Siberian Turkic Research Articles

Turkiy tilning proto-turk davri: xun va oʻgʻur-bulgʻor tarmoqlari

Today Turkic languages are divided into 3 main large dialects like Oghuz, Qarluq, Qipchaq and relatively small dialects such as Halač, Southern Siberian Turkic, Chuvash, and Yakut (Saha). Each or most of these dialects are the followers of the language of the ancient Turkic – “the language of the Ork-hon-Yenisey inscriptions”, i.e. according to some Turkologists, they are the di-rectly follower of the Common Turkic, and some of them different from these languages. Especially, this is very obvious in languages of Chuvash and in lan-guage of Volga Bulgarians of the Middle ages, for them the terms of “the fol-lowers of proto-Turkic language” or “a branch of the Hun language” are widely accepted. In this article, the terms “proto-Turkic” or “Hun language” the author try to analyze the questions what lies the behind these terms and why Altaic scholars or Turkologists came to conclusion that the aforementioned dialects are considered to be Proto-Turkic.

Sarı Uygurca Üzerine Etimolojik Denemeler: U-Ü Maddeleri

The aim of this paper is to contribute to the “U-Ü” items of Yellow Uyghur etymological dictionary which I plan to complete in the future. For this purpose, “U-Ü” items were investigated in Yazık jyoltıh uygurov: Slovar’ i grammatika published by Sergey Yefimoviç Malov in 1957 and Stroy sarıg-yugurskogo yazıka published by Tenişev in 1976. Items of dictionary parts and sentence examples in the items that were taken from these studies were translated into Turkish and etymologies about the words were listed. Then those words were compared with both historical and modern Turkic languages. A total of 197 words were identified in “U-Ü” items. The results of this comparison “U-Ü” items of Yellow Uyghur dictionaries with the other Turkic languages are as follows: 12 common words were identified in Yellow Uygur and North-South Siberian Turkic languages. These words are as follows: ulğak, ulug, uttur, uza-, uzruk, uzun, üç, üçür-, üleş-, ürek, ürgen-, ürget-. It was found that Yellow Uyghur words were detected in some languages, such as 32 of them in Khakas, 30 of them in Altay, 27 of them in Tuvanian and 18 of them in Yakut. This data containing approximate value confirms that Yellow Uyghur is closely related to South Siberian Turkic languages. It was determined 23 common words which are seen with some sound changes in all modern languages or languages groups in accordance with vocabulary of “U-Ü” items: uç, uç-, ula-, ulgak, ulug, ulus II, unut-, ürk-, ürküt-, uttur, uza-, uzun, uzut-, üç, üçür-, ülem, ülis-, ürek, ürgen-, ürget-, üy, üz-, üzge.

Личная и общественная гигиена в понимании и в жизни кочевников

Introduction. Since early times, traditions of different nations gave rise to ideas about purity of the body, clothing, and household items; so, certain rules have been developed to observe hygiene and behavioral norms during natural physiological processes inherent to the human body. The Turko-Mongolic nomads to have inhabited the dry and arid regions of Inner Asia developed a peculiar culture of personal and public hygiene. Objectives. The paper seeks to investigate the traditional culture of personal and social hygiene of Mongols – and more widely Turko-Mongolic nomads of Inner Asia. Materials and Methods. The main corpus of sources used in the research consists of archaeological, ethnographic, and historical materials that demonstrate some daily routine and culture of Inner Asian nomads — from the Xiongnu to later Turkic and Mongolic peoples connected with the region. The harsh natural conditions of the territory and the nomadic lifestyle created certain difficulties for practicing personal hygiene and especially complicated women’s life. On the other hand, many hygienic problems, such as overcrowding, accumulation of garbage and sewage, emergence of rodents spreading parasites and disease, – disappeared (i.e. there were no favorable conditions for spreading pathogenic bacteria). Results. The article reveals that nomadic communities established original ideas of purity of the body, clothes, utensils, and dwelling – completely correlate with the spiritual sphere and not closely connected with the hygiene as such. However, a number of ideas and traditions served as special measures to prevent any spread of infectious diseases. So, there was a custom to use one’s own dish while travelling or paying visits, and there was a ban to wear other people’s clothes. The dry and frosty climate did not contribute to the growth of pathogenic bacteria for most of the year. Archaeological finds of the Xiongnu and Khitan periods indicate the presence of special sets of hygienic devices which had been integral parts of men’s and women’s costumes, and were preserved in costumes of nomadic cultures to the 19th – early 20th centuries. Among the archaeological finds, toothbrushes attract particular attention. Under the conditions of water shortage and cold winters, it was most difficult to observe body hygiene. Hands and face were washed daily, in winter skin was rubbed with snow. Body washing procedures mainly occurred during the warm season. Women, fearing the wrath of the owner of the water, made ablutions in secluded places. During the menstruation period, animal hair and moss were used as pads. Oil and fat were used as a means to protect skin from moisture loss under conditions of frost and strong winds. Furthermore, the nomadic way of life determined the observance of hygienic requirements in nomadic dwellings. Due to regular changes of residence, the felt yurt would not become a breeding ground for pathogenic bacteria and parasites and was well ventilated. Stationary wooden dwellings of Siberian Turkic peoples and Buryats were aired, freezed and thoroughly washed with sand and water during seasonal movements. The mentioned groups regularly dried, aired and freezed household items (bedding, carpets) and clothes.

