Linguistic Nuances of Transport Abbreviations in the English

Language in Comparison with the Uzbek Language

Oybek S. Axmedov

and Jakhongir A. Masharipov

Uzbekistan State World Languages University, Tashkent, Uzbekistan

Urgench State University, Urgench, Uzbekistan

Keywords: English Language, Uzbek language, Terminological System, Transport Terms, Abbreviations, Translation

Methods.

Abstract: Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to investigate linguistic peculiarities of transport abbreviations in

English and Uzbek languages as well as to show the main mediums of translating those terms from English

into Uzbek. Design/methodology/approach: The authors use the mediums of comparative and statistical

analysis for finding which methods of translation are common in presenting transport related abbreviations

and exploring which method is dominant. The research objects are commonly used transport related

abbreviations based on transport related dissertations and dictionaries. Findings: From our research followings

are found: a) both in English and Uzbek three-component abbreviations are the most common than others; b)

among four common methods of translating terms semi-calque method is used most (42%), the next common

medium is meaning interpretation (28%); c) 44% of English abbreviations are not considered as abbreviations

in Uzbek and they are simply presented as one or multi component terms; d) regarding syntagmatic

relationship, nominative case is common in the English language, while in Uzbek the indicator of genitive

case is also found. Originality/value: the article conducts a comprehensive study of the previously unexplored

transport terminological system of the English language in comparison with the Uzbek language, in which

common component abbreviations are found and their translation methods are analysed with relevant

instances.

1 INTRODUCTION

Terminology systems represent a vital role in the

process of understanding the world. As a result of

innovations and advancements happening in every

sphere of industry, particularly in transport domain,

terms related to this field are gaining significance as

they have an influence in the spread of new

knowledge in professional as well as in other spheres.

Transport terminology systems of the English

language have been studied by many linguists so far.

However, the peculiarities and intricacies of transport

abbreviations have not been studied thoroughly. The

choice of Uzbek language as a contrast to English

makes this research even more pivotal. Since the

comparison and contrast of transport abbreviations

have not been the object of research until now.

Another reason of choosing the Uzbek language is the

https://orcid.org/0009-0001-1168-9849

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3054-8929

fact that Uzbekistan is one of the developing

countries with developing automobile industry. When

personnel in transport sphere are fully aware of

linguistic peculiarities of transport terms, they can

have the upper hand in various situations. While this

is true for English speaking countries, it is of utmost

importance for countries where English is not a main

language. Thus, the comparison of English transport

abbreviations with those of Uzbek ones provide not

only theoretical benefit, but also a practical one.

By comparing these two different transport

terminology systems in English and Uzbek, we will

explore typological characteristics of analytic and

synthetic languages which are essential in

comparative typological investigations.

The purpose of this paper is to explore linguistic

nuances of transport abbreviations of these two

different languages. Furthermore, it aims to depict the

318

Axmedov, O. and Masharipov, J.

Linguistic Nuances of Transport Abbreviations in the English Language in Comparison with the Uzbek Language.

DOI: 10.5220/0012841600003882

Paper published under CC license (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)

In Proceedings of the 2nd Pamir Transboundary Conference for Sustainable Societies (PAMIR-2 2023), pages 318-321

ISBN: 978-989-758-723-8

main ways of presenting and translating transport

related abbreviations from English into Uzbek. Thus,

the practical significance of our research is that the

results of it can be implemented in the process of

teaching applied linguistics, compiling course books

and thematic dictionaries. Comparative analysis of

transport abbreviations in this research will give

further opportunities to enhance terminology layer of

the Uzbek language.

2 METHODOLOGY

Terms are being widely investigated these days, so

terms in general and transport related terms are

studied by several linguists and scholars such as O. S.

Axmedov [20202] Yu. A. Chuntomova [2004], E. V.

Fedotkina, I. A. Ugolnikova, et al. [2020], H. I.

Hakimov [2019], Sh. B. Karimov [2014], O. G.

Kozlovskaya [2005], R. N. Nazimov [2023], Sh. S.

Olmatova [2017], O. A. Ruzmetova [2022], Sh. I.

Sheralieva [2023], V. A. Vinichenko [2020].

In different languages some dictionaries of

transport and logistics have been compiled until now,

in some of which terms are presented in an

explanatory manner (in the case of English

dictionaries), whereas there are others in which terms

are presented with either Uzbek or Russian

translations (in the case of Uzbek dictionaries). In our

article, we addressed different dictionaries such as

monolingual, bilingual, and explanatory, which were

compiled by linguists such as K. Button, H. Vega, P.

Nijkamp et al. [2010], J. E. Ermetova et al. [2019], D.

Lowe [2002], R. F. Pronina et al. [1958].

