The Role of the Communicative and Cognitive Consciousness in the

Development of National Languages

Akrom M. Kuldashev

, Mukhiddin M. Mukhtorov

and Otabek Y. Yusupov

Uzbekistan State World Languages University, Tashkent, Uzbekistan

Keywords: Anthropocentrism, Mind, Language, Linguistic Representation of the World, Logic, Speech, Internal,

External, Culture, Psychology, Globalization, Linguistic Suicide, Convergence, Divergence, Language Policy.

Abstract: The anthropocentric paradigm which has become dominant in the world of linguistic thought made reconsider

many hypotheses, statements, and theories existing in present-day linguistics. So was the problem of language

evolution, development of the structure, and functional aspects of the languages. One of the problems to be

reconsidered was the history of the national language and the role of mental structure and psychological

factors in language development. The next problem to be discussed in the article is the significance of the

historicism principle to the investigation of language history. The factors related to the External History as

suggested by F. De Saussure have not yet lost their significance in analysing the formation of national

languages. This theory helps to find parallels with the facts of the social history of the nation and the changes

in the structure of the language. The hypothesis put forward by the authors is illustrated by the material on

the history of the Uzbek language.

1 INTRODUCTION

Since antiquity, there have been eternal questions in

the field of linguistics that science has been

attempting to find answers. There have been such

questions as What is language? What is the structure

of it? How does it operate? How does it evolve and

change? Even after linguistics has advanced for

millennia, those problems remain unanswered. These

questions appear even more unanswered now than

they did, say, at the start of the 20th century.

Linguistics has never developed smoothly or

progressively. There were quiet times in between

revolutions, during which scientists merely gathered

data and refined their techniques. Issues of priority

also shifted. In many cases, issues that were viewed

as “unscientific” or “non-linguistic” in one century

became the main area of study for most academics in

another. Even while linguists may not be aware of a

key issue for a while, none of the once-discussed

issues permanently vanish from research. Linguistics

explores these issues at a deeper level by tackling

issues that have been neglected for a while. Thus,

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9668-1087

https://orcid.org/0009-0009-4177-222X

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8755-8220

linguistics is developing in a forward-moving

manner, much like other sciences—almost like a

spiral.

The realization of the diversity of languages as well

as their unlimited variety existed even before the 19th

century, and this realization prompted the

development of techniques for classifying and

comparing languages. Efforts were put into applying

the universal grammar conceptual apparatus for a

comparative examination of various languages along

with establishing related connections between

languages. The principle of historicism, which

emerged at the end of the eighteenth century and

declared that language's capacity for historical

development and its variability across time (and

space) constituted its most fundamental attribute, was

responsible for a profound shift in the understanding

of language’s nature and essence. Scientists started to

focus less on understanding the unique traits of a

certain language that gave it a unique place among a

specific linguistic community and more on figuring

out each language’s developmental route. Around

that time, linguistic studies began to place more

Kuldashev, A., Mukhtorov, M. and Yusupov, O.

The Role of the Communicative and Cognitive Consciousness in the Development of National Languages.

DOI: 10.5220/0012846400003882

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 373-382

ISBN: 978-989-758-723-8

373

emphasis on the distinctions between languages than

on the parallels, generalizations, and universalities

among them.

2 METHODOLOGY

The realization that historical-genetic linguistics,

with its arsenal of concepts and methods for

characterizing languages, had reached the end of its

useful life at the turn of the nineteenth and twentieth

centuries, as well as the fact that sticking to the rules

of antiquated, conventional logic did not advance

linguistic theory, dawned on scholars. The need for a

fundamental shift in our understanding of language,

its nature, and its essence was becoming increasingly

apparent. This shift would adequately account for the

most recent advances in mathematics, physics,

reasoning, anthropology, ethnography, cultural

studies, psychology, sociology, and the physiology of

higher nervous activity.

The reaction to the crisis in linguistics at the end of

the 19th century, as well as to the entire humanitarian,

technical and philosophical crisis that affected almost

all layers of culture of the 20th century, was the

emergence of a new direction in linguistics –

structural linguistics, which largely determined not

only the philosophical and cultural paradigms of

everything XX century. Structural linguistics is based

on the concept of structure as the systemic

interconnectedness of linguistic elements.

The first and main work of structural linguistics is

considered to be the “Course of General Linguistics”

by the outstanding linguist from Geneva Ferdinand de

Saussure (1857-1913). The Course of General

Linguistics is often called the most important

linguistic work of the twentieth century. Saussure’s

book contains three fundamental ideas necessary for

the further understanding of language by twentieth-

century linguistics: the distinction between language

and speech, language as a system of signs, and the

difference between synchrony and diachrony.

