Why Languages Never Stand Still
Nega tillar hech qachon bir joyda turmaydi
Sarlavha va pastdagi so‘zlarga qarang. Matn nima haqida bo‘lishi mumkin? Bir daqiqa o‘ylab ko‘ring — bu miyani o‘qishga tayyorlaydi.
Tillar qanday va nima uchun o‘zgarishi, so‘zlarning ma’no o‘zgarishi va “to‘g‘ri til” haqidagi bahslar.
Kalit so‘zlar
Bu so‘zlar matnda uchraydi va matnda ajratib ko‘rsatiladi. Bosing — talaffuzini eshitasiz.
⏱ O‘qish boshlanganda vaqt o‘lchanadi — oxirida tezligingizni ko‘rasiz.
👆 Istalgan so‘zni bosing — tarjimasi yoki lug‘atga havola chiqadi.
Every generation seems convinced that its language is being ruined by the young. In the eighteenth century, the writer Jonathan Swift complained about the “corruption” of English and proposed an academy to fix the language permanently. Today, similar complaints are directed at text messaging, social media and the influx of words from other languages. Yet the history of every language suggests that change is not a sign of decay but a fundamental property of living languages, as natural as the growth of a tree.
Har bir avlod o‘z tili yoshlar tomonidan buzilayotganiga ishonganga o‘xshaydi. XVIII asrda yozuvchi Jonatan Svift ingliz tilining “buzilishi”dan shikoyat qilib, tilni doimiy ravishda mustahkamlash uchun akademiya taklif qilgan. Bugun shunga o‘xshash shikoyatlar matnli xabarlar, ijtimoiy tarmoqlar va boshqa tillardan so‘zlarning oqib kelishiga qaratilgan. Biroq har bir tilning tarixi o‘zgarish tanazzul belgisi emas, balki daraxtning o‘sishi kabi tabiiy bo‘lgan jonli tillarning asosiy xususiyati ekanini ko‘rsatadi.
The scale of change over long periods can be astonishing. The opening line of the Old English poem “Beowulf”, composed more than a thousand years ago, begins with the word “Hwæt” and is entirely incomprehensible to modern English speakers without special study. Even Shakespeare, writing just over four hundred years ago, used many words in senses that have since shifted, and his pronunciation would sound strange to us. Between roughly 1400 and 1700, English underwent what linguists call the Great Vowel Shift, a series of changes in the pronunciation of long vowels that explains why English spelling, which was largely fixed before the shift was complete, so often fails to match modern pronunciation.
Uzoq davrlardagi o‘zgarishlar ko‘lami hayratlanarli bo‘lishi mumkin. Ming yildan ko‘proq vaqt oldin yaratilgan qadimgi ingliz tilidagi “Beovulf” dostonining birinchi satri “Hwæt” so‘zi bilan boshlanadi va maxsus o‘rganmasdan zamonaviy ingliz tilida so‘zlashuvchilar uchun mutlaqo tushunarsiz. Hatto atigi to‘rt yuz yil oldin yozgan Shekspir ham o‘shandan beri ma’nosi o‘zgargan ko‘plab so‘zlarni ishlatgan va uning talaffuzi bizga g‘alati eshitilardi. Taxminan 1400 va 1700-yillar oralig‘ida ingliz tili tilshunoslar Buyuk unlilar siljishi deb ataydigan jarayonni boshdan kechirgan — bu uzun unlilar talaffuzidagi o‘zgarishlar seriyasi bo‘lib, siljish tugashidan oldin asosan qotib qolgan ingliz imlosi nega zamonaviy talaffuzga ko‘pincha mos kelmasligini tushuntiradi.
The meanings of words drift too, often in unexpected directions. “Nice” comes from a Latin word meaning “ignorant” and for centuries meant “foolish” or “fussy” before acquiring its current positive sense. “Silly” originally meant “blessed” or “happy”. “Awful” once meant “inspiring awe” and could describe something magnificent. Such shifts follow recognisable patterns: words may become broader or narrower in meaning, more positive or more negative, and abstract senses frequently develop from concrete ones.
So‘zlarning ma’nolari ham ko‘pincha kutilmagan yo‘nalishlarda siljiydi. “Nice” so‘zi “johil” degan ma’noni bildiruvchi lotincha so‘zdan kelib chiqqan va hozirgi ijobiy ma’nosini olishdan oldin asrlar davomida “ahmoq” yoki “injiq” degan ma’noni anglatgan. “Silly” dastlab “muborak” yoki “baxtli” degan ma’noni bildirgan. “Awful” bir vaqtlar “hayrat uyg‘otuvchi” degan ma’noni anglatgan va ulug‘vor narsani tasvirlashi mumkin edi. Bunday siljishlar taniqli qonuniyatlarga amal qiladi: so‘zlar ma’nosi kengroq yoki torroq, ijobiyroq yoki salbiyroq bo‘lishi mumkin va mavhum ma’nolar ko‘pincha aniq ma’nolardan rivojlanadi.
Why do languages change? There is no single cause. Contact between communities is one of the most powerful forces: English absorbed thousands of words from French after the Norman Conquest of 1066, and Uzbek bears the marks of centuries of contact with Persian and Arabic, and more recently Russian and English. Social factors matter too. Young people often adopt new forms partly to mark their identity, and some of these innovations spread through the wider community as the young grow older. Simple efficiency also plays a role: frequently used phrases tend to be shortened over time, as when “going to” becomes “gonna” in casual speech.