Abbreviations and acronyms comprise a certain

extent of terminology system. In this research, our

main focus of interest is the most frequently used

transport abbreviations. We tried not to include too

specific terms which are applicable to certain areas

(i.e., there are several terms regarding only Canada,

Australia or other areas), since terms of generic and

universal features are commonly shared universally.

Thus, we decided to include those frequently used

terms which are in widespread interest globally.

In this article we will use the methods of

correlation and comparative analysis of most used

transport related abbreviations (most commonly used

abbreviations related to automobile, railway, sea and

air transports and logistics) as well as we will

illustrate some statistical analysis of our findings. Our

research objects are transport related abbreviations

which are commonly used and frequently appeared in

the works and dictionaries of linguists in the field.

3 RESULTS

In the sphere of linguistics, a calque (also known as a

loan translation) is explained as a word for word

translation from one language to another. The calque

method requires replacing the lexical units in the

original language with its component parts, such as

morphemes or words with equivalent lexical words in

the translated text. The main idea behind calque is to

generate a novel word or a set phrase in the translated

text by copying the structure of the original lexical

unit.

There are two main mediums of calque method:

• Full calque – CVT [Continuosly Variable

Transmission] – UO’U [Uzluksiz O’zgaruvchan

Uzatish]

• Semi-calque – AOV [Automatic Operated

Valve] – ABK [Avtomatik Boshqariluvchi Klapan]

There are various ways by which the translations

of terms and abbreviations can be carried out in the

dictionary, yet these four methods are common:

• Borrowings – IMDL [Intermodal] – Intermodal;

• Alternative versions in native language (in our

case it is Uzbek) – AFV [Alternative Fuel Vehicle] –

MYTV [Muqobil Vositali Transport Vositasi];

• Both in the borrowed forms and with alternative

translation – RV [Recreational Vehicle] – KTV

[Ko’ngilochar Transport Vositasi] or RV transport

vositasi;

• Explained as a multi-component term (meaning

interpretation) – DFOD [Delivery Fee On Delivery] –

Yetkazib berilgandan keyin qilinadigan yetkazib

berish to’lovi.

The results of the statistical and comparative

analysis of commonly used abbreviations according

to our investigation are shown in Fig. 1 and Fig. 2.

Figure 1: Statistical analysis of Uzbek transport related

abbreviations when they are translated from international

ones. Source Calculated and formed by the authors.

Linguistic Nuances of Transport Abbreviations in the English Language in Comparison with the Uzbek Language

319

As is shown in Fig. 1, semi-calque method is more

used (42%) while translating transport related

abbreviations. The reason is that there is at least one

word which is either English or Russian origin in

those abbreviations so only 20% of the abbreviations

are translated by fully calque method. Forming a

syntagmatic relationship with other lexical units,

borrowing components may gain case and number

indicators in the Uzbek language, e.g. Avtomatik

Uzatuv Transmissiyasi. Just under a third of these

terms are either explained further with additional

words or shortened in Uzbek to give more clear idea,

since certain concepts are new to Uzbek language.

For instance, LOLO ship is interpreted as Yuklarni

ko'tarib tushirish uchun maxsus vertikal qurilmaga

ega bo'lgan kema. The abbreviation becomes a ten-

component term in Uzbek with its definition. By

contrast, RDT&E ship (Research, Development,

Test, and Evaluation ship) is interpreted as Tajriba

kemasi [Experiment ship], since this two-component

term generally describes the overall meaning of the

abbreviation. Only one in ten of the abbreviations are

borrowings either from English Intermodal, or

Russian Katamaran [SWATH ship]. In Uzbek,

alternatively the word kema [ship] is also used to give

that meaning. Another word which is used as a

borrowing and having an Uzbek alternative is RV

transport vositasi [RV], its Uzbek alternatives are

Kemping avtomobili or Ko‘ngilochar transport

vositasi.

Figure 2: Statistical and comparative analysis of Uzbek

transport related abbreviations which stayed as

abbreviations while translating and those which are

interpreted as one or multi component terms. Source

Calculated and formed by the authors.

As is shown in Fig. 2, more than half of the

abbreviations are kept as abbreviations when they are

translated into Uzbek, however the others have to be

interpreted and become multi component terms. Also,

there are some terms in Uzbek such ot kuchi

(horsepower) which is not usually abbreviated,

whereas in English it is considered as an abbreviation.

Among these terms, three component terms are

dominant (30,5%), whereas seven and ten component

terms are the least found ones (4%).

In both languages, abbreviations with three letters are

most common such as (ABS, MPV, USW and etc).

When English abbreviations are translated into Uzbek

in most cases (42%) the number of letters in

abbreviations increases (for instance AFV-MYOTV;

AEA-YEHYA and others). This can be explained by

the fact that some terms have to be explained in order

to be clearer, making some terms multi component.

