CC BY
0
5.9.8 (10.02.20) ТЕОРЕТИЧЕСКАЯ, ПРИКЛАДНАЯ И СРАВНИТЕЛЬНО-СОПОСТАВИТЕЛЬНАЯ ЛИНГВИСТИКА 5.9.8 ЗАБОНШИНОСИИ НАЗАРИЯВЙ, АМАЛЙ ВА МУЦОИСАВЙ- ЦИЁСЙ 5.9.8 THEORETICAL, APPLIED AND COMPARATIVE LINGUISTICS
УДК 811.21
DOI 10.24412/3005-849X-2024-3-112-119
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF Ashrapov Bahodurjon Pulotovich, candidate of
MORPHOLOGICAL PECULIARITIES OF philological sciences, senior lecturer of the
NOUN FORMING SUFFIXES DENOTING department of English language, faculty of
PERSON AND NON-PERSON IN TAJIK oriental languages, SEI "KhSU named after
LITERARY LANGUAGE REFERRING TO academician B. Gafurov" (Khujand, Tajikistan) 18th AND 20th CENTURIES
ТАХЛИЛИ ЩИЁСИИ ВЕЖАГИХОИ Ашрапов Бахрдурцон Пулотович, н. и. ф.,
САРФИИ ПА СВАНДХОИ ИСМСОЗИ муаллими калони кафедраи забони англисии
ИФОДАГАРИ ШАХСУ ГАЙРИШАХС ДАР факултети забощои шарци МДТ "Донишгоуи
ЗАБОНИАДАБИИ ТОЦИКИИАСРХОИ давлатииХуцанд ба номи академикБобоцон
XVIIIВА XX Fафуров" (Хуцанд, Тоцикистон)
СРАВНИТЕЛЬНЫЙ АНАЛИЗ Ашрапов Баходурджон Пулотович, канд.
МОРФОЛОГИЧЕСКИХ ОСОБЕННОСТЕЙ филол. наук, ст. преподаватель каф.
ИМЯОБРАЗУЮЩИХ СУФФИКСОВ, английского языка ф-та восточных языков
ОБОЗНА ЧАЮЩИХ ЛИЦО И ГОУ "ХГУ имени академика Б. Гафурова"
БЕЗЛИЧНОСТЬ, В ТАДЖИКСКОМ (Худжанд, Таджикистан)
ЛИТЕРАТУРНОМ ЯЗЫКЕ XVIII-XX вв. e-mail: bahodur.ashrapov@mail.ru
The article dwells on the comparative analysis of morphological peculiarities of noun forming suffixes denoting person and non-person in Tajik literary language referring to 18th and 20th centuries. The factological material is the historical works and in order to conduct the comparative analysis beset with the topic under considerdation, the author used "Tukhfat-ul-khoni" (18th century), "The History of Manghit Emirs of Bukhara. Muqanna's Rebellion", "The History of Intellectual Revolution in Bukhara" and "Slaves" (20th century). It is concluded that the adduced analysis beset with lexical possibilities of the noun forming suffixes denoting person and non-person in the language of the period in question shows that the range of connection of these lexical elements with different lexical units is more widely-sued, they could be not only nouns, but parts of speech, especially adjectives, infinitive, verbs and adverbs are added to create new derived words either.
Keywords: suffixes, word-building elements, comparative analysis, morphological peculiarities, Tajik literary language, level of usage, historical works
Тащили циёсии вежагщои сарфии пасвандуои исмсози ифодагари шахсу гайришахс дар забони адабии тоцикии асруои XVIII ва XX сурат гирифтааст. Маводи фактологии тадцицот осори таърихи буда, барои таулили циёсии ин мавзуъ "Тууфат-ул-хони" (а.ХУШ), "Таърихи амирони мангитияи Бухоро. Исёни Муцаннаъ", "Таърихи инцилоби фикри дар Бухоро" ва "Fуломон" (а.ХХ) мавриди истифода царор гирифтааст. Хулоса карда шудааст, ки тащили имконоти калимасозии пасвандуои исмсози ифодагари шахсу гайришахс дар забони осори мавриди циёс шауодат аз он медщад, ки доираи васлшавии онуо бо воуидуои лугавии гуногунмаъно васеъ будааст, яъне онуо метавонистаанд на
фацат ба исмуо, балки ба уиссауои нутци дигар, бахусус сифат, масдар ва феъл низ уамроу шуда, вожауои нави сохта ба вуцуд оранд.
