Zahiriddin muhammad bobur nomidagi andijon davlat universiteti ingliz tili grammatikasi kafedrasi

Now let’s focus our attention on the correlation between comparative typology and methods ofteaching English.
Comparative typology, as has been said above, has close links with methods of teaching languages and translation, as well as with such applied bran-ches of lingiustics as lexicography.
The main purpose of the course of Comparative typology is to work out some effective methodical recommendations for teaching process as well as for promoting translation activities and lexicographical research.
What are the links between comparative typology and methods of teaching languages?
The links are observed when methods of teaching languages are by all means to be based on the linguistic data of the comparative analysis of ME, MU and MR, without which no methods of teaching is possible.
Here first of all dissimilarities are to be taken into consideration, for it is vital that students should know what differences are there between ME, MU and MR and what reasons are there bribging them forth.
Usually dissimilarities are accounted for by the typological features of the compared languages, and they do help, if precisely explained, to work out effective methods of teaching languages.
Similar features are also well-applicable in here, for when a student sees likenesses between English, Uzbek and Russian it is easy for him to learn this or that phenomenon.
Comparative typology helps us, then, to:
1) work out effective methodology of teaching languages
2) prevent various mistakes caused by interlanguage interference
3) promote translation work and research
4) compile textbooks and dictionaries
5) provide some valuable linguistic data for typological research
6) make general, special, comparative and typological grammars, etc.
Comparative typology helps to do away with language interferences:
a) interlanguage interference
He live (wrong) – He lives
He (she) came (indifferent use of he or she)- укелди
b) intralanguage interference
man - men (correct) - mans (wrong)
child - children (correct) - childrens (wrong)
ox - oxen (correct) - oxes (wrong)
fox - foxes (correct) - foxen (wrong)
box - boxes (correct) - boxen (wrong)
mouse- mice (correct) - mouses (wrong)
house - hice (wrong) - houses (correct)
Lets' consider the correlation between the comparative typology and methods of teaching languages (English, Uzbek and Russian).
When teaching a foreign language teachers usually come across mistakes (errors) in the sphere of pronunciation (phonetics and phonology), parts of speech and their grammatical categories (morphology) and in constructing phrasemes and sentencemes (syntax), hence in using them in everyday speech - both oral or written speech (in textics).
The analysis of the mistakes prompts us to divide them into two main groups:
1. accidental mistakes
2. typicalmistakes
The first group of mistakes is caused by the weak knowledge of the learned material by students and such mistakes may be corrected through a careful methodical approach to offective system of exercises aimed at drilling the language phenoman in question.
The second group of mistakes is caused by the typological differences or by the allomorphic features of the languages compared, and they occur very often in typical situations and contexts. That is why such mistakes reqularly occuring in oral or written speech of foreign language learners are called typical mistakes.
Typical mistakes may be further subdivided in to the structural and the semantical types:
I. Structural types:
1. Typical mistakes in pronunciation (phonetical mistakes).
2. Typical mistakes in expressing the grammatical categories of the parts of speech (morphological mistakes)
3. Typical mistakes in making up phrasemes and sentences (syntactical mistakes)
II. Semantical types:
1. Typical mistakes in understanding or disclosing the semantics of words (lexemes)
2. Typical mistakes in understanding or disclosing the semantics of phrases (phrasemes)
3. Typical mistakes in understanding or disclosing the semantics of sentences (sentencemes)
4. Typical mistakes in understanding or disclosing the semantics of texts (textemes)
The above offered classification of typical mistakes can be done away with only by the help of a throughly investigated, methodically well-grounded and carefully planned system of both language and speech exercises aimed at liquidating the mistakes in question.
In this connection three phase approach to liquidating mistakes has to be applied through a set of:
1) language exercises
2) conditional speech exercises (mixture of language and speech exercises)
3) speech exercises
The systematic work on typical mistakes through the above offered types of exercises will undoubtedly result in developing writing, reading and speaking habits, as well as automatic skills of using a foreign language.
We can illustrate the cases of typical mistakes observed universally in the speeches of learners of the foreign languages.
For instance, the absense of the long phoneme (i:) both in Uzbek and Russian will cause a typical mistake resulting in the wrong promunciation of the long phoneme (i:) as a short one (i) which is typical of the mother tongues of Uzbeks and Russians; for example: street (stri:t) may be wrongly pronounced as (strit) both by Uzbeks and Russians under the great impact of their mother tongnes.
The absense of the articles, for instance, in Uzbek and Russian is the source of a lot of typical mistakes in translating the word "город" or "шахар" into English, because the determinating feature of the article of English is not typical of Uzbek and Russian:
So, we get: город - шахар - a town
город - шахар - the town
Such typical mistakes as "four boy" "ten girl" are the results of the weak differentiation of the plural and singular forms of the Uzbek nouns like any other turkic languages, in which such phrases are normal phenomena: "туртбола, ункиз or турттабола, унтакиз" and never "турттаболалар, унтакизлар", which will be then a violation of the rule of the use of the category of number of the Uzbek or turkic nouns in general.
In the sphere of syntax one can observe such typical mistakes as a broken word order in a sentence of the English language which is canonically as follows:
S (subject) + P (predicate) + DO (direct object) + ID (inderect object) + Adv.modifiers of place + Adv. modifiers of time, here attribute being more in preposition than in postposition as to the antecedent in a sentence. This canonic position of sentence parts in English is usually broken, because of the impact of the typical word order in a sentence of the Uzbek language (where as Russian sentence parts fully correspond to the positions of sentence parts in English, because they belong to one and the same language type - SVO which is typical of all the Indoeuropean languages.
Typical semantical mistakes are observed in the everyday speech of foreign language learners, because of the weak knowledge of the semantical organization or structure of certain language units (be it a lexeme, phraseme or sentenceme, etc.). This is clearly felt when students are asked to choose appropriate synonyms to the lexeme in hand: to get, to recieve, to obtaim ,to take, etc.
Students use these synonyms indifferently, because they doint know the seme structure of their semantics in which contensive differences are hidden.
Hence, "to obtain" is never a synonym of "to take" and to recieve" in such situations as "to recieve a telegramme" and perhaps never "to obtain a telegramme" although to get or to take a telegramme" is normal here.
Or take the word "decade" in English and compare it with the Russian and Uzbek word "декада", which means "ten days" unlike its meaning of "ten years" in English.
The comparative typological studies help us to distinguish types of the languages compared and solve many general methodical problems such as:
1) problem of diagnosing difficulties of phonological, syllabic, morphemic, morphological and syntactical levels of the language hierarchy, that is, all the typical mistakes that students commit and have to cope with in studying a foreign language;
2) problem of selection (or choice) of the necessary language and speech material taking into account the specific features of the compared languages and determining the strict succession (or sequence) of the language and speech material.
3) problem of methodical prognosing and creating an effective system of methods of presentation of the teaching material and of rational exercises, as well as of drilling, further autonatization and working out an effective system of controlling the knowledge, habits and skills of students.
4) problem of creating a scientifically grounded system of textbooks of practical courses of foreign languages.
Besides that comparative typological studies help us to solve among others a lot of problems of special methods of teaching a given foreign language in a certain national anditorium pushing off from the specific features of the mothertongue of students.

2.