




































Volume 02 Issue 03-2022 14 

                 

 
 

   
  
 

American Journal Of Philological Sciences   
(ISSN – 2771-2273) 
VOLUME 02 ISSUE 04     Pages: 14-20 

SJIF IMPACT FACTOR  (2022: 5. 445)  
OCLC – 1121105677    METADATA IF – 5.963 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
Publisher: Oscar Publishing Services 

Servi 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ABSTRACT 

The relation of comparison is a category of a universal nature in languages, which is expressed at all levels of 

language, including the text. The fact that the textual unity of this relationship comes through supersyntactic 

integrity (SSB) is a uniquely complex process that needs to be studied. In linguistics, there are opinions about the 

existence of semantic types of text, among which very few scholars have expressed their views on the expression of 

the relation of comparison through the text unit. They dwell on  comparative texts with the meaning similarity in 

general way. Therefore, this article  analyzes the comparative SSI with the meaning contrast, its type of SSBs 

representing the comparative relation and identifies their specific features. The article describes the types of SSBs in 

the comparative context, the phenomena that give rise to them (such as antithesis and differentiation), the 

differences between these phenomena on the example of different systematic languages (Uzbek and English). 

Based on the studied sources and the analyzed examples, comparative SSI were divided into two types  such as SSIs 

with the meanings contrasting and differentiating  . In the above first type of SSBs, which represent a comparative 

relation, it was proved on the basis of the analysis of examples that the comparative component is expressed in an 

incomplete form, and the second type in a complete form. 

KEYWORDS 

Supersyntactic integrity, SSI with the meaning similarity, SSI with the meaning contrast, antithesis, differentiation, 

comparee, standart of comparison, standart marker, parameter. 

  

  Research Article 

 

SUPERSYNTACTIC INTEGRITY WITH THE MEANING OF CONTRAST 
 

Submission Date: April 20, 2022, Accepted Date:  April 25, 2022,  

Published Date: April 30, 2022  

Crossref doi: https://doi.org/10.37547/ajps/Volume02Issue04-04 

 

 

A.Mamajonov 
Corresponding Member Of The Russian Academy Of Science, Professor Fergana State University, Fergana, 

Uzbekistan 

 

Sh.Dadabayeva 
Phd Student Of The Department Of Linguistics, Fergana State University, Fergana, Uzbekistan 

Journal Website: 

https://theusajournals.

com/index.php/ajps 

Copyright: Original 

content from this work 

may be used under the 

terms of the creative 

commons attributes 

4.0 licence. 

 

https://theusajournals.com
https://doi.org/10.37547/ajps/Volume02Issue04-04


Volume 02 Issue 03-2022 15 

                 

 
 

   
  
 

American Journal Of Philological Sciences   
(ISSN – 2771-2273) 
VOLUME 02 ISSUE 04     Pages: 14-20 

SJIF IMPACT FACTOR  (2022: 5. 445)  
OCLC – 1121105677    METADATA IF – 5.963 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
Publisher: Oscar Publishing Services 

Servi 

INTRODUCTION 

Initially,  sentence was considered  the largest unit of 

speech in linguistics, and then, interest to  the text as 

the  largest unit of speech than sentence  began in the 

70s and 80s of the twentieth century. 

Text and its types were originally studied by cognitive 

psychology as a unit of social communicative speech. 

Later, the development of cognitive linguistics 

became the basis for approaching it as a linguistic 

unit. [5,21]Brinker will have three steps in this learning 

process of it : 

1. The stage of studying the communicative-pragmatic 

features of the text; 

2. The stage of studying the theme of the text 

(context); 

3. The stage of studying the linguistic-stylistic features 

of the text (syntactic-stylistic relations).[1,80-85] 

Literature review 

The research conducted by European and Russian 

linguists on text linguistics was the main impetus for 

the development of this field in Uzbek linguistics. 

The first source on the text in Uzbek linguistics is G. 

Abdurahmanov's lecture on text theory that was the 

basis for the emergence of text linguistics. Then the 

researches of I.Rasulov[12,174], M.Askarova[2], 

A.Mamajonov[7;8], N.Turniyozov[13], M.Khakimov[3], 

M.Yuldashev[11], M.Kurbanova[11], 

M.Abdupattoev[9], D.Hudoyberganova[4], 

U.Nosirova[10] carried out the development of this 

field. 

These researchers gave information on the semantic 

aspects of the text,  but some  of them have 

expressed their views on how the relation of 

comparison is expressed through this unit (especially 

supersyntactic unit). 

A. Mamajonov, in his textbook Text Linguistics, notes 

that there is comparative  semantic types of the text 

such as complex sentence,  and emphasizes the 

participation of phenomena such as antithesis in the 

comparison of two ideas.[7,35] 

In the book "Text Linguistics" co-authored by M. 

