THE SYNTHESIS OF MODERNISM AND TRADITION: THE STREAM OF CONSCIOUSNESS IN THE WORKS OF JAMES JOYCE AND CHO'LPON

JOURNAL OF IQRO – ЖУРНАЛ ИҚРО – IQRO JURNALI – volume 18, issue 01, 2025 ISSN: 2181-4341, IMPACT FACTOR ( RESEARCH BIB ) – 7,245, SJIF – 5,431 www.wordlyknowledge.uz ILMIY METODIK JURNAL Shomurodova Mahliyo Mingnor qizi Qarshi xalqaro universiteti, assistent o‘qituvchi E-mail: [email protected] THE SYNTHESIS OF MODERNISM AND TRADITION: THE STREAM OF CONSCIOUSNESS IN THE WORKS OF JAMES JOYCE AND CHO‘LPON Abstract: This study explores the synthesis of modernist experimentation and national tradition through a comparative analysis of James Joyce and Abdulhamid Cho‘lpon—two literary figures who reshaped their respective cultural landscapes during the first half of the twentieth century. Although separated by geography, language, and ideology, both writers engaged in a radical redefinition of narrative form and consciousness. Joyce, in Ulysses (1922) and A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man (1916), revolutionized narrative language through his stream of consciousness technique, linguistic fragmentation, and interior monologue, representing the modern individual’s divided psyche. Cho‘lpon, in Kecha va Kunduz (Night and Day, 1936) and his lyrical poetry, introduced psychological introspection and linguistic modernism to Uzbek literature, blending European narrative forms with national poetic identity. This article examines how both authors negotiate between modernism and tradition, how the technique of stream of consciousness functions as a vehicle of cultural self-expression, and how linguistic innovation mirrors socio-political transformation. By employing comparative stylistic and semiotic analysis, this research demonstrates that both Joyce and Cho‘lpon exemplify a “double consciousness” —a modern awareness shaped by cultural memory and artistic autonomy. Their works illuminate how global modernism can be localized through language, identity, and imagination, providing insight into the transcultural nature of literary modernity. Keywords: Modernism, tradition, stream of consciousness, James Joyce, Cho‘lpon, comparative literature, national identity, linguistic modernism Annotatsiya: Ushbu maqolada XX asrning birinchi yarmida ingliz yozuvchisi Jeyms Joys va o‘zbek adibi Abdulhamid Cho‘lpon ijodida modernizm va an’anaviylik sintezi masalasi tahlil qilinadi. Garchi bu ikki ijodkor turli madaniy, til va tarixiy muhitlarda yashagan bo‘lsa-da, ularni birlashtiruvchi jihat — inson ongining murakkab kechinmalarini badiiy tilda ifodalashga bo‘lgan intilishdir. Joys “Ulis” va “San’atkorning yoshlik portreti” asarlarida ong oqimi, ichki monolog va til parchalari orqali zamonaviy inson tafakkurining ichki dinamikasini aks ettirgan. Cho‘lpon esa “Kecha va kunduz” romani hamda she’riyatida o‘zbek badiiy tafakkuriga yangicha psixologizm va til modernizmini olib kirgan. Maqolada har ikki muallifning ijodida modernizm va milliy an’ana uyg‘unligi, shuningdek, ong oqimi uslubining madaniy o‘zlikni ifodalash vositasi sifatidagi ahamiyati yoritiladi. Kalit so‘zlar: modernizm, an’anaviylik, ong oqimi, Jeyms Joys, Cho‘lpon, qiyosiy adabiyotshunoslik, milliy o‘zlik, lingvistik modernizm. Аннотация: В статье рассматривается синтез модернистских поисков и национальных традиций в творчестве Джеймса Джойса иАбдулхамида Чулпана, писателей, сформировавших художественное сознание своего времени. Несмотря на различия в языке, культуре и историческом опыте, оба автора стремились выразить внутренний мир личности, находящейся между прошлым и будущим. Джойс в романах «Улисс» и «Портрет художника в юности» создал новый тип повествования на основе потока сознания и языковой фрагментации. Чулпан, в романе «Ночь и день» и в поэзии, ввёл в узбекскую литературу элементы психологического анализа и лингвистического JOURNAL OF IQRO – ЖУРНАЛ ИҚРО – IQRO JURNALI – volume 18, issue 01, 2025 ISSN: 2181-4341, IMPACT FACTOR ( RESEARCH BIB ) – 7,245, SJIF – 5,431 www.wordlyknowledge.uz ILMIY METODIK JURNAL модернизма, сочетая европейские формы с национальной поэтикой. Исследование показывает, что в их произведениях модернизм не противопоставляется традиции, а трансформирует её в новое художественное качество. Ключевые слова: модернизм, традиция, поток сознания, Джеймс Джойс, Чулпан, сравнительное литературоведение, национальная идентичность, языковой модернизм. Introduction The first half of the twentieth century marked a profound transformation in world literature. Amid the collapse of empires, the rise of nationalism, and the birth of modernity, writers across linguistic and cultural frontiers sought new forms to express the fragmented consciousness of the modern age. Among the most emblematic of these figures were James Joyce, the Irish modernist who revolutionized narrative structure and