537-543 Theoretical Fundamentals of Word Formation in Uzbek 537 AMERICAN Journal of Language, Literacy and Learning in STEM Education www. grnjournal.us AMERICAN Journal of Language, Literacy and Learning in STEM Education Volume 01, Issue 09, 2023 ISSN (E): 2993-2769 Theoretical Fundamentals of Word Formation in Uzbek Mardonova Sarvinoz Oripovna Bukhara State University, teacher of the Department of Uzbek Linguistics and Journalism Abstract This article is related to the issues of word formation in the modern Uzbek literary language. The research puts forward theoretical ideas related to terms such as "making a lexeme", "root lexeme", " artificial lexeme" and distinguishes between "made-up words" and "artificial words". Moreover, it expresses reasonable opinions about the place of made-up words in language and speech. Keywords: linguistic phenomena – interpretations, word formation system, literary language, artificial words, Lexical-semantic word formation method, transformation, lexeme. INTRODUCTION. One of the first works related to the issues of word formation in the modern Uzbek literary language was carried out by the linguist scientist A. Gulomov[18,4-46], and the next one - as a research that occurred in the last ten years A. Hojiyev's book "Uzbek language word formation system" can be said that this study brought the issue of word formation in Uzbek linguistics to a new level [27]. The research results of professors Sh.Rahmatullayev and H. Nematov should also be acknowledged. In this regard Sh. Rahmatullayev puts forward theoretical ideas related to terms such as "making a lexeme", "root lexeme", " artificial lexeme" ("derivative lexeme")[14,16], H. Ne'matov emphasizing the need to distinguish between "made-up words" and "artificial words", he expresses reasonable opinions about the place of made-up words in language and speech[11]. The main part. Observations show that the issues related to word formation in Uzbek linguistics are traditional, complete, general interpretation of this phenomenon [18; 27], historical, modern word formation; problems of productive and ineffective word formation [5;10;18;22;27], the question of the role of artificial words in language and speech [11;14;23], which directly and indirectly acquire unity with artificial words , relatively little-studied linguistic phenomena - interpretations of specialization, simplification, generalization, termination, lexeme phenomena[4;10], etc. is determined by etc. As the common sign for word formation is "creating a new lexeme", words with new meanings at one or another level appear from their previous meaning through simplification (its manifestations are rounding, rooting, specialization). Only this situation does not happen quickly and easily, but over a long period of time, sometimes before the eyes of one or two generations. So, word formation by "lexical-semantic" and "morphological-syntactic" methods is an existing phenomenon in the Uzbek language, and it is considered an inactive type of word formation. In Uzbek linguistics, artificial words can be classified as follows without rejecting the ideas related to the ways of word formation. By the reduplication method, in Uzbek language, words belong to the ravish group usually appear. In academic grammar, the following opinion is given in this regard: "The repetition of a word is also considered a useful method. ...the main semantic function of the word in reduplication is generalization. If the repeated words remain within their 538 AMERICAN Journal of Language, Literacy and Learning in STEM Education www. grnjournal.us category, the meaning of generalization prevails; if words go out of their category through repetition, a new word is formed" [18,534]. We focused on this in our researches related to adverb [1;2]. The fact that repeated and paired words leave their category and move to another category (for example: the transition of words such as colour-to colour from noun to adjective) is actually a new word. Hovuch-hovuch, izma- iz, takror-takror, etc. the expression of words in explanatory dictionaries can also indicate that they are made-up words (lexemes). However, there is no need to explain that dictionaries cover lexical units (literally, artificial words) and not speech units. Head-to-head, group-group, piece- by-piece, shoulder-to-shoulder, side-by-side, turn-by-turn, name-by-name, wire-by-wire, door- to-door, face-to-face, etc. which are learned as a repetition and pair the units have already left their category ("parent category") and have been collected in another grammatical category (arrival category). The important thing is that the number of such words is not limited to the examples given above. Their composition is growing in relation to society and time. For example, such words as wagon-wagon (flour), car-car (soil), plane-plane (food), which deviate from their meaning and specialize in expressing the meaning of quantity, appeared in a relatively later period. The