He loved the dregs of the broth and the stub of days left:
The little sleep nudging and knocking on his eyes,
And the crystal crumbs crying uneaten on the plate.
He shredded sweet meats with forked toothpicks,
A tired mouth disdained the rinds of cheese.
The tiny crimps on the suit he missed in the ironing
Lingered like sore fingers of a leprous hand.
All the small words that stuck to his throat like phlegm and the bigger world of remembering of those days,
Those tiny footnotes his life had become
Sat like dust on the oaken table, grey and tangible.
At last he mowed down his once-hot soupand the bistre in his eyes asked not for pity.
GEOMETRY OF THE DAY AFTER
What happens when the sirens
stop? Think of the silence,
or the rhetoric’s sweet sonic
in the city’s cold tumult.
Talk of the spikelets raising heads after the clean shave.
I choose you, a stranger’s outstretched hand, after the unmerciful quiet wears your face to the bones.
I see your ears
Pockmarked in blood, your name, splattered across the city’s grey face,
cake into a totem cream.
The sounds you bear
from rapping the door and flaking the wall
in the city hall conjure the ghost of the last frost.The only time birds sang
in the blistered sky
was when the moon wrestled the earth.
AS THE OVERPLAYED TURNTABLE GROANS
the world holds its breath as if sweet stenches from the trenches were some fetish to disdain or dissuade.
The skeletal threads of fire and brimstone chainsaws to teacups.
Morning hailstorms ground the waters of Hormuz.
Brackish taste remembers what the smell strains to unlearn.
Every step is a swindle of note. Every word a luxury.
Every tap dance kneads a hollow sound in the bones
from the brain that owns a hundred ritual regrets to the trails of ourselves in the shadow overlooking the cliff we turn to for a plunge. We love grunge whether the sun sinks behind hills or
the world frays at its forked ends.We are worn-out fingers on a ploughshare,
the forgotten half-life of a smouldering song.
PARABLE OF THREE TANGLED SPIRITS
Freedom rides in the saddle of death.In his hands lies the reins and the kingdom,
neither sauntering nor galloping in the streets of Jerusalem,
not sweating or wallowing in Golgotha’s fields;
thoughts scurry awayuntil the trial pales into a shadow.
In the remnants of a losing battle and a strained home,
Jesus dreams of marrying a shadow.
Neither flesh nor soft touch stays, but silence
that sways like miracles within.
Smoothly, the water splits into wine,
When Mary and Martha linger at his feet,
it is as if the lips of heaven were kissing His Holy Ventriloquist with the magic words.
How will a spiritual eye choose between two beauties?
One ruby-haired and full-bosomed. The other blue-eyed and sprite. What is the cost of the fragrance in shekels? And the trio spar unclad in a serpent bed
where the sheets frayed in a million places.
A pillow strains with mixed blood and lumps
of a built-in liberty; in the transfiguration of love,
intransigence hardens a garden into a layered city
where bones and walls refuse to die.
Nattie O’Sheggzy is a poet who, often accompanied by his loyal dog, Exhale, finds inspiration in the complexities of simple things. He is the author of two poetry collections: Random Imaginations and Sounds of the Wooden Gong. Nattie’s work has been featured in various literary publications, including Literary Yard, Sandy River Review, Everscribe, Ultramarine Review, Heroin Love Song, Agape Review, SweetSmell Journal, Smoky Quartz, Feed The Holy, and LiteZine. He is currently working on publishing his third poetry collection.