language, and Abdulhamid Cho‘lpon, the Uzbek poet, novelist, and intellectual who brought psychological depth and stylistic innovation to Central Asian literature. Despite their differing contexts, both authors pursued the same artistic question: How can language capture the inner life of a self torn between the past and the future? Joyce’s Dublin and Cho‘lpon’s Tashkent may appear distant, yet both served as symbolic spaces of colonized modernity, where individuals struggled to reconcile inherited tradition with the demands of a changing world. Modernism, as a literary and cultural movement, emerged from linguistic, moral, and epistemological. It represented both a rebellion against inherited forms and a search for new modes of expression. Joyce’s stream of consciousness technique, for instance, shattered the linearity of narrative time, while Cho‘lpon’s modernist realism introduced unprecedented psychological complexity into Uzbek prose. Each in his way enacted what T.S. Eliot (1921) termed “the historical sense,” a simultaneous awareness of tradition and innovation that defines the modern artist. This study situates Joyce and Cho‘lpon within a comparative framework that reveals how global modernism interacts with national tradition. It explores how the stream of consciousness operates not merely as a stylistic device but as a semiotic bridge between Western and Eastern modes of self-expression. By analyzing the interplay of language, identity, and narrative consciousness, the paper aims to show that both writers achieved a synthesis rather than a rupture: their modernism was not a rejection of tradition but its reinvention. Furthermore, this analysis addresses the broader question confronting comparative literature today: how modernism manifests across cultural boundaries and how local literary modernities contribute to a global understanding of art and consciousness. Joyce’s verbal experimentation and Cho‘lpon’s linguistic renewal together form a transcultural dialogue, illustrating that modernism is not a monolithic Western invention but a shared human response to modernity’s intellectual and emotional dilemmas. Literature Review Scholarly interest in the stream of consciousness technique and its relationship to modernist aesthetics has long been central to twentieth-century literary criticism. James Joyce, alongside Virginia Woolf and Marcel Proust, is often cited as a pioneer of psychological narration and linguistic experimentation. The technique, initially theorized by philosopher William James (1890) as a metaphor for the continuous flow of human thought, was transformed by modernist authors into a narrative method capturing interiority and subjectivity. In Ulysses and A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man, Joyce developed this into what critics such as Hugh Kenner (1956) call a “linguistic consciousness,” where language itself becomes the medium of thought rather than its mere representation. In Uzbek literary studies, Cho‘lpon has been increasingly recognized as a parallel modernist figure. As noted by Omonov (2019) and Tosheva (2022), JOURNAL OF IQRO – ЖУРНАЛ ИҚРО – IQRO JURNALI – volume 18, issue 01, 2025 ISSN: 2181-4341, IMPACT FACTOR ( RESEARCH BIB ) – 7,245, SJIF – 5,431 www.wordlyknowledge.uz ILMIY METODIK JURNAL Cho‘lpon’s narrative style—particularly in Kecha va Kunduz—reflects an unprecedented attention to individual psychology, inner speech, and the fragmentation of social reality. Scholars have described Cho‘lpon’s prose as “a mirror of the self in transition,” linking his linguistic experimentation to the cultural awakening of the Jadid movement and the intellectual search for national identity during the early Soviet era. Comparative modernism, as a field, has broadened in recent decades to include non-Western literatures in global modernist discourse. Susan Stanford Friedman (2015) and Laura Doyle (2020) emphasize that modernism must be seen as a network of intersecting temporalities and geographies rather than a unidirectional Western export. In this context, analyzing Cho‘lpon alongside Joyce contributes to the emerging paradigm of global modernisms, revealing how local literary practices reinterpret universal forms. Previous comparative attempts (Khurramov, 2018; Karimova, 2020) have explored thematic parallels between European and Uzbek modernism but often without deep stylistic analysis. This study seeks to fill that gap by focusing on language as consciousness—how Joyce and Cho‘lpon both transform linguistic material into psychological realism. It positions the stream of consciousness not merely as a Western innovation but as a universal literary language through which modern subjectivity articulates itself. Equally significant is the role of tradition in both authors’ modernism. Joyce’s invocation of classical mythology (e.g., Homer’s Odyssey as a structural framework for Ulysses) reflects his conviction that the modern world could only be represented through the lens of inherited myth. Similarly, Cho‘lpon drew on Uzbek classical poetics—Navoi’s spiritual humanism and folk symbolism—to ground his modern experiments in cultural continuity. As such, both writers embody what literary theorist Mikhail Bakhtin (1981) would describe as dialogism—a multiplicity of voices that coexist and interact within a single text, linking the individual’s inner voice to the collective memory of a culture. While Joyce’s works have been extensively theorized through psychoanalysis (Ellmann, 1959; Lacan, 1975) and linguistic modernism (Barthes, 1970), Cho‘lpon’s contributions are still underrepresented in global modernist studies. This paper aims to correct that imbalance by situating Cho‘lpon within a transnational context and demonstrating that his “Uzbek modernism” reflects the same universal tension between freedom and belonging, between the modern self and its cultural roots. Thus, the present study builds upon three strands of scholarship: 1. The stylistic and philosophical foundations of modernist narrative (Kenner, Eliot, Woolf, Barthes); 2. Uzbek literary modernism and the psychology of national awakening (Omonov, Tosheva, Karimova); 3. Comparative and global modernism theories (Friedman, Doyle, Moretti, Damrosch). Together, these provide a conceptual framework for understanding how Joyce and Cho‘lpon exemplify the synthesis of modernism and tradition through the medium of language and consciousness. Theoretical Framework: Modernism, Consciousness, and the Language of the Self Modernism, as both an aesthetic and philosophical movement, emerged from the disillusionment and epistemological crisis of the early twentieth century. It was marked by the collapse of traditional certainties — linguistic, moral, and metaphysical — and by the rise of a fragmented perception of reality. As Jean-François Lyotard (1979) notes, modernity signifies a “crisis of grand narratives,” compelling artists to seek new forms capable of expressing subjective JOURNAL OF IQRO – ЖУРНАЛ ИҚРО – IQRO JURNALI – volume 18, issue 01, 2025 ISSN: 2181-4341, IMPACT FACTOR ( RESEARCH BIB ) – 7,245, SJIF – 5,431 www.wordlyknowledge.uz ILMIY METODIK JURNAL experience in a disordered world. The stream of consciousness technique, central to this aesthetic revolution, represents the artistic embodiment of that search. Coined by philosopher William James in Principles of Psychology (1890), the term originally described the continuous and associative flow of thought in the human mind. For writers like James Joyce,Virginia Woolf, and Marcel Proust, this psychological model became a literary method — one that replaced external plot with internal monologue, logic with association, and syntax with rhythm. The stream of consciousness in literature functions as a linguistic mirror of consciousness. It breaks with classical narration by foregrounding interior temporality — what Henri Bergson called la durée, the fluid experience of time as lived rather than measured. Joyce’s Ulysses, for example, transforms Dublin into a mental landscape where the boundaries between thought, memory, and sensation collapse. From a semiotic perspective, the stream of consciousness also constitutes what Yuri Lotman (1990) calls a semiosphere — a self-contained system of signs through which a culture interprets its reality. Each act of consciousness is both individual and collective; the language of thought reflects the semiotic codes of a society. In this sense, Joyce’s linguistic experimentation and Cho‘lpon’s adaptation of modernist narration both represent an intersemiotic dialogue between personal consciousness and cultural discourse. In non-Western literary contexts, modernism was not merely aesthetic imitation but also a cultural translation. Cho‘lpon’s modernism, born out of the Jadid intellectual movement, was deeply intertwined with questions of national identity and colonial resistance. His linguistic choices — the fusion of classical Uzbek with colloquial and Russian-influenced syntax — signify both the fragmentation and renewal of selfhood. Whereas Joyce used language to deconstruct the English colonial mentality of Ireland, Cho‘lpon used it to reconstruct the cultural dignity of Turkic-Uzbek consciousness within the Soviet colonial framework. Thus, both authors engage in what Mikhail Bakhtin (1981) terms dialogism: the coexistence of multiple voices — social, ideological, and psychological — within a single text. Their linguistic polyphony transforms narrative into a site of negotiation between self and society, modernity and tradition. In Joyce’s case, this manifests as irony and linguistic play; in Cho‘lpon’s, as moral introspection and poetic sincerity. In