Nega tillar o‘zgaradi? Yagona sabab yo‘q. Jamoalar o‘rtasidagi aloqa eng kuchli omillardan biri: ingliz tili 1066-yilgi normannlar istilosidan keyin frantsuz tilidan minglab so‘zlarni o‘zlashtirgan, o‘zbek tili esa fors va arab, so‘nggi davrda esa rus va ingliz tillari bilan asrlar davomidagi aloqalar izlarini olib yuradi. Ijtimoiy omillar ham muhim. Yoshlar ko‘pincha yangi shakllarni qisman o‘z o‘zligini belgilash uchun qabul qiladi va bu yangiliklarning ba’zilari yoshlar ulg‘aygan sari kengroq jamoaga tarqaladi. Oddiy samaradorlik ham rol o‘ynaydi: tez-tez ishlatiladigan iboralar vaqt o‘tishi bilan qisqarishga moyil, masalan, so‘zlashuvda “going to” “gonna”ga aylanganidek.
None of this means that “anything goes”. Linguists distinguish between a descriptive approach, which studies how people actually speak and write, and a prescriptive approach, which lays down rules about how they should. Both have their place. Standard forms of a language are valuable for communication across regions and social groups, in education, law and publishing, and learners of a language, including learners of English, need to master them. The problem arises when prescriptive rules are mistaken for eternal truths, and when non-standard varieties, which follow their own consistent grammatical patterns, are dismissed as simply “wrong” or used to judge the intelligence of their speakers.
Bularning hech biri “hamma narsa mumkin” degani emas. Tilshunoslar odamlar haqiqatda qanday gapirishi va yozishini o‘rganadigan tavsifiy yondashuvni ular qanday gapirishi kerakligi haqida qoidalar belgilaydigan me’yoriy yondashuvdan farqlashadi. Ikkalasining ham o‘z o‘rni bor. Tilning standart shakllari mintaqalar va ijtimoiy guruhlar o‘rtasida muloqot uchun, ta’lim, huquq va nashriyotda qimmatli va til o‘rganuvchilar, jumladan ingliz tilini o‘rganuvchilar ularni egallashlari kerak. Muammo me’yoriy qoidalar abadiy haqiqat deb adashtirilganda va o‘zining izchil grammatik qonuniyatlariga amal qiladigan nostandart variantlar shunchaki “noto‘g‘ri” deb rad etilganda yoki ularda so‘zlashuvchilarning aql-zakovatini baholash uchun ishlatilganda yuzaga keladi.
Some prescriptive rules, moreover, have surprisingly shallow roots. The prohibition on ending an English sentence with a preposition, for instance, appears to have been popularised in the seventeenth century by writers who believed English should imitate Latin, in which such constructions are impossible. Great writers before and since have ignored it freely.
Bundan tashqari, ba’zi me’yoriy qoidalarning ildizlari ajablanarli darajada sayoz. Masalan, ingliz tilidagi gapni predlog bilan tugatishni taqiqlash XVII asrda ingliz tili lotin tiliga taqlid qilishi kerak deb hisoblagan yozuvchilar tomonidan ommalashtirilganga o‘xshaydi, lotin tilida esa bunday tuzilmalar imkonsiz. Undan oldin ham, keyin ham buyuk yozuvchilar uni bemalol e’tiborsiz qoldirishgan.
For language learners, understanding change can be liberating. The English you learn today is not a fixed monument but a snapshot of a moving river. The words that seem new and strange now may be standard in twenty years, and some of today’s rules will no doubt look as quaint to future speakers as Swift’s anxieties look to us.
Til o‘rganuvchilar uchun o‘zgarishni tushunish ozod qiluvchi bo‘lishi mumkin. Bugun o‘rganayotgan ingliz tilingiz qotib qolgan yodgorlik emas, balki oqayotgan daryoning bir lahzalik surati. Hozir yangi va g‘alati tuyulayotgan so‘zlar yigirma yildan keyin standart bo‘lishi mumkin va bugungi qoidalarning ba’zilari kelajak so‘zlovchilariga, shubhasiz, Sviftning xavotirlari bizga qanday g‘aroyib ko‘rinsa, shunday g‘aroyib ko‘rinadi.
Tushundingizmi?
Javob topa olmasangiz, «O‘qish» bosqichiga qaytib, matnga qarang — bu ham mashq.
-
Asosiy g‘oya
1 What is the main idea of the article?
-
2 What does the Great Vowel Shift help to explain?
-
3 What did “silly” originally mean?
-
4 Which is NOT mentioned as a cause of language change?
-
5 What is the origin of the rule against ending sentences with a preposition, according to the article?
True / False / Not Given
True — matnda aynan shunday deyilgan. False — matn aksini aytadi. Not Given — matnda bu haqda ma’lumot yo‘q.
-
1 “Nice” comes from a Latin word meaning “ignorant”.
-
2 Jonathan Swift proposed an academy to fix the English language.
-
3 Shakespeare’s pronunciation would sound strange to modern listeners.
-
4 English took thousands of words from French after 1066.
-
5 The writer argues that standard forms of language have no value.
-
6 Uzbek has been influenced by Persian and Arabic.
-
7 Modern English speakers can easily understand “Beowulf” without study.
-
8 “Awful” has always had a negative meaning.
-
9 The Great Vowel Shift also affected French.
-
10 Most new English words today come from Uzbek.
-
11 According to the article, non-standard varieties follow consistent grammatical patterns.
-
12 Swift himself ended sentences with prepositions.
So‘zni ma’nosi bilan juftlang
Chapdan so‘zni, o‘ngdan uning ma’nosini tanlang. Hammasi juftlansa, natija chiqadi.