SYMMETRIC AND ASYMMETRIC RELATIONS IN THE PERCEPTION OF LANGUAGES WITH DIFFERENT STRUCTURES
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/Keywords:
linguistic symmetry, linguistic asymmetry, language perception, structurally different languages, linguistic typology, language transfer, interference, comparative linguistics, translation.Abstract
This article examines symmetric and asymmetric relations in the perception of languages belonging to different structural and typological systems. Symmetric relations are manifested through similar semantic functions, universal communicative purposes, equivalent sentence roles, and partially corresponding grammatical categories. Asymmetric relations arise when languages use different lexical, morphological, syntactic, and pragmatic means to represent the same concept or communicative intention. The study is based on a comparative analysis of English, Uzbek, and Russian. These languages differ in their morphological organization, dominant word order, case systems, grammatical gender, article usage, and means of expressing definiteness, politeness, tense, and aspect. The findings indicate that structural symmetry facilitates comprehension and positive language transfer, while asymmetry may cause interference, non-standard constructions, semantic loss, and translation difficulties. However, linguistic asymmetry is not regarded merely as a barrier. It reflects the distinctive cognitive, cultural, and communicative characteristics of each language. The article concludes that the systematic comparison of symmetric and asymmetric relations is important for foreign-language teaching, translation practice, comparative linguistics, and intercultural communication.
References
1. Comrie, B. (1989). Language Universals and Linguistic Typology: Syntax and Morphology (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
2. Corbett, G. G. (1991). Gender. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
3. Croft, W. (2003). Typology and Universals (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
4. Evans, N., & Levinson, S. C. (2009). The myth of language universals: Language diversity and its importance for cognitive science. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 32(5), 429–448.
5. Greenberg, J. H. (Ed.). (1966). Universals of Language (2nd ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
6. Gumperz, J. J., & Levinson, S. C. (Eds.). (1996). Rethinking Linguistic Relativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
7. Jakobson, R. (1959). On linguistic aspects of translation. In R. A. Brower (Ed.), On Translation (pp. 232–239). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
8. Odlin, T. (1989). Language Transfer: Cross-Linguistic Influence in Language Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
9. Slobin, D. I. (1996). From “thought and language” to “thinking for speaking.” In J. J. Gumperz and S. C. Levinson (Eds.), Rethinking Linguistic Relativity (pp. 70–96). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
10. Talmy, L. (2000). Toward a Cognitive Semantics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
11. Whorf, B. L. (1956). Language, Thought, and Reality: Selected Writings of Benjamin Lee Whorf. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
12. Wierzbicka, A. (1996). Semantics: Primes and Universals. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
