Copyright ©2020Shayan Salehi no. 3(2005):254-272. Context,”Social 1 centuries argued that territorial jurisdic tion-state. ofwith concept rise the the of na the forefrontthe of discourse sociopolitical enon, but linguistic nationalism assumed groupa social is not phenom a modern of language as asymbol of unity amongst to legitimize existence.seek their The use tool through many which nations modern nationalismguage-based remains apotent torians and psychologists alike, and lan subjectthe of extensive analysis by his language on identity formation has been It is thus unsurprising that impact the of landscapepolitical world. of modern the consolidation has helped shape socio the its as avehicle use of national and ethnic inseparable of part national identity, and Salehi Shayan ation of Modern the Turkish Nation-State forms of Early Republican Turkey Cre inthe The Significance of Turkish Language Re Building aNation: Bernard Spolsky, Bernard “Language inits Language is acentral and often 1 Nationalists of 19 the Journal of Baltic Studies Studies ofBaltic Journal th and 20 36, th ------

Context,” 2 comprised of Turks, Arabs, Kurds, Greeks, territoriesthe over Sultan the which ruled land. In of case the Ottoman the empire, over kingsthe to rule a conquered piece of through right God-given ofgitimacy the of nations; specific ratherthey sought le guistic empires claimed not patrons to be jars. These multi-national and multi-lin empirestic of Ottomans the and Qa the imminent collapse of non-national dynas aftercially the First World Warwiththe important topic espe Middle inthe East self-determination aparticularly became and thus astate could derive legitimacy to links it,and developed sociocultural language and religion) that had occupied of nation the largely (defined through tion over aland was afundamental right a national entity. through presenting itself as patron the of

256. Spolsky, “Language in its Social 2 The rise rise this The of national ------55 ISSUE XII | 56 NMC JOURNAL | tion of centuries of Arabic and Persian (Osmanlıca) was asynthetic amalgama average Turk. ent and largely incomprehensible to the of Ottoman the state was vastly differ ly a millennium prior, yet language the since of arrival the Turkic nomads near had spoken a common Turkic language of language. Turkish peasants inAnatolia at forefront the of debate this was issue the it meant aTurk, to be and unsurprisingly statenew thus was to clearlywhat define of Turkish the nation. The this goal of through presenting itself as protector the fa Kemal beganto establish its legitimacy lian state under leadership the of Musta of Lausanne, formed newly the Anato andpendence signing the of Treaty the self-determination afterthe war. tions, each of began which to push for Armenians, and amultitude of other na 6 University of Hawai’i Press, 1971),153. ed. Joan Rubin and Björn H.Jernudd (Hawaii, Nations for Developing Theory Sociolinguistic in Turkey,” in “Language Modernization Reform and Social 5 Society,tal 1954),9-15. Modern Turkey, The (Jerusalem: Israel Orien 4 Westview(Boulder: Press, 2012),149-171. Bunton, 3 in astate of where diglossia, two highly werethey thus presented with alanguage Turkish-speaking the ed Ottoman lands, When Republican the statesmen inherit was limited largely to Ottoman the elite languageficult to master, thusand its use ly unsuitable Arabic abjad made it adif structures. largely comprising of loaned words and influence,withgrammar a and vocabulary A History ofthe Middle Modern A History East Afterthe Turkish War of Inde Ibid., 154-155. Ibid., 9; Willian L.Cleveland and Martin Uriel Heyd, Language 5 Moreover, its of use high the Can Language bePlanned? 4 This ‘Ottoman’language Charles F. Gallagher, Reform in 3