Калидвожах;о: пасвандуо, унсуруои вожасоз, тащили циёсй, вежагщои сарфй, забони
адабии тоцикй, дарацаи корбурд, осори таърихй
Проводится сопоставительный анализ морфологических особенностей именнообразующих суффиксов лица и безличности в таджикском литературном языке XVIII-XX вв. Фактологическим материалом являются исторические труды, для проведения сопоставительного анализа по изучаемой теме были использованы исторические труды «Тухфат-ул-хони» (XVIII в.) Мухаммадвафо Карминаги, а также «История мангытских эмиров Бухары. Восстание Муканны», «История интеллектуальной революции в Бухаре» и «Гуломон» (XX в.) С. Айни. Делается вывод, что приведенный анализ лексических возможностей именнообразующих суффиксов, обозначающих лицо и безличность в языке рассматриваемого периода, показывает, что диапазон связи этих лексических элементов с разными лексическими единицами достаточно широк: ими могут быть не только имена существительные, но и слова других знаменательных частей речи, особенно прилагательные, инфинитив, глаголы и наречия, которые добавляются для создания новых производных слов.
Ключевые слова: суффиксы, словообразовательные элементы, сопоставительный анализ,
морфологические особенности, таджикский литературный язык, степень
употребления, исторические труды
Introduction
It is common knowledge that "word-combination is considered to be one of the ways to enrich the language word-stock. There are also several ways and methods targeted at word-combination in modern Tajik literary language, but the most productive is the morphological one in the language of the comparative historical productions, like MTLL many new lexical elements participate in the creation of a large considerable new derivative words" [5, 93].
It is worth mentioning that not all kind of words are mechanically connected to any wordbuilding elements to form new derivative words, but such combination of words by virtue of prefixes or suffixes occurs in term of certain linguistic rules. Indeed, the number of nominal suffixes are numerous those ones form the nouns denoting place and temporal, personal and nonpersonal and material etc.
Literature review
The given article dwells on word-building potential and morphological peculiarities of the noun forming suffixes denoting person and non-person in Tajik literary language on the example of "The History of Emirs of Bukhara. Muqannas Rebellion" (1966), "The History of Intellectual Revolution in Bukhara" (2005), "Ghulomon" by S.Ainy (2019) (20th century) and "Tuhfat-ul-khoni" by Muhammadwafa Karminagi (2018) (18th century). Into the bargain, we decided to canvass the relevant lexical elements contributed to engendering new derivative nouns in the corpus of our study upon the whole.
The objective of the corpus of our study are:
- to consider morphological features and determine the level of usage of the relevant wordbuilding elements in terms of their functions and meaning;
- to compare the relevance of the theme explored with other word-building elements;
- to canvass certain distinctive peculiarities of the noun forming suffixes denoting person and non-person in Tajik literary language referring to the centuries under comparison.
Methodology
While canvassing the distinctive peculiarities and the frequency of usage of the suffixes under study, we have resorted to the following visual methods, such as: comparative and historical, synchronic and diachronic ones.
Main results and discussion
Our comparison shows that a series of word-building elements are used for the formation of derivative words expressing a person which, despite being present in modern Tajik literary language, differ from the point of view of their role in word-building, namely, some of them are productive, some others, on the contrary, belong to the group of less productive ones. The following word-building suffixes, such as -gar, -bon, -chi, -gor, -var and -bor are used in the corpus of our study.
Hence, we decided to carry out the above-mentioned suffixes in terms of their morphological peculiarities and word-building potentiality comparatively.
The suffix -gar.
It is well-grounded that in MTLL (modern Tajik literary language), the suffix -gar is considered to be one of the productive and active word-building elements [6, 75], and in this regard, Sh.Niyazi asserted that the suffix -gar is a rarely used one. By adding the relevant suffix to a noun extremely short information about a person is given, a new word is born representing his/her occupation, profession, social status, character and behavior: ohangar, korgar etc. [10, 20]. In conformity with Prof. M. Kasimova the suffix in question engenders a new non appertaining to a person [8, 347]. However, Academician M. Shakuri noted that "... the possibilities of -gar in term of word-building seem to have no limits and a new word can be derived from different types of other words. This provides many opportunities for enrichment of language word-stock" [14, 172]. Nevertheless, the relevant word-building element is mentioned in scientific literature and separate dissertations, theses and articles as one of the most frequently used ones.