THE SINCERITY PARADOX: COGNITIVE MECHANISMS OF PRAGMATIC FAILURE IN UZBEK-ENGLISH POLITENESS TRANSFER
Kоshevа Dilrаbо, Phd, prоf.оf TSPU named аfter Nizаmi
Yulduz Kurbоnоvа, MА оf the TSPU nаmed аfter Nizаmi
E-mаil: yulduzqurbоnоvа0211@gmаil.cоm
Abstract: This research investigates the ‘Sincerity Paradox’ within the context of pragmatic transfer between Uzbek and English languages. The sincerity paradox occurs when the linguistic markers of politeness intended to show deep respect in a source culture (Uzbek) are perceived as insincere, manipulative, or redundant in the target culture (English). This study utilizes a qualitative analysis of Discourse Completion Tasks (DCT) and semi-structured interviews with 50 Uzbek EFL (English as a Foreign Language) learners at the C1 level. The findings reveal that pragmatic failure is not merely a result of insufficient vocabulary but is rooted in deep-seated cognitive mechanisms where the ‘Positive Face’ strategies of Uzbek culture—characterized by high-context indirectness and verbal decoration—clash with the ‘Negative Face’ priorities and clarity-based sincerity of English speakers. Specifically, the transfer of Uzbek ‘lutf’ (graceful speech) and ‘andisha’ (thoughtful restraint) into English often results in over-politeness, which English native speakers decode as a lack of transparency. The article concludes that pedagogical approaches to language learning must transition from grammatical competence to sociopragmatic awareness to mitigate these communicative breakdowns.
Annotatsiya: Ushbu tadqiqot o‘zbek va ingliz tillari o‘rtasidagi pragmatik transfer kontekstida “Samimiyat paradoksi”ni o‘rganadi. Samimiyat paradoksi shundan iboratki, manba madaniyatda (o‘zbek tilida) chuqur hurmatni ifodalash uchun ishlatiladigan muloyimlik (odob) ko‘rsatkichlari maqsad tilida (ingliz tilida) samimiy emas, manipulyativ yoki ortiqcha sifatida qabul qilinishi mumkin. Tadqiqot C1 darajadagi 50 nafar o‘zbek EFL (ingliz tilini xorijiy til sifatida o‘rganuvchi) talabalari bilan o‘tkazilgan Diskursni To‘ldirish Vazifalari (DCT) va yarim tuzilgan intervyular asosida sifat jihatdan tahlil qilindi. Natijalar shuni ko‘rsatadiki, pragmatik xatolik faqat lug‘at boyligining yetishmasligi bilan bog‘liq emas, balki chuqur kognitiv mexanizmlarga borib taqaladi. Ya’ni, o‘zbek madaniyatidagi “Ijobiy yuz” strategiyalari — yuqori kontekstli bilvositalik va nutqiy bezakdorlik bilan xarakterlansa — ingliz tilida “Salbiy yuz” ustuvorligi va aniqlikka asoslangan samimiyat bilan to‘qnash keladi. Xususan, o‘zbek tilidagi “lutf” (nazokatli nutq) va “andisha” (mulohazali o‘zini tiyish) tushunchalarining ingliz tiliga ko‘chirilishi ko‘pincha ortiqcha muloyimlikka olib keladi, bu esa ingliz tilida so‘zlashuvchilar tomonidan shaffoflik yetishmasligi sifatida talqin qilinadi. Maqola xulosa qiladi: til o‘rgatishdagi pedagogik yondashuvlar grammatik kompetensiyadan sotsio-pragmatik xabardorlikka o‘tishi lozim, aks holda kommunikativ uzilishlar davom etadi.
