MODELS AND METHODS IN MODERN SCIENCE
International scientific-online conference
95
SYNTACTIC PATTERNS OF REPORTING PERCEPTUAL
EXPERIENCES IN ENGLISH
Karabaeva Barno Bobir qizi
PhD in Philology, doctorate,
Uzbekistan State World Languages University
b.karabayeva@gmail.com
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14875741
Annotation.
This paper explores the syntactic structures used to report
perceptual experiences in English. Drawing on corpus-based analyses and
comparative linguistic studies, it examines the ways in which sensory verbs such
as
see, hear, feel, smell,
and
taste
are embedded in a variety of clauses. Special
attention is paid to how complements and subordinate clauses serve to convey
different degrees of speaker subjectivity. The study also incorporates
perspectives from Uzbek linguists, highlighting comparative aspects between
English and Uzbek syntax. Findings underscore the complexity and flexibility of
English reporting verbs and provide insights for cross-linguistic research.
Keywords
: Perceptual verbs, reporting clauses, syntax, English, Uzbek
linguistics
The syntactic representation of perceptual experiences in English has
attracted substantial attention in linguistic research due to its relevance for
understanding how language encodes sensory input and subjectivity (Biber,
Johansson, Leech, Conrad, & Finegan, 1999). Studies suggest that English
deploys a range of clause configurations when reporting perceptual events,
revealing the interplay between syntactic form and semantic nuance (Quirk,
Greenbaum, Leech, & Svartvik, 1985). This paper aims to offer a concise
overview of the syntactic patterns used in reporting perceptual experiences,
using data from existing corpus-based research and comparative analyses by
both Western and Uzbek scholars.
Perception verbs in English – commonly
see, hear, feel, smell,
and
taste
–
allow speakers to report sensory experiences (Quirk et al., 1985). These verbs
can introduce complex complement structures that range from simple noun
phrases to non-finite and that-clauses. For example, Quirk et al. (1985, p. 1185)
illustrate the following sentences to demonstrate varying syntactic complexity:
1.
I see the car.
2.
I see the car moving.
3.
I see that the car is moving.
MODELS AND METHODS IN MODERN SCIENCE
International scientific-online conference
96
In (1), the verb
see
is followed by a direct object (
the car
). In (2), the
present participle (
moving
) provides additional detail on the action being
perceived, thus increasing syntactic and semantic complexity. Finally, sentence
(3) employs a that-clause to frame the perceptual event as a proposition,
foregrounding the speaker’s interpretation of the observed action.
Recent corpus-based studies underline how diverse syntactic choices
reflect varying degrees of the speaker’s involvement or subjectivity in the
reported event. Biber et al. (1999) note that bare infinitives (
I saw him leave
) can
denote a direct and complete perception of the event, while present participial
forms (
I saw him leaving
) often highlight the durative, ongoing process. For
instance,
I heard her sing
implies witnessing the entirety of the performance,
whereas
I heard her singing
suggests partial or continuous observation of the
action.
Such nuances have also been discussed by Uzbek linguists investigating
cross-linguistic parallels. Tursunova (2019) compares English perception-
reporting verbs and their Uzbek equivalents, noting how Uzbek tends to employ
postpositional complements and auxiliary verbs to achieve similar semantic
distinctions. The variability in these syntactic patterns underscores the
complexity of perceptual reporting when aligning English usage with other
languages, including Uzbek (Tursunova, 2019).
Perception verbs in English frequently appear with non-finite clauses,
particularly the infinitive or –ing forms. Biber et al. (1999) observe that:
Infinitives
usually convey a perception of a complete action (e.g.,
I
saw her leave the room
).
-ing forms
stress the ongoing nature of the perception (e.g.,
I saw
her leaving the room
).
These syntactic choices can influence how speakers interpret and recount
the chronology or completeness of perceived events. Uzbek scholar Rakhimov
(2020) points out that while Uzbek also utilizes non-finite constructions, the
language’s agglutinative morphology produces different morphological markers.
Comparisons with English confirm that both languages maintain a robust
mechanism to express perception with varying degrees of aspectual emphasis
(Rakhimov, 2020).
Another prominent pattern involves using that-clauses after perception
verbs, particularly when speakers convey evidential or inferential nuances
(Quirk et al., 1985). Sentence (3) from Quirk et al. (1985) –
I see that the car is
moving
– exemplifies how the event is presented as a proposition that the
MODELS AND METHODS IN MODERN SCIENCE
International scientific-online conference
97
speaker perceives as true. This construction can signal a level of interpretive
distance between the speaker and the perceived fact, suggesting that the
speaker’s sensory input aligns with an underlying proposition that can be
questioned or affirmed.
Nazarova (2021), in her comparative work on evidentiality in English and
Uzbek, indicates that Uzbek also displays similar evidential markers, though
they are often embedded in verb morphology rather than separate that-clauses.
This reveals an intersection between syntactic choice and morphological
processes in reporting perceptual experiences.
The interplay between syntax and semantics in reporting perceptual
experiences is not unique to English. However, English offers a wide array of
constructions – bare infinitives, participial clauses, and that-clauses – to encode
perceptual content. The comparative work of Uzbek linguists (Rakhimov, 2020;
Tursunova, 2019) underscores the importance of examining the typological
features that shape syntactic realizations of perception across languages.
The implications of these findings are twofold. First, they highlight the
complexity in teaching and learning these structures in second language
contexts, particularly for Uzbek learners of English. Second, they offer fertile
ground for further research into how languages manage the interface between
perception, cognition, and syntax. By integrating corpus-based analyses with
cross-linguistic approaches, future studies can deepen our understanding of the
universal and language-specific dimensions of perceptual reporting.
Reporting perceptual experiences in English involves a variety of syntactic
patterns that reflect the speaker’s perspective, the nature of the perceived event,
and the degree of evidential certainty. The range of constructions – from simple
noun phrases to elaborate that-clauses – demonstrates the language’s flexibility
in encoding sensory experiences. Comparative studies with Uzbek show both
shared and distinct mechanisms in how perception is linguistically framed.
These findings contribute to ongoing discussions in descriptive and theoretical
linguistics and reinforce the need for further cross-linguistic exploration of
perceptual reporting strategies.
References:
1.
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E. (1999).
Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. London, UK: Longman.
2.
Nazarova, S. (2021). Evidentiality in English and Uzbek: A comparative
perspective. Uzbek Journal of Comparative Linguistics, 17(3), 55–66.
3.
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., & Svartvik, J. (1985). A Comprehensive
Grammar of the English Language. London, UK: Longman.
MODELS AND METHODS IN MODERN SCIENCE
International scientific-online conference
98
4.
Rakhimov, F. (2020). Linguistic Variation in Uzbek and English. Tashkent,
Uzbekistan: University Press.
5.
Tursunova, G. (2019). Comparative study of English and Uzbek syntax.
Uzbek Journal of Linguistics, 12(2), 45–57.