Moreover, it is stated in Academic Tajik Grammar that "the suffix -gar is productive in the derivation of noun and creates nouns that have different meanings in reference to human being. It creates other nouns of wide spectrum. E.g., it denotes man's occupation, profession, social status, character etc.: shishgar, shamshergar, charmgar, suzangar, suratgar, halvogar, ohangar, na'lgar, misgar, etc." [6, 111].
The factual material belonging to the 18th century shows that the mentioned suffix is considered to be one of the less productive word-building elements and it formed derivative nouns only with a few words, such as ohan (once), kor (once) and jilva (11 instances): Chun qalai Dizax dar kamol-i rif atu matonat bud va harchand topu arrhoda ba devor-i sangin-i u zadand, korgar nayomad [9, 198/394]; Va fazo-i maraz-i tamosho az shiddat-i sharora-i nor va kasrat-i ghalaba-i duxon chun kura-i ohangaron darguzor meomad [9, 126/249].
Apparently, in the above-mentioned example, the derivative word korgar appears in the composition of the nominal verb metaphorically and the former in question expresses the following meanings, namely sudmand nayomadan, befoida gashtan. However, in MTLL, the relevant word indicates a profession and personal occupation. As well as, a researcher of the novel entitled as "Siyovush" by Abulqosim Firdawsi - D.N. Akbarova spoke about the specifics of the suffix -gar and she noted: "The word korgar, which represents a person based on his/her activity is used only twice in "Siyavush" metaphorically:
Nagardad chunin ohan az ob tar,
Na otash bar u-bar buvad korgar" [4, 181].
Thus, the mentioned word-building element united with the abstract noun jilva and formed a derivative word. It is worth stressing that jilvagar is used in all cases in the formation of compound verbs with the auxiliary verbs omadan (to come 8 instances), shudan (to become
once) and soxtan (to make twice): ....to nayyir-i iqbol-i kadomin davlat-i poidor az hijob-i tavorivu makman-i astor ba saroparda-i zuhuru ishtihor jilvagar oyad va axtar-i saodat-i kadom mushtarixosiyat az falak-i e'tibor ba ufuq-i ruzgor chehra kushoyad... [9, 45/85].
In the corpus of our study, the suffix -gar is one of the most productive ones, and we extracted 31 examples of derivation forming derive the new nouns, such as: misgar [1, 123, 123], jilvagar [1, 146], javobgar [1, 152], jodugar [1, 236, 236], isyongar [1, 207], shurishgar [1, 207, 243, 282], zargar [1, 198], korgar [1, 211, 271, 271, 271, 271], savdogar [1, 197, 198, 198; 2, 170, 196, 196, 196, 200, 200], istilogar [1, 205, 214, 231], duredgar [1, 198], torojgar [1, 228], firebgar [2, 144]: ... az tamom-i ahvol-i daruni-i u va istilogharon-i Arab voqif shuda bud... [2, 205].
The suffix -bon.
This suffix is originally an independent word traced back to the root -ra, which meant hifz kardan (to protect) and was used as an auxiliary morpheme in the middle period of the development of Iranian languages [7, 210].
In the works under discussion the mentioned word-building element was added to the words engendering new words denoting a person possessing certain profession and occupation. On the basis of the collected examples we notice the fact that by means of this suffix there were formed new derivative words; 5 examples representing in the corpus of our study upon the whole.
In the historical production appertaining to the 18th century the mentioned suffix appears only once with an impersonal animate noun and it forms another lexical unit which is used in a metaphorical sense: Az asokir-i mansura har bahodure, ki se sar meovard, ba nazar-i xos-i hazrat-i komgori-i saltanatshior manzur soxta, navozish-i shohona meyoft, to ki az sagbonon-i davlat-i komron shaxse-ro basta ovard va az iltifot-i olijohoi sarafroz gardad... [9, 208/413].
Similarly, in Amy's historical productions the mentioned word-building element is one of the most productive ones as in MTLL, and a number of derivative nouns are used, including soyabon [1, 197], osiyobon [1, 199], mizbon [1, 220], darbon [1, 223],posbon [1, 270; 3, 330]; saroibon [3, 69], haivonbon [3, 443], anborbon [3, 472], didbon [3, 370], nardbon [3, 368], boghbon [3, 465]: Abumuslim dar in mehmoni ba mizbon-i xud roz-i siyoshi-i xud-ro kushoda... [1, 220].