Аннотация: Данное исследование рассматривает «Парадокс искренности» в контексте прагматического переноса между узбекским и английским языками. Парадокс искренности возникает, когда языковые маркеры вежливости, предназначенные для выражения глубокого уважения в исходной культуре (узбекской), воспринимаются в целевой культуре (английской) как неискренние, манипулятивные или избыточные. Исследование основано на качественном анализе заданий на дополнение дискурса (DCT) и полуструктурированных интервью с 50 узбекскими изучающими английский язык как иностранный (EFL) на уровне C1. Результаты показывают, что прагматические ошибки обусловлены не только недостаточным словарным запасом, но и глубинными когнитивными механизмами. В частности, стратегии «позитивного лица» в узбекской культуре — характеризующиеся высокой контекстуальностью, косвенной речью и украшенностью высказывания — вступают в противоречие с приоритетами «негативного лица» и ясности, присущими английской культуре. Перенос таких понятий, как «lutf» (изящная, вежливая речь) и «andisha» (вдумчивая сдержанность), в английский язык часто приводит к чрезмерной вежливости, которая носителями английского языка интерпретируется как недостаток прозрачности. В заключении отмечается, что педагогические подходы к обучению языкам должны перейти от акцента на грамматическую компетенцию к развитию социопрагматической осведомлённости для предотвращения коммуникативных сбоев.
In the contemporary era of globalization, the ability to communicate across cultural boundaries is paramount. However, linguistic proficiency in a second language (L2) does not guarantee communicative success. One of the most complex hurdles for learners is the mastery of pragmatics—the study of how context contributes to meaning. This paper explores a specific phenomenon termed the ‘Sincerity Paradox,’ particularly focusing on the transfer of politeness strategies from Uzbek to English. Pragmatic failure occurs when a speaker’s intended illocutionary force is misunderstood by the listener due to differing cultural norms regarding what constitutes ‘polite’ or ‘sincere’ behavior.
Uzbek culture is fundamentally high-context and collectivist, placing a high value on ‘andisha’ (social caution/restraint) and ‘lutf’ (eloquence and hospitality). In contrast, English-speaking cultures, particularly in Western contexts, tend toward lower-context communication where sincerity is often equated with brevity, directness, and transparency. When an Uzbek speaker applies the cognitive scripts of their native culture to English, they often employ excessive honorifics, indirect requests, and prolonged introductory rituals. While these are markers of extreme sincerity in the Uzbek worldview, they often trigger a cognitive dissonance in English interlocutors, leading to the perception that the speaker is being ‘too formal’ or even ‘disingenuous.’ This research seeks to map the cognitive mechanisms behind this transfer and identify the specific linguistic structures where pragmatic failure is most prevalent. By understanding the gap between Uzbek ‘Hormat’ (respect) and English ‘Sincerity,’ we can better prepare learners for the nuances of international discourse.
Methodology
This study is grounded in the Politeness Theory proposed by Brown and Levinson (1987), which distinguishes between ‘Positive Face’ (the desire to be liked and appreciated) and ‘Negative Face’ (the desire to be unimpeded). In Uzbek communicative culture, there is a heavy emphasis on attending to the interlocutor’s positive face through ‘mubolag’a’ (hyperbole) and elaborate hospitality formulas. English pragmatics, however, often prioritizes the negative face, where being polite means not imposing on the other person’s time or autonomy.
To investigate the cognitive mechanisms of transfer, a mixed-methods approach was adopted. The primary data collection tool was a Discourse Completion Task (DCT) administered to 50 Uzbek students enrolled in advanced English programs. The DCT presented ten social scenarios requiring varied speech acts: making a request to a superior, declining an invitation from a peer, and offering a compliment. Following the DCT, participants engaged in semi-structured interviews to explain their cognitive reasoning behind their linguistic choices. This ‘stimulated recall’ method allowed researchers to see whether the learners were consciously trying to translate Uzbek concepts of politeness or if the transfer was an unconscious cognitive default.
Data analysis focused on ‘pragmalinguistic’ transfer (the use of specific linguistic forms) and ‘sociopragmatic’ transfer (the underlying social values). For instance, the Uzbek phrase ‘Sizni ko‘rib juda xursandman, qadamlaringizga hasanot’ translates literally to a level of enthusiasm that, in an English professional setting, might seem exaggerated. The study analyzed how these ‘scripts’ are cognitively mapped from the L1 (Uzbek) to the L2 (English). We specifically looked for instances of ‘upgrading’ (intensifying politeness) and how these correlate with the learner’s perception of social distance and power dynamics.
