A Comparative Analysis of the Phonetic and Orthographic Features of English and Uzbek Musical Terminology

Бюллетень науки и практики / Bulletin of Science and Practice Т. 11. №6 2025

UDC 811                                           

Musical terminology is studied not only in terms of meaning and origin but also in terms of phonetic (pronunciation) and orthographic (spelling) realization. A comparative study of these characteristics in English and Uzbek, two languages with different sound systems and writing norms, is the main emphasis of this paper. Effective communication, translation, and cross-cultural awareness in the domain of music depend on a grasp of these distinctions and commonalities. English, a Germanic language with a Latin-based alphabet, and Uzbek, a Turkic language with a changed Latin and historically Cyrilic script, provide an interesting case study for exploring the interaction between language and musical expression.

A focused corpus of musical terminology was gathered from reliable English and Uzbek sources. This covered: Music encyclopedias and standard English dictionaries (e.g., The New Grove

Бюллетень науки и практики / Bulletin of Science and Practice Т. 11. №6 2025

Dictionary of Music and Musicians, Oxford English Dictionary). Dictionaries of English-Uzbek and Uzbek-English, as well as specialist glossaries of musical words in Uzbek (where applicable). Musical vocabulary found in academic papers, musical scores, and journalistic writing in both languages. Phonetic transcriptions for English words mostly relied on the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA) as shown in reliable dictionaries and phonetics tools. Where differences occurred, the more frequent or standard pronunciations were recorded. Considering the phonetic values of the letters in the present Latin script, phonetic transcriptions for Uzbek words were founded on the generally acknowledged pronunciation norms of modern Uzbek. Where dialectal or regional variances in pronunciation are known to occur for certain musical terminology, they were recorded for possible debate. A comparative study was done to find similarities and variations in the phonetic realisation of cognate terms — words having a same origin — and loanwords taken in by each language. This included looking at stress patterns, syllable structure, and vowel and consonant inventory. The musical terminology' regular spellings in both English and Uzbek (using the present Latin script) were documented. To grasp the history of its written form, historical variances in orthography — especially when phrases may have been once written in the Cyrillic script — were taken into account for Uzbek. A comparative study emphasizing the link between spelling and pronunciation in both languages, the representation of comparable sounds using distinct graphemes (letters or combinations of letters), and the orthographic adaption patterns seen in loanwords. Using a comparative linguistic method, this paper examined the phonetic and orthographic characteristics of musical vocabulary in English and Uzbek. The approach included the following main steps: Phonological Systems: A Short Comparison

Example: English: symphony/ ˈ sɪm.fə.ni/

Orthographic Features and Issues Loanwords in Uzbek and English: Adaptation Musical words acquired from English and Uzbek both change their spelling to different degrees. Especially from Romance languages, English keeps the original spelling of loanwords. Uzbek usually alters the spelling more closely to its phonetic system, which might cause orthographic modifications making the source less instantly clear to a speaker of the source language. For example, a very straight phonetic and orthographic translation of the Russian word “симфoния” (simfoniya) in Uzbek Latin script is “simfoniya”. To show the phonetic and orthographic variations, let us look at some instances of musical terminology in both languages:

Бюллетень науки и практики / Bulletin of Science and Practice Т. 11. №6 2025

These instances show how different sounds and spellings reflect similar or identical musical ideas because of the unique phonetic and orthographic systems of English and Uzbek. Though the degree of orthographic adaptation may differ, loanwords — especially those of international origin — often experience phonetic adaptation in both languages. The variations in phonetic and orthographic characteristics create difficulties in the translation and transliteration of musical vocabulary between English and Uzbek:

Phonetic Approximation: Because each system has its own sounds, it can be hard to find exact phonetic matches between two languages when transliterating words. A lot of the time, transliterations use the best match they can find, which can mean that some sound details are lost. Consistency in spelling: For clarity and consistency, it is important to set uniform spelling rules for copied words. It's important to think carefully about whether to keep the original spelling (which is what most people do in English) or change it to fit the orthographic rules of the target language (which is what most people do with Uzbek phonetic adaptation). While this piece is mostly about phonetics and orthography, it's important to keep in mind that the cultural and historical background of musical terms can also make it harder to translate them in a way that is semantically equivalent. Even if two words look or sound the same, they might have different meanings or refer to slightly different singing practices.

It is well known that English orthography is “non-phonemic”, which means that writing does not always match speech. As an example, choir is pronounced/ˈkwaɥər/, while bass is pronounced /beɥs/ in music but is spelled like “bass” (the fish).

On the other hand, Uzbek spelling is based more on sound, especially in the Latin and Cyrillic systems: Most of the time, what is written is what is said. There are still some differences, though, mostly with loanwords. Examples.

Common Patterns of Adaptation in Uzbek. Uzbek musical terminology has been subjected to a process of adaptation that has been influenced by Russian, Arabic-Persian, and, to a greater extent, English sources. In order to accommodate Uzbek phonotactics (i.e., the permissible sound combinations), Uzbek speakers naturally adapt foreign terms. This is due to the disparities in phonological systems. The following are the most frequently observed strategies during the adaptation process. Several patterns are observed when English or Russian musical terms are borrowed into Uzbek: Epenthesis (Vowel Insertion)To disrupt consonant clusters:

Piano → pianino (via Russian);

drum → baraban (adapted from Russian).

Final vowel addition to align with Uzbek word structure:

Rock → rok → rok musiqa (compound to contextualize the meaning).

Phoneme Substitution, Sounds that are absent from Uzbek are replaced: /θ/, as in theatre, frequently undergoes a transformation into /t/ or /s/. However, /ʃ/ and /ʒ/ from Russian are preserved (e.g., joz). Translation vs. Transliteration Certain terms are borrowed phonetically, while others are semantically translated:

Melody → navo (semantic match), while Symphony → simfoniya (transliteration).

Phonetic Adaptation: Uzbek phonetic principles are applied to the pronunciation of foreign musical terms, including vowel harmony tendencies, consonant substitutions, and a stress transfer to

Бюллетень науки и практики / Bulletin of Science and Practice Т. 11. №6 2025 the final syllable. The concluding inflection in the Uzbek word “simfoniya” is derived from the Russian word “симфония” (simfoniya). The word “jazz” in English is pronounced with Uzbek consonant sounds. Morphological Adaptation: The integration of foreign musical terms into Uzbek grammar is achieved by utilizing Uzbek plural suffixes (-lar), case endings, and the formation of verbs with auxiliary verbs such as qilmoq (to do). “Nota” (derived from Latin) is rendered as “notalar” (notes). “Aranjirovka qilmoq” (to arrange — derived from the Russian words “aранжировка” and “qilmoq”). Semantic Adaptation: The meaning of borrowed musical terms may be condensed, expanded, or adopt slightly different nuances in the Uzbek musical context. The term “klassik” (from the Russian/international language) encompasses both the Western classical music and the Uzbek classical maqom tradition.

The phonetic and orthographic traits of English and Uzbek musical vocabulary show the unique linguistic qualities of both languages. English, with its complicated vowel system and historically affected spelling, differs from Uzbek's more phonemic writing system and diverse set of defining sounds. Loanword adaptation and the portrayal of common musical ideas show how every language fits and incorporates musical terminology. Accurate communication, efficient translation, and a greater awareness of the linguistic variety inside the worldwide scene of music all depend on an understanding of these phonetic and orthographic distinctions. Further study might investigate the perceptual elements of these phonetic and orthographic differences and their influence on the knowledge and learning of musical vocabulary across language boundaries.