Хорижий филология
№3, 2020 йил
52
THE SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES OF PHONOSTYLISTIC MEANS OF THE
RUSSIAN AND UZBEK LANGUAGES
Saparova Kunduz Otaboyevna,
Doctor of Science on Philological Sciences,
Associate professor of UzSWLU
Key words:
phonostyle, phonostylistics, phonovariant, sounds, sound system, phonostylistic
units, phonostylistic means.
Phonostylistic means of heterogeneous
systems have serious differences that give rise
to different results. That is, the uniqueness of
segment and super-segment phonostylistic
units in different-system languages (in our
case, Russian and Uzbek) determines their
specific functioning in the speech process.
Therefore,
the
implementation
of
phonostylistic studies in a comparatively
typological aspect involves an inventory of
phonetic means of expressing the stylistic
coloring of linguistic units, which are
manifested when pronouncing variants of
words, phrases and expressions occur, and
identifying interlingual features of their
implementation.
An inventory of the phonetic means of
expressing the stylistic coloring of the
pronunciation variants of linguistic units, and
therefore, the phonetic means participating in
the formation of the type of stylistic coloring,
is carried out with the aim of establishing
regular relationships between the relevant
phonostylistic systems of the compared
languages.
The phonostylistic system of one or
another language is a combination of stylistic
properties of sound (phonetic) units of a
language. Sound (phonetic) language units
serve as stylistic markers of pronunciation
styles, or phonetic styles.
The phonostylistic system of the
language is closely connected with phonetics
(phonology) and stylistics. Accordingly,
comparative
phonostylistics
is
directly
determined by the phonological (phonetic)
typology (on the one hand) and stylistic (on
the other hand).
Comparative
phonostylistics
(phonics), therefore, is a section of linguistics,
whose tasks include a comparative study of
the stylistic properties of sound (phonetic)
systems of two or more arbitrary languages,
regardless
of
kinship
and
territorial
distribution.
Two or more languages, especially
closely related, can have ―systemic, or
typological, kinship‖ in their structure.
Despite this, from a stylistic point of view,
there is non-identity in certain respects, since
―any grammatical proximity (in the broadest
sense of the word) is not stylistic proximity‖
(Buranov, 1983, p. 154).
Studying and analyzing the stylistic
properties of the sound systems of two or
more languages involves the identification of
interlanguage
corresponding
means
of
expressing the stylistic coloring of a linguistic
unit at a sound level. In this case,
interlanguage phonostylistic correspondence
is single-level, and its identification is
possible if there is developed material for the
structure of phonostylistic systems of each
individual language being compared.
The development of the material of the
structure of phonostylistic systems of each
separately compared language, that is, their
analysis and inventory, sets the task of
matching their formal-substantive units at the
phonetic level of the resource stylistics,
determining the typical features characteristic
of the sound stylistics of these languages,
establishing isomorphism and allomorphism
of their stylistic resources of sound system.
Determining
the
features
and
similarities
of
the
phonostylistics
of
languages, identifying the causes of the
isomorphism and allomorphism of the
stylistic resources of their sound system
necessitates substantiating the basic methods
Хорижий филология
№3, 2020 йил
53
of analysis and general principles of
comparison, since linguistic literature has not
yet developed the basics of a comparative-
typological study of the phonetic aspect of
stylistic systems of languages.
As
it
is
recognized,
for
the
transmission of a particular segment of the
content plan in any language, there are some
form of expression plan. A certain unit of the
content plan is assigned a certain form of the
expression plan. However, in the process of
evolutionary linguistic development, along
with the functioning forms of the expression
plan, there are synonymous variants, in our
case phono-options (pronunciations), which
are subsequently used depending on the
nature of the language-speech functional
styles and, accordingly, are divided into:
1) stylistically unmarked, neutral;
2) stylistically marked, conditioned.
Consequently,
the
phonostylistic
typologist should be involved in identifying
both stylistically unmarked and stylistically
marked units of the expression plan at the
phonostylistic
level
of
languages
and
establishing correspondences between them.
Stylistically
marked
and
stylistically
unmarked, neutral variants of expression of
the same plan of content ―constitute two sides
of a single process of communication, are two
sides of the plan of expression, which reflects
the dialectical unity of form and content‖
(Buranov, 1983, p. 154).
Thus, the main inventory, which
serves as an external spokesman for the plan
of the content of stylistic coloring at the
phonostylistic level, can be attributed to
pronunciation versions of linguistic units,
which are divided into stylistically neutral,
unconditioned
and
stylistically
colored,
conditioned.
