journal Of Multidimensional Research, 11(9), 110-114.
17. Bakhtiyarova, M. B. (2021). VERBALIZATION OF THE CONCEPT" ONIM" IN LINGUOCOGNITOLOGY. Ростовский научный вестник, (3), 11-12.
18. Baxtiyorova, M. B. (2020). ANTROPONIMLARNING SHAKLLANISHIDA MORFEMALARNING SEMANTIK VAUSLUBIY XUSUSIYATLARI. Студенческий вестник, (36-3), 96-98.
19. Bakhtiyorova, M. (2019). THE EFFECT OF USING MNEMONICS. Студенческий вестник, (22-8), 63-65.
20. Pulatova, S., & Bakhtiyorova, M. (2019). THE STRUCTURAL-SEMANTIC ANALYSIS OF THE WORDS RELATED TO" SPORTS" IN PRESENT DAY ENGLISH. Студенческий вестник, (22-8), 69-71.
21. Bakhtiyorova, M., & Djumabayeva, J. (2017). WRITERS MAKE NATIONAL LITERATURE, WHILE TRANSLATORS MAKE UNIVERSAL LITERATURE. Студенческий вестник, (10), 55-56.
22. Bakhtiyorova, M., & Elmurodova, F. (2017). THE PRINCIPLES OF SEMANTICS. Студенческий вестник, (10), 52-54.
23. Bakhtiyorova, M., & Elmurodova, F. (2017). PAPERS IN ENGLISH. СТУДЕНЧЕСКИЙ ВЕСТНИК, 10, 52.
