Senior
lecturer, Kosimova N.F.
Bukhara State
University, Uzbekistan
ABOUT THE ASYMMETRY IN LANGUAGE
AND SOME REASONS FOR ITS OCCURENCE
Such concepts as
orderliness, the regularity, uniformity of subjects and phenomena of the
objective world in linguistics are generalized in one concept – the concept of
symmetry. The given concept is identical with such concepts as law, preservation,
and invariability. Symmetry is characterized with the stability and balance of a state. The concept
which is opposite to the
symmetry is asymmetry. Asymmetry is a
reflection of a variety, infringement of orderliness and regularity. This is
such a phenomenon where the balance and stability of components of the whole
are broken. S.O.Kartsevsky was the
first among researchers of language to use the terms symmetry and asymmetry in
relation to the language phenomena in his article «About asymmetric dualism of
a linguistic sign» (1929). His attention has been directed on a parity
"polysemy/synonymy" of the language phenomena, arising as result of a
divergence between the plan of expression and the content plan. In this
connection, S.O.Kartsevsky marks, “signifier and signified are in asymmetric relationship. Having formed a pair,
they are in a condition of unstable balance. Due to this phenomenon, asymmetric dualism of the sign a
language can develop” [5, 90].
As it is already
mentioned symmetry and asymmetry in the language occur in a condition of
unstable balance. Constant movement from one phenomenon to another and back is
mainly observed. Symmetry creates convenience with its uniformity. It is
favorably conditioned by alignment according to analogy which leads to the
elimination of asymmetric forms. As a rule, symmetric forms are more motivated,
they are easier perceived, used and force out unmotivated asymmetric forms
which carry not a classifying but an individualizing character. Despite it,
however, symmetry in some particular cases can give way to asymmetry.
In each living language
there are certain means for indemnification of absent symmetric forms. For
example, the absent gerundial form of the verb ïèñàòü (to write) in the Russian language can be compensated with the
prepositional construction âî âðåìÿ ïèñüìà (while writing) or with a gerundial form of a synonymic or adjacent
verb in meaning: ñî÷èíÿÿ ïèñüìî (ñomposing the letter), ñîñòàâëÿÿ äîêóìåíò (making the document) instead of ïèøà ïèñüìî, äîêóìåíò [3, 125].
As V.G.Gak states, asymmetry is the eternal and universal
phenomenon, and therefore it is necessary to concern it not as an
"illness" of a language, not as a language lack as dialogue tools,
but as the major component of a
language system connected with the device and functioning of the language. Asymmetry is first of all
explained not by the speakers’
limiting the quantity of elements of the plan of
expression and the content plan, without having possibility or desire to keep
their big number in memory. According
to V.G.Gak, the main reason the
occurrence of the asymmetry is that
people operate with the concepts with
indistinct borders, though with an accurate kernel or core. It is possible to
express any object in the verbal form, even such objects for which in the
language there are no special names. However, this major problem of
communication is realized by an illegibility of borders of the value of the
language elements, i.e. words, grammatical forms [3, 123-124].
The homonymy is the sharp display of asymmetry, but it at
the same time represents the display of invariability in respect of expression.
In the history of linguistics the cases of elimination of a homonymy were often
observed, but along with it the cases of homonymization, not caused by the
actions of phonetic laws were also observed. For example, the technical
language gives an abundance of deliberately entered homonyms; so in radio
engineering various devices receive names CIRE, CID, TAM-TAM. Here invariant
forms prevail over the distinction in the meaning. Synonymy, on the contrary,
is a domination of unity of the maintenance over distinctions of forms. The
opinion is sometimes expressed that the occurrence of such asymmetry as a
polysemy is caused by inability of a human brain to acquire too many signs: a
special word for each concept. But the person without special complexity
acquires also two-three languages, that is, he/she is capable to remember several signs for the same concept.
