Articles | Open Access | https://doi.org/10.37547/ajps/Volume05Issue11-80

Linguocultural Study Of Anaphora In Different Languages (Uzbek, English, German)

Azimova Xurshida Zohidjon qizi , Fergana State University Phd student, Uzbekistan

Abstract

This article presents a comprehensive linguocultural analysis of anaphore in Uzbek, English, and German. Anaphore - the phenomenon of referring back to an antecedent – is both the grammatical device and a reflection of culture-specific communicative strategies. Anaphora functions as a central cohesive device in discourse, yet its form and cultural manifestations vary across linguistic systems. By examining structural features, discourse conventions, and culturally determined communicative behaviors, the study aims to identify how different linguistic communities conceptualize reference, cohesion, and implicitness. The research employs a comparative typological approach, supported by discourse analysis and linguocultural interpretation, and highlights culturally embedded tendencies such as pro-drop use in Uzbek, explicit referential structure in English, and gender-governed anaphoric patterns in German. The findings contribute to a deeper understanding of cross-cultural communication and the interaction between linguistic form and cultural worldview.

Keywords

Anaphora, linguoculture, zero anaphora, pronominal reference

References

Ariel, M. (1990). Accessing Noun-Phrase Antecedents. Routledge.

Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. Longman.

Levinson, S. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge University Press.

Wierzbicka, A. (1997). Understanding Cultures Through Their Keywords. Oxford University Press.

Haspelmath, M. (2013). Understanding Morphology. Routledge.

Fillmore, C. (1982). Frame Semantics. Linguistic Society Publications.

Dixon, R. M. W. (2010). Basic Linguistic Theory. Oxford University Press.

Huang, Yan. Anaphora: A Cross‑Linguistic Approach. Oxford University Press, 2000.

Givón, Talmy. Topic Continuity in Discourse: A Quantitative Cross‑Language Study. John Benjamins, 1983.

Givón, T. “Interpreting Anaphoric Expressions: A Cognitive Versus a Pragmatic Approach.” Journal of Linguistics, vol. 19, no. 1, 1983, pp. 1–38.

Halliday, M.A.K., va Ruqaiya Hasan. Cohesion in English. London: Longman, 1976. (Ko‘plab tadqiqotlarda anaphora va cohesion kontseptsiyalari uchun manba sifatida ishlatiladi.)

Lehmkuhle, Ina, va Josefin Lindgren. “Anaphoric Reference in Written Narratives by German‑Speaking 10‑Year‑Olds and Adults: The Influence of Referential Function and Character Type.” Discours – Revue de linguistique, psycholinguistique et informatique, 2022.

Dipper, Stefanie; Melanie Seiss; Heike Zinsmeister. “The Use of Parallel and Comparable Data for Analysis of Abstract Anaphora in German and English.” Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC'12), 2012.

Anaphora-With-Non‑nominal Antecedents in Computational Linguistics: A Survey. Computational Linguistics, MIT Press.

Ravshanova, Nozima Axtam qizi. “Anaphora Analysis in Uzbek Language Texts.” Issues of Pragmalinguistics, 2024.

Azimova, X. “Linguopragmatic and Linguocultural Study of Anaphora in English and Uzbek Languages.” Issues of Turkish Philology, 2025.

Synchronous and Asynchronous Distance Learning of Anaphora in Foreign Languages: An Experimental Study. (Turkum tadqiqot)

Article Statistics

Copyright License

Download Citations

How to Cite

Azimova Xurshida Zohidjon qizi. (2025). Linguocultural Study Of Anaphora In Different Languages (Uzbek, English, German). American Journal of Philological Sciences, 5(11), 346–351. https://doi.org/10.37547/ajps/Volume05Issue11-80