A CONTRASTIVE ANALYSIS AND TRANSLATION FRAMEWORK OF COMPOUND TERMS IN CONSTITUTIONAL AND CRIMINAL LAW: ENGLISH AND UZBEK PERSPECTIVES

Abstract

Specialized legal terminology functions as a rigid conceptual matrix within constitutional and criminal jurisprudence, leaving no room for semantic ambiguity. This paper conducts a rigorous contrastive linguistic investigation into the structural, semantic, and functional-pragmatic properties of English and Uzbek compound terms within these two core domains of law. Operating on the principle of language economy, compounding serves as a vital lexical mechanism to encapsulate complex statutory doctrines into singular or cohesive units. By analyzing an empirical corpus extracted from constitutional texts, criminal codes, and bilateral treaties, this study maps structural asymmetries between the analytical Germanic framework of English and the agglutinative Turkic framework of Uzbek. The investigation categorizes typical translational hurdles, including asymmetric noun-premodification, systemic lacunae, and the deceptive allure of literal calquing. Ultimately, the paper provides a systematic taxonomy of translational transformations—ranging from syntactic transposition (izofat structures) to descriptive modulation—designed to achieve absolute functional equivalence in cross-linguistic legal communication