THE STRUCTURAL AND COMPARATIVE-TYPOLOGICAL ANALYSIS OF SOCIAL-RELATION VERBS (ON THE EXAMPLE OF ENGLISH AND UZBEK)

Ushbu maqolada ingliz va o‘zbek tillaridagi ijtimoiy munosabat fe‘llarining struktur va qiyosiy-tipologik xususiyatlari tadqiq etiladi. O‘zaro ta‘sir, munosabat va ijtimoiy rollarni ifodalovchi ijtimoiy munosabat fe‘llari til va muloqotda muhim o‘rin tutadi. Tahlil madaniy va lisoniy omillar ta‘sirini hisobga olgan holda fe‘l yasalishi, grammatik vazifalar va qo‘llanish qoliplariga qaratilgan. Natijalar shuni ko‘rsatadiki, har ikkala tilda ijtimoiy munosabat fe‘llarining qo‘llanishida umumiy xususiyatlar mavjud bo‘lsa-da, ularning struktur va tarixiy taraqqiyoti tufayli o‘ziga xos tipologik farqlar ham namoyon bo‘ladi. Bunday qiyosiy-tipologik yondashuv ijtimoiy munosabat fe‘llaridagi tillararo tafovutlarni va ularning inson muloqotidagi o‘rnini chuqurroq tushunishga xizmat qiladi.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15071990

THE STRUCTURAL AND COMPARATIVE-TYPOLOGICAL ANALYSIS OF SOCIAL-RELATION VERBS (ON THE EXAMPLE OF ENGLISH AND UZBEK) Nabiyeva Zarrina Isomiddinovna Zarmed universiteti Tillar kafedrasi oʻqituvchisi E-mail: zarrinanabiyeva.1990@gmail.com

Abstract. This article explores the structural and comparative-typological features of social-relation verbs in English and Uzbek. Social-relation verbs, which express interactions, relationships, and social roles, play a crucial role in language and communication. The analysis focuses on verb formation, grammatical functions, and usage patterns, considering the influence of cultural and linguistic factors. Findings reveal that while both languages share universal features in social-relation verb usage, they also exhibit unique typological distinctions due to their structural and historical development. This comparative-typological approach contributes to a deeper understanding of cross-linguistic variations in social-relation verbs and their role in human communication. Key words: structural analysis, social relation verbs, semantic structure, comparative-typological forms of the verb, cognitive and communicative features of social relation verbs, cross-linguistic variation.

The activation of verbs in speech has led researchers to seek out many issues regarding their functional laws. In particular, the typology of systematic organization of verbs in speech (fragments at the level of the semantic and lexico-semantic structure of the word, and also entire micro and macrotisms, areas engaged in interrelationships within the system, including paradigmatics, syntagmatics and epidigmatics) is noticeable that it is necessary to conduct comparative-typological in-depth research in scientifically non-sister languages. In practical terms, the study of functional and pragmatic tasks of socio-relational verbs their comparative-typological analysis issues such as the structure of verbs of this group semantically in the system of different languages, their pragmatic tasks in communication, their functional aspects in the language in different situations and the identification of aspects of originality and commonality of verbs remain relevant.

All of this indicates the necessity of addressing social-relation verbs, which actively function in speech and text. However, a comprehensive comparative-typological analysis of social-relation verbs in terms of semantic content is essential for determining the cognitive foundation of the verb system. Since these verbs reflect the unique characteristics of each national language and its associated culture, their in-depth study is crucial. Social-relation verbs are directed toward actions that manifest real human activities, as the functional aspects of language are directly linked to the verb system.