In conformity with the traditions and rules of MTLL, the suffix -bon is added to the noun in the corpus of our study producing derivational new nouns representing the names of things: Piyodavu savora ba teghu tir ba surox-i devor muqayad shuda, ba'ze nardbonho bar kungura-i on qal'a nihodand va ba qadam-i sur'atu choloki bar faroz-i hisor baromada [9, 134/265, 152/301]; ...pardaho-i pesh-i xaima va pardahoy-e, ki ba joy-i soyabon dar rui havli ba tarz-i saqf mekashand... [1, 197]; Durust, - guft yak kambaghal-i digar, - yak nardbon yoftan darkor ast... [3, 368].
While adducing the appropriate examples it became clear that Karminagi by dint of the suffix -bon formed a derivative noun denoting occupation and profession from the Turkish word bosh=sar once, but this morphological event was not found in Ainy's works: Va az jonb-i Qubodiyon umaro-i naimonu durmon bo elu boshbon va sarguruhon-i xud peshkashhoi- munosib bardoshta, ba xokbus-i oston-i rif atbunyon shitoftand [9, 240/478].
The suffix -chi.
According to the assumptions and considerations done by certain researchers there were two suffixes -chi: firstly, the suffix that was borrowed from Turkic into Tajik in very ancient times; secondly, the suffix that originally had an Iranian root and the forms -chig and -chik in Middle Persian at different stages of the history of the Tajik language [7, 211]. From this point of view the outstanding linguist D. Saimiddinov proved with a strong argument that the mentioned wordbuilding element originally belongs to Turkish, and in the long period of its use, not only in one or another Iranian language, but in most middle languages (such as Middle, Persian, Sughdian),
New Iranian (such as Modern Persian, Afghan Dari); even one of the Indo-European languages, namely Armenian being included in the list [13, 116-118].
In the language of the historical productions belonging to the compared periods the nominal word-building suffix -chi can be seen as a productive one. The distinctive peculiarity of Karminagi's work is manifested in the fact that, in most cases, Turkish words are used in the formation of derivative nouns referring to human beings, but the relevant feature is rarely encountered in Ainy's compared works. It is worth stating that the suffix in question is found in the historical productions under comparison, this suffix forms new nouns proceeding from Tajik, Arabic and Turkish words which represent a person by profession and occupation:
a) Tajik words: tufangchi - 7 instances [9, 239/475],parvonachi - 11 instances [9, 287/571 1, 12 - 18 intances], jazoirchi [9, 151/299, 159/315, 239/476], zanburakchi [9, 159/315], udchi [9, 226/449, 142/282], tupchi [9, 238/473, 280/558, 280/558; 1, 132], daryuzachi [9, 270/538], charikchi [9, 270/537], pardachi [9, 91/179], hudaichi [2, 211, 216, 242, 242], tupchi [1, 132 ], namoishchi [1, 161, 161; 2, 190], shurishchi [1, 207, 208, 281, 282, 282; 2, 235, 249], qalyonchi [1, 40]: ...Shohmuhammadtubchiboshi, ki nizom-i umur-i favji jazoirchi va tufangandozu zanburakchi va tupxonador dar uhda-i ehtimom-i u bud... [9, 159/315]; Javob-i sharoit-i shumo-ro ba dasturxonchi halova namudam... [1, 33].
It is common knowledge that the derivative noun shikorchi belongs to the group of those ones representing a person possessing a certain profession in MTLL [12, 127; 6, 111]. However, it should be said that in Karminagi's work the nominal word-building suffix -i was used once as -chi in the term of function, and in "Ghulomon" by Amy, the relevant derivative noun is resorted to as an adjective twice: Baro-i Ghoib, Shukur, Istad va Normurod boshad, chor miltiq-i shikori yofta mediham [3, 271, 239]; ...shikoriyon-i humoyunlaqab dar axz-i murghobi-i maqsad ba nav'e ishtiho-i yoft-i qoz doshtand... [9, 64/124]; Man inho-ro az sarbozoho-i peshtara va az shikorchiyon xarida girifta mediham [3, 270].