О служебном слове суг в тувинском языке

In the following article, we analyze the meanings and functions of the polysemantic function word sug in the Tuvan language. It is commonly used to denote the collective meaning, or group multitude: ‘his family’, ‘his friends’, ‘his home’. Among the Siberian Turkic languages, functional analogues of this meaning of the word sug are found in the Yakut language, which has a number of specific traits in common with the Tuvan language. In its collective meaning, the particle sug attracts some grammatical markers of the nouns (case affixes, the possessive form with =nyy with the affirmative particle =dyr) which it is combined. The function word sug is also used as an expressive-distinguishing par-ticle: combined with the dep marker and the speech verb de= ‘to speak’, ‘to say’, it is used for emotional and expressive direct speech.

Некоторые особенности консонантизма чалканского языка

In the following article, we describe the changes that have occurred in Chalkan phonetics over the last 70 years. We compare the consonant system data collected by N. A. Baskakov to modern research data of Siberian experimental phonetics. Certain differences between the Chalkan phonetic systems and other Siberian languages are revealed. We also describe the phonetic processes that are currently taking place in the modern Chalkan language. We list the following changes in Chalkan consonantism: nasalization of labial consonants in anlaut (p- → m-), denasalization of labial consonants in inlaut (-m- → -β-), spirantization of occlusive labial phonemes in inlaut (-p- → -β-), replacement of the anlaut č- by the Altai ħ-, removal of the final fricative low-obstruent super-weak -ɣ. In Siberian Turkic languages, including the Chalkan language (as well as some Kipchak languages, including Kyrgyz, Kazakh, etc.), one may observe a process that can be characterized as a shift of phonotactic trends typical for monosyllabic roots in inter-morphemic clusters of consonants. As the model of affix annexation via connective vowels disappeared, the number of inter-morphemic consonant combinations increased, intensifying the processes of assimilation. Cases of progressive assimilation are the most common: if a stem ends with a vowel or a sonorous consonant, the first obstruent consonant of the affix is either voiced or sonorous (tүn=de ‘at night’, palъ=ɡe ‘to the child’ in Chalkan). If a stem ends with a voiceless consonant, the first consonant of the affix is also voiceless (pᴜlᴜt(t)e ‘on a cloud’, kaske ‘to a goose’ in Chalkan). The Chalkan languages possesses traits typical for Southern Siberian Turkic languages; however, it also has traits similar to those of Kipchak languages, namely the relatively high degree of preservation of voiceless intervocalic consonants in stems (whereas in inter-morphemic positions they are voiced).

Конструкции с депиктивными второстепенными предикатами со своим собственным грамматическим субъектом в сибирских тюркских языках

Specific syntactic constructions of complex predicates that assign more than one predicate to their semantic subject are well known cross-linguistically. Examples of such constructions are structures such as He returned tired, lived alone, worked as a teacher, etc. They contain two semantic predicates – a main one expressed by a finite verb form, and a secondary one, often expressed by a nominal form or an infinite verb form. Our research has shown that depictive predicates have their structural and functional peculiarities in different South Siberian Turkic languages, compared between themselves and with depictives in Oguz and Kypchak languages. The article deals with South Siberian depictive secondary predicates and describes their semantic and structural types. A special attention is paid to depictive predicates having a subject, different from the subject of the main predicate.