One of the first scientists to attempt to develop a

universal theory of language was Ferdinand de

Saussure. But first, it was important to provide a

solution to such question as: "What is language?"

Saussure used the generic word "speech activity"

(language) to refer to any phenomena connected to

the speaking and listening activities. Speech activity

is highly varied and intersects with different fields of

science as: physics, physiology, and psychology.

Language (langue) and speech (parole) are the two

polar qualities that Saussure recognizes in the entirety

of speech processes. According to Saussure, language

is simply a small—if not the most significant—part

of speaking action. Language, in Saussure’s view, is

just the accumulation of the essential social norms.

However, it is exactly because of this that speaking is

possible. Language is made up of vocabulary and

grammatical systems, or an inventory of linguistic

tools that are necessary for verbal communication to

take place.

Among people who share the same language

community, language might exist in the form of a

lexical and grammatical system. Language is a social

product that allows individuals to comprehend one

another regardless of the speaker. On the other hand,

achieving complete mastery of the linguistic system

requires a great deal of work.

Speaking is the act of using language to convey one’s

ideas to another; it is the application of language to

communicate; speaking and listening are separate

acts that are performed in a communication cycle.

Language and speech “are closely related and

mutually presuppose each other: language is

necessary for speech to be understandable and to

produce its effect; speech, in turn, is necessary for

language to be established: historically, the fact of

speech always precedes language” (Saussure). As a

result, speech reveals how language develops; living

speech is a manifestation of language's existence and

evolution. Despite acknowledging this, Saussure

contrasts language with speech, saying that “all this

has nothing to do with the fact that they are both

entirely distinct things”.

Just as speech is different from language, so is

language from an individual phenomenon. Language

is a type of code that society enforces as a need for all

of its members. It is a social product that is fully

digested by each individual. Speech is invariably

personal. Every speech performance has a creator, the

speaker, who chooses to improvise their words.

Language is implicitly absorbed by the speaker, who

“by itself cannot create nor change it.” It is not a

component of the verbal topic. Conversely, “speaking

is a personal act involving will and comprehension.”

Speech is erratic and ephemeral, but language is

steady and long-lasting. According to Saussure,

language is "the vital from the accidental and

somewhat accidental," setting it apart from speech.

The distinctions Saussure made within speech and

language are true, but they do not provide justification

for absolutizing them. Instead, these two facets of

verbal activity in each unique instance represent an

unbreakable dialectical unity, neither of which can be

imagined apart from the other and both of which are

dependent on the other because language is general

and speech is unique and private.

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

374

In many respects, F. de Saussure just made clear what

linguists were really interested in. However, linguists

did not traditionally distinguish difficulties with

language from other problems. This now outlines the

set of issues that linguistics should address initially.

F. de Saussure made a distinction between “external

linguistics,” which analyses what is “alien” to its

body, its system, and “internal linguistics,” which

deals with language. The field of external linguistics

encompasses several issues related to language

dissemination across different regions, culture,

history, politics, acoustics, physiology, and speech

psychology. While the scientist acknowledged the

need of researching exterior language difficulties, he

saw them as unrelated to the primary concerns of

linguistics. Although Ferdinand de Saussure

restricted the field of language research, this was a

first step in elucidating and defining the main duties

of language. He offers the following conclusion at the

end of his “Course”: “From the excursions we have

made into areas adjacent to our science, the following

principle of a purely negative nature follows, but all

the more interesting because it coincides with the

main idea of this course: the only and true object of

linguistics is language, considered in itself and for

itself.”

For fifty years following de Saussure, linguists

devoted their attention to the study of language in a

new, Saussurean sense, with a particular emphasis on

sound structure and morphology. And they made

great progress. If the restoration of proto languages

was the only domain in which linguistics was precise

in the past, then many linguistic techniques became

more accurate in the twentieth century, and a

methodical approach to language study emerged.

F. de Saussure remarked that “Language can be

likened to writing, the alphabet for those who are deaf

and dumb, symbolic ceremonies, manners of

etiquette, military signals, and any other system of

signs that represent concepts, and it is only the utmost

significant of these systems.”

What do a linguistic unit (such as a word or sentence),

a military signal, and a form of politeness such as a

bow have in common? In each case, some action -

human speech, the sound of a drum or trumpet, a

certain body movement - in itself has no special

meaning. What matters is what information it carries

about something else, not directly related to sound or

movement. This is the essence of a sign: it always

informs about something else. In particular, sounds

contain information about certain events, the

speaker’s feelings, and his attitude towards the

interlocutor.

F. de Saussure considered linguistics to be only a part

of the not yet created general science of signs -

semiology (from the Greek “semeion” - sign and

“logos” - teaching) or semiotics. Each linguistic sign,

according to Saussure, is two-sided and includes both

a signifier (sound image) and a signified (meaning).