b) Arabic borrowings: it should be said that only in Ainy's works Arabic words formed a series of derivative nouns by virtue of the suffix -chi, and they were never encountered in Karminagi's work: naqorachi [2, 115], balvochi [2, 195, 239], xazinachi [1, 110], istiqomatchi [1, 103, 103, 104], ixtilolchi [1, 165; 2, 113, 240], tayorachi [1, 182], tashkilotchi [1, 216], tahqiqotchi [1, 234], hisobchi [1, 237], ta'rixchi [1, 239, 240, 263, 266, 266, 270 ], fitnachi [2, 238], zakotchi [1, 142, 143; 2, 110], mas'alachi [2, 55]: ...ahli darbor az mashkob girifta to naqorachi, az yasovul to sais, az hudaichi to mirzo va mulozimon-i eshon, ba unvon-i "oluq" az in qoziyon pul megirand [2, 114 ]; In panjoh nafar ulamo-i mazkur ba hamin qabil istiqomatchi budand [1, 103].
Adducing the results of the comparative analysis concerning the theme explored one can underscore that Ainy resorted to -chi only twice in the composition of the Arabic phrase aksulharakat to engender a new noun and the relevant feature is considered to be one of distinctive ones: Vaqte ki dasta-i namoishchiyon az Chorsu-i Bukhoro ba roh daromada, to Xiyobon rasida budand, az taraf-i digar aksulharakatchiyon niz ba quvvat-i tamom barxosta... [1, 161, 165].
c) Turkish borrowings; jorchi - 6 instances [9, 219/435], tavochi [9, 31/57, 117/231, 156/309, 2, 105], qurchi, kemachi=kishti [9, 291/580], urunchi [9, 130/258, 150/298, 164/325, 167/331, 230/ 458], boshchi [9, 207/411], elchi [9, 291/580; 2, 223]: ...Shayxnazarbahodur va digar boshchiyon-i hazora va sada va daha, ki zikr-i asome-i eshon mujib-i atnob-i ta'rix ast... [9, 207/411]; ...jorchiyon-ro farmon dod, ki...xaloiq-ro az turku tojik va arobu ahshom axboru e'lom namoyand [9, 33/61]; Mazmun-i farmon dar bozorho-i tumanot va viloyot ba vosita-i jorchiyon - munodiyon ba umum-i ahol-i e'lo karda shud... [2, 105].
It is worth stressing that Karminagi used the word elchi in 30 examples totally, and the relevant derivative word is considered to be one of the most frequently occurred ones. While
comparing the morphological features and word-building potentiality of -chi we noticed that Ainy resorted to this derivative word 20 times in [1] and 101 times in [2]; among them 94 times appeared in the composition of the compound word elchixona which was not encountered in Karminagi's historical production at all: ...dar muntasaf-i moh-i mazkur elchi ba darbor-i kayvonmador omada, izz-i bisotbus yoft [9, 140/278]; Al'on man az zuhur-i elchi omadam [2, 190, 72, 145, 178, 189, 190, 223].
The suffix -gor.
It is worth mentioning that the suffix -gor is traced back to the Middle Persian -gar [7, 212213]. In the course of conducting the comparative analysis beset with the relevant word-building element it became clear that by means of -gor, a new derivative noun is formed from the past tense of the verb xost, which represents a person by his/her occupation in the historical production referring to the 18th century. However, only furushgor is derived by this suffix in the comparative works of the 20th century: Podshoh-i najobatpanoh niz az ray-i durandesh-i amir-i sutudaxisol ittilo' yofta, az u xostgor va xotimat-i xusronu vubol mustash'ar shud [9, 35/65]; Pas az pul barovarda shumurda dodan-i boy boz dallol har du dastho-i xaridor va furushgor-ro bo pul ba ham payvand doda... [3, 69].
Thus, the suffix -gor participates to the formation of a new noun from the present participle in Ainy's belles-letters prose. However, such morphological peculiarities of the relevant wordbuilding element did not occur in Karminagi's historical production: ...ba taraf-i Qarshi raftagor budand, ba tarz-i amonat supurd [3, 32, 118, 467].
In the corpus of our study the mentioned suffix only forms other new derivative nouns from the abstract nouns madad and xidmat which denote the person by his/her action or occupation: Ammo zot-i sharif va unsur-i latif-i eshon-ro juz zill-i humo-i saodat-i azali bor-e ne va dar harayon-i havodis-i ayom juz inoyat-i lam yazali madadgor-e ne [9, 58/111; 3, 10]; ...baro-i xizmatgoronash "insof' va itoat, baro-i gumoshtagonash, ki ba ghulomfurushi raftaand... [3, 34; 2, 184].