sum, the stream of consciousness in both authors becomes not only a technical innovation but also a moral epistemology — a way of knowing the self through the act of linguistic creation. It embodies modernism’s paradox: rebellion against tradition through the reanimation of its deepest values. Comparative Analysis: Joyce and Cho‘lpon as Architects of Consciousness 1. James Joyce: Language as a Mirror of Mind James Joyce’s Ulysses (1922) and A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man (1916) stand as milestones in the evolution of modern narrative form. Both works foreground the interior monologue as a means of representing thought before logical or grammatical organization. In A Portrait, Stephen Dedalus’s consciousness evolves through linguistic shifts — from the rhythmic simplicity of childhood perceptions (“moocow came down along the road”) to the complex philosophical reflections of adulthood. Joyce transforms language into a psychological chronotope, where syntax and rhythm echo the movement of consciousness itself. In Ulysses, Joyce radicalizes this technique. The novel’s structure parallels Homer’s Odyssey, but the heroic journey is internalized; the modern Odysseus, Leopold Bloom, navigates the labyrinth of his own mind. The Penelope episode — Molly Bloom’s soliloquy — epitomizes the purest form of stream of consciousness in literature: unpunctuated, associative, and bodily. Her monologue flows through memory, desire, and perception without rational interruption. As scholars such as Kenner (1956) and Ellmann (1959) observe, Joyce’s linguistic experimentation collapses the boundaries between narrator and character, transforming language into consciousness itself. JOURNAL OF IQRO – ЖУРНАЛ ИҚРО – IQRO JURNALI – volume 18, issue 01, 2025 ISSN: 2181-4341, IMPACT FACTOR ( RESEARCH BIB ) – 7,245, SJIF – 5,431 www.wordlyknowledge.uz ILMIY METODIK JURNAL Joyce’s engagement with Irish colonial identity further deepens his modernism. For him, English was both the medium of expression and a symbol of oppression. His famous statement — “The language we are speaking is his before it is mine” — encapsulates this ambivalence. Consequently, Joyce’s manipulation of English — through puns, neologisms, and multilingual allusions — constitutes an act of linguistic decolonization. His stream of consciousness thus becomes a political tool: by remolding English, he reclaims Irish identity. 2. Cho‘lpon: Consciousness and Cultural Self-Reflection Abdulhamid Cho‘lpon (1897–1938) occupies a similarly transformative position in Uzbek literature. His novel Kecha va Kunduz (Night and Day) and his lyrical poetry mark the birth of psychological realism in Central Asian prose. Cho‘lpon’s writing reflects the intellectual ferment of the early Soviet period and the spiritual legacy of the Jadid reformers, who sought to modernize Muslim society through education and art. In Kecha va Kunduz, Cho‘lpon employs interior monologue and free indirect discourse to explore the inner conflicts of his protagonists — particularly the female character Zebi, whose emotional and moral dilemmas symbolize the awakening of individual consciousness under social constraint. Her inner dialogue, shifting between duty and desire, mirrors the broader cultural tension between traditional morality and modern self-realization. Linguistically, Cho‘lpon’s prose oscillates between poetic rhythm and realist description, creating a texture akin to the musicality of thought. His vocabulary blends classical Chagatai elements with the spoken idioms of early twentieth-century Uzbek, achieving a linguistic modernism that parallels Joyce’s experimentation. Critics such as Omonov (2020) and Tosheva (2022) have described this as “inner lyricism” — a mode where the boundaries between narrative and poetry dissolve, revealing the psyche through language rather than description. Cho‘lpon’s engagement with tradition, however, differs from Joyce’s ironic stance. While Joyce often subverts myth to expose modern alienation, Cho‘lpon revitalizes it to affirm cultural continuity. His poetic invocations of Navoi, Sufi imagery, and nature metaphors transform the stream of consciousness into a spiritual introspection — not merely an analytic tool but a form of ethical self-examination. The “night and day” metaphor in his novel is simultaneously psychological and metaphysical: it represents the oscillation between ignorance and enlightenment, stagnation and progress. 