CC BY
16YHeHbiH XXI BeKa • 2022 • № 5-1 (86)
THЕ BRАNСHЕS ОF TYPОLОGY АССОRDING TО THE СОNNЕСTIОN ОF LАNGUАGЕ LАYЕRS АND THЕIR
TЕАСHING PRОBLЕMS
U. Boltaboeva1
Linguistic typology (or language typology) is a field of linguistics that studies and classifies languages according to their structural features. Its aim is to describe and explain the common properties and the structural diversity of the world's languages. Its subdisciplines include, but are not limited to: qualitative typology, which deals with the issue of comparing languages and within-language variance; quantitative typology, which deals with the distribution of structural patterns in the world's languages; theoretical typology, which explains these distributions; syntactic typology, which deals with word order, word form, word grammar and word choice; and lexical typology, which deals with language vocabulary.
Key words: Typology, grammar, language, method, syntactic typology, theoretical typology.
Linguistic typology has different divisions based on the objectives of analysis. According to the object of study, linguistic typology may include the following sections:
Gеnеаlоgiсаl typclGgy
In genealogical typology of languages, a classification is based on the genetic principle, that is, grouping related languages by origin into language families. Genealogical typology became possible only after the concept of linguistic kinship arose in 19th century and the principle of historicism was confirmed in linguistic research. It is formed as a result of the study of languagesusing the comparative-historical method.
The comparative historical method is used to establish the relationship of languages. This method is based on a comparison of languages and is aimed at elucidating their historical past. A comparative historical method is based on the laws of phonetic changes, on the laws and trends of morphological, word- formation, syntactic and lexical levels of a language. Using this method, scientists compare genetically identical words and forms of related languages with each other and restore, their original form, their archetypes, or proto-language.
To prove the genetic relationship of languages, the existence of systemic tendencies in the language development is analyzed. In this case, the specific criterion is the presence of systematic relationships like lexical and grammatical similarities, and the presence of regular phonetic correspondences in the originalmaterial of languages.
1BoAma6oeea YMuda - MaracrpaHT, HaMry, HaMaHraH, y36eKHcraH.
Moreover, when identifying lexical similarities, not all words should be used, but only those that express vital concepts (basic vocabulary): body parts (arm, leg), terms of kinship (mother, father), some actions (take, eat, give) etc. It can be easily noticed that in the structures of manylanguages of Europe there are common features, for example, Polish wоdа, Russian вода, English wаtеr, German Wаssеr, etc. Such common features can be found not only in geographically related but also geographically and historically unrelated languages. For example, the table of basic words in 11 different languages extracted from A.A.Reformatskiy illustrates the resemblance of such distinct related languages as English, Greek or ancient languages like Sanskrit and Avestian.
As a rule, proto-language of the language family was supposed to exist 6- 7 thousand years ago. This time interval was taken from the example of the Indo-European language family, which is the largest in the world - about 3 billion people speak its languages. In recent decades, linguists have made attempts to implement a genealogical classification of languages for a time period earlier than7 thousand years ago. In this case, it is supposed to talk about macro-families that unite several distinguished language families. One of such macro-families is the Nostratic macro-family, which, in addition to the Indo-European, includes the Altai, Ural, Afro-Asian and other language families. According to various estimates, it is assumed that a single Nostratic-parent language existed 10-20 thousand years ago. In the following extract several words resembling phonetically and semantically in 3 language families are illustrated.
The purpose of structural typology of languages is establishing the similarities and differences of languages, which are rooted in the most common and most important properties of languages and are not dependent on their genetic affinity. Structural typology operates with classes of languages, united bythose signs that are selected as reflecting the most significant features of morphological structure, for example, the method of connecting morphemes. Classical morphological types of languages include four linguistic types:
Inflectional languages
This type includes languages whose forms are formed by external and internal inflection. Inflexion is an indicator or ending of a complex of grammatical categories expressed in wordforms. Distinguished two types of inflexion: internal and external. The first is such a method of inflection, in which the forms of a word are formed by changing sounds inside the stem. So, for example, Arabian qаtаlа - hе killed is divided into q-t-I root and vowels а-а-а expressing grammatical meanings: 3rd person singular past tense, whereas in qutih - hе wаs killed vowels u-i-а indicates 3rd person singular past tense in passive voice. The second type of inflection is about using endings after the rootexpressing different grammatical meanings, for example, Russian поле - field, поля - fiеШs, полей - о/^fields, etc.