The suffix -var.
This suffix originates from the ancient Iranian bara, which means burdan, and represents the notion of ownership (in ancient Persian arstibara - spear bearer) [11, 74]. In "The Academic Tajik Grammar" it is written about the mentioned word-building element, that "the suffix -var is less productive, it forms only new adjectives expressing a possession of man or his/her subjective characteristics" [6, 143]. Into the bargain, one can assert that in the language of the history of the 18th century the suffix in question was used in the formation of derivative nouns, but in the language of Ainy's historical productions is resorted to by the author only for engendering new derivative nouns, such as peshavar, bahravar and shu'lavar. Therefore, the suffix -var in Ainy's works is considered one of the less productive word-building elements.
In "Tuhfat-ul-khoni" the suffix -bor is combined with the word jon, the name of an animal is added with the word bor and it is included in the verb, namely borvar gardidan: ...misl-i yak tuquz ghulom va joriya-i qalmoq va yak tuquz jonvar az shunqoru shohinu boz va chand dast nayza va asb-i tulfor... [9, 206/409]; ...to ba muqtazo-i tanokihu! tanosilu! naxl-i umed samara-i murod borvar gardad... [9, 220/437].
In reference to it, in the compared historical production belonging to the 18th century there were formed a new derivative noun from the present participle dida by dint of the word-building element -var in two cases: ...roygon dar kanor-i masnad-i ehtirom-u muknat nanishast va bo har didavar-e bedori-i sadamat-i tumtaroq-i havodis-i ruzgor ba nazar-i e'tibor nadid... [9, 88/173]; El-i burqut va Tagoymurodbiy bo mardum-i didavar-i on vilo dar xona-i xavf-u dahshat va dar ma'raka-i vahmu xashyyat nishastand... [9, 120/238].
The suffix -bor.
_«ВЕСТНИК ТГУПБП», выпуск 3 (100), 2024
The suffix -bor is considered to be one of the non-productive word-building elements in Karminagi's historical production and it is resorted to only once, however, the relevant suffix never occurred in Ainy's works under study: ...ba poy-i xizmat bar sar-i shelon (xon-i ta om, ziyofat - A.B.) va ziyofatkada istoda, anvo-i atima va shirabor hozir karda, ...ba on qavm-i nomdor rasonidand [9, 255/508]. Conclusion
To sum it up, due to the comparative analysis of morphological peculiarities of noun forming suffixes denoting person and non-person of the language of the compared centuries we can come to the conclusion that the word-building elements under consideration are meaningful ones contributed into engendering new derivative nouns, and in terms of their usage the formers in question are not identical some of them are productive and other are non-productive ones. There are derivative words which are traced back to today's language word stock and are engendered according to Tajik word-building models, but some of them are not in use.
ПАЙНАВИШТ:
1. Айни, С. Таърихи амирони мангитияи Бухоро. Исёни Муцаннаъ / С. Айни. Ц.10. -Душанбе: Ирфон, 1966. - 243 с.
2. Айни, С. Таърихи инцилоби фикри дар Бухоро / С.Айни. Куллиёт. Ц.14. / Тартибдщанда К.С. Айни. - Душанбе: Матбуот, 2005. - 270 с.
3. Айни, С. Fуломон / С. Айни. Рабы. - Душанбе: Адабиёти бачагона, 2019. - 488 с.
4. Акбарова, Д.Н. Вижагщои вожасозии пасванди -гар дар достони "Сиёвуш"-и "Шоунома"-и Абулцосим Фирдавси / Д.Н. Акбарова // Паёми Донишгоуи миллии Тоцикистон. Бахши илмуои филологи. - 2018. - №7. - С. 178 - 183.
5. Ашрапов, Б.П. Тащили муцоисавии маънои пасванди -гоу дар забони адабии тоцикии царнуои XVIII ва XX / Б.П. Ашрапов // Ахбори Донишгоуи давлатии ууцуц, бизнес ва сиёсати Тоцикистон. Силсилаи илмуои гуманитари. - 2021. - № 3(88). - C. 93-99.
6. Грамматикаи забони адабии уозираи тоцик: дар се цилд. Цилди 1. - Душанбе: Дониш, 1985. - 355 с.
7. Ефимов, В.А. Персидский, таджикский, дари / В.А. Ефимов, В. С. Расторгуева, Е.Н. Шарова // Основы иранского языкознания. Новоиранские языки. - Москва: Наука, 1982. - 230 с.