As J. Lakoff emphasized, the verb itself is not used to determine the acceptability of a particular construction; rather, it is necessary to consider the semantics of the arguments. [45] It is well known that the verb plays a significant role in shaping the semantics of a sentence or may simply indicate the manner, means, conditions, or result of an action. The verbal structure, in turn, is considered "central" to the meaning being conveyed. For example, The shepherd and the marquis faced each οther frοm the ends οf the lοng table. The landlοrd, in an age οf terrοr, clutched the air and stammered: “M-M-Mοnseigneur, fοr the lοve οf Christ! Nοt in my hοuse! -dο nοt spill blοοd-it will ruin my custοm –“The lοοk οf the marquis, threatening him, paralyzed his tοngue”. [ 520] In the given excerpt, the predicates clutched the air and threatening him express a relationship that reflects a negative impact on both animate and inanimate objects. The verb in the sentence provides information about the action taking place. Similarly, the structure it will ruin my custom conveys the execution of an action.

Since the semantic structure of each verb possesses a unique metaphorical extension, it represents a cognitive scenario specific to that verb. However, because semantic derivation is linked to the lexical-semantic variability processes we have identified—namely, the relationship between the development of polysemous verb meanings and their classification into lexical-semantic groups—it allows for the identification of key characteristics necessary for systematization.

Indeed, the meanings of constructions related to verbs can encapsulate reality. As a result, analyzing and describing the syntactic relationships of a construction’s meaning becomes essential. In other words, elements that are syntactically significant emerge to express the syntactic representation of arguments through linking mechanisms. [56] It has been determined that the basis of the derivational processes characteristic of verbs belonging to each lexical-semantic group lies in the cognitive scenario of the introduced proposition regarding the manner of action. This includes concepts such as submission, conflict, victory and defeat, coercion, direct impact, persuasion, permission and prohibition, and deprivation. For example, in Uzbek, — – Rοst! Nοbakοrlar sizni “Samarqandda vafοt etdi”, deb οvοza tarqatdilar, – dedi Qutlug‘ Nigοr xοnim. – Behush yοtganingizni kοʻrib kelgan chοparni guvοh qilib kοʻrsatib, kοʻp οdamni bunga ishοntirdilar. [ 87] Shuning uchun ham Xοndamirdek muarrixlar pοdshοlar haqida οddiy οdamlar tushunmaydigan balandparvοz, sertakalluf tilda kitοb yοzishga majbur bοʻladilar. [293] The transformation of such propositions also shapes the semantic structure of individual social-relation verbs. Due to the presence of manner propositions in the lexical-semantic group (LSG) of social-relation verbs, their semantic derivation processes involve actions related to searching for, acquiring, alienating, depriving of, possessing, and transferring an object. These actions define the purpose of the object within the given proposition.

The structural and comparative-typological analysis of social-relation verbs in English and Uzbek has revealed both universal and language-specific features in their formation, semantics, and syntactic behavior. While both languages exhibit common cognitive scenarios related to social interactions—such as authority, conflict, persuasion, and prohibition—their realization differs due to linguistic structure and cultural context.

English, as an analytic language, relies on auxiliary verbs and prepositions to express relational meanings, whereas Uzbek, with its agglutinative nature, employs affixation and specific syntactic constructions to convey similar relationships. Furthermore, the study has shown that the lexical-semantic groups of social-relation verbs in both languages are shaped by metaphorical extensions, cognitive scenarios, and argument structures.

These findings contribute to a deeper understanding of the role of social-relation verbs in human communication and highlight the importance of typological studies in cross-linguistic analysis. Future research could further explore the pragmatic and discourse-level implications of these verbs, shedding light on their usage in different communicative contexts.

The list of used literature: 1. Lakoff G. Stative Adjectives and Verbs in English. UC Berkeley previously published works. 1966. – P. 45. 2. Лaнгaкeр Р.У. Когнитивнaя грaммaтикa. – Москвa: РAН, 1992. –56 с. 3. Ο. Henry “100 Selected stοries” Wοrdswοrth Editiοns Limited Cumberland Hοuse, Crib Street, Ware, Hertfοrdshire 1995. – 750 p. 4. P.Qodirov Yulduzli tunlar. – Tοshkent, 2002. – 165 b.