ANALYZING COMMENTARY: LINGUISTIC TOOLS AND SPORTS DISCOURSE

DISCOURSE

National university of Uzbekistan

Department foreign language and literature

Doctor of science, professor

Sarimsokov Khurshid Abdimalikovich

Annotation: This paper explores the concept of commentary (sharh) as a cognitive and communicative phenomenon in both literary and journalistic contexts. It highlights the historical development of commentary, its differentiation from related notions such as analysis and description, and its role in public discourse. Particular attention is given to the emergence of sports commentary in the UK and Uzbekistan, emphasizing the linguistic competence required for effective live reporting.

Keywords: commentary, analysis, description, rhetoric, sports media, broadcasting, Uzbekistan, live speech,

Аннотация: В данной статье рассматривается концепция комментария (sharh) как когнитивного и коммуникативного феномена как в литературном, так и в журналистском контексте. В ней освещается историческое развитие комментария, его отличие от связанных понятий, таких как анализ и описание, и его роль в публичном дискурсе. Особое внимание уделяется появлению спортивного комментария в Великобритании и Узбекистане, подчеркивая языковую компетенцию, необходимую для эффективного прямого репортажа.

Ключевые слова: комментарий, анализ, описание, риторика, спортивные СМИ, вещание, Узбекистан, прямая речь,

Annotatsiya: Ushbu maqolada sharh (sharh) tushunchasi ham adabiy, ham publitsistik kontekstda kognitiv va kommunikativ hodisa sifatida o‘rganiladi. Unda sharhning tarixiy rivojlanishi, tahlil va tavsif kabi bir-biriga bog‘liq tushunchalardan farqlanishi, ommaviy nutqda tutgan o‘rni yoritilgan. Buyuk Britaniya va O'zbekistonda sport sharhlarining paydo bo'lishiga alohida e'tibor qaratilib, samarali jonli reportaj uchun zarur bo'lgan lingvistik kompetentsiyaga urg'u beriladi.

Kalit so‘zlar: sharh, tahlil, tavsif, ritorika, sport mediasi, translyatsiya, O‘zbekiston, jonli nutq.

Introduction. In today’s world, the exchange of information plays a critical role in human cognitive development. Commentary (sharh) is considered an interpretive reaction to an event or phenomenon, serving as a structured means to articulate thoughts and evaluations. One of the natural abilities endowed to humans is the capacity to express opinions and judgments about their surroundings in a coherent and meaningful way. When such an expression is directed toward a specific purpose and situated within a defined timeframe, it is categorized as micro-commentary. The term sharh, derived from Arabic, denotes clarification or explanation and is generally classified into two types. The first is textual commentary, which offers scientific and explanatory insights into the content of written works such as books, documents, or translations. This form of commentary is typically authored by experts like translators, editors, or scholars and provides historical context, intertextual references, and clarifies complex terms or allusions. It is frequently appended to the text or, in the case of classical works, presented as a separate volume. The second type belongs to the field of journalism and involves presenting timely explanatory material on socio-political or cultural events via mass media [1]. It includes fact analysis, comparison, argumentation, and conclusion, tailored for specific platforms like radio, television, print, or digital media.

Before fully exploring the concept of commentary, it is important to distinguish it from related notions such as analysis, explanation, description, and portrayal. While commentary often overlaps with these terms in function, it maintains distinctive features. For instance, though some scholars equate commentary with analysis, theoretical inquiry reveals their specific boundaries. According to the Explanatory Dictionary of the Uzbek Language, analysis includes the study of phenomena from various perspectives-essence, structure, and contextual significance. In journalism and sports, analysis often involves experts critically evaluating events or actions based on both theoretical and practical grounds. Commentary is also closely related to the concept of “explanation”, which is used when specific terms or events within a text require clarification. The difference largely depends on context: when presented in simpler terms, an explanation may function as commentary. Dictionaries define “explanation” as a clarifying note or added remark, often accompanying texts to aid comprehension.