Pronunciation variants of linguistic
units along with stylistic means of other levels
of the linguistic hierarchy form speech styles.
The stylistic characteristic of speech is
determined by the quantitative parameters of
the functioning of stylistic means in it, by
their peculiar selection and organization
(according to M.N. Kozhina). In other words,
speech styles are determined by the
systematic relationship of linguistic means in
the socio-communicative functioning of the
language.
So, stylistically labeled versions of
linguistic units of the plan of expression,
giving the speech a stylistic coloring, have a
lower frequency than their stylistically neutral
invariants.
However,
this
circumstance
indicates the presence of greater stylistic
significance, stylistic information content.
Phonetic changes contribute to the
emergence of pronunciation variants of words
and their stylistic differentiation. Phonetic
changes as stylistic markers of pronunciations
of words are involved in the formation of a
particular pronunciation style. We can
distinguish stylistic markers of neutral, high,
low pronunciation styles. In this regard, a
comparative analysis of phonostylistic means
of the compared languages is carried out by
identifying stylistically neutral, stylistically
sublime and stylistically reduced forms of
expression of phonetic units, which allows us
to establish typical and specific relations
between the relevant unrelevant means of two
or more languages.
Phonetic changes, which serve as
stylistic markers of pronunciation styles, can
cover both units of the linear level and units
of a nonlinear, prosodic level. Depending on
what phonostylistics of one or another
language is studying - phonetic changes at the
linear level or phonetic changes at the non-
linear level - distinguish segment and super-
segment phonostylistics.
The comparative phonostylistics of the
segment level is engaged in determining the
corresponding
stylistically
colored
and
stylistically
unpainted
(neutral)
phono-
variants of the word in the compared
languages, the cause of which is the phonemic
changes in the composition of the lexeme.
Thus, the main object of comparative
typology in segment phonostylistics is the
study of the stylistic functions of the phoneme
and its positional varieties in the changing
sound structure of the word.
The
change
in
the
phonemic
composition of a word acts as a high-
frequency phonostylistic means participating
in the formation of pronunciation variants of
words, which is explained by the wide field of
Хорижий филология
№3, 2020 йил
54
possibility of varying phonemes and their
combinations in comparison, for example,
with stress. A change in the phonemic
composition of a word can be motivated by
the qualitative and quantitative characteristics
of
phonemes,
their
paradigmatic
and
syntagmatic
features,
the
activity
and
probability of their appearance in speech. In
particular, a change in the phonemic
composition of a word is determined by the
degree of reduction of vowels, assimilation
and dissimilation of consonants, reduction or
increase in the composition of phonemes in a
word, the number of syllables in it, etc.
Stylistically
significant
phonetic
modifications in the field of changing the
phonemic composition of a word can be, for
example, in modern Russian:
a) the replacement of one positional
variety of the phoneme with another
positional variety - the alternation of
positional varieties of vowels and consonants
of phonemes;
b) replacement of one phoneme (both
vowel and consonant) with another.
When
alternating
the
positional
varieties of vowel phonemes in modern
Russian, the change in the vowel depending
on
the
adjacent
consonant
sound
in
phonovariants of words like
каст[р
,
у]ля-
каст[ру]ля
(pan),
ци[р
,
у]льня-ци[ру]льня
(barber) (the second pronouncing version of
these words gives the speech a stylistically
reduced character). Stylistically significant in
the alternation of positional varieties of vowel
phonemes in modern Russian can also be the
degree of reduction of vowels in an unstressed
position. This phenomenon is especially
characteristic of the high pronunciation style
and
stage
speech
when
pronouncing
unreduced vowels [o] and [э] in the first pre-
stressed syllable of words of foreign origin
like
[но]каут, [но]кдаун
(compare the
stylistically neutral pronunciation of these
words:
[нΛ]каут, [нΛ]кдаун
).
When alternating positional varieties
of consonant phonemes, the pronunciation of
consonants with a tinge of labialization in
front of labialized vowels in colloquial words
of the type nickname
ник[ч˚о]мный, я[p˚о]м
and pronunciation of consonants in a
confluence of homogeneous consonants by
types
ми[с
,
]ия-ми[с
,
]ия,
фоногра[м]а-
фоногра[м]а
, which is characteristic of a
neutral pronunciation style.
