SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES IN SENTENCE STRUCTURE IN ALTAIC LANGUAGES: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF UZBEK, KOREAN, AND JAPANESE

Аннотация

This article explores the syntactic parallels and divergences among three prominent Altaic languages: Uzbek, Korean, and Japanese. Drawing on historical linguistics and structural typology, the study examines sentence order, subject-verb agreement, particle use, and honorific constructions. While the three languages share SOV (subject-object-verb) structure and agglutinative morphology, their grammar systems also display distinct features shaped by geography, contact, and cultural evolution. This comparative approach contributes to understanding how typologically similar languages evolved under different sociolinguistic conditions. This study provides a comprehensive syntactic comparison of three languages historically associated with the Altaic family: Uzbek (Turkic branch), Korean (isolate with Altaic features), and Japanese (Japonic with Altaic influences). Through contrastive analysis of sentence structure, morphological typology, and grammatical particles, the research identifies both shared features (SOV word order, agglutination) and divergent patterns (case marking, honorific systems). The findings challenge traditional Altaic classifications while revealing meaningful syntactic parallels that facilitate interlinguistic comprehension. Data is drawn from nativespeaker interviews, corpus analysis, andhistorical texts. Keywords: Altaic languages, Uzbek, Korean, Japanese, syntax, sentence structure, agglutination, SOV order, language typology, Altaic languages, comparative syntax, Uzbek grammar, Korean sentence structure, Japanese linguistics, agglutinativelanguages. The classification of the Altaic language family has been debated in linguistic scholarship, yet the syntactic commonalities among Turkic, Koreanic, and Japonic languages are undeniable. Uzbek, Korean, and Japanese exhibit notable parallels in sentence structure, particularly in their subject-object-verb (SOV) order, agglutinative morphology, and postpositional particles. However, deeper syntactic layers reveal important distinctions resulting from historical isolation, influence from neighboring language families, and independent grammatical evolution. This article provides a comparative analysis of these three languages to better understand theirtypological similarities and functional divergences. TheAltaicHypothesis Revisited The contested Altaic language family—traditionally comprising Turkic, Mongolic, Tungusic, Koreanic, and Japonic languages—remains a subject of debate [Georg et al., 1999: 15]. This studyexamines core syntacticfeatures across three representativelanguages: page1201 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE ISSN:2692-5206,ImpactFactor:12,23 AmericanAcademicpublishers,volume05,issue06,2025 Journal: https://www.academicpublishers.org/journals/index.php/ijai Language Classification Speakers Script Uzbek Turkic 36M Latin/Cyrillic Korean Koreanic(isolate) 82M Hangul Japanese Japonic 125M Kanji+Kana Recent phylogenetic studies suggest only 28% of proposed Altaic cognates are verifiable [Robbeets, 2020: 112], making syntacticcomparison particularly valuable. Word OrderandBasicSentence Structure Allthree languages followtheSOVsentence structure: Uzbek:Men kitob o‘qiyman ("I read abook") Korean:나는책을읽는다(Na-neun chaek-eul ilneunda) Japanese: 私は本を読む(Watashiwa honoyomu) This syntactic parallelism suggests a common typological foundation. However, variation exists in the use of particles and the flexibility of word order. Korean and Japanese are highly reliant on particles to indicate grammatical roles, whereas Uzbek uses case suffixes more rigidly [Fisher2003,p.84]. CoreStructural Similarities 1.1.WordOrder Typology Allthree languages exhibit rigid SOV(Subject-Object-Verb) structure: Uzbek:Men kitob o‘qidim(I bookread) [Boeschoten, 1998:45] Korean:나는책을읽었다(Na-neun chaek-eul ilg-eotda)[Sohn, 1999:89] Japanese: 私は本を読んだ(Watashiwa honoyonda) [Kuno,1973: 33] Exception: Japanese allows limited OSVintopicalization [Hinds, 1986: 77]. 1.2.AgglutinativeMorphology Uzbek:o‘qi-gan-man (read-PAST-1SG) Korean:읽-었-습니다(ilk-eoss-seubnida) (read-PAST-FORMAL) page1202 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE ISSN:2692-5206,ImpactFactor:12,23 AmericanAcademicpublishers,volume05,issue06,2025 Journal: https://www.academicpublishers.org/journals/index.php/ijai Japanese: 読ん-で-い-ます(yon-de-i-masu)(read-CONT-PROG-POLITE) Commonality: Suffix stacking withclear morphemeboundaries [Comrie, 1981: 134]. 2.Key Divergences 2.1.CaseMarking Systems Feature Uzbek Korean Japanese Nominative -∅ (null) -가/-이 -は/-が Accusative -ni -을/-를 -を Dative -ga -에게/-한테 -に Korean shows dual case markers depending on consonant endings [Lee, 2003: 56], while Japanese employs topicmarker waalongside grammatical cases [Shibatani,1990: 112]. 2.2. Honorifics Implementation Uzbek:Limited lexical substitutions (e.g., sizvs sen) Korean:7-tier verb conjugation system [Brown, 2015: 201] Japanese: Special honorificverbs (kudasaru vs morau) 2.3.Negation Strategies Uzbek:Pre-verbal em