ANALYSIS OF CONDITIONAL SENTENCE STRUCTURES IN LINGUISTICS

Аннотация

This paper examines the non-marked case of conditional sentences, focusing on the structure "if A, B" and its various interpretations. Unlike explicitly marked conditionals, the non- marked case requires contextual inference to determine the type of logical connection between antecedent and consequent. Through transformation and syntactic modifications, we analyze necessary, sufficient, and insufficient conditionals, highlighting their distinctive features. Additionally, we explore how Uzbek linguistic structures express conditional and subjunctive moods, emphasizing the role of affixes such as -sa and modal constructions like "qani endi" and "koshki." The study illustrates how different languages manage conditionals and subjunctive expressions,underscoring both syntacticand semanticchallenges in formalizing thesestructures. Keywords: stylistic figure, chiasmus, French language, Uzbek language, comparative analysis, linguistics, rhetorical devices, literary language, stylistics, analysis. We designate the non-marked case the linguistic form of the conditional “if A, B”. The difference with theprevious forms isthat the syntacticmarker, which compounds theconnective, is inadequate in isolation to determine the type of connection exemplified in the sentence. So, at first sight, the meaning of the conditional may seem ambiguous. In general, the context of utterance of the sentence or the semantic comprehension of the relations of the antecedent and the consequent permit recognition of the connection. Here, we will base our analysis only on the transformation of the conditional sentence in the non-marked case into the same conditional sentence with additional syntactic markers. But we will see that this strategy is not always sufficient. In the most complex cases, we also need to add some piece of information which is presupposed and usually known by the listeners or readers. This information may come from general knowledge of the world or be part of the information learned from the context (for instance by the previous elements of the discussion). However, we will put forward no real technical argument. We address here the comprehension and judgment of the reader who can appreciate by himself if the transformation that we propose changes wrongly or not at all the meaning of the sentence. Some subtleties may be lost, but our goal here is to bring to light and exemplify the type of connection. Sometimes, the resulting sentence is not completely grammatically correct, but at least we can always understand it, so a counter-argument in this vein is not really important. We will first examine the case of the necessary connection, then the sufficient connection and finally theinsufficient connection. Examples concerning a necessary connection expressed by an “if A, B” are scarce. But we can give forinstance thefollowing example: We know that the speaker likes to impress people by showing off that he is very rich. This person says: www.wordlyknowledge.uz ILMIYMETODIK JURNAL JOURNAL OFIQRO –ЖУРНАЛ ИҚРО –IQRO JURNALI –volume 14,issue02,2025 ISSN:2181-4341, IMPACT FACTOR( RESEARCH BIB )–7,245,SJIF–5,431 (1) Iwill buythiswatch, ifittakes all themoney inmy wallet. (2) Iwill buythiswatch, only ifittakes all themoneyin my wallet. This possibility seems to exist only when there is an inversion of the antecedent and the consequent. The standard way would be to use an “only if” conditional but when we use a marked-case, the antecedent and consequent can be put in the normal order. So, to exemplify a necessary connection, the non-marked case also needs this inversion. This example is not really convincing to some people but with the right intonation of voice, I think that the listener can understand it in theintended way. It may not an obligatory interpretation of the sentence, but with the context in mind, some hearers dounderstand it likeahidden“only if” conditional. I agree with the conception which says that “A only if B” is equivalent to “if A, then B”. So, we won’t have to investigate separately the logical properties of “only if” in the second part of the thesis. The examples concerning asufficient connection represent the majority oftheinstances ofthe “if A, B” form. The principal reason of this phenomenon is that we employ this type of connection more often than the others. We have also the tendency, especially in spoken language, to try to economize on the length of the sentence while conveying the same amount of information. So, it isnatural to drop the“then” and to usethe non-marked case. Here isan example: (3) If it is sunny, Iwillgo to thebeach. (4) If it is sunny, then Iwill go tothebeach. But we can find more interesting uses. One is the conditional with a trivially true antecedent. Because the antecedent is sufficient to deduce theconsequent, the meaning is that the consequent is also considered as true. So, we employ this type of conditional for a rhetorical effect. Here is oneexample: (5) If there is onething I