In contemporary communication, commentary represents a vital cognitive function, expressing interpretative judgments on events and phenomena. It is generally classified into two types: textual commentary, often appended to written works to clarify content or offer scholarly insights; and journalistic commentary, which analyzes and contextualizes socio-political or cultural developments across media platforms. Closely related to commentary are the concepts of analysis, explanation, and description, yet each bears distinctive features. Analysis involves examining the essence and structure of a subject, whereas explanation clarifies specific terms or facts within a context. Description (tavsif), in contrast, focuses on conveying the specific attributes of a single element-such as a player or an object in a game-rather than interpreting the entire process as commentary does[2]. Commentary often demands not only academic insight but also rhetorical skill, neutrality, and linguistic agility, especially in fields like broadcasting or public speech, where figures might deliver commentary during military events or read decrees aloud to the public.

The concept of commentary in the sports domain has a less extensive historical record compared to fields like law or economics, though its roots can be traced to military traditions. The term commentary itself emerged in the early 15th century, according to English etymological sources, deriving from the Medieval Latin commentarius (“notebook, annotation”) and ultimately from commentum (“interpretation, statement”). This evolution reflects its function as a sequence or collection of observations. As defined in the Oxford English Dictionary, commentary refers to “a spoken description of an event that is given while it is happening, especially on the radio or television,” underlining its real-time explanatory role. Overall, commentary stands at the intersection of interpretation, public discourse, and information delivery, adapting across historical, linguistic, and functional contexts.

The scholar I.Yu. Bokatina, who analyzed the historical features of commentaries, rightly stated that “from a historical perspective, the study of commentary led to the scholarly examination of the art of rhetoric.”

In contemporary discourse, commentary plays a key role in the transmission and interpretation of information, serving as a cognitive mechanism that connects individuals with their environment. Defined as an explanatory or interpretative reaction to events, the term commentary (sharh), derived from Arabic, includes both written and spoken forms. It traditionally comprises two main types: literary commentary, which provides scholarly clarifications in texts—offered by authors, translators, or editors— and journalistic commentary, which explains socio-cultural and political developments through mass media. Closely associated with, but distinct from, analysis, explanation, and description, commentary carries unique attributes. Description (tavsif), for instance, captures the traits of a particular subject or moment within a larger event, whereas commentary encompasses a more comprehensive narrative. As I.Yu. Bokatina notes, “from a historical perspective, the study of commentary led to the scholarly examination of the art of rhetoric,” affirming its foundational role in discourse traditions [3,19].

The practice of live commentary particularly advanced with the rise of mass broadcasting. In the UK, the first sports commentary was delivered on January 15, 1927, during an international rugby match between England and Wales, aired live by the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC). The main commentator, Teddy Wakelama former military man and rugby player-was supported by secondary commentator Cecil Arthur Lewis, who read out players’ numbers. Television broadcasting began in 1937, with the first live sports commentary provided by former middleweight boxing champion and Olympic gold medalist Harry Mallin[4,320]. In Uzbekistan, the first major radiophonic infrastructure appeared in 1915, but regular sports commentary was not introduced until decades later. It wasn't until 1960 that the first live football report was aired by Uzbek radio. Initially, Soviet-era television sports commentary in Uzbekistan was conducted in Russian. Notable progress came with the emergence of Uzbek-language commentators such as Axbor Imomxo‘jayev and sports journalist Abduxakim Turg‘unov.

Live commentary entails a dynamic, real-time interaction between the commentator and the audience, characterized by spontaneous, fluent speech. As G.A. Tezekboyeva emphasizes, “spontaneous (live) speech occurs under constantly changing communicative conditions, and is therefore an indicator of the speaker’s language proficiency.”[5] This insight suggests that an effective commentator must possess a high command of their native language to convey events clearly, accurately, and engagingly in the moment. The evolution of commentary, particularly in sports, thus not only reflects technological and historical developments but also demands a refined mastery of language and rhetorical skill.

THE LIST OF USED LITERATURE

1. https://qomus.info/encyclopedia/cat-sh/sharh-uz

2. https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=commentary

3. Бокатина Ю.И. Историческое комментирование в системе методической подготовки студентов-филологов. Автореф. дисс. ... канд. филол. наук. – Москва, 2006. – 19 с.

4. Barclay P., The Definitive Story of the Father of Modern Football, Herbert Chapman. W&N publisher. 2015. 320 p.

5. Belitskаyа А.А. Оn the rоle оf hesitаtiоn pаuses in spоntаneоus speech // Philоlоgy аnd literаry criticism. 2014. Nо. 2. URL:http://bit.ly/2XBhоОe (Аccessed:05/12/2019)