- 6 , , ------. Ottoman time, this as During in period. lican Turkey and has its roots late in the Turkish was not solely afeature of Repub tween Ottoman Turkish and vernacular European future. past and towards its secular, and modern, its ‘backward’ Islamic and Middle Eastern with anand outlook society away from at Turkish engineering amodern state tafa Kemal’s vast reform programs, aimed anbecame important component of Mus Turkish Language Reforms consequently Republicanmodern Turks. generation new language the to serve of Perso-Arabic features and replaced with a and modified frombe purified its archaic Turkishthe language therefore to needed of as heart the Turkish the to serve nation, past that replaced. to be needed and thus was arelic of Turkey’s Ottoman influence over Turks theirlanguage,and embodimentthe of centuries of foreign eyesofthe Republicans modernist the was More importantly, Ottoman Turkish in variable standards of Turkish coexisted. Politics Turkishtics, Language Reform,” 10 ModernizationSocial inTurkey,” 154-156. 9 8 67-70. y,” ke andEarly in Republican Official Ideology Tur 7 people. tocloser of vernacular the ordinary the as simplified needing to be and brought ization of empire, the and thus was seen was perceived as avehicle for modern the community. binding force for people the of same the Europe, language as a seen beganto be

Middle Eastern Studie Middle Eastern 26,no. 2(1964):193. 10 These ideas became evenbecame more ideas These Frank Tachau, “Language and Poli The issue be the disconnect of Gallagher, “Language Reform and Ibid., 68. Yilmaz “Language Çolak, Policy 9 More importantly, language s 40,no. 6(2004): 8 The so-called so-called The The Review of Review The 7 In order ------and Gökalp pushed Ziya for creation the ‘Turkist’ activists such as Ömer Seyfeddin pronounced during CUPera,when the Syracuse University Press, 2013),139-145. Early Republican Turkey. tionalist Reforms and Cultural Negotiations in 12 Turkey,” 69. andEarly in Republican Official Ideology 11 influenceseign to create an ‘uncorrupted’ tasked Turkish with purifying from its for ish Language Association, TDK) in1932, lishment of Türk the Kurumu Dil (Turk continued into 1930’s the with estab the Ottoman past. Language reform further help it distance itself from its ‘backwards’ place’ful among western civilization and thoughtalso to help Turkey claim its ‘right tem of ‘civilized’ European nations was writing sys itation of the However, im of time. the population erate Turkish vastlythe illit amongeracy increase lit a measure to as advertised was largely from Arabic toalphabet The Latin. shift culminated 1928alphabet inthe change tual and circles, political and ultimately man empire amongst Republican intellec afterthe collapse discussed Ottothe of expressed. phoneticsthe of Turkish the language was for reforming script the to better express subject of heated debates, and need the abic script of Ottoman Turkish was too a of ordinary the people. dialect the The Ar of aYeni Lisan(New on Language) based

Hale Yilmaz, Yilmaz “Language Çolak, Policy 11 These debates These becamewidely 12 - - - -

modern ideals of ideals European the modern and instead geared towards the andEastern Ottoman heritage entity devoid of of all its Middle homogenous Turkish national The TDK,alongside decreesother Becoming Turkish: Na Becoming ... further aimed to create... further a (Syracuse, New York: nations. ------reform programs of Mustafa Kemal’s re remainperiod one of most the successful guage of policies Early the Republican gation of Turkish nationalism, and lan creation,the consolidation, and propa Reforms thus consequential became in The programs the of LanguageTurkish of ideals European the modern nations. heritage and instead geared towards the of of all its and Middle Eastern Ottoman mogenous Turkish national entity devoid aimedsurnames, to create further aho of 1934banning non-Turkish all sounding other decrees such as Surnames the Law Turkish language. 14 70-75. Early in RepublicanOfficial Ideology Turkey,” 13 duced to Turkish the mass. In November, samethe year alphabet new the was intro (European) numerals, and inAugust of from Arabic Eastern to Western Arabic in May of 1928, initially with shift the The conversion of Turkishwritingbegan itage and toward its European outlook. Turkey’s Perso-Arabic and Islamic her nationala new identity away based from Republic of Turkey, thereby engineering enforce Eurocentric anew image of the an opportunity for Republican the elite to of orthogra

Ibid., 82. “Language Çolak, Policy and - 13 The TDK,alongside phy, provided Latinization the pecially reforms, es languagethe Turkish mass, literacy of the improve the drastically helping from gime. Apart Apart 14 ------

