Comparative analysis of the morphological systems of English and Uzbek - Английский язык - Рефераты

Comparative analysis of the morphological systems of English and Uzbek

Загружено в:

20.09.2019

Скачано:

0

Размер:

51 KB

Comparative analysis of the morphological systems of English and Uzbek Plan:  Morphological structure of words  Parts of speech

Word is usually characterised as the smallest naming unit consisting of a definite number of sounds and denoting a definite lexical meaning and expressing definite grammatical categories. It usually is a subject-matter of morphology, which studies the form and structure of the word. It is well known that the morphological system of the language reveals its properties through the morphemic structure of words. As a part of the grammatical theory morphology faces two segmental units of the language: the morpheme and the word. Morpheme is known as the smallest meaningful unit of the language into which a word may be divided. E.g. in the word writ-ER-s the root morpheme write expresses the lexical meaning of the word, lexical morpheme - ER showes the doer of the action denoted by the root morpheme, and the grammatical suffix - s indicates the number of the doers, i.e. more than one person is meant. Similar opinion can be said regarding the following units of the language, such as finish- ed, courage-ous-ly, un-prepar-ed-ness; тугал - лан - ма - ган - лик - дан - дир , бе - даъво - лар - дан . Being a meaningful segmental component of the word a morpheme is formed by phonemes but unlike the word it is elementary, i.e. it is indivisible into smaller meaningful components. There may be zero morphemes, i.e. the absence of morpheme may indicate a certain lexical or grammatical meaning: Cf: book _ - book- s, hope _ -hope-ful # китоб _ - китоб - лар ; но - умид - _ умид . In these examples the zero morphemes denoted by ( _ ) shows a singular form of the noun or absence of certain notion. In cases of “student s come, childr en come, g ee se come” the morphs - s, en, and [i:] (Cf goose) are allomorphs of of the morpheme of plurality “- лар ” in Uzbek. Like a word a morpheme is a two-facet language unit, an association of a certain meaning with a certain sound-pattern. But unlike the word a morpheme is not an autonomous body (unit) and can occur in speech only as a constituent part of the word. It cannot be segmented into smaller units without losing its constitutive essence.

The morphemes can be divided into root (free) morphemes and affixal (bound) morphemes (affixes). A form is said to be free if tit may stand alone without changing its meaning; if not it is a bound form, as it always bound to something else. E.g: In the words sportive, elegant morphemes sport, elegant may occur alone as utterances, but the forms - ive, -ant, eleg- cannot be used alone without the root morphemes. The morphemes may be classified in two ways: a) from the semantic point of view, and b) from the structural point of view. Semantically morphemes fall into two classes : the root morphemes and non- root (affixational) morphemes. The root morphemes is the lexical nucleus of the word and it they usually express mainly the lexical meaning, i.e. ‘material’ part of the meaning of the word, while the affixal morphemes can express both lexical and grammatical meanings, thus they can be characterised as lexical affixes ( -er) and grammatical suffixes (-s ) in ‘writ-er-s’. The lexical suffixes are usually used mainly in word building process to form new words (e.g. help-less, black-ness, teach-er, speak-er; нажот - сиз , қ ора - лик , ы қ ит - ув - чи , сыз - лов - чи ), whereas grammatical suffixes serve to express the grammatical meaning of the word by changing its form (paradigm) {e.g. speaker- s, (plurality ) John’- s , (case ending denoting possession ), come- s ( person, number, tense, aspect, mood, voice ) 3rd person singular, present simple, indicative mood, active voice)}. Thus we can say that the grammatical significance of afixal (derivational) morphemes is always combined with their lexical meaning. e.g. verb - to write- ёзмо қ noun -writer - ёзувчи The derivative morpheme ‘-er’ has a grammatical meaning as it serves to distinguish a noun from a verb and it has a lexical meaning i.e the doer of the action. The roots of the notional words are classical lexical morphemes. The affixal (derivational) morphemes include prefixes, suffixes and inflexions (grammatical suffixes ). Prefixes and lexical suffixes have word building functions.