Analysis of Results
The results of the DCT and interviews revealed three primary cognitive mechanisms driving pragmatic failure in Uzbek-English transfer. First is the ‘Hospitality Script.’ In 85% of the responses involving invitations, Uzbek learners used multiple refusals before accepting, or multiple offers when hosting. In Uzbek, ‘qistov’ (insisting) is a sign of sincerity. However, when translated into English (‘You must eat more,’ ‘No, I cannot possibly accept’), it often leads to a ‘Sincerity Paradox.’ The English speaker takes the first ‘no’ as a literal fact, while the Uzbek speaker expects the offer to be repeated. This results in the Uzbek speaker feeling neglected and the English speaker feeling pressured.
Second, the data showed a high frequency of ‘Internal Modification’—the use of elaborate honorifics and apologetic openings. Learners frequently used phrases like ‘If it is not too much trouble for your kind self’ for simple requests. In English, this level of indirectness is often decoded as ‘beating around the bush’ or being manipulative. Native English speakers in the control group rated these responses as ‘suspiciously polite.’ This is the core of the paradox: the more the Uzbek learner tries to show respect (using L1 logic), the less they are trusted by the L2 listener.
Third, the ‘Andisha’ mechanism leads to a lack of clarity in disagreement. Instead of saying ‘I disagree,’ 70% of participants used vague phrases like ‘Maybe you are right, but perhaps we can think.’ While this avoids immediate conflict (Uzbek norm), in an English business or academic context, it is often interpreted as agreement or a lack of opinion. The cognitive load of trying to balance ‘Andisha’ (not offending) with English grammar often results in ‘pragmatic fossilization,’ where the learner continues to use these patterns despite high levels of grammatical accuracy. The data suggests that the ‘Sincerity Paradox’ is most acute in high-stakes environments where the social consequences of perceived insincerity are highest.
Discussion: Cognitive Mapping and Sociopragmatic Awareness
The findings suggest that the ‘Sincerity Paradox’ is a result of conflicting ‘cultural schemas.’ A schema is a cognitive framework that helps individuals organize and interpret information. The Uzbek schema for a ‘Sincere Request’ involves a long preamble, establishing a social bond, and using diminutive or honorific suffixes. The English schema for a ‘Sincere Request’ involves a brief apology for the intrusion, a clear statement of the need, and a thank you. When these schemas clash, the ‘Pragmatic Failure’ is not just a linguistic error; it is a failure of social alignment.
The cognitive mechanism at play is ‘Negative Transfer,’ where the rules of the native culture are inappropriately applied to the target culture. Interestingly, the study found that even learners with high IELTS scores (7.5-8.0) struggled with this paradox. This indicates that sociopragmatic competence does not develop automatically alongside linguistic competence. The participants’ interviews revealed a ‘Fear of Rudeness.’ Many Uzbek learners stated that using direct English politeness felt ‘cold’ or ‘dry’ (quruq). This emotional resistance to English pragmatic norms is a significant barrier. They feel that by adopting English directness, they are losing their own cultural identity or being ‘insincere’ to their own values of ‘Hormat.’
Furthermore, the discussion highlights the role of ‘Attribution Error.’ When an English speaker encounters an over-polite Uzbek speaker, they often attribute the behavior to the person’s character (e.g., ‘he is sneaky’) rather than to their cultural background. This underscores the importance of ‘Explicit Pragmatic Instruction’ in the classroom. Learners need to be taught that ‘sincerity’ is a culturally constructed concept. In English, sincerity is often signaled by ‘Prosodic Cues’ (tone of voice) and ‘Directness,’ rather than the ‘Lexical Verbosity’ common in Uzbek. To bridge this gap, educators must move beyond teaching ‘Please’ and ‘Thank you’ and begin teaching the cognitive logic of English social interactions.