Almost in half of the cases (52%) the number of

letters does not change (AA-AA; AMT-AUT, etc). In

rare cases (6%), they decrease (CTC-DM; CHW-

TO). In one case, we come across an abbreviation

with number involved: 3PL – Third Party Logistics.

As Uzbek language belongs to agglutinative

languages which are in subgroup of synthetic

languages, in some cases it is noticed that while

translation terms face the phenomenon called a

flexion. For instance, AA – Automobile Association

becomes AA – Avtomobillar Assosatsiyasi. In the

case of English transport related abbreviations, we do

not come across this phenomenon. Terms are in

Nominative case. Regarding Uzbek transport

abbreviations there are cases in which some

components within abbreviations are in Genitive

case. In contrast to English, in the Uzbek language

possession elements are shown in both modifying and

modified words, e.g. Shinalarning Eskirish

Ko‘rsatkichi. Yet, in some cases the suffix –ning

added to a modifying word can be omitted without

changing the meaning. In most of the terms we

analysed, the same phenomenon was observed. It is

interesting to note that these types of terms

constituted almost half of the terms we investigated.

4 CONCLUSIONS

According to our linguistic analyses of English and

Uzbek transport abbreviations following are found: a)

in both languages three-component abbreviations

comprised most compared to others; b) the semi-

calque method used commonly to translate

abbreviations from English into Uzbek; c) meaning

interpretation is also prevalent in Uzbek; d) in English

Nominative case is dominant, whereas in Uzbek

virtually the half of the abbreviations have the

indicator of Genitive case.

The feature of agglutinative languages – adding

inflections proved to exist in Uzbek transport terms.

PAMIR-2 2023 - The Second Pamir Transboundary Conference for Sustainable Societies- | PAMIR

320

It usually indicates the features of the Genitive case.

Interestingly, in most of cases, this indicator is added

to borrowed words forming a syntagmatic

relationship. Pure borrowings in Uzbek make up the

least, which can be explained by the fact that at least

one component in an abbreviation has an alternative.

By contrast, borrowings of simple terms account for

more considerable figures than abbreviations. Some

abbreviations tend to be explained as a multi-

component term rather than simply borrowing. It is

important to note that in some cases we found that

English transport abbreviations are not considered an

abbreviation in Uzbek. According to our research, the

main reason is abbreviations becoming multi-

component terms.

In general, through our research, we found out that

there are both similarities and discrepancies regarding

syntactic and semantic features of English and Uzbek

transport-related abbreviations. Without a doubt, in

the development of linguistics, it has been paid great

attention to compile thematic dictionaries and it is

essential in order to develop every language.

REFERENCES

Axmedov, O. S. (2020). Ingliz va o‘zbek tillarida soliq-

bojxona terminlarining lingvistik tahlili va tarjima

muammolari [Linguistic analysis and translation issues

of tax and customs terms in English and Uzbek

languages]. Monograph PhD dissertation. Tashkent. p.

176-180.

Button, K., Vega, H., Nijkamp P. (2010). A Dictionary of

Transport Analysis. Edward Elgar. Cheltenham, UK •

Northampton, MA, USA. p. 19.

Chuntomova, Yu. A. (2004). Angliyskaya transportnaya

terminologiya [English Transport Terminology]. PhD

thesis paper. Moscow. p 58-60.

Ermetova, J. E., Xojayev, O. X. (2019). Uzbek-English and

English-Uzbek explanatory dictionary of automobile

industry terms. Fan [Science]. Tashkent. p. 150.

Fedotkina, E. V., Ugolnikova, I. A. (2020). Strategy of

teaching foreign language communication in transport

universities of the Russian Federation. Gumanitarnye i

sotsial’nye nauki [Humanitarian and social sciences].

№6. p. 2-4. DOI: 10.18522/2070-1403-2020-83-6-348-

359.

Hakimov, H. I. (2019). Methods of translating words

denoting national values. Foreign Philology. № 2. p.

38-42.

Karimov, Sh. B. (2014). Strukturno-semanticheskiy analiz

aviatsionnykh terminov v tadjikskom i angliyskom

yazykakh [Structural and semantic analysis of aviation

terms in Tajik and English languages]. PhD

dissertation. Dushanbe. p. 95-106.

Kozlovskaya, O. G. (2005). Kognitivnye i strukturno-

semanticheskie osobennosti morskoy terminologii (na

materiale angliyskogo i russkogo yazykov) [Cognitive

and structural-semantic features of marine terminology

(based on English and Russian languages)]. PhD

dissertation. Saint Petersburg. p. 374-462.

Linguistic Nuances of Transport Abbreviations in the English Language in Comparison with the Uzbek Language

321