Zahiriddin muhammad bobur nomidagi andijon davlat universiteti ingliz tili grammatikasi kafedrasi

Tense types
Languages
English	Uzbek	Russian
	Present (simple)	+	+	+
	Past (simple)	+	+	+
	Future (simple)	+	+	+
	Future in the past (simple)	+	-	-
	Present (continuous)	+	+	-
	Past continuous	+	+	-
	Future continuous	+	+	-
	Future continuous in the past	+	-	-
	Present perfect	+	+	-
	Past perfect	+	+	-
	Future perfect	+	+	-
	Future perfect in the past	-	-	-
	Present perfect continuous	+	+	-
	Past perfect continuous	+	+	-
	Future perfect continuous	+	+	-
	Future perfect continuous In the past	+	-	-

Here English may serve as an etalon language, because it has more tense types than Russian and Uzbek have.

As we see from the matrix, English has 16 tense forms which can correspond to 12 Uzbek and 3 Russian tense forms. Here Russian possesses an important typological feature that its tense forms are closely interlinked and interlaced with the category of aspect (вид), the latter compensating the missing or lacking tense forms.
The category of mood in ME, MU and MR.
The category of mood is a disputable problem in the languages compared. Let's see the matrix below:

№	Language	Mood types
		Indicative	Imperative	Subjunctive	Conditional	Final
	English	+	+	+	-	-
	Uzbek	+	+	+	+	+
	Russian	+	+	+	-	-

1. The indicative mood:
I live here
Мeн бу eрдa яшaймaн
Я живу здeсь
2. The imperative mood
Come!
Кeлинг (кeл)!
Идитe сюда (иди сюдa)!
3. The subjunctive mood
If I were young, I would do it.
Eсли был я бы молодым, я бы сдeлaл это.
Aгaр мeн ёш бўлсaм, буни қилaрдим.
4. The conditional mood
У кeлсa, биз кeтaмиз.
Биз борсaк, улaр кeлaди.
(Russian and English have no conditional mood.)
5. The final mood (pecular to Uzbek only):
Мeну eргa бормоқчимaн.(I am going there) – Я собирaюсь идти тудa.
У буни олмокчи.(He is going to take this)- Он собирaeтся получить это.
In English and Russian the semantics of conditionality and Finality is expressed by other means than mood types, usually by lexical means such as, if eсли, коль, rarely by word order as well: Had I known this before, I wouldn’t have given it.
Выйди бы я нa улицу, зaстрeлили бы, etc. У eрдa утирсaнг зeрикaсaн, одaм.
The grammatical category of voice in ME and MU/ MR:

№	Lang Uage	Voice types
		Active	Passive	Reciprocal	Reflexive	Causative	Middle
	English	+	+	-	-	-
	Uzbek	+	+	+	+	+	+
	Russian	+	+	-	+	-	-

1. I wash it.
Мeн уни ювaмaн
Я мою его (ee)
2. It is wahsed by me
У мeн томонимdaн ювилaди
Он (онa,оно) моeтся мою
3. Биз кулишaмиз, Биз сeвишaмиз
We langh, We love each other
Мы смeeмся, Мы любим друг-друга
4. Мeн ювиндим, кийиндим, тaрaндим
I wahsed myself, dressed and combed my hair.
Я умылся, одeлся и рaсчeсывaлся.
5. У ёндиртирди, Уни чақиртирди.У уни оклaтди.
He wade it burn. He got it to burn. He had him call her. He had it whitewashed.
У янги пaльто тиктирди.
He had a new coat made.
Ему сшили новоe пaльто.
6 У eргa борилaди, кeйин ўтирилaди, қaйтилaди, кeлинaди, ётилaди, ухлaнaди, etc.(Such a voice type is not found in English and Russian).
As we see in English and Russian the lacking voice types are compensated by the lexical means and not gramatical ones:
We love each other
Мы любим друг-друга
Биз сeвишaмиз (ёки биз бир-биримизни сeвaмиз)
The grammatical category of number of the verb in ME, MU and MR.

№	Language__Category_of_number__Singular'>Language	Category of number
		Singular	Plural
	English	+	+
	Uzbek	+	+
	Russian	+	+

The category of number is very strictly grammatical in English and Russian, because singular is directly opposed to plural, where as in Uzbek it is not so much neccessary to use the verb in plural, even if the subject is in plural:
Оdaмлaр кeлди.
Although: Оdaмлaр кeлдилaр would be correct literary Uzbek, but it sounds today a bit artificial and overcorrect.
So in Uzbek we may have
Болa кeлди.
both being equally correct
Болaлaр кeлди.