Kurbanova and M. Yuldashev, the means involved in 

the formation of the meaning of comparison in the 

lexical and syntactic analysis of the literary text are 

described with various examples.[11,60-61,78-79] 

In her scientific work devoted to the anthropocentric 

study of the text, D.Khudoyberganova studied the 

linguocultural features of texts and their role in the 

creation of the text. In this point she shows the texts 

with the meaning similarity and their features. [4,98-

101] 

DISCUSSION 

Thus, “the text is the largest expression of speech 

with its own complex syntactic structure,” which in 

the broad sense represents a whole fiction, and in the 

narrow sense the supersyntactic integrity. Professor 

A. Mamajonov states in his linguistic research that the 

text consists of the following units:[7,12] 

 

     



Volume 02 Issue 03-2022 16 

                 

 
 

   
  
 

American Journal Of Philological Sciences   
(ISSN – 2771-2273) 
VOLUME 02 ISSUE 04     Pages: 14-20 

SJIF IMPACT FACTOR  (2022: 5. 445)  
OCLC – 1121105677    METADATA IF – 5.963 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
Publisher: Oscar Publishing Services 

Servi 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Super Syntactic Integrity (SSI) is a form of the text, a 

language unit that is larger than a sentence and 

smaller than fictions. “Each SSI is a miniature story 

that represents an event with its own beginning, 

development, and ending.”[6,63] The first statement 

of the SSI is called a theme that  represents the main 

idea and the structure of the text . The sentence  in 

the SSI are combined and represent a certain 

semantic relatives. It has the following semantic 

relations as a compound sentence:[7,34] 

1. Time  

2. Cause-effect 

3. Compare-contrast 

4. Description 

5. Problem-solution 

6. Sequence. 

RESULT 

It can be seen that a comparative relation can also be 

expressed in languages through SSI. When the exact 

comparison relationship is expressed through this 

unit, the properties of the two objects are compared 

to each other. 

Based  on the above sources, it is expedient to first 

divide the comparative SSI into two types:  

Below we analyze SSIs with the meaning contrast. 

In SSIs with the meaning contrast, the two ideas are 

compared, and in the content they are contrasted and 

differentiated. This involves phenomena such as 

antithesis and differentiation. 

In the text (SSI), words, affixes, and sentences with 

opposite meanings are involved, and they compare 

the two objects  by contrasting. This phenomenon is 

sentence 
Super 

syntactic 

integrity 

paragraphs period 

The units of 

Text 



Volume 02 Issue 03-2022 17 

                 

 
 

   
  
 

American Journal Of Philological Sciences   
(ISSN – 2771-2273) 
VOLUME 02 ISSUE 04     Pages: 14-20 

SJIF IMPACT FACTOR  (2022: 5. 445)  
OCLC – 1121105677    METADATA IF – 5.963 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
Publisher: Oscar Publishing Services 

Servi 

called antithesis in the scientific literature, tazod in 

Eastern art.[11,61] 

The following is an example of how this process 

occurs in languages(The Uzbek and English 

languages): 

Luvrga yangi kirish joyi huddi muzey kabi mashhur 

bo‘lib ketgan. Uni amerikalik me’mor I.I.Pey 

tomonidan bunyod etilgan oynavand ehrom bezab 

turipdi.Ehromning modernizm uslubida qurilgan 

an’anadorlarga yoqmagani aniq. Ular ushbu inshoot 

Uyg‘onish davri uslubi va mavqeiga putur yetkazadi 

deb hisoblar edilar.Gyote ushbu me’morchilik asarini 

to‘xtab qolgan musiqa deb atagan bo‘lsa, Peyning 

tanqidchilari uni sinf taxtasi bo‘ylab tirnoqning 

g‘ichirlashiga o‘xshatishgan. Ilg‘or fikrli kishilar esa 

bo‘yi yetmish fut keladigan shaffof ehromni qadimiy 

an’analar va zamonaviy tehnologiyalarning ajoyib 

uyg‘unligi, o‘tmish va bugungi kunni bog‘lab turuvchi 

ramziy halqa deb hisoblashgan.Ular ana shunday 

bezakka ega Luvr uchinchi ming yillikda o‘zining 

munosib o‘rniga ega bo‘lishiga ishonganlar.(“Da 

Vinchi siri”) 

In this SSI, the views of traditionalists and progressive 

thinkers on the pyramid are contradicted by 

antithesis. 

Highly processed foods – package goods made from 

high amounts of sugar and other simple 

carbohydrates -  drain us more than they fuel us. 