That is, language is a form, a means of expressing all

content, and language and the meaning of what is

being expressed ought not to be confused. A linguistic

sign is required by the linguistic community even if it

is both arbitrary and customary (the choosing of a

sign is discussed here).

Another famous opposition of Ferdinand de Saussure

is the opposition between synchrony and diachrony.

The simultaneous presence of language, a fixed

feature of language in its system, is called synchrony.

Diachrony is the temporal order of language

elements; it is a dynamic or historical feature.

Saussure contends that this calls for the separation of

synchronic and diachronic linguistics into a separate,

autonomous field. When historical context is

removed, the synchronic feature enables the

researcher to understand the connection between

concurrent facts, or to study language “in itself and

for itself.”

Of all of Saussure’s ideas, the distinction between

synchrony and diachrony was the most controversial.

However, scientists of a younger generation have

picked up this distinction. The time has come to

develop new, more accurate methods of language

learning, and the best “testing ground” for such

methods is modern languages, which can be studied

as fully as possible using experimental methods.

After Saussure, of course, historical, and comparative

historical research did not stop, but the focus shifted

to synchronic linguistics, primarily to work with

modern languages. It was in this area that the most

significant results were achieved in the twentieth

century.

3 DISCUSSION

Since the processes of globalization are all-

encompassing, they are studied by various sciences.

It is noteworthy as well that each of these sciences is

not limited to the study of its own part of the problem,

but also uses the system of concepts related to this

science. That is why until now there has been no

universally accepted definition of the concept of

“globalization”.

Globalization makes it possible for universal culture

to settle. This requires not only common beliefs,

The Role of the Communicative and Cognitive Consciousness in the Development of National Languages

375

values and principles, but also a sharp increase in

caring for the local cultures that are preserved.

In some places, the death of languages is accelerated

by the speakers of this language. This phenomenon is

called “linguistic suicide”. Globalization in the field

of language is not such a simple phenomenon as it

seems on the surface. The hegemony of the English

language is not accepted similarly in Europe today.

Experts note with concern that French, German and

some other languages accepted as official languages

of the UN are becoming more and more popular. The

development of these processes, especially in the

revival of small languages, has a negative impact on

the reforms in the field of education and culture,

which are carried out in accordance with the needs of

the main mass of the indigenous population.

Currently, the Welsh, Basque, Catalan, Scottish,

Gaelic-speaking peoples of the world are constantly

fighting for the development of their languages [27].

In the last 10 years, languages such as Baloch,

Gujarat, Domaaki, Kalasha, Phamura have been

dying in Pakistan itself (Times, 2005, January 24, p.

8.) In 1990, Reg Hindali published a book called The

Death of the Irish Language. Although Ireland gained

independence from Britain in 1922 and the

government established the Irish language as the

language of education, socio-economic development

caused these efforts to disappear. Currently, the

number of Irish speakers is only 10,000. The English

language has become a necessary condition for

Ireland's economic and social prosperity. At present,

the Irish language has become a sign of backwardness

and illiteracy.

It is natural that we Uzbeks are primarily interested in

the fate of the Uzbek language, because it is certain

that the process of globalization will not bypass the

Uzbek language. The fact that the Uzbek language

survives the huge process, does not lose its position

and, on the contrary, continues to develop

functionally, depends only on the speakers of this

language and the responsible persons who determine

the state policy on the language in our country.

The current Uzbek literary language is the highest

form of the development of the only Uzbek language

that has been used for centuries and is a refined form

of the national language. Modern Uzbek literary

language is the scientific and cultural language of the

state and social organization, science and school,

mass media, in short, the Uzbek nation.

The current unified literary language of the Uzbek

people was created based on the living spoken

language of the nation, and found its reflection, grew

and developed in the unified writing system and

pronunciation of this national language. The

formation and development of the Uzbek people as a

nation means the formation and development of the

national literary language at the same time.

Nowadays, the Uzbek language, including the Uzbek

literary language, is the only national language of the

Uzbek nation. The Uzbek national language is a

higher and improved stage of the national language.

In the 20th century, the single national language of

the Uzbek people grew and improved in every way,

some changes were made to its phonetic system - the

vowel structure was condensed, the consonant

structure was enriched with some new words and

phrases, the word their meanings have expanded,

obsolete words have gone out of use, and the

grammatical construction of the Uzbek language has

improved. The Uzbek national literary language

grew, strengthened and matured in the principled

struggle against various currents.

Some people who think in a reactionary spirit

recommend building the modern Uzbek national

literary language based on the old literary language

and try to push back the development of the language.

