STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS OF THEONYMUS USED IN TURKIC LANGUAGES

Аннотация

This article presents a structural analysis of theonyms historically used in the Uzbek language and throughout Turkic languages, such as Bayat//Bayot, Ugan//Ugon, and Tangri, as well as borrowed theonyms like Alloh and Parvardigor. It explains the simple and compound structures ofbothusual and occasional (figurative) theonyms with illustrativeexamples. Keywords:Bayat//Bayot, Ugan//Ugon, Tangri, Alloh, Parvardigor, beauty, peri, laylivash. The theonyms Bayat//Bayot, Ugan//Ugon, and Tangri, historically used in Uzbek and other Turkic languages, along with borrowed theonyms Alloh and Parvardigor, are structurally simple. Even today, Ega and Tangri, belonging to the native lexicon, and borrowed forms like Allohand Parvardigor remain structurally simpletheonyms. Occasional theonyms, which are based on figurative usage, are structurally categorized as eithersimpleorcompound. Theonyms formed from simple words are divided into single-base (simple root) and double-base (simple derived) forms. Single-base theonyms consist of one morpheme, while double-base theonyms consist of a root and affixal morphemes. However, not all figuratively used theonyms in speech possess derivational potential. For example, words like oy (moon), tabib (healer), hakim (sage), habib (beloved), sulton, ayyor (cunning), oshik (lover), and ma’shuq(beloved) are not derivational bases. Mythonyms that convey the meaning of "creator" such as pari (fairy), hur (houris), and malak (angel) are considered active theonyms with derivational potential. "Jununichra majnun emas, eypari, Yo‘lingda buoshuftaxolingcha xo‘b." Munis "To ul pariliqo mangadur iltifotsiz, Bo‘ldimnechukki telba qaroru sabotsiz." Ogahiy "Ul parivash ishqidin,nosiq, meni man’etmakim, Telbalik vaqtiyu oshiqlik zamonidurmanga." Navoiy In the first couplet, pari serves as a figurative simple root noun representing the Creator. In the following verses, pariliqo and parivash are simple derived forms expressing attributes such as "like a fairy" or "fairy-like," functioning as adjectival epithets for the concept of Creator, even though theword Yaratguvchi (Creator) isnot explicitly used. page1270 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE ISSN:2692-5206,ImpactFactor:12,23 AmericanAcademicpublishers,volume05,issue05,2025 Journal: https://www.academicpublishers.org/journals/index.php/ijai The word Parizod denotes origin from the fairy lineage, implying descent from beauty, thus becoming aspeech-based theonym: "Ul husnujamoling o‘tiMashrabga tushubdur, Parvonasifat kuydi, parizod, eshigingda." Mashrab The root pari symbolizes beauty and functions as a base for word formation, modifying and linkingto the implied Creator. It also functions as an epithet for other figurative theonyms, used inphrases such as pari yuz (fairy face), ruxsor(cheek), and chehra(face): "Ey pari yuzluk begim, jonlarfido bo‘lsunsanga, Dunyoda husni otibor erkan, baqo bo‘lsun sanga." Lutfiy Similarly, themythonym hur acts as a derivational base: "Ey hurvashki, pokdurasru senga sirisht, Rang aylar iktisob yuzungdin guli bihisht." Munis Propernames with symbolic meanings also functionas speech-based theonyms, such as Layli: "Ayo laylivashim, birg‘amzayu noz birlao‘ldurding, Firoqing dashtidaMajnun ilahamxonayig‘larman." Mashrab Here, laylivash is a derived word made of layli (root) and -vash (affix), functioning as a figurativename fortheCreator. Words like barno, zebo, nigor (beauty-related terms) lack derivational potential, functioning only as epithets. Dilbar, dilrabo, and nozanin also lack this capacity, while moh and layli serve as derivational bases: "Yuz ochibkelgil, ey mahvash, quyosh yanglig‘xirom aylab, Boshimg‘asoldi savdo firqating subhimnishomaylab." Ogahiy In this couplet, moh (moon) functions as an attributive component for the Creator, and its compound with-liqo further emphasizesbeauty: "Sen yaqo chek otlanib, ag‘yor ila, ey mahliqo, Men yiroqdin rashk ilgi birlayirtarmen yaqo." Munis page1271 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE ISSN:2692-5206,ImpactFactor:12,23 AmericanAcademicpublishers,volume05,issue05,2025 Journal: https://www.academicpublishers.org/journals/index.php/ijai Words conveying character traits like ayyor, sho‘x, makkor may imply the Creator but lack derivational function. Theword mehribon (kind)has derivational potential: "Jonimichra otashimehring bo‘lubdurshu’la zan, Ko‘rguzub birmehr, ey nomehribon, kelmasmusen." Munis Here, the prefix no- forms an antonym without changing the word class. In derived theonyms, the root itself often implies the Creator concept independently. In some cases, the root alone does not denote a theonym but functions as a base for new formations, such as madad (aid) forming madadkor(helper): "Madad qilg‘il, madakorim." Mashrab Similarly, nomdor(famous, name-bearing)may express theCreator: "...Jumlashohlarni ulug‘i,nomdorim kelsano, Dilnizangorin ochurg‘aoinaro‘kelmadi." Mashrab Words like sitamgar, zulmgar (oppressor) contain root and affix compo