3. Parallels and Contrasts: Modernism as Cultural Dialogue A comparative reading reveals both convergence and divergence in Joyce and Cho‘lpon’s literary projects. Structurally, both employ fragmented narration, interior monologue, and associative logic to depict the flux of consciousness. Thematically, both address the individual’s struggle for autonomy within a repressive social and colonial order. However, the function of modernism differs according to cultural context. In Joyce, modernism is centrifugal — it breaks apart inherited forms to expose the chaos of modern existence. In Cho‘lpon, it is centripetal — it gathers new forms to reconstruct cultural wholeness. Joyce’s irony deconstructs; Cho‘lpon’s lyricism reconciles. Both, nevertheless, achieve what Eliot (1921) termed “the fusion of past and present,” demonstrating that true modernism is impossible without historical consciousness. Another significant parallel lies in their use of myth and symbolism. Joyce’s reworking of the Odyssey myth situates modern Dublin within a universal pattern of human experience. Cho‘lpon, in turn, draws on Eastern poetic archetypes — the beloved, the night, the dawn — to articulate national consciousness. Both authors employ myth not as escapism but as a semiotic code that links individual experience to collective memory. Finally, the linguistic innovation of both writers reflects what Roland Barthes (1970) describes as the “writerly text” — a text that demands active participation from the reader. Joyce’s dense allusions and Cho‘lpon’s layered metaphors both require interpretive collaboration, transforming reading into a creative act. In this JOURNAL OF IQRO – ЖУРНАЛ ИҚРО – IQRO JURNALI – volume 18, issue 01, 2025 ISSN: 2181-4341, IMPACT FACTOR ( RESEARCH BIB ) – 7,245, SJIF – 5,431 www.wordlyknowledge.uz ILMIY METODIK JURNAL sense, their works exemplify the dialogic essence of modernism: art as communication between consciousnesses across time, language, and culture. Cultural Context and Symbolic Parallels To understand how Joyce and Cho‘lpon construct consciousness, it is essential to view their work within the broader cultural and historical frameworks that shaped their art. Both authors wrote at moments of profound national transformation — Ireland’s struggle for independence and Central Asia’s encounter with Soviet modernity. These contexts generated hybrid identities in which the artist became a mediator between tradition and change. In Joyce’s Ireland, colonial domination by Britain fostered a crisis of linguistic and cultural identity. English, the imposed language, functioned simultaneously as a tool of expression and a mark of subjugation. Joyce’s deliberate reworking of English grammar, his multilingual puns, and his incorporation of Irish idioms constitute an artistic rebellion against colonial uniformity. His city of Dublin becomes a linguistic microcosm where the past — Catholicism, myth, empire — and the modern present coexist in ironic tension. Thus, the stream of consciousness becomes not merely a psychological mirror but also a political discourse of liberation: it internalizes resistance by asserting creative ownership of language itself. In Cho‘lpon’s Uzbekistan, cultural modernity unfolded under the contradictory forces of Jadid enlightenment and Soviet ideology. The Jadids sought renewal through education and artistic reform, while the Soviet regime imposed ideological control over expression. Cho‘lpon navigated this tension by embedding modernist techniques within national motifs. His narrative rhythm, full of pauses and introspective monologues, symbolically restores individual voice in an environment where collectivism dominated. Linguistically, his blending of classical Uzbek poetic diction with colloquial realism parallels Joyce’s fusion of myth and everyday speech. Both create a dynamic code that simultaneously preserves and transforms tradition. Symbolism plays a crucial role in articulating this synthesis. Joyce’s recurrent imagery — water, mirrors, and circular motion — reflects the flux of thought and time. Cho‘lpon’s recurring metaphors — night and dawn, light and shadow, bird and sky — similarly encode psychological and spiritual renewal. In both cases, symbolic language bridges the empirical and the metaphysical, turning narrative into a semiotic field of cultural memory. In this sense, both writers perform an act of cultural translation: Joyce translates myth into modern psychology; Cho‘lpon translates tradition into modern consciousness. Each transforms inherited symbols into vehicles of new meaning, exemplifying the modernist impulse to “make it new” (Pound, 1934) while remaining rooted in the familiar. Discussion: Toward a Theory of Comparative Modernism The comparative perspective offered by Joyce and Cho‘lpon illuminates the plural nature of modernism. Rather than viewing modernism as a Western aesthetic exported to peripheral literatures, this study supports a polycentric model — what Friedman (2015) calls planetary modernism — in which diverse cultures articulate their own modernist idioms. Joyce’s linguistic experimentation and Cho‘lpon’s moral lyricism reveal that modernism is less a set of stylistic features than