Rather than increasing your energy, these essentially 

“dead”foods cause your to spike  and then crash, 

leaving you tired and listless. On the other hand, 

whole foods like fruits, vegetables,nuts,and seeds 

typically keep you healthier and maintain your energy 

levels,empowering your body and mind and enabling 

you to perform at your best.(“Miracle morning 

millonaires”)  

Differentiation in SSIs is also involved in the 

expression of comparison. “Differentiation is the 

definition of a differential sign in two things — an 

event or a situation.” It is logically different from an 

antithesis event in that two opposite objects are 

compared in the antithesis, but these objects are 

distinguished on different  comparative parameters. 

[11,79]For example, 

“O‘rdakning uzri 

Poklarning poki  bo‘lib o‘rdak suvdan chiqdi, boshqa 

qushlar ichida u yaxshilik va poklik ramzi edi. Dedi: 

- Ikki jahonda  biron kishi mendan ko‘ra pokroq, 

pok yuzliroq emas. Har lahzada savob uchun g‘usl 

qilib, suv uzra joynamoz to‘shayman. Menga o‘xshab 

hech kim suv ustida tik turolmaydi. Karomatimga 

shubha qilolmaysiz. Qushlarning pok niyatli zohidi 

menman, joyim ham, to‘nim ham tozadir. Men 

jahonda suvsiz yasholmayman, chunki men 

tug‘ilganimdan suvdaman va suv mening 

borlig‘imdir...”(“Mantiqut-tayr (nariy bayoni)”).  



Volume 02 Issue 03-2022 18 

                 

 
 

   
  
 

American Journal Of Philological Sciences   
(ISSN – 2771-2273) 
VOLUME 02 ISSUE 04     Pages: 14-20 

SJIF IMPACT FACTOR  (2022: 5. 445)  
OCLC – 1121105677    METADATA IF – 5.963 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
Publisher: Oscar Publishing Services 

Servi 

In this Uzbek example, the duck distinguishes itself 

from other birds by certain features - purity and face. 

In this case, a differentiation phenomenon is 

observed. 

“Hanry Ford, Thomas A. Edison, and Harvey Firestone  

are men of great  achievement in their respective 

fields of endeavor. Of the three, Henry Ford is the 

most  powerful, with reference to economic power. 

So great is his power that he may have anything of a 

physical nature that he desires, or its equivalent. 

Millions of dollars, to him, are but playthings, no 

harder to acquire than the grains of sand with which 

the child builds and tunnels.”(“Law of success”)  

In this example, it is emphasized that Henry Ford is 

stronger than other businessmen. He is differentiated 

according his  strength  from others and by this 

process the phenomenon of differentiation was 

performed. 

Based on the above information, it is possible to 

distinguish two types of comparative SSI: 

1. SSI with contrasting content; 

2. SSI with differential comparative content. 

Sources point out that the  texts with the meaning 

similarity contain comparative elements such as 

comparee, standart of comparison, standart marker, 

and parameter.[4,97] Comparative elements are also 

present in SSIs with the contrasting meaning. 

However, the comparison components are not fully 

involved in SSIs with a contrasting content. In it, since 

two poles are compared on the basis of two opposite 

comparison signs, one of the objects that being 

compared cannot be compare or  the standard of 

comparison. The reason is that they are two 

independent opposing views, one of which cannot be 

the norm for the other. It is precisely from this 

situation that it is correct to name them as the objects 

of comparison by combining these components. In 

addition, this type of SSI involves two or more 

opposing parameters representing a comparative 

relative. For example, 

“Bir bor ekan, bir yo‘q ekan, bir chol bor ekan. Uning 

Zumrad ismli qizi bor ekan. Chol bir qizi bor ayolga 

uylanibdi. Qizining ismi Qimmat ekan. O‘gay ona 

Zumradni yoqtirmas ekan. Eng og‘ir ishlarni unga 

buyurar, qarg‘ab, urarkan. Uzining qizini juda yaxshi 

ko‘rarkan, doim uni maqtagani maqtagan ekan. 

Zumrad aqlli, chiroyli va muloyim  qiz ekan. Qimmat 

esa unga hich ham o‘xshamas ekan. U tantiq, qo‘pol 

va dangasa ekan. Kun bo‘yi ovqat yer, bo‘lar-

bo‘lmasga urisharkan. ”(“Qimmat va 

Zumrad”ertagidan) 

In this example, Zumrad's qualities such as 

intelligence, beauty, and gentleness are compared to 

that of Qimmat, who is elegant, rude, and lazy. In this 

case, the two objects are in conflict with each other 



Volume 02 Issue 03-2022 19 

                 

 
 

   
  
 

American Journal Of Philological Sciences   
(ISSN – 2771-2273) 
VOLUME 02 ISSUE 04     Pages: 14-20 

SJIF IMPACT FACTOR  (2022: 5. 445)  
OCLC – 1121105677    METADATA IF – 5.963 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
Publisher: Oscar Publishing Services 

Servi 

with independent Parameters.  A comparison  is 

emerged through the  standart marker such as esa. 