However,
not
only
alternating
positional varieties of vowels and consonants,
but also alternating phonemes have a stylistic
informativeness. For example, alternating
vowels of phonemes, such as:
a) replacing the vowel [e] by [o] in
words such as
быти
е
-быти
ѐ
, гренад
е
р-
гренад
ѐ
р;
b) the replacement of the vowel [o]
with [e] in words such as
т
ѐ
лочка-т
е
лочка,
грав
ѐ
р-грав
е
р;
c) the replacement of the vowel [o]
with [a] in the words of the type
обусл
о
вливать-обусл
а
вливать,
сосредот
о
чивать-сосредот
а
чивать
(from
the point of view of styling, the second
phono-variant of the above words is
recognized colloquial in modern Russian
literary language).
The
replacement
of
consonant
phonemes correlating in hardness / softness in
position in front of vowels [e] and [e] in
words of foreign origin such as
но[в
,
е]лла-
но[вэ]лла, [кр
,
е]мовый-к[рэ]мовый,
also has
a certain stylistic significance, as well as the
replacement
of
consonant
phonemes
correlating in hardness / softness in the
position of the end of the word and in other
positions. So, for example, colloquial speech
is characterized by the pronunciation of words
such as
дверь, затмить
with a soft
consonant when a consonant is combined:
[д
,
]верь, за[т
,
]мить
.
Thus, segment phonostylistics is
engaged in determining the qualitative
characteristics of phonemes and their shades,
studying normalized and non-normalized
segment units, as well as identifying their
quantitative parameter in various functional-
stylistic varieties of speech. The study of
phonetic means of expressing the stylistic
coloring of a word at the segment level allows
us to identify those differential signs that
contribute to the formation of pronunciation
variants and their further stylistic distinction.
The
formation
of
pronunciation
variants of words and their further stylistic
Хорижий филология
№3, 2020 йил
55
distinction is facilitated not only by segment
units, but also by prosodic ones. The range of
problems in the comparative typology of units
of the supersegment level of phonostylistics
includes, in connection with this, studies of
the stylistic properties of vibrations in the
statement of verbal stress, intonational
structure of languages (components of
intonation such as timbre, tempo, rhythm,
melody, etc.), violation of syngarmonization
of vowels in synharmonic languages .
Fluctuations in the formulation of
verbal stress in languages in which verbal
stress is the prosodic dominant of a word have
great stylistic potential. For example, in
modern Russian literary language, the word
шумы
in professional speech is used with
emphasis on the last syllable:
шумы́
. In the
sailors‘ speech, the word
рапорт
is
pronounced with emphasis on the second
syllable:
рапо́рт
. In the speech of doctors
there is a pronunciation of the word
шприцы
with an emphasis on the root:
шпри́цы
. In the
speech of musicians, the word
полифония
is
pronounced with emphasis on the penultimate
syllable:
полифони́я
.
In other languages, in which verbal
stress is not a prosodic dominant of the word,
for example, in the modern Uzbek literary
language, stress is not a vivid phonostylistic
tool. Consequently, the phonostylistic system
of these languages has other prosodic means
of expressing the stylistic coloring of
linguistic units.
So, syngarmonism can act as a
prosodic phonostylistic means in the modern
Uzbek language. However, syngarmonism in
the Uzbek language (unlike other Turkic
languages) is violated, therefore it is also not
a universal phonostylistic tool, as, for
example, in the Kazakh or Kyrgyz languages.
Thus, in the modern Uzbek literary
language, neither verbal stress (due to its
fixity) nor syngarmonism (due to its
inconsistency) are not a strong phonostylistic
means.
In
the
modern
Uzbek
literary
language, segmented phonetic means of
expressing the stylistic coloring of linguistic
units are, at the level of words and phrases,
mainly phonetic modifications of vowels and
consonants, as well as a change in the
phonemic composition of a word due to a
reduction / increase in the number of
phonemes and syllables in it. In particular, the
high-frequency phonostylistic tool in the
modern Uzbek literary language is the
dissimilation of consonants in pronunciations
of words such as
б
ундай-
м
ундай, су
н
бул-
су
м
бул,
the sound of words such as
жа
б
в-
жа
в
р,
бе
б
ош-бе
в
ош
,
alternation
of
consonants in phonetic words such as
т
овуш-
д
овуш, хуру
ж
-хуру
ш
, etc. (The second
variant of these pronunciation variants of
words in the modern Uzbek language is
spoken).