8. Цосимова, М.Н. Таърихи забони адабии тоцик / М.Н. Цосимова. Цилди 1. - Душанбе, 2011. - 566 с.
9. Мууаммадвафои Карминаги. Тууфат-ул-хони / Муцаддима, тауияи матн, нусхабадал, таълицот ва феурастуои Цамшед Цуразода ва Нурулло Fиёсов / Мууаррирон: И.У. Рауимов, Б.П. Ашрапов. -Хуцанд: Ношир, 2018. - 390 с. + 586 сау. ф. - 976 с.
10.Ниёзи, Ш. Исму сифат дар забони адабии тоцик/Ш.Ниёзи. - Сталинобод, 1954. - 50 с.
11. Расторгуева, В.С. Среднеперсидский язык / В.С. Расторгуева, Е.К. Молчанова //Основы иранского языкознания. Среднеиранские языки. - Москва: Наука, 1981. - С. 6 - 146.
12.Рустамов, Ш. Исм / Ш. Рустамов. - Душанбе: Дониш, 1981. - 220 с.
13.Саймиддинов Д. Корбурди пасванди -чи дар забони тоцики / Д.Саймиддинов // Пажууишуои забоншиноси. - Душанбе: Шарци озод, 2013. - С. 114-126.
14.Шукуров, М. Часпаки "-гар" ва "-чи" / М.Шукуров // Забони мо уастии мост. -Душанбе: Маориф, 1991. - С. 167-177.
REFERENCES:
1. Ainy, S. The History of the Emirs of Bukhara. Muqanna's Rebellion / S. Ainy. V.10. -Dushanbe: Irfon, 1966. - 243 pp.
2. Ainy, S. The History of Intellectual Revolution in Bukhara / S. Ainy. The collection of compositions. V.14. /Prepared by K.S. Ainy. - Dushanbe: Press, 2005. - 270pp.
3. Ainy, S. Slaves /S. Ainy. Roman. - Dushanbe: Children's literature, 2019, - 488pp.
4. Akbarova, D.N. Word-building Features of the Suffix -gar in the Story Entitled as "Siyovush" out of "Shoh-name" by Abulqosim Firdawsi / D.N. Akbarova // Bulletin of the Tajik National University. Series of philological sciences. - 2018. - #7. - PP. 178 - 183.
5. Ashrapov, B.P. Comparative Analysis of the Meaning of the Suffix -goh in Tajik Literary Language referring to 18th and 20th centuries / B.P. Ashrapov // Bulletin of the Tajik State University of Law, Business and Politics. Series of humanitarian sciences. - 2021. # 3(88). -PP. 93-99.
6. Grammar of Modern Tajik Literary Language: in three volumes. V.1. - Dushanbe: Donish, 1985. - 355 pp.
7. Efimov, V.A. Persian, Tajik, Dari / V.A. Efimov, V.S. Rastorgueva, E.N. Sharova // Grounds of Iranian linguistics. New Iranian languages. - M. : Nauka, 1982. - 230 pp.
8. Kosimova, M.N. The History of Tajik Literary Language /M.N. Kosimova. V.1. - Dushanbe, 2011. - 566pp.
9. Muhammadwafo Karminagi. Tuhfat-ul-khoni. Introduced, prepared, commented and indexed by Jamshed Jurazoda and Nurullo Giyasov / Editors: I.U. Rahimov, B.P. Ashrapov. -Khujand: Publisher, 2018. - 390p. + 586p. f = 976pp.
10.Niyozi, Sh. Noun andAdjective in Tajik Literary Language / Sh. Niyozi. - Stalinabad, 1954. - 50pp.
11.Rastorgueva, V.S. Middle Persian Language / V.S. Rastorgueva, E.K. Molchanova // Grounds of Iranian linguistics. Middle Iranian languages. - M.: Nauka, 1981. - PP. 6 - 146.
12.Rustamov, Sh. Noun /Sh. Rustamov. - Dushanbe: Donish, 1981. - 220pp.
13.Saymiddinov D. The Usage of the Suffix -chi in Tajik / D. Saymiddinov. // Linguistic research.
- Dushanbe: Sharqi ozod, 2013. - PP. 114 - 126.
14.Shukurov, M. The Endings -gar and -chi / M. Shukurov // Our language is our existence. -Dushanbe: Maorif, 1991. - PP. 167 - 177.