formation of a new word by the method of conversion ("transition", "migration", transposition), which is interpreted as a method of forming a grammatical word, also requires special observation, analysis and classification. This phenomenon between grammar and lexicology has a somewhat controversial interpretation in the matter of word formation in the Uzbek language. In the studies related to this issue, it is emphasized that the criteria related to the phenomenon of conversion and its limits are not strict not only in Uzbek linguistics, but also in general linguistics, this is the same fact. In the work of J. Eltazarov, dedicated to the study of this issue in Uzbek linguistics, the interaction and migration occurring in the paradigm of word groups, the origin, differentiation (emergence) of word groups; In the modern Uzbek language, nouns, adjectives, numbers, pronouns, verbs, etc. have been analyzed [17]. Word formation is not active in this way. Lexical-semantic word formation method. In the sources, it is said about this method, "The transformation of a word form into a new word (lexeme) as a result of acquiring a lexical meaning, and the formation of a new word, between the meanings of a polysemous word the formation of a new lexeme as a result of the loss of a connection (semantic connection)" [22,29]. However, the comment in the first paragraph of the definition in the form of "a new word is formed as a result of the acquisition of a lexical meaning of a word form" does not refer to the "semantic method" of word formation rather, it corresponds to the phenomenon of word formation by the "morphological-syntactic" method. In the sources, it is said that homonymous words are formed from polysemous words by the lexical-semantic method of word formation. In this method, nouns and verbs take the lead in the creation of words. For example: stream I, stream II; day I, day II; street I, street II; sentence I, sentence II; wedding I, wedding II; satellite I, satellite II, etc. As homonyms are formed by the lexical-semantic word formation method, polysemous words gradually move away from their single meaning, that is, their meaning in the previous semasiological system, and become a stable lexicon. formed as a unit. Some sources indicate the following as criteria for creating a lexical-semantic word: 1) moving away from the original meaning of the word as a result of the transition of the lexical meaning to a different semasiological system; 2) to have a unique formal feature in the construction corresponding to the recognized new meaning [7,22]. In general, the "starting point" of the historical-genetic differentiation of word groups, i.e., which word group was primary in the primitive language, the fact that there is no consensus in science (J. Eltazarov) casts some shadow on this method of word formation. In fact, in our speech (in general, in Turkic languages) there are dozens of units that have arisen on the basis of polysemantic words, and it is very difficult to find their primary, main meaning. In Turkish languages, koch I and koch II, shish I and shish II, toy I and toy II, kok I and kok II, etc. such as speech, that is, out of context, there are a number of words that express both the concept of 539 AMERICAN Journal of Language, Literacy and Learning in STEM Education www. grnjournal.us object and action at the same time, and it is impossible to determine the primary meaning - which one grew out of which one [6,80]. Word formation in this style is very slow. Forming words in a morphological-syntactic way. Most of the Turkish (Uzbek) words in our speech, according to their origin (etymology), are characterized by the fact that they acquire integrity in terms of structure and content and express a whole meaning. This is determined by the antiquity of these words. In different periods of language development, the transition of word forms to lexemes was active, as a result, hundreds of words were formed in this way. In the Uzbek language, the method of "morphological-syntactic word formation" is also studied under the term "lexeme". This can be the basis of a logically correct classification, because this method is directly related to the acquisition of a new content (form) and meaning of a word form or compound. Examples of such ways of word formation include simplification, generalization, (specialization), lexeme, termination. Such terms and theoretical views related to them emerged mainly in the last decades of the 20th century [4], and began to be studied and classified. In relatively new studies related to the vocabulary layer of the Uzbek language, its enrichment, simplification is directly related to word formation (in the morpheme structure of the word, independent morphemes are joined together, i.e. combining the base and suffix to form an inseparable whole [21,36], as well as expressing a completely new meaning), rounding up (ideomatization or specialization - the pattern of creating a word or form of a