Семантика и функция форм настоящего времени изъявительного наклонения в тюркских языках Сибири (на примере алтайского и якутского)

Семантика и функция форм настоящего времени изъявительного наклонения в тюркских языках Сибири (на примере алтайского и якутского)

СЕМАНТИЧЕСКАЯ ЭВОЛЮЦИЯ БАЗОВЫХ МЕНТАЛЬНЫХ ЛЕКСЕМ (НА ПРИМЕРЕ МЕЖЪЯЗЫКОВЫХ ЭКВИВАЛЕНТОВ В СИБИРСКИХ ТЮРКСКИХ, КИРГИЗСКОМ И МОНГОЛЬСКОМ ЯЗЫКАХ)

The present article views the basic interlingual lexical correspondences expressing mental meanings in the Siberian Turkic, Kirghiz and Mongolian languages. In these languages, mental tokens are few; they are characterized by a ramified semantic structure and polysemy. In the semantics of the lexemes considered, the mental component prevails, less often the emotional component takes priority. The fixation of certain relevant properties for specific lexemes is associated with their combining abilities.

Некоторые типы ассимиляции на морфемных швах в тюркских языках Сибири

Некоторые типы ассимиляции на морфемных швах в тюркских языках Сибири

Характеристика вокальных систем южносибирских тюркских языков по параметрам объективной сложности

Характеристика вокальных систем южносибирских тюркских языков по параметрам объективной сложности

Принципы организации сингармонических систем в южно-сибирских тюркских языках как индикаторы языковой сложности

Принципы организации сингармонических систем в южно-сибирских тюркских языках как индикаторы языковой сложности

Interrogative structures in Tuvan

This article is a descriptive study of interrogative structures in Tuvan, one of the Southern Siberian Turkic languages. The interrogative structures were examined in terms of both their morphosyntactic and syntactic structures and their semantic and discourse functions within the scope of this study. Firstly, Tuvan interrogative sentences were classified on a typological basis and described in detail. Also, the place of the interrogative particle in the sentence, grammatical functions of interrogative words and their discourse-pragmatic values were mentioned. The descriptions here can be applied not only to Standard Tuvan but also to certain of its dialects (Altay Tuvan and Jungar Tuvan). This article aims to provide a basis for interrogative typology in Turkic languages.

Some Notes on the Leipzig–Jakarta List of the Chulym Language

Based on the analysis of the most resistant words (Leipzig–Jakarta list) of Chulym Turkic in comparison with those of the Oghuz and Kipchak languages, authors come to a conclusion that Chulym Turkic is more similar to the Kipchak Turkic languages than the Ohguz ones. The Chulym Turkic material for the analysis is field dialectological data. The words of other languages under study were taken from dictionaries. The comparative method was used as the main research method. Previously, Chulym Turkic was considered as one of the Siberian Turkic languages also including Khakass, Shor and Saryg-Yughur, to which the authors disagree.

On a Multidisciplinary Study of South Siberian Turkic Varieties (in Comparison with Yakut). Part I

This study encourages a multidisciplinary research to identify parallels in the group belonging and chronology of South Siberian Turkic (Chulym Turkic and Bachat Teleut) and Yakut. There is solid evidence that the ancestors of modern Yakuts and their language originate from the Central Asian steppe Proto-Turkic community of the 1st century BC. South Siberian Turkic varieties have not been studied as thoroughly, but they are expected to have traces of some non-Turkic language substratum. The analysis of the Teleut gene pool has revealed two different components of the Turkic and non-Turkic nature, which gives reason to consider non-Turkic elements in Teleut as aboriginal. The gene pool study of the Chulym Turks is expected to contribute to the issue of language history and Chulym Turkic lexicon which is etymologically vague from the Turkic viewpoint.

Siberian languages in contact, 1: Collective numerals in Yakut, Dolgan, Tuvinian, Tolofar and some other Turkic languages

Morphological categories of Siberian Turkic numerals are particularly complex and therefore deemed to be especially advantageous to areal investigations. The aim of this paper is to see whether (at least some of) the suffixes of collective numerals can readily be used as isogloss connecting Yakut and Dolgan with Tuvinian and Tofalar or, maybe, also some other Turkic languages.

Diachronic Aspects of Russianisms in Siberian Turkic

Proceedings of the Twenty-First Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society: General Session and Parasession on Historical Issues in Sociolinguistics/Social Issues in Historical Linguistics (1995)