REFLECTION AND NEGATION: A PHONOSEMANTIC ANALYSIS OF SHARED ICONIC ROOTS IN TURKIC, SLAVIC, AND ENGLISH DEIXIS AND REFLEXIVITY MARKERS

Authors

  • Muhayyo Sobirjonova Author

Keywords:

phonosemantics, sound symbolism, iconicity, Odam Tili theory, Turkic linguistics, Slavic linguistics, comparative semantics, reflexivity, negation morphemes

Abstract

This article applies the phonosemantic framework developed within Odam Tili 
theory, associated with Dr. Mahmudjon Kuchkarov, to a cluster of deictic, reflexive, 
and negational morphemes found in Turkic (Uzbek), Slavic (Russian), and English. 
We argue that a small inventory of articulatory-iconic primitives recurs across these 
languages with a consistent semantic profile: space, an object occupying space, and 
the reflection of that object, understood as an entity that occupies no space of its own. 
Central to the argument are negating consonants such as n, k, v and p acting on the 
open spatial vowel a, and a reflexive-image marker realised as ay, я, or I. We illustrate 
the framework through the Uzbek word yoziq and the Russian язык, the Uzbek darya 
and the Russian dative form даря, the Uzbek aynak and aynan, the historical hydronym 
Sayhun, the Russian меня against мен, and the object-marking particle на compared 
with the English indefinite article an. We do not claim genetic relatedness between 
Turkic, Slavic, and English in the sense used by historical linguistics; instead we 
propose that these forms are best understood as convergent phonosemantic iconicity, 
grounded in a shared embodied human experience of standing upright and seeing one's 
own reflection in still water. We situate the claim against Ferdinand de Saussure's 
arbitrariness principle and against the existing literature on sound symbolism, and we 
set out what would be needed to test it more rigorously. 

References

Kuchkarov, M., Kuchkarov, Mavlonbek, & Sobirjonova, M. (2026). The

archaeology of natural coding: A phonosemantic deconstruction of the English lexicon

through Odam Tili theory. International Multidisciplinary Journal for Research &

Development,

13(03),

398–405.

https://www.ijmrd.in/index.php/imjrd/article/view/5320

Kuchkarov, M., Kuchkarov, Mavlonbek, & Sobirjonova, M. (2026).

Archaeology of language: Phonosemantic foundations and the universal water code.

Journal

of Applied Science and Social Science, 16(03), 417–421.

https://www.internationaljournal.co.in/index.php/jasass/article/view/3705

Kuchkarov, M., & Kuchkarov, Marufjon. (2025). Human language as natural

coding: The natural genesis of human language: Insights from the Odam Tili theory.

World Scientific Research Journal, 36(1), 143–145. https://scientific

jl.com/wsrj/article/view/1904

Kuchkarov, M. (2026). Artificial intelligence out of control: A civilizational risk

analysis

via

Odam

Tili

theory.

https://scientific

jl.com/new/article/download/26675/25964/52055

Odam Tili Akademiyasi. (2025). Why Odam Tili is crucial for AI meaning.

https://webofjournals.com/index.php/3/article/download/5079/5115/10016

Saussure, F. de. (1916). Cours de linguistique générale [Course in general

linguistics] (C. Bally & A. Sechehaye, Eds.). Payot.

Pinker, S. (1994). The Language Instinct: How the Mind Creates Language.

William Morrow.

Published

2026-08-16

How to Cite

REFLECTION AND NEGATION: A PHONOSEMANTIC ANALYSIS OF SHARED ICONIC ROOTS IN TURKIC, SLAVIC, AND ENGLISH DEIXIS AND REFLEXIVITY MARKERS . (2026). ОБРАЗОВАНИЕ НАУКА И ИННОВАЦИОННЫЕ ИДЕИ В МИРЕ, 99(1), 107-116. https://alpharesearchs.com/index.php/obr/article/view/4080