Together with the root they form the stem of the word. Prefixes precede the root morpheme ( im-personal, un-known, re-write), suffixes follow it (e.g: friend-ship, activ-ize, readi-ness, дыст - лик , фаол - лаш - тир - мо қ, тайёр - лик ) . Inflexions (word-forming suffixes express different morphological categories. Structurally morphemes fall under three types: a) free morphemes, b)bound morphemes, c) semi-bound morphemes. A free morpheme is the stem of the word, a great many free morphemes are root morphemes. (e.g.: London -er, spotrs -man- ship). A bound morpheme occurs as a constituent part of the word. Affixes are naturally, bound morphemes for they are always make a part of the word.(e.g.: - ness, -ship, -dom, dis-, pre-, un-; - чи , паз , - дон , бе -, сер -, но -) some root morphemes also belong to the class of bound morphemes, which always occur in morphemic sequences, i.e. in combinations with roots or affixes (e.g.: theor - in theory, theoretical ; - cieve , in percieve, concieve; назар - ий , хусус - ий , хусус - ият . Semi-bound morphemes are morphemes that can function in a morphemic sequence both as an affix and as a free morpheme. (e.g.: half an hour, well-known, sleep well, half killed; ярим соат , чала - жон , яхши кырмо қ). The root , according to its positional content of the term ( i.e. border area between prefix and suffix ) is obligatory for any word while affixes are not obligatory. Therefore one and the same morphemic segment can be used now as an affix, now as a root. E.g . ‘ out ’ - a root word (preposition, adverb, verbal postposition, adjective, noun, verb); ‘throughout’ -a composite word where ‘out’ of the roots; ‘outing’ - a two morpheme word in which ‘out’ is a root and ‘ing’ is a suffix; ‘outlook, outline’ - words in which ‘out’ is a prefix; ‘look out, shut out, time-out’ words in which ‘out’ is a suffix;

The abstract complete model of the English word is as follows: ‘prefix-root- lexical suffix-grammatical suffix’ (or ‘Pr-Rt-Ls-Grs). e.g.: un-import-ant-ness, out-look-er-s The model of modern Uzbek word can be drawn similarly to the English one, i.e. ‘Pr-Rt-LxS-GrS’ , e.g.: бад-жащл-лиг(к)-инг-из-дан-дир, но-умид-лик-нинг’. But it should be kept in mind that the use of prefixes is not native for the Uzbek language, as the prefixes in this language is borrow mostly from Persian or Arabic languages. But being a representative of agglutinative (Turkic) languages Uzbek has a peculiarity of its own that makes it unsimilar to English. Unlike English in Uzbek the root of the word can be followed by a number of ( up to 10 ) lexical and grammatical suffixes. E.G.: бе-маза-гар-чи-лиг-и-нг-из-дан бе-кор-чи-лик-дан-дир-да-а? { Pref - root - lex . suf - lex . suf - gram . suf .} The syntagmatic connections of morphemes within the model form two types of structure in Modern English: W’ қ [Pr-(R-L)-Gr] W” қ {[(Pr-R)-L]-Gr } As to the structure of the Uzbek words they display following models: W’қ [Pr-(R-L)-Gr] E.g.: но-умид-лик-нинг W”қ (R-L)Gr(1-10) E.g.: механизация-лаш-тир-а-ол-ма-ган-лик-лар- и-нгиз-дан-дир-да-а? Parts of speech. A word is known as the smallest naming unit of the language. According to L. Bloomfield, word is a minimum free form. Close observation and comparison of words clearly shows that a great number of words have a composite nature and are made up of smaller units, each possessing sound-form and meaning. In other