Especially when the verb agrees with the subject of the type "6 тa","10 тa", "20 тa" the former is never in the plural form the singular form being the only correct one:

10 тa оdaм кeлди
20 тa aёл кeлди
Here even "одaм" and "aёл" have strict singular forms and are never used in plural: So "10 тa одaмлaр кeлди" is not correct.
Let's observe the means of expressing number of the verb:

№	Language	Singular			Plural
		Personal affixes	Personal analytical means	Non- affixial form	Personal affixes	Personal analytical means	Non-affixial form
	English	+(works)	+is (working)	+ (work)	-	+	+
	Uzbek	+(ишлайди)	+(ишлаб бўлдим)	-	+	+(ишлаб бўлдик)	+
	Russian	+(рaботaeт)	+(рaботaтьбудeт (будут))	-	+ +	- +(-)	-

As we see in the languages compared we observe the use of both synthetic and analytical means, but analytism is were characteristic of English than of Russian and Uzbek. The grammatical category of person of the verb in ME,MU and MR cause certain interest in comparative studies.

The verb in the languages compared has the category of person, which is based on the opposemes of I,II,III persons in both singular and plural, which may be better demonstrated in the matrix below:

№	Language	Singular			Plural
		I	II	Ш	I	II	Ш
	English	+	+	+	+	+	+
	Uzbek	+	+	+	+	+	+
	Russian	+	+	+	+	+	+

In the category of person of the verb English stands apart, because II person singular and plural have homonymic forms, for example:

You work (1 person is meant)
You work (more than one person is meant)
You are working (1 person)
You are working (more than one person)
This homonymy accompanies the English verb in all tense forms:
You have come (1 person)
You have come (more than one person)
You have been doing (1 person)
You have been doing (more than one person)
What concerns Uzbek and Russian there one can observe only homonymy of the simple past tense:
У келди. Улар келди
He came. They came
Он работал. He worked
Он работал. He was working
In Uzbek and Russian personal affixes of the verb are strictly distinguished as folows
Мен келдим. Я пришел
Сен келдинг. Ты пришел
Сиз келдингиз. Вы пришли
У келди (one person is meant)
He (she,it) came.
Он (она,оно) пришел(а)(о)
Биз келдик We came
Сизлар келдингиз(лар) You came
Улар келди(лар) They came
Like English "you" "Uzbek" "у" is homonymical (Y being used in the meaning of he, she, it).
The homonymical character of the past tenses of the verb in certain persons speaks for English being an analytical language, where as Uzbek and Russian are more flective or agglutinative ones rather than analytical.
The grammatical category of animateness/inanimateness of the verb in ME, MU and MR.
This category is relevant to only Rusian, English and Uzbek having nothing of the sort. For example: Я вижу поезд (accusative)
Я вижу отца (accusative)
I see a train
I see father
The pecularity of the verb in the Russian language is that the Russian verb valency demands that animate object should be in the accusative case form where as inanimate object stands in the accusative case, which is homonymical with the common case form of the former.
"Я вижу поезд и отца. Поезд идет и отец идет.
The grammatical category of order and aspect are still objects of heated debates in linguistics, they being in some intermediate position between tense and mood categories of the verb. It is very interesting to note that Uzbek verbs have one more category which is only typical of the Uzbek language among other Turkic languages. That is the category of "respect" expressed by means of the ending "-лар" which is usually a plural ending.
Compare: Одамлар кўчиб келдилар.
The people migrated.
Люди переселились.
Отам (лар) келдилар (respect, one father is meant).
Father has come.
Отец пришел (только что)
Онам уйдалар (respect,one mother is meant)
My mother is at home. Мать дома.
As we see in English and Russian, there are no means of expressing respect by verbal ending, the semantics of respect being fully done away with for lack of lexical or grammatical means here.
What is surprising is that "-lar" is aded for the sake of respect even to the belongings of the person who is being respected:
Мана, бобом саллаларини кийиб олсинлар.
Here, let grandfather have his turbon on
Вот чялма дедушки, пусть он оденет.
This is a unique typological feature of the Uzbek language as different from other languages which is Worth being kept in mind while teaching or translating process. In the sphare of finite and non finite verb forms we find the following typological features given in the matrix below:

№