1.2 Comparative – typological analysis of the phonological systems of English and Uzbek

In the linguistic literature phoneme is defined as the smallest distinctive unit. Unlike the other bigger units of language as morpheme and word it doesn’t have its meaning but helps us to distinct the meanings of words and morphemes. Comp. boy-toy, better-letter-latter-litter-later; бола-тола-хола-ола, нон-қон-сон-он, ун-ун(товуш)-ўн-ўнг(моқ), бўз(ўзлаштирилмаган) – бўз(материал), бўл-бўл(тақсима) etc. From the acoustic and articulatory points of view the phonemic system of any language may be divided into vowels and consonants.

The systems of vowel phonemes

From the acoustic point of the view vowels are speech sounds of pure musical tone. Their oscillagraphic melody tracing are characterized by periodically.

From the point of view of articulation vowels are speech sound in the production of which there are no noise producing obstructions. The obstructions by means of which vowels are formed may be of two kinds:

1)  The fourth obstruction without which neither vowels nor voiced consonants are formed.

2)  The third obstruction characteristic of both: English and Uzbek vowels.

The channels formed in the mouth cavity for vowel production by moving a certain part of the tongue and keeping the lips in a certain position cannot be regarded as obstructions. They change the shape and volume of the resonance chamber, and in this way, help to achieve the timbre (or quality) of voice, characteristic of the vowel in question.

In modern English we distinguish 21 vowel phonemes:

10. monophthongs [e, i, u, æ α:, c, c:, ۸,]ə, ə:]

9. Diphthongs [ei, ai, au, æ i, əi,]

In modern Uzbek we find 6 vowel letters and corresponding vowel phonemes [a, o, y, (e, э) i(и)]

The main principles of classifying the vowel phonemes are as-follows: a) according to the part (place of – articulation or horizontal movement) of the tongue; b) according to the height (vertical movement) of the long; c) according to the position of lips; d) according to quality (length) of vowels.

1. according to the part (horizontal movement) of the tongue vowel may be divided into;

central [ə: ə], front [i:, i, e, æ,] and back [a, u, æ, u, α:, æ:] vowels.

2. according to the height of the tongue into: close (high) [i:], [u:] medial [e, ə: ə, ¬] and open [æ, α:, æ:, æ] vowels

In the languages, in which hot only the quality but also quantity of vowels is of certain phonemic or positional value, one more subdivision appears.

3. according to vowel length th vowels may be divided into short; [i, ə, u, æ, ¬,] and long [i: ə: u: æ: α:] vowels. (In this case it belongs only to the English vowels as far as in Uzbek the length of the vowel is of no importance).

4. according to the position of lips vowels may be; rounded (or labilialized)

[u:, u: ۸, c c,] and unrrounded (non-labialized) [e, ə: ə, æ] vowels.

5. we may also subdivide vowels according to their tensely or laxity into: lax

[i, c, e, ۸, ə, ə, æ] and tense [i: u: ə: æ: α:] vowels.

Vowel quality, vowel length and the position of the lips are denoted in the classification by transcription symbols of the phoneme itself. For instance [α:] is a long diphthongized vowel phoneme, pronounced with lips unrounded and [æ:] is a rounded long diphthongized vowel, while [۸] and [e] are an unrounded monophthongs. The first and the second principles constitute the basis of any vowel classification. They were firs suggested by H. Sweet (1898).

 

1.3 Comparative vowel table

The first comparative vowel tables appeared in the 19th-century. Their aim was to prove the common origin of some two modern languages belonging to the same family. In the 1920s of the XX century Prof. D. Jones suggested a classification based on the principle of the so called «cardinal vowels». But these cardinal vowels are abstract notion and have nothing to do with the comparison of two language from the typological viewpoint.