The “inescapability” of
asymmetry representing a motive power of
the language development, is based, first of all, on the feature of
thinking and psychology of the person. In this connection, V.V.Ivanov considers
that propensity of the person to the asymmetry is explained by the asymmetry of
cerebral hemispheres[4, 56].
V.N.Bgashev states that
symmetry at a morphological level is considered as «a certain regularity of the
language system structure, repeatability of the general principles of this
structure in its separate parts and subsystems». Asymmetry represents
«infringement of steadiness of the language system, caused by change and
development of the language and causing in
its turn the reorganization of the whole system»[1, 32].
According to V.G.Gak,
at each level and a language site it is necessary to distinguish kernel,
typical, basic elements and peripheral ones. The parity of a kernel (centre)
↔periphery is shown in the structural, semantic and functional aspects
[2, 25]. In the structural aspect the kernel
is the dominating models of word
change, a combination of words; and the periphery is the deviation from these
models. So, for example, in the English language the formation of the plural by adding the ending -s
concerns a kernel of a language system, the formations of the type man - men, child - children, sheep -
sheep belong to its periphery. In
the semantic aspect the center is the typical forms and meanings, while the
periphery is intermediate forms and
meanings. Head elements possess the basic features of the given category,
but peripheral ones occupy an
intermediate position between this
category and others. For example, in
the English language among forms of a verb the personal form is central,
and impersonal one (the infinitive, a participle, a gerund) concerns the periphery and combines the verb properties with the properties of other parts
of speech. In the functional aspect the center is common and generally accepted
forms. Periphery consists of less common and
not frequent phenomena. In this sense in the system of tenses of the
English language it is reasonable to include the Future Perfect Continuous, the
Future Perfect Continuous in the Past to the
periphery.
Comparing the languages
in the functioning aspect makes it
obvious that the asymmetry is shown
where the speech conformities are not
similar with the conformities of the system
and the given position is visually opened in the process of translation.
«Any deviation from the system
conformity in translation concerns the asymmetric phenomena» [3, 112]. So, for
example, the future time exists in all languages, but to the Russian form of
the future time in English texts quite often correspond present forms (Present
Indefinite, Present Continuous). For example: Îí
óåäåò
â Ëîíäîí
çàâòðà óòðîì. He is leaving for London tomorrow morning (instead
of “he will leave”).
The language evolution
moves not only towards establishing the
symmetry, but also in an asymmetry direction. So, for example, in the language
constant differentiation of word meanings and forms, a reduction of a polysemy
and other similar phenomena creating symmetry is observed. However, along with
it the wide variation of means of expression, occurrence of new homonyms,
analytical designs and ways of expression and other facts of asymmetry of a
language system are fixed. Thus, in a language, as well as in other areas of
the nature and society the concept of asymmetry of a system coincides with the concept of presence of certain
unsystematic phenomena in the system.
So, the philosophical categories of symmetry and
asymmetry represent the dialectic unity
owing to what in a science about a language they are studied in their unity and
interdependence. Such an approach to the consideration of these two phenomena
of the language regularities
promotes the deeper knowledge of
the language structure, gives the chance to explain the dynamic stability of the given structure and its readiness
for changes.
LITERATURE USED:
1. Bgashev V. N. Symmetry and
Asymmetry Of the Language System. Perfection of training in the conditions of
higher school reorganisation (Materials of seminar-meeting on foreign languages
of high schools of Central Asia and Kazakhstan). Tadjikistan, Dushanbe, 1990.
2. Gak V.G. Language
Transformations. Ìoscow, 1998.
3. Gak V.G The Theoretical Grammar of the French
Language. Ìoscow, 2000.
4. Ivanov V.V. Asymmetry Of a
Brain and Sign Systems. Ìoscow, 1978.
5. Kartsevsky Ñ.Î. About the Asymmetric Dualism of a Linguistic Sign// The History
of Linguistics of
the XIX-XX th centuries in Sketches and Extractions. Compiled by
V.A.Zvegintsev. Part 2. Ìoscow, 1965.