historically artificial lexeme meaning moving away from its meaning, disconnection), terminization (terminologizing - the transformation of a social word into a scientific term), lexemization (lexicolization - as a result of the disruption of syntactic communication in units that historically are the result of word combinations, sentence patterns, stable, ready turning into a unit) is evaluated as active methods of new lexeme formation [10,43-45]. In fact, it is, for example, at once, on the day, together, soon (simplification), pilot, builder, worker, assembly, construction, party, play (specialization), filler, determiner, possessor, participle, explanatory ( new words such as termization), marble stone, limestone (lexicalizing) are considered units that took place later in the vocabulary of the Uzbek language. Another important fact is that the formation of words by such methods cannot be put on the same level as the formation of words by means of affixation and composition, the most important thing is that these methods are relatively inactive. In the Uzbek language, word formation is active with the methods of affixation and composition. However, in this process, there are sometimes unethical creations - occasional uses [15]. As a rule, poets and writers create speech-making words as a product of style and expression of thought. They also help to ensure expressiveness and imagery of speech. Uzbek language has dozens of suffixes as word-forming affixes. However, it can be said that only a certain group of them is active today. There are a number of affixes defined as word-formers that have already lost their effectiveness or, as A. Hojiyev said, were not effective at the time. This can be explained as follows. It is known that in the sources -a, -an, -i, -illa/ulla, -ik, -ir/ur, -ira, - ay, -la, -lan, -lash, -lashtir, - lantir, -r/ar, -ra, -si, -sin, -sit, -t, -it, -ot, -q, -iq, -qar, -g'ar, -qir, etc. are presented. But most of them have already lost their effectiveness. There are reasons for this. For example, there is no need to explain that the affix -illa (-ulla) serves only to form verbs from imitation words (for example: to knock, to knock). You can make a verb from any imitation word using this form. This is widely explained in the sources. In order for this affix to form a new verb at the same time, first of all, a new imitative word is needed, so that this affix can form a verb. The "viability" of the affix -illa (-ulla) is directly related to the development of imitative words. In order for this addition to be activated, a new imitation word is needed first. The same and similar thoughts can be said about many passive verb-forming affixes. Words formed (historically formed) with these additions (in general, ineffective word-forming affixes) should be evaluated as root words (lexemes). Now let's look at another situation. Observations show that many artificial words related to the verb are associated with the affixes -la, -lan, -lash. The -la affix is an active, productive verb builder, and its meaning possibilities are very wide. This affix acquires character by forming new words (to shade, to cool, to roll, to program, to field, to travel, to program, to scan, to code, to 540 AMERICAN Journal of Language, Literacy and Learning in STEM Education www. grnjournal.us disinfect, to remove). The same can be said about the affixes -lan, -lash. The fact that the affix - la is active in verb formation in oral and written speech can be widely observed in the work of the talented writer T. Murad "Fields left by my father". Let's look at some examples taken from the work: 1. The road is shaded by willows. Our grandfather walks along this road every morning. 2. Qiblalatib spreads the belt. 3. I'm going out with my back. 4. The swallows traveled to Afghanistan, and autumn ended. 5. I was entering the gate, and our daughter Aysuluv came out. Although these formations are of the type of speech unit, occasional word formation, it is natural that over time, their scope of use will expand. This situation, i.e. whether or not a made-up word (neologism of the author's speech - speech derivative) turns into a made-up word (usual unit - lexical unit) is related to the further "fate" of these words. More precisely, the artificial verbs listed above can remain within this work as a speech unit or become popular and become a lexeme. The affix -la acquires character as an active word builder even in live speech: Let's look at the examples: 1. Shall we shadow you under your eyelashes? Shall we mend the ties you broke? (From the song). 