The aim of our comparison is pedagogical. Every phoneme of the English language should be compared with the' Uzbek vowels as comparison of an unknown language phoneme with that of one's mother tongue is of great use. The aim of our comparison (does not need any universal principle) and is to underline the specific features of vowel formation in the two languages in question. The tables of English vowels (accepted in our country) are based on the principles of acad. L.V. Sherba's vowel classification, later on prof. G.P. Torsueva’s and prof. V.AVasiljev's classification.

1. According to the position of the tongue in the horizontal plane English vowels are divided into 3 groups: close, medial, and open. Each of them is subdivided into: narrow and broad.

2. According to the part of the tongue: front, – front – retracted, mixed, back advanced and back.

In comparing the English and Uzbek vowel systems one more principle should be accepted – central vowels must be divided into: l) central proper and central retracted.

Comparison shows, that:

1. the Uzbek [a] should be classified as broad open central retracted vowel

2. the neutral vowel [ə] in English was pronounced by – the English speakers examined as a broad medial, central retracted vowel.

3. the English [۸] was pronounced as an open narrow, central retracted vowel (evidently thanks to the new tendency to make it less back).

As there is ho subdivision of Uzbek vowels according to their

quantity into long and short ones there is no perceptible,

difference in their tensely or laxity. So the Uzbek Vo – .veil

phonemes are differentiated by their qualitative features.

The main philological relevant features of the Uzbek vowels phonemes are: front–central–back, according to which they may form phonological opposition: close-mid-open (сил-сел-сал – кўр–кир, кўл – кел, тор – тер etc.)

It should be kept in mind that there is a difference between the phonetic and phonological classification of phonemes. In the phonetic classification articulation arid acoustic features ane, taken into consideration. Every point of its cliJference is of-pedagogical use.

But philological classification is based on the abstract differential features of phonemes. They serve the purpose of their differentiating, and are called philolbgically relevant attributes of phonemes. They may be defined with the help of, philological opposition in some pairs of words.

Comparative analysis of the English and Uzbek vowels systems

As has been mentioned above the system of English vowel phonemes consists of monophtongs, diphthongized vowels and diphthongs. There are 21 vowel phonemes in English. They are: [i:, I, e, æ, ά, c, c, u, u, ۸, ə, ə, ei, ou, au, ci, iə, ei, uə,] There are 6 vowel phonemes in Uzbek. They are: [i, u, əie, a, o, y, y]

The main point of difference: similarly between the English monophtongs, diphthongizes vowel and Uzbek may be summed up as follows:


Информация о работе «The comparative typology of English, Russian and Uzbek languages»
Раздел: Иностранный язык
Количество знаков с пробелами: 80636
Количество таблиц: 3
Количество изображений: 0

Похожие работы

Скачать
99613
1
0

... Smirnitsky 2). He added to Skeat's classification one more criterion: grammatical meaning. He subdivided the group of perfect homonyms in Skeat's classification into two types of homonyms: perfect which are identical in their spelling, pronunciation and their grammar form, such as «spring» in the meanings: the season of the year, a leap, a source, and homo-forms which coincide in their spelling ...

Скачать
93279
0
0

... . In the above example the verb undergo can be replaced by its synonyms without any change of the sentence meaning. This may be easily proved if a similar context is found for some other synonym in the same group. For instance: These Latin words suffered many transformations in becoming French. The denotational meaning is obviously the same. Synonyms, then, are interchangeable under certain ...

Скачать
74600
0
0

... of this language and changes in its synonymic groups. It has been mentioned that when borrowed words were identical in meaning with those already in English the adopted word very often displaced the native word. In most cases, however, the borrowed words and synonymous native words (or words borrowed earlier) remained in the language, becoming more or less differentiated in meaning and use. As a ...

Скачать
78822
3
0

... signaled by the pattern of the order and arrangement of the stems. A mere change in the order of stems with the same lexical meanings brings about a radical change in the lexical meaning of the compound word. For illustration let us compare lifeboat— 'a boat of special construction for saving lives front wrecks or along the coast' with boat-fife—'life on board the ship', a fruit-market — 'market ...

0 комментариев


Наверх