The representatives of this reactionary struggle tried

to replace the words and terms accepted by the masses

and some grammatical forms with the words and

forms used in the written monuments of the 11th-15th

centuries and out of use. This kind of “theory” was

widespread among certain layers of the society in

1917-1922.

After this “theory” was exposed, they were forced to

change their tactics and took a different route. Among

them, some representatives of this group aim to

preserve the main features of the old Uzbek literary

language, which is called “Chigatoy language”, but to

make some changes to it, and the second group is the

mask of bringing the literary language closer to the

living spoken language. under it, they put forward the

idea of “reforming” it. “Reformists” claim to take the

local Uzbek dialect, which is known as the Kipchak

or using [dʒ] in the context when others use [j] as the

basis of a single national language and create a

unified pronunciation based on this dialect.

Independence was given to each existing Uzbek

dialect, creating a separate literary language on the

basis of each local dialect, newspapers, magazines

and books in the literary languages that arose on the

ground of local dialects, thus a group of scholars

claimed to open a wide path to “dialect autonomy”.

Different views on the issues of the formation and

development of the modern Uzbek national language,

especially in 1922-1929, among groups of Uzbek

“linguists” scientists were put forward.

When the Uzbek writing was transferred from the

Arabic alphabet to the Latin alphabet, i.e., in 1929-

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

376

1933, as well as when the number of vowels in this

alphabet was reduced to five, i.e., in 1934-1937, the

Uzbek literary year was somewhat unknown. and

they wanted to see based on a vague “dialect”.

However, no matter how hard these elements tried,

fortunately for the Uzbek-speaking people, they could

not achieve their goals and were not successful. The

modern Uzbek literary language, without deviating

from its main path of development, developed, and

brought out all its potentials in the direction of

convergence and rise of a single national culture.

In the 20th century, the Russian language had a great

impact on the development of the language and

writing system of many nations on earth, including

the Uzbek nation. Behind the effective influence of

the Russian language, new phenomena took place in

the construction of the single national language of the

Uzbek nation, in its phonetic structure, the vocabulary

was enriched with words and terms that entered

directly through the Russian language, and in the

construction of the grammar of the Uzbek language.

According to the morphological composition of

words, some grammatical forms - new word-forming

affixes, word combinations, free use of words in

sentences and some new patterns of sentence

structure appeared.

At the same time, various concepts, words and terms

about the Uzbek country, culture, customs, clothes,

and lifestyle spread to world languages through the

Russian language. Uzbek words spread to English,

German, French and other languages of the world

through Russian pronunciation.

Nowadays, in the Uzbek national literary language,

word-changing affixes, for example, possessive and

agreement affixes, as well as adjectives, have become

basically homogeneous. It differs from the dialects

with more phonemes, as well as from other Turkic

languages. This fact means that the literary language

is condensed in terms of some grammatical forms. In

this regard, the grammatical and orthographic rules

have also become compact and precise, smooth and

fluent.

Many such facts related to the semantic features of

words in modern Uzbek literary language show ways

of growth of the universal Uzbek language lexicon.

Another fact that characterizes the development of the

Uzbek national literary language is that the universal

Uzbek language, while preserving its centuries-old

grammatical construction, polished it, improved it,

and enriched it with new laws and regulations.

In the grammatical construction of the Uzbek

language, a huge process that began in the 90s of the

20th century, that is, as a result of the process of its

gradual development from simplicity to complexity,

from a lower state to a higher state, appeared during

the period of some changes and innovations, is one of

the changes corresponding to the new structure of the

national literary language.

The stylistic features or different genres of the literary

language clearly show that the grammatical

construction of the modern Uzbek language has been

improved, that it has been enriched with new

grammatical rules and various idioms.

The rise of written monologue and dialogue forms;

the development of various correspondences between

individuals; Internet websites, newspaper and

magazine articles; the emergence of some new speech

idioms including terms related to various branches of

science in textbooks and manuals; slogans and

appeals new forms; fax modems, orders, telegrams,

orders, instructions, business papers and other

documents; speaking through a telephone and

microphone; announcers, artists, lecturers, and

speakers, improvement of speech, development of

different forms in oral and written form and others

testify to the considerable growth of the Uzbek

literary language in terms of style. This indicates that

new qualitative elements are gradually entering the

structure of the Uzbek national language and that it is

gradually accumulating. But the transition of the

language from one quality to another quality is has

not happened by the sudden formation of the old

quality, but by the accumulation of new quality

elements, the new structure of the language slowly

and over an extended amount of time, the old quality

elements gradually it happened by way of slow death.

