REFLECTION AND NEGATION: A PHONOSEMANTIC ANALYSIS OF SHARED ICONIC ROOTS IN TURKIC, SLAVIC, AND ENGLISH DEIXIS AND REFLEXIVITY MARKERS
Keywords:
phonosemantics, sound symbolism, iconicity, Odam Tili theory, Turkic linguistics, Slavic linguistics, comparative semantics, reflexivity, negation morphemesAbstract
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.