Conclusion
This research has demonstrated that the ‘Sincerity Paradox’ is a significant barrier in Uzbek-English cross-cultural communication. The study identified that the transfer of Uzbek politeness strategies—characterized by indirectness, hyperbole, and insistence—often leads to pragmatic failure in English contexts, where these same traits are perceived as insincere. The cognitive mechanisms of ‘andisha’ and ‘lutf’ are so deeply embedded in the Uzbek speaker’s psyche that they persist even at advanced levels of English proficiency.
The key finding is that pragmatic failure is a two-way street: it involves both the speaker’s transfer of L1 norms and the listener’s cultural interpretation of those norms. To mitigate the sincerity paradox, it is recommended that English language curriculum in Uzbekistan include specific modules on sociopragmatics. These modules should focus on ‘contrastive pragmatics,’ allowing students to compare how sincerity is signaled in both languages. Future research should expand this study to include non-verbal communication, such as eye contact and physical distance, which also play a crucial role in the perception of sincerity. Ultimately, achieving true fluency in English requires more than just mastering grammar; it requires the cognitive flexibility to navigate different systems of social value without losing one’s cultural essence.
References
1. Bardovi-Harlig, K. (2013). ‘Exploring the pragmatics of interlanguage pragmatics.’ Language Learning, 63(s1), 68-86.
2. Blum-Kulka, S., House, J., & Kasper, G. (1989). ‘Cross-cultural Pragmatics: Requests and Apologies.’ Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
3. Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1987). ‘Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage.’ Cambridge University Press.
4. Crystal, D. (2003). ‘English as a Global Language.’ Cambridge University Press.
5. Kasper, G. (1992). ‘Pragmatic transfer.’ Second Language Research, 8(3), 203-231.
6. Leech, G. N. (2014). ‘The Pragmatics of Politeness.’ Oxford University Press.
7. Safont, M. P. (2005). ‘Third Language Learners: Pragmatic Production and Awareness.’ Multilingual Matters.
8. Taguchi, N. (2012). ‘Context, Individual Differences and Pragmatic Competence.’ Multilingual Matters.
Hotmama kicks open the saloon doors of the multiverse, heels clicking like two caffeinated metronomes on a bender.
“Before we get to da canole,” she says, “we gotta talk lineage. Receipts. Pedigree. Da who‑da‑hell‑you‑think‑you‑are file.”
She snaps her gum. The gum files a counterclaim.
BIO INSERTION: ALEX S. JOHNSON
Hotmama waves a cosmic clipboard.
“Dis one? Alex S. Johnson — transfemme polymath, author, editor, metal journalist, books sittin’ in Harvard, MIT, SUNY like they payin’ rent. Former English professor, horror surrealist, creator of Axes of Evil, Bad Sunset, Wicked Candy, editor of Just One Fix: A Literary Salute to William S. Burroughs, and boss‑witch of Nocturnicorn Books / Darkest Wine Media. Host of The Kandy Fontaine Show. A whole literary hydra widda thousand heads, and every one of ‘em talkin’ smack.”
She winks.
BIO INSERTION: TRICIA WARDEN
“Then we got Tricia Warden — femme‑feral Jersey City oracle, author of Brainlift, Attack God Inside, Death Is Hereditary. Her words ended up in a Golden Calf–winning film, and she’s performed widda legends: Hubert Selby Jr., John Cale, Ntozake Shange, Exene Cervenka, Mark E. Smith, Henry Rollins — the whole pantheon of beautiful weirdos. She writes like a fever dream and performs like a prophecy.”
Hotmama leans in, conspiratorial.
“These two? They ain’t collaborators. They’re a double‑helix of chaos. A matched set. A cosmic tag‑team. A literary buddy‑cop movie where both cops are unhinged and the precinct is a surrealist nightclub.”
RETURN TO THE ORIGINAL HOTMAMA PART III ENERGY
“Badda BOOM, badda BING, badda metaphysical BLING,” Hotmama says, heels clicking like two switchblades flirting in an alleyway behind a quantum bodega.