It is known that now Uzbek language accomplishes 7

social functions, which should be performed by

developed countries, out of 10 namely: 1) the official

working language of the UN; 2) regional language; 3)

state language; 4) the official language of a certain

part of the country; 5) the language of science; 6)

fiction and mass media language; 7) language of

education; 8) language recently used in the area; 9)

the language of communication in the family; 10) the

language of religion and religious ceremonies [26]. 3

functions (namely, tasks 1, 2, and 10) are not fulfilled

by the Uzbek language. Putting functions 1 and 10

aside, we need to talk about function 2 since we can't

even think about functions 1 and 10 at all. If we talk

about function 1 if everything is clear, the Uzbek

language has been granted the chance to perform the

10th function for 5-10 centuries.

Therefore, the only possibility is to take the Uzbek

language to the level of a regional communication

language in Central Asia. However, the Uzbek

language performed this function until the events of

1917, and the demarcation of the newly founded

The Role of the Communicative and Cognitive Consciousness in the Development of National Languages

377

nation-state in 1924 made all nations to have their

states. It reduced the need to communicate in Uzbek

to a minimum by driving the nations and other ethnic

units to their homes.

At present, restoring the Uzbek language to its

former position requires the implementation of major

and significant work in the field of organizational,

political, economic and spiritual education. Because

this is a very delicate step for a country in Central

Asia that has its own state system. may be

misunderstood by other peoples, that is, it may be

accepted in the form of “great Uzbek chauvinism”.

Therefore, in the development of the state strategy in

this field, it is necessary to use the recent

achievements of the modern sociolinguistics and to

apply it to everyone at the same level, an appropriate

action strategy should be developed.

For this, in our opinion, the following tasks should be

performed:

1. It is necessary to increase scientific research

works written in Uzbek language and ensure that they

do not become a repetition of works in other

developed languages of the world. Because only

original research can attract the attention of foreign

scientists and experts.

2. The teaching and learning of the Uzbek

language in countries other than Uzbekistan should be

supported by the state, and this work should be made

an integral part of interstate educational and cultural-

educational relations.

3. It is necessary to further expand the opportunity

to provide education to foreign citizens who wish to

learn the Uzbek language or to study in higher

education institutions of Uzbekistan, and prepare

higher education institutions for this complex task.

4. It is necessary to further improve the teaching of

the Uzbek language in Uzbekistan itself, to

modernize the existing SES (state educational

standard), programs, textbooks and training manuals

of new generation.

5. It is necessary to establish a permanent working

control commission in the field of monitoring the

compliance of the Uzbek literary language spoken

version in the mass media and in cinema, theatre,

advertising publications and preventing violations of

the language norms, and fight for the purity of the

Uzbek language. because if the Uzbeks themselves do

not appreciate the Uzbek language, what can be

expected from others.

6. Increasing the amount of information in the

Uzbek language in the Internet system leads to an

increase in interest in Uzbekistan and the Uzbek

language.

The purpose of turning over these pages of history,

which have been obscure for us, is to learn about the

past in order not to repeat the mistakes made in the

era when the current inter-ethnic relations are tense,

when various large and small nations are giving a new

value to the place of their ethnic unity in history. In

the period that is true to the historical role of the

Turkic languages, which is a means of

communication between people of different religions

and sects, more precisely, the language that served as

the language of communication between Christians in

the west, Buddhists in the east, Muslims in the south,

and pagans in the north, helped peoples to understand

each other and to jointly solve various international

problems that have arisen and may arise. It is known

from historical sources that in the 15th-17th centuries

of our era, many nations and peoples who confessed

the Christianity, more specifically Greek, Armenian,

Goth, Tat, Vlach, Ukrainian, Lak, Alan, Avar,

Kumyk and others lived there.

There is nothing surprising about this fact, of course.

However, what is intriguing is that according to the

memories written down by people who travelled to

this country, lived here for several years, and saw the

country with their own eyes, all these peoples those

who know the Turkic language to one or another level

and actively use this language as a means of daily

communication in one or another social situation, or

rather, those who can speak Turkic, and the Turkish

language serves as the main language of ethnic

communication in these places.

The first information about this fact, which is

somewhat unexpected for the current stage of our

history and source studies, was given by the

missionary John Galifontius (died 1412), the

ambassador of the French king Charles VI in the

kingdom of Amir Temur, and this message belongs to

1404.

At this point, it ought to be mentioned that this Turkic

language has been called differently by different

nations, i.e., in Western Europe it is called “Tatar

language”, in Southern Europe and North Africa it is

called “Kipchak language”, and in the East and

China, this language was called by the name of its real

name in Central Asia, “Turkic language”.