a mode of perception — a way of seeing and re-imagining reality in the aftermath of cultural rupture. From a semiotic standpoint, both writers demonstrate that meaning in modern literature arises through tension between signs. Joyce juxtaposes mythic archetypes with banal urban imagery; Cho‘lpon juxtaposes poetic idealism with social realism. Their texts function as dialogic systems where old and new, sacred and profane, coexist. The stream of consciousness, therefore, becomes a cross-cultural semiotic structure — a form capable of carrying multiple cultural grammars. JOURNAL OF IQRO – ЖУРНАЛ ИҚРО – IQRO JURNALI – volume 18, issue 01, 2025 ISSN: 2181-4341, IMPACT FACTOR ( RESEARCH BIB ) – 7,245, SJIF – 5,431 www.wordlyknowledge.uz ILMIY METODIK JURNAL Furthermore, both authors exemplify what Walter Benjamin (1936) termed the aura of authenticity: the attempt to recover human presence in an age of mechanization. Joyce achieves this through linguistic multiplicity that resists standardization; Cho‘lpon, through ethical sincerity that humanizes ideology. Their convergence reveals that modernism’s essence lies not in alienation alone but in the search for wholeness within fragmentation. For comparative literature as a discipline, these findings highlight the need for an intercultural poetics that transcends binary models of center and periphery. The dialogue between Joyce and Cho‘lpon demonstrates that literary modernism can be simultaneously local and universal — each rooted in its language yet speaking to shared human consciousness. This approach enriches current debates on global literary circulation, translation, and cross-cultural aesthetics. Conclusion The synthesis of modernism and tradition in the works of James Joyce and Abdulhamid Cho‘lpon illustrates how artistic innovation emerges from cultural dialogue rather than rupture. Both writers confront the fragmentation of the modern world by transforming language into a site of consciousness. Through the stream of consciousness, they re-create the rhythm of thought, blending memory, perception, and emotion into a new narrative grammar. Joyce’s linguistic revolution dismantled the hegemony of English and reinvented narrative form, while Cho‘lpon’s psychological realism redefined Uzbek prose through moral introspection and poetic language. Each stands as a national modernist who expanded the expressive possibilities of his language and shaped the trajectory of twentieth-century literature. The comparative analysis reveals that modernism is not confined to geography or ideology but is rooted in the universal need to articulate the inner life of the individual. Joyce’s irony and Cho‘lpon’s sincerity, though stylistically distinct, converge in their pursuit of authenticity — the reclamation of selfhood through the medium of language. Their legacies remind us that tradition is not the opposite of modernity but its living foundation, continually renewed through creative consciousness. By situating these two authors within a shared framework of aesthetic transformation, this study contributes to the broader field of global modernist studies and opens pathways for future research on transnational literary interactions between Western and Central Asian cultures. It suggests that the comparative study of consciousness — linguistic, cultural, and moral — remains essential to understanding how literature shapes the modern human condition. References 1. Bakhtin, M. M. (1981). The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays. University of Texas Press. 2. Barthes, R. (1970). S/Z. Seuil. 3. Benjamin, W. (1936). The work of art in the age of mechanical reproduction. In Illuminations (pp. 217–252). Schocken. 4. Bergson, H. (1911). Creative Evolution. Macmillan. 5. Chandler, D. (2017). Semiotics: The Basics (3rd ed.). Routledge. 6. Eliot, T. S. (1921). Tradition and the individual talent. The Sacred Wood. Methuen. 7. Ellmann, R. (1959). James Joyce. Oxford University Press. 8. Friedman, S. S. (2015). Planetary Modernisms: Provocations on Modernity across Time. Columbia University Press. 9. Kenner, H. (1956). Dublin’s Joyce. Chatto & Windus. 10. Lotman, Y. M. (1990). Universe of the Mind: A Semiotic Theory of Culture. I.B. Tauris. 11. Lyotard, J.-F. (1979). The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge. University of Minnesota Press. 12. Omonov, H. (2020). Tarjima nazariyasi va madaniy kodlar muammosi. Fan va texnologiya. 13. Pound, E. (1934). Make It New. Faber and Faber. JOURNAL OF IQRO – ЖУРНАЛ ИҚРО – IQRO JURNALI – volume 18, issue 01, 2025 ISSN: 2181-4341, IMPACT FACTOR ( RESEARCH BIB ) – 7,245, SJIF – 5,431 www.wordlyknowledge.uz ILMIY METODIK JURNAL 14. Tosheva, G. (2022). Multimodal tarjimada vizual belgilar semantikasi. Filologiya masalalari, 3(2), 97–105. 15. Woolf, V. (1925). Mrs. Dalloway. Hogarth Press.