“You think Part Two was the blackout? Honey, that was the brownout. This here’s the grid collapse.”
She snaps her gum. The gum snaps back.
“Lissen. I went down the canole hole again. Not the K‑hole. Not the Acker hole. Not the Pirandello‑rhinoceros‑barber‑sno‑cone hole. The canole hole. The one widda sprinkles of doom.”
She leans in.
“You ever meet a pastry that knows your government name? That’s what I’m talkin’ about.”
A voice from the mezzanine of the multiverse yells:
“HOTMAMA, YOU A WALKIN’ DISASTER OF SEMIOTICS.”
She blows a kiss.
“Baby, I’m the FEMA trailer of your subconscious. I show up after the storm widda glitter tarp and a bottle of olive oil.”
Suddenly the sky cracks open like a cannoli shell under too much pressure.
Out steps:
Cosey Fanni Tutti in a rhinestone hazmat suit
Nina Hartley holding a clipboard labeled “Continuity Errors”
Simone Signoret smoking a cigarette that smokes her
Harpo Marx honking a horn tuned to the frequency of feminist rage
Kathy Acker’s motorcycle, idling like a prophecy
Hotmama throws her hands up.
“OKAY, OKAY, I GET IT. THE LINEAGE IS HERE. THE GIRLS ARE GIRLING. THE META IS METTING. THE CANOLE IS CANOLING.”
She sighs.
“Fine. Let’s finish the scene.”
The reflection steps out of the puddle, puts on Hotmama’s shoes, and says:
And the light through the kitchen window of course.
Not forgetting the chill in the air
that the warm is starting to get around to.
But, in lieu of company, I have this cup.
Instead of conversation, I sip.
In the world of anatomical animation,
this caffeine juice is paramount.
My mouth creases upwards into a smile.
My eyes flick aside the sleep detritus,
open wide.
I am coming into my body, into my own.
Soon I will be ready for the world.
Who knows?
I might even, in my own way, shape it.
WELCOME
The baby draws her first breath.
A nurse’s brown eyes look down on her.
It’s all good now they say
but just you wait.
The doctor takes no side.
He’s here to do his job.
Some woman meekly asks,
“Can I see her.”
Her glass body lies in pieces.
But at least her heart is intact.
For now.
The nurse camps a red face
inches from the pillow.
The baby waves her arms like wings.
Through the blur of pain,
she’s soft enough
to be an angel.
An angel that’s fishing for compliments.
So soon. So young.
TOM
Tom’s body just developed sooner
than the skinny frames of the rest of us.
He arms and legs grew muscles
while our limbs could have cleaned pipes.
No wonder he was school sports star:
best player in the rugby and cricket teams,
fastest in the hundred and two hundred,
records in the long jump and javelin.
His school work was below average.
He hated to read
and he struggled with geometry.
But we made him class captain anyhow.
He was never a smartass, never a bully.
Kids looked up to him,
figuratively and literally.
But things didn’t go so well for him
once he left school.
Most of us caught up with him
in size if not in speed.
He worked in his father’s garage,
liked a drink, lost two teeth in a fight,
got a girl pregnant and married her,
divorced, took over the business
when his father died, then learned
to really love a drink, went bankrupt,
lost track of his kid, ended up on
the streets and sleeping on a park bench,
spent the rest of his days as an example
for mothers to point at when they were
out with their children.
I saw Tom not long before he died.
He was unshaven, dressed in torn t-shirt
and greasy jeans, and sneakers that
flapped at the toes.
Most people avoided him.
I just bent my head down
as he cried out, “Hey, don’t I know you?”
I remembered so many times
when guys were picking sides
and Tom was always first one called
and I was near last.
Now life had chosen me well ahead of him.
But that did nothing for my pride, my ego.