2. When he plowed the ground twice and was cooling down by the nearby large stream, a stork fell down while flying in the sky. (From a fairy tale) 3. It consists in the use of special technical means that program the educational material in the teaching of subjects that develop certain qualities of the student's personality (quick reaction, orientation, etc.). (From the newspaper) Analysis of the possibility of -la and -illa affixes in word formation shows the above situation. So, among the active and middle active affixes in the Uzbek language, including -la, -lan, -lash, - lantir, -lashtir (former verb); -chi, -kor, -shunos, -paz, -khor, -ma, -lik (name maker); -li, -siz (adjective); Examples are -larcha, -chasiga, -ona (former). It is observed that new words appear with the method of adding words (composition). But A. Hajiyev rejects the formation of a new word with a compound word and says: "In all works on the formation of Uzbek language, the "composition method" of word formation is noted, and it is the method of word formation. is defined as a productive method. However, if the phenomenon is approached directly from the materials of the Uzbek language, it will be known that there is no method of word formation in this language that can be called a "composition method" [27,8]. The term "composition" does not correspond to the essence of the term compound word, but it is observed that in the language of the artistic work, as a manifestation of the author's speech (individual speech), quite a few new compound words are used. . For example, nuqratan, telefonkhat (U.Azim), sahibdil, kiikso'qmoq, ayqavoq, chakmoktuyoq, sirtlonpanja (M. Yusuf), kajboshlik, oromkursi (K. Do'stmuhammad) can be cited as examples. We will give examples of artistic fragments: Ø More and more brittle rocks. (A. Qutbiddin) Ø Who will guarantee that those who are used to the Qorkhat party will not invent new customs such as Yogmirkhat, Shabnamkhat, Kirovkhat, Jalakhat? (S. Ahmad) Such speech formations used in the examples have an intermediate status compared to neologisms and occasionalism, they are close to simple words - neologisms, and occasionalism as a speech phenomenon [15,13] 541 AMERICAN Journal of Language, Literacy and Learning in STEM Education www. grnjournal.us The vocabulary of the Uzbek language is enriched on the basis of dialect (local) words. Sources include friend, cup, etc. it is stated that the words are selected from the composition of the dialect layer into the literary language. In this process, necessity, need is implied, that is, the "speech need" criterion is relied on as the main criterion. A specific dialect word or unit known and understood by a wide range of people is included in the literary language. In general, the development and enrichment of vocabulary is integrally and closely related to national dialects. As the Uzbek literary language is enriched due to the composition of the national language, not only lexical units, phraseological units can serve in this [13,60-62]. The method of enriching the Uzbek language based on an external source (external opportunity) occurs in connection with the appearance of neologisms in the vocabulary layer. This phenomenon is common to all languages, as a result of social-political, cultural-educational contacts between different peoples, there are quantitative and qualitative changes in the lexical layer. Along with social life, our vocabulary layer includes algorithm, sensor, market, antivirus, hacker, show, chat, site, coronavirus, prodigy, motivation, pandemic, quarantine, etc. is getting rich with s. Although some of these words existed before, they were not as popular and actively used as they are today. Summary. So, the enrichment and development of the Uzbek language vocabulary layer in terms of form and content (number and quality) is related to the above-mentioned word formation methods, and their Uzbek language vocabulary the possibility of enriching the horse layer is different. In this case, it is observed that the creation of new words is actively taking place based on external sources (words specific to other languages) in the enrichment of our vocabulary. List of used literature 1. Asadov T. Development in the system of word groups. - T.: "Editor", 2010. 2. Asadov T. Spiritual and stylistic features of idioms in the Uzbek language. - Bukhara: "Bukhara publishing house", 2011. 3. Akhmanova S. Slovar lingvisticheskikh terminov.–M.: "Sov. encyclopedia", 1966. 4. Begmatov E., Ne'matov H., Rasulov R. Lexical microsystem and its research methodology (theses of system lexicology) // Uzbek language and literature, 1989, issue 6, p. 35-40. 5. Gulyamov A. Problems of istoricheskogo slovobrazovaniya Uzbekskogo language. ADD. - T. 1955. 6. Kononov A.N. Grammatical language tyurkskikh runicheskikh pamyatnikov VII - IX vv. - L.: Nauka, 1980. 7. Najimov P. Word formation system of Karakalpak language. DDA.–Nukus, 2019. p. 23. 8. Nematov H. Reconstruction strategy and tasks of Uzbek synchronic linguistics (Language and speech differentiation) // Uzbek language and literature, 1987, issue 3, pp. 27-31; 9. Nematov H. The word, its role in language and speech // Uzbek language and literature, 1988, issue 6, p. 38-43. 10. Nematov H., Rasulov R. Basics of system lexicology of the Uzbek language. - T.: "Teacher", 1995. 