The famous medieval Polish historian Jan Długosz

(1415-1480) wrote the following in his work entitled

“History of Poland”, “The Tatar clan and people”

initially originated and developed from the

Armenians, as proof of this two we can cite

similarities in facial structure and language between

peoples. Of course, we will not argue about the degree

to which this opinion is incorrect, and we will draw

attention to an important detail that served as a basis

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

378

for Jan Dlugosh to think that “Turkic tribes originated

from Armenian tribes”, i.e. Let’s look at the fact that

the Armenian people who spoke the Turkic language

really lived in the Russian lands at that time.

Since the 16th century, the language used by the

Armenian people living in this territory in mutual

communication and religious ceremonies has aroused

the interest of many people, especially Polish authors.

Their main goal was to bring the Armenian Gregorian

Church, which the Armenians in Ukraine confessed

under the control of the Pope. Italian ecclesiastic and

diplomat Antonio-Mario Graziani (1537-1611) was

Cardinal J.F. Commendone’s secretary. A.M.

Graziani and J.F. Commendone were traveling

together in Poland and Ukraine, and in 1564 they met

the Armenian community living in Lviv.

Graziani expresses his impressions of those meetings

as follows. "Armenians have their own codes and

hymns that are sung in the church, which are in the

Armenian language and are given in the Armenian

script. But only a few, only a group of old priests, can

read them. Armenians communicate in Turkic or

Scythian language. “(Scythian language means the

language of the Kipchaks of that time, or more

precisely Turkic, and linguists and historians who

consider Scythian to be an Iranian language somehow

ignore this fact)”.

Valentin Espry, a French writer and historian,

translating the above-mentioned memoirs of Flechier

Graziani from the Latin original into French,

translated the passage we quoted as “... Armenians

speak Turkic and Tatar”.

Jan Dmitria Solikowski (1539-1403), a representative

of the Polish Catholic priests, in his memoirs written

in 1597 (“Some Thoughts on Polish Affairs”) says

that the language of the Armenians is the same as the

language of the Turks.

In 1597, there was a mutual agreement between the

Polish and Armenian residents of Lviv, and in the text

of this agreement, there was also a separate chapter

about preserving the social position (of the Turks).

According to Solikovsky, all Armenians knew

Turkish, which greatly helped them to establish trade

relations with Turkey. The draft agreement contained

the following words: Armenians lived with Poles and

performed religious ceremonies in their own

language. Solikovsky saw a great danger in the union

of Armenians and Turks. That is, with the support of

the Turks, the Armenians could soon take over the

city of Lviv.

We can also find some information about Turkish-

speaking Armenians in Russian literature. For

example, in the chapter “A word about Armenians”,

a specifier about various titles and positions created

in the 16th century, it is written that Armenians are

Muslims with Muslims, Tatars with Tatars. Later, i.e.,

we can find about Turkic-speaking Armenians who

existed in the 16th century in the work “General

Relations” (1591) of the famous Giovanni Botero,

who was an Italian geographer (1533-1617), said that

religious rituals were carried out by Armenians in

their own tongue. In different settings, they spoke in

different ways. However, in Jerusalem, people were

so accustomed to speaking Turkish that many

Armenians found it difficult to say “a word” in their

own language.

Johann Anpech, a German chronicler from Lviv,

described the city of Lviv in 1603-1605 and wrote

that “Armenians hold religious ceremonies in

Armenian, but speak only Tatar at home.”

The well-known Polish philosopher Szymon Petritsi

(1554-1626) dedicated a separate paragraph to the

Armenian language in his comments to the translation

of Aristotle's work “Politics”. The paragraph begins

“Armenians speak the language of Pagans.” Here is

an excerpt from this paragraph. “For Christians, those

who speak the language of their enemies, that is,

Turkish, Tatar, and Dahri, are more suspicious and

unreliable as opposed to people who don’t speak

these languages (...,). But Armenians do not know

their Armenian language either. They know how to

use (it) and learn it like we learn Latin and Greek at

school.” In another part of the work, Petritsi says: “...

Armenians live in friendship with our enemies, the

Turks, due to the homogeneity of their language, ...

Armenians preserve their foreign language.”

Earlier, in 1578, the Lviv City Council appealed to

King Stephan Batory and asked to cancel equal rights

with Poles in relation to Armenians because they

spoke a foreign language.

Martin Zeiller (1581-1661), a German geographer,

authored "A New Description of the Kingdom of

Poland and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania" in 1657

that “the language spoken by the Armenians and that

of the Turks’ are the same.” Another geographer who

lived at that time, Dutchman Adreas Tsellary, writes

in his work that “Armenians living in Ukraine in 1659

speak Turkish.”