If it was a game
than it was one that didn’t feel right,
wasn’t worth playing.
He staggered onward.
I just kept walking.
ODE TO HOLLY
Here’s a sharp air to match its claws,
a chilly white to shimmer its dark blood,
a wind to blow the ilex blue
at a Christmastime of gloved hands plucking.
But here’s a survivor in a hard-bitten land,
a stem of insurrection,
leaves defiantly evergreen,
branches bone-brittle
but militant against the freeze.
GREEN MAN
I walk where hills lean into sky,
where green is a language all its own.
My lungs, grateful. My mind,
rinsed clean by lordly pine
and patient moss.
What else is there but to wander –
to listen for the shy rustle of brush,
the flit of wings, the soft syllables spoken
by trees to the wind?
My boots speak in twig-snaps and stone-taps,
but even they fall silent when the breeze arrives,
a gentle visitor brushing my cheek.
The forest stirs. And I, no longer needing to speak,
am blessed by the quiet.
Honestly, it knows more than I do.
John Grey is an Australian poet, US resident, recently published in Midnight Mind, Novus and Abbey. Latest books, “Bittersweet”, “Subject Matters” and “Between Two Fires” are available through Amazon. Work upcoming in the MacGuffin, Touchstone and Willow Review.
The Future of Artificial Intelligence and Information Technology: Where Is the Digital World Heading?
Abstract Information Technology (IT) has become a fundamental pillar of modern society. Rapid advancements in Artificial Intelligence (AI), cloud computing, and cybersecurity are reshaping global industries. This article analyzes the significance of IT, explores key technological trends, and examines future opportunities in the digital era.
Introduction In the 21st century, Information Technology has evolved into an essential component of human life. The acceleration of digital transformation is influencing economies, education systems, healthcare, and communication worldwide. Among the most impactful innovations are Artificial Intelligence, cloud computing, and cybersecurity, which are driving technological progress.
The Importance of IT IT plays a crucial role in global development by enhancing efficiency and enabling innovation across multiple sectors.
Key areas of impact: Education: Online platforms provide global access to knowledge Business: E-commerce and automation increase productivity Healthcare: Digital systems improve diagnostics and patient care Communication: Instant connectivity through digital platforms
Major IT Trends Artificial Intelligence (AI) Artificial Intelligence enables machines to simulate human intelligence and decision-making. Applications: Virtual assistants and chatbots Medical diagnosis systems Autonomous transportation AI is expected to significantly enhance productivity and efficiency.
Cloud Computing Cloud computing provides scalable and flexible data storage solutions via the internet. Advantages: Cost efficiency Scalability Secure data management Cybersecurity As digital systems expand, cybersecurity becomes increasingly important.
Focus areas: Data protection Network security Prevention of cyber attacks Software Development Software development remains one of the most in-demand professions globally. Popular domains: Web development Mobile applications Artificial Intelligence systems
How to Start a Career in IT To begin a career in IT, individuals should: Learn programming languages (Python, JavaScript) Work on practical projects Build a professional portfolio Develop English communication skills Obtain certifications
Future Perspectives The future of IT will be characterized by: Increased automation Expansion of remote work Growth of the digital economy
Conclusion Information Technology is not only the future but also the present. Individuals who invest in digital skills today will shape tomorrow’s world.
I am Rahmonova Barno Kilich qizi, born on November 30, 2007 in Kamashi district of Kashkadarya region. In 2015, I started studying in the 1st grade at school No. 14 in Kattakurgan city of Samarkand region. I am a 1st year student at Tashkent International University of Financial Management and Technologies, studying Information Systems and Technologies. I am a 2-time champion of Uzbekistan in taekwondo ITF and have repeatedly won 1st places in regional tournaments. I won 1st place in the regional stage of the “Young Reader” competition, and 1st place in the regional stage of the Native Language Science Olympiad.
BIO INSERTION: ALEX S. JOHNSON