11. Nematov H. Pattern of word formation, about made and artificial words // Uzbek language and literature, 2007, issue 1, p. 14-18. 12. Nurmonov A., Sarimsakov B. The place of the word in the language system and the problems of dividing words into categories // Uzbek language and literature, 1999, issue 5, p. 19-23. 542 AMERICAN Journal of Language, Literacy and Learning in STEM Education www. grnjournal.us 13. Orifboev D. About dialectal phraseology// Uzbek language and literature, 1974, issue 6, p. 60-62. 14. Rakhmatullaev Sh. Basic units of language construction. - T.: "Universitet", 2002. 15. Toshalieva S.N. Occasional word formation in Uzbek. NDA. -T. 1998. 16. Turdiboev T. Conversion of auxiliary words in Uzbek. NDA. -T. 1996. 17. Eltazarov J. Interaction and migration of word groups in the Uzbek language. DDA. -T. 2008. 18. Grammar of the Uzbek language. Roof 1. Under the editorship of G. Abdurahmanov. - T.: "Science", 1975. 19. An explanatory dictionary of the Uzbek language. Volume 1. - T.: "Uzb. mil. enk.si ", 2006. 20. Kudaybergenov M. Morphological phenomena in the Karakalpak language. DDA.-Nukus, 2004. 21. Hojiev A., Reshetova L. Brief explanatory dictionary of Uzbek grammatical terms. - T.: "Teacher", 1980. 22. Hojiev A. Uzbek language word formation. - T.: "Teacher", 1989. 23. Hojiev A. Is an artificial word a linguistic unit or a discourse unit? // Uzbek language and literature, 2004, issue 1, pp. 49-54. 24. Hojiev A. Comments on the main units of language construction ("lexical" and "grammatical" morpheme) //Uzbek language and literature, 2004, issue 3, p. 29-35. 25. Semantic properties of effective constructions in English and Uzbek languages 26. Muhayyo Davlatova E3S Web Conf., 420 (2023) 10027 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202342010027 27. Hasanovna, D. M. (2019). VARIABILITY OF ASPECTUAL MEANINGS IN ENGLISH. European Journal of Research and Reflection in Educational Sciences Vol, 7(12). 28. Davlatova, M. H. (2020). An Integrative history of Aspectual meanings. JournalNX, 6(04), 17-22. 29. Davlatova, M. H. (2020). Aspectual variability of information culture in the history of the English language. International Journal on Integrated Education, 3(3), 24-28. 30. Davlatova, M. H. (2020). Lexico-semantic Structure and Its Analysis on the Example of Verbs. JournalNX, 6(06), 189-192. 31. Davlatova, M. H. (2021). Relation of lexical-semantic structure of verbs in the linguistic essence. IEJRD-International Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(5). 32. Hasanovna, D. M. (2021). Semantic Implementation of resultutive structures. JournalNX, 7(06), 291-294. 33. Давлатова, М. Х. (2017). Этапы работы с видеотекстами на занятиях Английского языка. Интернаука, (9-2), 16-19. 34. Давлатова, М. Х. (2015). The role of songs in learning English. Молодой ученый, (10), 1145-1147. 35. Hasanovna, D. M. (2021). Different aspects of resultative structures according to their linguistic essence. Academicia Globe, 2(05), 475-479. 36. Hasanovna, D. M. (2021). Linguistic and cognitive features of performing effective actions. World Bulletin of Social Sciences, 3(10), 41-44. 543 AMERICAN Journal of Language, Literacy and Learning in STEM Education www. grnjournal.us 37. Habibova, M. (2023). EPISTOLARY COMPARISONS AND TRENDS. Евразийский журнал академических исследований, 3(5 Part 4), 330–338. извлечено от https://in- academy.uz/index.php/ejar/article/view/16170 38. Habibova, M. (2023). PRAGMATICS AND COGNITION. Current approaches and new research in modern sciences, 2(10), 90-96. 39. Manzila Nuriddinovna Habibova. (2023). THE CONCEPT OF THE WHITE MAN’S SUPERIORITY AND THE PORTRAYAL OF THE ARABIC CHARACTERS IN “THE LAWRENCE OF ARABIA” AND “THE SEVEN PILLARS OF WISDOM”. Academia Repository, 4(10), 24–31. Retrieved from https://academiarepo.org/index.php/1/article/view/96 40. Habibova, M. N. (2023). Letter Fiction and Diary Fiction. American Journal of Public Diplomacy and International Studies (2993-2157), 1(9), 153–158. Retrieved from http://grnjournal.us/index.php/AJPDIS/article/view/1386 41. Habibova, M. N. (2023). Women and the Epistolary Novel. American Journal of Science on Integration and Human Development (2993-2750), 1(9), 119-124. 42. Mahmudova, D. (2023). CORPORA AND LITERATURE. Current approaches and new research in modern sciences, 2(10), 63-64. 43. Olimova, D. Z., & Mahmudova, M. D. (2022). POLITICAL DISCOURSE AND TRANSLATION. RESEARCH AND EDUCATION, 1(3), 176–179. Retrieved from https://researchedu.org/index.php/re/article/view/577 44. Kholova, M. (2023). PRAGMATICS. В МЕЖДУРОДНАЯ КОНФЕРЕНЦИЯ АКАДЕМИЧЕСКИХ НАУК (Т. 2, Выпуск 10, сс. 68–74). Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10054322 45. Kholova Madina Boboqulovna. (2023). POLITENESS AND CULTURE. Academia Repository, 4(10), 4–9. Retrieved from https://academiarepo.org/index.php/1/article/view/139 46. Yunusova Muattar Shokirovna. (2023). POLYSEMY AND HOMONYMY IN ENGLISH MEDICAL TERMINOLOGY [Data set]. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10075547