At the beginning of the 16th century, the code “Lviv

criminal code” was translated into Turkish. In 1562,

Constantine's son and priest Mikhail wrote that

"Revelations of St. Paul” was translated into Kipchak

(Turkish). In 1591, the calendar and the Book of

Prayers were translated into Turkish. In 1618, the

renowned Armenian explorer Semion Dpir Leatsi

Martirosovich (1585-1639) remarked that “the Lviv

Armenians do not speak Armenian.” They speak

either Polish or Turkish. In the poem “Nicol’s

The Role of the Communicative and Cognitive Consciousness in the Development of National Languages

379

History” written in 1634, Semeon laughs at the

Armenian priests from Lviv and says that they do not

know the Armenian language and do not comprehend

what they are reading during the lecture. Astvatsatur

(Deodat) Nersesovich (1644-1709), one of the

students of the Armenian collegium in Lviv, writes an

interlude. It talks about the fact that the elderly

representatives of the community do not know the

Armenian language (that is, they speak Turkish), and

the young people, that is, the college students, teach

it to the older generation who returned home after

taking Armenian lessons at school. Armenian

archbishop of Lviv Vardan Unanyan (1644-1715)

wrote in 1703 that the Armenian clergy and the whole

people did not know the Armenian language until the

60s of the 17th centuries. It ought to be mentioned

that Armenians used the ethnonym “Kipchak” in the

meaning of “Scythians, Huns, Khazars, Seljuk

Turks”.

From the 16th to the 17th centuries, the word Kipchak

was completely replaced by the word Tatar. Now let’s

move on to a few drawbacks. The first issue is how

did the Armenians who lived as a community in

Ukraine and Russia come to these places and where

did they learn the Turkic language? At this point, we

will limit ourselves to citing the following facts. In

1222-1237, the Mongol-Tatars organized a massacre

in the lands north of the Black Sea. Campaigns to the

North Caucasus and Crimea ended with the same

result. The peoples who fled from the oppression of

the Mongols went to the west and north. After the first

wave of Mongol-speaking peoples passed away, the

second wave came as Turkic peoples, who were allies

of the Mongols and made up the vast majority of

Genghis and Batu's army. They began to occupy the

lands left by the Kipchaks, who were linguistically

related to them, but did not get used to alliance with

the Mongols, and as a result were persecuted by

Genghis and Batu. Many other peoples who lived

together with the Turkic peoples and had various

trade relations with them also began to speak the

Turkic language. One of them, the Armenians,

brought the language they learned and spoke, that is,

Turkish, with them to the north, to the Russian lands

and the lands around the Black Sea, which they used

for several centuries, and by the 18th century they

completely forgot about it. The reasons why

Armenians went to the above-mentioned areas were

the conquest of Northern Ukraine by Khan of the

Golden Horde Tokhtamish in 1379-1380, Amir

Temur's conquest of Georgia and Armenia in 1392,

and finally Amir Temur’s defeat of Tokhtamish in

1395, and the resulting ethnic caused by migration

processes.

Another question arises. Perhaps the spoken language

is Crimean Tatar. There are several reasons why we

disagree.

1) The people speaking this language called

themselves Armenians and believed in the Gregorian

sect of Christianity.

2) Only the Armenian alphabet was used in writing.

3) At the end of the 17th century, it was transferred to

the full Armenian language. The norm of the

Crimean-Tatar language began to be formed as an

independent language in a completely different

geographical area only in the 16th century [26].

So, the language used by the Armenians as a means

of communication is not the language, we now call

the Crimean-Tatar language. If we look at history, in

the 15th and 16th centuries, in a very large area, that

is, from the border of peoples who speak Slavic and

Ural-Altaic languages in the North to Hungary and

Yugoslavia in the West, Copper, Iraq, India in the

South, and Xinjiang, Great Britain in the East. The

people who lived in the vast territory up to the Great

Wall of China spoke a single Turkic language. This

single language, which has its own literary norm,

eased social, economic, political, and educational

relations between peoples. The Armenian

communities mentioned in the article lived near the

center of this huge area, and speaking Turkish was

natural for that time.

From the 17th-18th centuries, the Turkish dialects,

which served as a means of ethnic unity or inter-

national communication in this vast area, gradually

developed into independent languages. Despite the

fact that Uzbek, Azerbaijani, Kyrgyz, Uyghur, and a

number of other national languages have already

separated from it, the difference between them was

not yet significant. This is the topic of a separate

conversation.

4 CONCLUSION

The Uzbek people have achieved unprecedented

success in all spheres of activity, production,

economic relations, politics, and culture, thanks to the

single universal Uzbek language and the help of this

language. All these in turn strongly influenced the

development of the Uzbek national language.