The presence of external and internal inflection is an important stable signof languages. Other such signs are: the multifunctionality of grammatical morphemes, the presence of fusion, phonetically unreasonable root changes, a large number of
phonetically and semantically unmotivated types of declination and conjugation. Indo-European, Semitic-Hamitic languages belong to the inflective type; they also have signs of agglutinative languages. Inflective languages include languages that occupy a different place in the genealogical classification. Morphological typology does not take into account kinship. Its classification criterion is the form of the word change and the relationship of theword and sentence. The presence of affixes is also characteristic of agglutinative languages, but in these two morphological types of languages external flexion has significant differences. Flexion in inflected languages has the following features:
1) Morphological homonymy.
morpheme -е in German: a) is ending of first person singular verb in Present tense (Ich lerne - I learn); c) is added to the present or past verb stem to create a feminine noun (haben/die Habe - to have/ belongings); d) is ending of adjectives for feminine nouns in singular (gute Mutter - a good mother).
The synthetic nature of affixes is combination of several different values in one morpheme. In other words affixes of inflected languages are polysemantic (personal endings of verbs in German, for example, in the verb machst - he doesthe ending -st is one morpheme, combines 2 grammatical meanings: a) a secondperson; 2) in singular; in Russian иду - I am coming the ending -у indicates 3 grammatical meanings: 1) first person; 2) singular; 3) present tense; 4) indicativemood;).
2)Another sign of inflection is the expression of one grammatical meaning in different forms, it means, morphemes sometimes can be synonyms (theexpression of plural number in German occurs using three suffixes and inner inflection - umlaut: Nächte (nights), Häuser (houses), Menschen (people), so as in English, external inflexion: books, inner inflection: men, and children is a rare exception, where to indicate the number both external and internal inflexions areused).
Inflectional languages are characterized by internal inflection. For instant, alternating consonants in the root: in German schneiden - schnitt - geschnitten (cut-cutcut); spontaneous alternation of vowels in the root: in Russian deHb-дия-днём (day-day's-in the daytime) or historically explained sound alternation: in English goose -geese, in German (umlaut): Baum - Bäume (tree-trees).
Conclusion
Incorporating languages are considered to be a unique type. Feature of thistype of languages illustrated in the fact that a sentence is constructed as a complexword, that is, root words are combined into one general whole, which has a formof a word and a sentence at the same time. The whole is a sentence word, where the beginning is the subject, the end is the predicate, and the objects are incorporated in the middle with their definitions and circumstances. The main way to express grammatical relationships in them is incorporation. Incorporated languages include Paleo-Asian, Chukchi-Kamchatka languages, languages Indians of North America and some other languages. For example, in the Chukchi language sentence t-i-kaa-nm-at-i-rkin (I am killing the deer) consists of two roots (-kaa- deer and -nm- kill), two connective vowels -i-, first person singular t- and suffixes -at- (suffix of verb action) and -rkin (verb suffix of the present tense). Literally this sentence can be translated as my deer killing: I + deer + kill
+ now.
It should be noted that sometimes incorporating languages may have agglutinative and inflectional features too. Chukchi language as incorporative language is accompanied by agglutinative prefixation as well. They come closerto agglutinating according to the principle of combining morphemes, and with flexing - by the presence of internal inflection. Many languages are intermediatein morphological classification scale, combining signs of different types, for example, the languages of Oceania are characterized as amorphous-agglutinative.
References
1. Abduazizov A.A. Theoretical Phonetics of Modern English. - T. 2016.
y4eHbrn XXI BeKa • 2022 • № 5-1 (86)
2. Jensen-Jarolim, E. (2013). Comparative Medicine: Anatomy and Physiology. Springer Science & Business Media. ISBN 9783709115596. Retrieved 24 May 2018. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_medicine
3. Yusupov U.K. Contrastive Linguistics of the English and the Uzbek Languages. - T.: Akademnashr, 2013.
4. Бурaнoв Дж. Cрaвнитeльнaя типoлoгия aнглийcкoгo kob: y4e6. пocoбиe для тед. ин-tob. 2013.
5. ^любин Л.Л. Cрaвнитeльнaя типoлoгия aнглийcкoгo и pyccKoro языкoв: учeбник. - М.: ФЛИНТA: HAyKA, 2012. - 152 c.
6. РeшeтoвВ.В.Ocнoвыфoнeтики,мoрфoлoгиииcинтaкcиca y36eKcKoro языга. - Т.: Учитeль, 2015.
© U. Boltaboeva, 2022.