In the field of phoneme changes, in the
Uzbek language, their alternation in the
pronunciation of words such as
мулл
а
-мулл
о
,
домулл
а
-домулл
о
(the second phono-variant
of these words is bookish) is stylistically
significant. Stylistically significant in the
Uzbek language are also:
a) the epithesis of vowels in
phonovariants of words such as
столб-
столб
а
, танк-танк
а
;
b) the epithesis of consonants in
phonovariants of words like
янгидан-
янги
т
дан, карчалон-карчал
л
он;
c)
a
syncope
of
sound
in
phonovariants of words such as
ар
и
за-арза,
бухор
о
ча-бухорча;
d) the elimination of sounds in
variants of pronunciation of phrases such as
ан
а у
-анов, ман
а у
-манов
, etc. (The second
phono-variant of these words is colloquial in
nature).
It can be concluded that the system of
phonostylistic means of the compared
languages, in this case Russian and Uzbek, is
not identical. The idiom of phonostylistics of
the Russian language, in contrast to the
phonostylistics of the Uzbek language, lies in
the fact that in Russian the means of
expressing the stylistic coloring of linguistic
units along with segment units (changes in the
phonemic composition of the word) are super-
segmented, prosodic, in particular stress. The
idiomatic phonostylistics of the Uzbek
language, in contrast to the phonostylistics of
the Russian language, can be expressed by the
fact that phonetic stylistics of the Russian
Хорижий филология
№3, 2020 йил
56
language is not characterized by such a
phonetic phenomenon as the syngarmonism
of the word in the Uzbek language, which is
still preserved in many Uzbek words in the
root morpheme and is consistently manifested
in a number of dialects of modern Uzbek
language, under the influence of which it
often penetrates into normalized speech.
Thus, to identify isomorphism and
allomorphism between the stylistic resources
of the sound system of the languages being
compared,
analysis
and
inventory
of
phonostylistic systems are necessary both in
terms of monolingual and in terms of
bilingual and multilingual.
References
1. Абдуазизов А.А. Элементы общей и сравнительной типологической фонологии /На
материале узбекского и других языков.-Ташкент, 1981.
2. Буранов Дж.Б. Сравнительная типология английского и тюркского языков.-Москва,
1983.
3. Вопросы фоностилистики: сб. статей/ Отв. ред. К.Б. Карпов.-Москва,1980.
4. Норма и стилистическое варьирование: Межвуз. сб. науч. тр./ Отв. ред. О.С.
Сапожникова.-Горький, 1987.
5. Нурахметов Е. Проблемы супрасегментной фоностилистики (на материале
французского языка): Автореф. дисс. …докт.филол.наук.-Москва, 1997.
6. Панов М.В. История русского литературного произношения 17-20вв.-Москва, 1990.
7. Пинежанинова Н.П. Фоностилистический аспект звуковой организации стиха (на
материале поэзии А. Блока): Автореф. дисс. … канд. филол. наук.-Санкт-Петербург, 1992.
8. Портнова Н.И. Фоностилистика французского языка.-Москва,1986.
Сапарова К. Сходства и различия фоностилистических средств русского и
узбекского языков.
Данная статья посвящена изучению сходных и своеобразных
особенностей фоностилистических средств русского и узбекского языков. В частности,
особое внимание уделяется стилистическим свойствам фонетической системы языков в
сравнении. Фоностилистическая система того или иного языка представляет собой
сочетание стилистических свойств звуковых (фонетических) единиц языка. Звуковые
(фонетические) языковые единицы служат стилистическими маркерами стилей
произношения или фонетических стилей. Стилистические свойства звуковых систем двух
или более языков включают в себя выявление межъязыковых соответствующих средств
выражения стилистической окраски языковой единицы на звуковом уровне. Уникальность
сегментированных и суперсегментных фоностилистических единиц в языках разных систем
является ключевым фактором различий в фоностилистических единицах звуковой системы
сравниваемых языков.
Сапарова К.
Рус ва ўзбек тиллари фоностилистик воситаларининг ўхшаш ва
ўзига хос хусусиятлари.
Ушбу мақола рус ва ўзбек тилларининг фоностилистик
воситаларининг ўхшаш ва ўзига хос хусусиятларини ўрганишга бағишланган. Хусусан,
қиѐсланаѐтган тилларнинг фонетик тизимининг стилистик хусусиятларига алоҳида
эътибор қаратади. Тадқиқот методологиясига кўра, ушбу тадқиқот қиѐсланаѐтган
тилларда фоностилистик бирликларни таҳлил қилиш учун асосий таҳлил усуллари ва
қиѐслашнинг умумий тамойилларидан фойдаланишга асосланган.