The modern Uzbek national literary language has

grown along the path of the development of national

culture and has reached the highest level of its

development. Uzbek scientists, poets and writers,

translators, and journalists made a great contribution

to the development of the modern Uzbek literary

language; in particular, the central mass media of the

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

380

republic played an important role in the development

of the literary language. Thanks to the modern Uzbek

national literary language, uniform literary

pronunciation norms, and uniform scientific and

technical terms, unifying and generalizing some

grammatical forms of all Uzbek dialects have been

created.

The development path of modern Uzbek literary

language:

 The single national language and its relation

to local dialects.

 The phonetic system of the main and leading

Uzbek dialects.

 The number and quality, scope, and content

of the vocabulary of the national language.

 The size and essence of grammatical rules.

 5)Various determined according to stylistic

principles.

As a result of the fact that the Uzbek national literary

language, which includes this common feature, has a

positive effect on other dialects, it is experimenting

with some dialects with the common phonetic

features of the dialects of the central city.

The characteristic of the modern Uzbek literary

language is not limited to the innovations in its sound

system. The national literary language as a result of

the economic, political, and cultural growth of the

Republic of Uzbekistan become so rich due to words

and expressions based on the main vocabulary of the

Uzbek language, as well as words and terms

borrowed from the Russian and English languages

and introduced through the Internet websites that the

number of new words evolved per year was much

greater than the words that had gone out of use.

Due to the achievements of the Uzbek people in all

sectors of the national economy of independent

Uzbekistan, the vocabulary of the Uzbek language

has been enriched. There appeared words related to

the most important and main branches of industry:

ferrous metallurgy, non-ferrous metal production,

aircraft construction, automobile construction,

mining, electrification, oil industry, gas industry,

electrification, oil industry, gas industry, coal

industry, chemical industry, forest industry and words

and phrases related to others; words and phrases

related to the growth of agriculture, the development

of all kinds of agricultural crops and livestock, and

others; in the field of exchange, transport and

communication words and phrases related to the

development of business, trade and transport,

important types of transport - railway and road

transport, river and sea fleet, air fleet,

communications business, export-import operations;

Words and phrases related to the further development

of the cultural and spiritual level of the people, school

and education, science and science, literature and art,

computers, modern information and educational

technologies.

Summarizing the above points, the following can be

said as a general conclusion:

1. It is necessary to thoroughly study the

negative effects and consequences of the

globalization process on the Uzbek

language, develop the principles of the

appropriate constructive language policy,

and define a specific strategy.

2. The main factor determining the survival

of any language in the process of

globalization is the expansion of the

functional scope of the language because

the language must work like any

mechanism, if it does not work, it

becomes useless. More precisely, if

people do not speak Uzbek, do not create

works of art, if do not write scientific

work or state documents are published

nor education is carried out in school then

it is not surprising that the Uzbek

language will slowly turn into a dead

language like Baloch language, Gujarat

language, Damaaki language, Kalasha

language and other languages mentioned.

3. Lifestyle, dress culture, music-art,

scientific-technical achievements, unity,

and similarity of things that are the main

attributes of globalization can be adopted

from developed countries, but we should

not rush to do it at the sacrifice of national

spirituality and language. Because in the

conditions of globalization, language

becomes the only attribute of the nation

that preserves its identity.

4. It is necessary to learn foreign languages,

let every citizen know 3-4 foreign

languages, use them fluently and without

difficulty when traveling the world, leave

a positive impression on foreigners, but

do not change the attitude towards the

Uzbek language, despise it and spoil it.

However, no one has the right to speak

with various barbarisms, substandard

forms, and elements of dialect.

In the process of full use of all the positive moments

of globalization, and at this stage of socio-economic

and spiritual-educational development, to provide

appropriate and correct guidance to ordinary people,

to improve their language culture, communication,

Uzbek philologists and language teachers should

The Role of the Communicative and Cognitive Consciousness in the Development of National Languages

381

understand the great responsibility they have in the

field of improving linguistic literacy, providing

objective information about world languages and

their development, and, accordingly, in this way, they

should perform their work following world standards.

This is the main requirement of globalization.

REFERENCES

Jenkins J. The spread of English as an International

language. – Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000.

Jenkins J. Global intelligibility and local diversity:

Possibility or Paradox? In: Sacarini M. and Ruby R.

English in the World: Global rules, global roles –

London. Continuum, 2006, p.32-39.

Joseph J. Language and Identity. – Mills, Basingstoke:

Palgrave, Macmillan, 2004.

House J, Misunderstanding in Intercultural communication:

interactions in English as a Lingua Franca and the myth

of mutual intelligibility. In: Gnutzmann(ed) Teaching

and Learning English as a Global Language. –

Tubingen: Stauffenberg, 1999.

Foley J. (ed). English in New Cultural Context. – New

York: Oxford University Press. 1999.

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

382