In contrast, in SSIs with differential comparative 

content, the elements of comparison are fully 

involved. The main reason for this is that the two 

objects are compared on the basis of certain 

comparative parameter. For example, 

“Boshlovchi kishi uchun qorong‘ilikda eshik bor, bu 

yorug‘likdan ko‘ra yaxshiroq. Qorong‘ilikda  u sahovat 

dengiziga  butkul cho‘madi va demak, vujudidan biror 

qismi dengizdan tashqarida qolmaydi. Zero, shu 

dengizdan  uning bir qismi tashqarida qolib, zohir 

bo‘lsa, shunga mag‘rurlanib, kufrga beriladi. Neki 

hasad va g‘azabdan senda bo‘lsa, buni piri komillar 

ko‘zi ko‘radi, sening o‘z ko‘zing buni ko‘rolmaydi. 

Senda ajdar, ilonlar bilan to‘liq gulhan bor, sen 

g‘aflatda qolib, ularni qo‘yib yuborgansan. Kecha- 

kunduz ularni parvarish etasan, ularning to‘ymas 

ishtahasi domidadirsan, fitnalariga giriftorsan. Agar 

sen botiningdagi palidliklarni ko‘rolganingda,  bunaqa 

g‘ofil o‘tirmas eding. ”(“Mantiqut-tayr”)  

In this SSI, compare  is represented by “eshik”, the 

standard of comparison is “yorug’lik”, the parameter 

of comparison is “yaxshi”, and the standart marker is 

represented by “-dan ko’ra” . 

CONCLUSION 

In short, the fact that the relation of comparison is 

also expressed through the unit of text is a peculiarly 

complex process, and the study of issues related to 

this process is important in linguistics. The 

comparative relation is a broad category is also 

proved by the fact that it is expressed through the 

linguistic units,  in particular, super syntactic integrity. 

REFERENCES 

1. Brinker K .Textstrukturanalyse.Halban 

d.Walter de gruyter:Berlin.-pp80-85 

2. Gulomov A., Asqarova M. Hozirgi o‘zbek 

adabiy tili. Sintaksis. –Toshkent: O‘qituvchi, 

1987;  

3. Hakimov M. O‘zbek ilmiy matning sintagmatik 

va pragmatik xususiyatlari. Filol.fan.nomz. 

diss… –Toshkent, 1993. 

4. Hudoyberganova D. Matnning antropotsentrik 

tadqiqi. – Toshkent:”Fan”.2013 

5. Jurin S , Kriskovic A.Texts and their usage 

through text linguistic and cognitive linguistic 

analysis.2017.-Rijeka.-21p  

6. Loseva L.M.Kak stroitsya 

tekst.Mokva.,1980.str.63 

7. Mamajonov A. Tekst lingvistikasi. –T.: 1989; 

8. Mamajonov A. Yirik sintaktik birliklar // O‘zbek 

tili va adabiyoti, 1980. –№5; Sverxfrazovoe 

yedinstvo kak sintaktiko-stilisticheskaya  

kategoriya // Sov. tyurkologiya. –Baku, 1983. –

№ 6 



Volume 02 Issue 03-2022 20 

                 

 
 

   
  
 

American Journal Of Philological Sciences   
(ISSN – 2771-2273) 
VOLUME 02 ISSUE 04     Pages: 14-20 

SJIF IMPACT FACTOR  (2022: 5. 445)  
OCLC – 1121105677    METADATA IF – 5.963 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
Publisher: Oscar Publishing Services 

Servi 

9. Mamajonov A., Abdupattoev M. Matn 

nazariyasi. –Farg‘ona, 2016. –114. 

10. Nosirova U. Poetik matnlarning pragmatik 

hususiyatlari.PHD disser.-Farg‘ona.2021.-B.31. 

11. Qurbonova M., Yo‘ldoshev M. Matn 

tilshunosligi. –Toshkent: “Universitet” 

nashriyoti, 2014. 

12. Shomaqsudov A., Rasulov I., Qo‘ng‘urov R., 

Rustamov H. O‘zbek tili  stilistikasi. Toshkent: 

O‘qituvchi, 1983.  –B. 147.  

13. Turniyozov N. Matn lingvistikasi (ma’ruzalar 

matni). –Samarqand, 2004. 

 

 

 

 