words, the term word denotes the basic unit of a given language resulting from the association of a particular meaning with a particular group of sounds capable of a particular grammatical employment . A word is therefore simultaneously a semantic, grammatical and phonologically unit . The words of every language fall into classes which are called parts of speech. The problem of parts of speech is one of the controversial problems of modern linguistics. The theoretical side of this problem is the subject matter of the theoretical grammar. Therefore we should base our comparison of system of parts of speech on the generally recognised (acknowledged) opinions of grammarians. In order to make easier to learn the language the grammarians usually divide the word-stock of the language into some subclasses called in linguists the parts of speech . The main principles of classifying words into parts of speech are: their meaning, form and function , that is to say, the words of any language differ from each-other in meaning, in form and in function. Different parts of speech have different lexical meanings. E.g. verbs denote process or state; nouns express the names of objects, adjectives their properties... Some parts of speech have different grammatical categories. Verbs have the category of mood, tense, aspect, voice, person, number etc., nouns-case, number, adjectives-comparison, etc. The parts of speech also differ from each other in their syntactic function e.g. Verbs are used in the sentence structure as predicates, nouns-as subjects, adjectives as attributes... etc. All words of the comparing languages may be divided into three main groups: 1. Notional words; 2. Structural words; 3. Independent element. Notional words have distinct lexical meanings and perform independent syntactic functions in the sentence structure. They serve as primary or secondary parts of the sentence. To this group belong the following parts of speech: Nouns,

verbs, adjectives, pronouns, numerals, statives and adverbs. It should be kept in mind that statives in Uzbek are often interchanged with adjectives and not treated as an independent part of speech. Structural words differ from the notional words semantically; their lexical meaning is of a more general character than that of the notional words (e.g.: in, and, even, alas). Moreover they sometimes altogether avoid it if they are isolated from the context (e.g.: article the , conjunction that, interjection oh etc.) Structural words do not perform any independent syntactic function in the sentence structure but serve either to express various relations between the words in a sentence. (e.g: trees in the garden, Tom and Joe, etc.) or to specify the meaning of the words (e.g.: there is a book on the table; the book on the table is mine, etc. The following parts of speech are to be treated as structural words : articles, particles ( only, solely, exclusively, mainly) , prepositions and conjunctions . Articles and prepositions are of individual character of English differentiating it from Uzbek as the functions of these parts of speech in Uzbek are performed by other elements of the language. Independent elements are words which are characterised by their peculiar meanings of various kinds. (yes, no, certainly, oh, alas, etc.) They usually have no grammatical connections with the sentence in which they occur, i.e. they do not perform any syntactic function in the sentence. E.g.: They certainly will come to the party. Sometimes independent elements can even serve as sentences themselves. E.g.: Yes., No., Alas. Independent class of words include: modal words, interjections, words of affirmation & negation. It is noteworthy that the division of words into parts of speech can be accepted only with certain reservations; there are words which cannot be classed among any of the above mentioned parts of speech (such as please, anyway, щар қ алай , марщамат , etc.)

Bibliography 1. Modern English in Action, Henry I. Christ, DC Heath and company, Boston 2001. 2. Mountains are climbing, study book, Boston 2003y. 3. English phonetic, A.A. Abduazizov издательство « Укитувчи » Т . 1972 г . 4. Reference guide to English, Alice Maclin, USA Washington 1994 5. Improve your sentence, Ann M. Sala, McCraw-Hill, USA. 1999y 6. Language for daily use Mildred A Dawson New York, 2001y 7. New English voyages in English, Francis B. Connors, Loyola University. Press, Chicago 1991y 8. Writing skills, Suzanne Chance, Clencoe, McCraw-Hill. New York 9. Reading and writing, Natasha Haugnes 10. Contemporary English, Mechella Perrott, contemporary publisher group, Illinois USA. 11. Beginning English writing skills, Mone Scherago, National textbook company, Illinois USA. 12. Lectures of comparative typology, C. Satimov, M. Просвещениею 1991 г . 13. Comparative typology V.D. Arakin, M. «Prosveshenie» 1991 14. Comparative grammar, J.I.

Похожие

Comparative Analysis of the English and Uzbek Vowels Systems

Comparatie-typological Analysis of the Phonological Systems of English and Uzbek

The comparative typology of English, Russian and Uzbek languages

The analysis of the grammatical features of English and Uzbek adjectives used in different discourse

The place of English in morphological and genetic typology of languages