57 ISSUE XII | 58 NMC JOURNAL | of Western modernity. removedto be and replaced with symbols dresses, and Caliphate, the it needed too such as Ottoman clothing, serpu the and like other symbols of Ottoman culture from Turkey’s archaic and backwards past, acters were thus presented as arelic being Early Ottoman period. from of time the its adoption’ during the were a‘destructive influence on Turkish to Mustafa Kemal, Arabic the characters Republicanmodernist elite and especially atbeing centre the of debate. this and Turkish the language was presented as of archaism/civilization the dichotomy, agendas was Kemalist the understanding centrethe of Early the Republican reform ter following government the decree. At Mektepleri (Nation semes the Schools) taught to Turkish children Millet in the change, and alphabet new the beganbeing governmentthe alaw passed for script the 43, no. 4(2011):678-679. International Studies of Middle Journal East ofriences Turkey’s 1928 Alphabet Reform,” 18 17 16 72-75. Early in RepublicanOfficial Ideology Turkey,” 15 Economic Conference, Arabic the script presented by Kazım Karabekir at İzmir the groups of thought. one On the hand and as 1928 and was generally presented by two extent the ed of alphabet reform up until However, considerable debate surround followingdecades alphabet the reform. in literacy that Turkey inthe experienced as well, and it paved way the for spike the for phonology the of Turkish the language in characters was undoubtedly abetter fit replace Arabic the abjad. The shift to Lat hats,style alphabet Latin didthe too so was serpuş replacedthe with Western the

Hale Yilmaz, “The Social Expe Hale Yilmaz,Social “The Ibid., 73. Ibid., 72. Çolak, “Language Çolak, Policy and 17

16 Therefore, just as The Arabic char 15 To the ş - , me , 18

- - - - -

al culture,al and apivotal step towards the formationin the nation of modern anew was thus regarded as an essential element real enemy of Republic.” the Latinisation Orientalthe mentality as the stood which afforded apsychologicalbackground to of European civilization. The Arabicscript it could never properly express ideals the as Turkish was written from right to left, alphabet, Latin the stated: who “So long Kemal himself following adoption the of lief is presented words inthe of Mustafa modernity. as inherentlywas seen incompatible with rather,crease literacy; Arabic orthography a medium through state which could in characters was not only meant to provide of its Ottoman past. for Turkey to itself free from burdens the sawkı Latinisation inorder as necessary such as Hussein and Cahit Kılıçzade Hak mate of Republican view the elite, writers otherthe hand, and inline with ulti the replacement of script the On was needed. and only revision the and not complete amongst Turkey and its Muslim brethren, was thought of as asymbol being of unity 21 20 70-71. Early in RepublicanOfficial Ideology Turkey,” 19 of Turkish anew collective consciousness. tage, and thus allow for proliferation the elements of Perso-Arabic Ottoman heri pendence’ of Turks from backwards the perceived to allow for ‘cultural the inde and elements. Eastern This change was purified toall be of needed of its archaic Turkish new this culture, meaning Turkish Republic was to create language anew for raphysecond theshifttask in 1928, the of (Western) civilization.’ ‘nationalisation of universalized values of

Ibid., 73. Ibid., 72-73. “Language Çolak, Policy and 20 This early This Republican be 19 Therefore,Latinthe 21 Afterthe orthog ------Türkçe ly 1930’s, was tasked with producing Thus,the TDK, establishedearthe in 24 23 Ideology in Earlycial Republican Turkey,” 79. 22 on acollective attempt at bringing Turk on pragmaticbased reasoning, but rather to borrowing which from French was not lents already inuse, indicating extent the Turkisheven had useful equally equiva and loaned journals, the French words demonstrates how insome newspapers Turkish further Lewis lexicon. Geoffrey loans constituted nearly 30percent of the abic loans, and by 1950’s the European loans were nearly three that times of Ar 1930’s for instance, incidence the of French endthe of Language the Reform Erainthe ones, French.pean especially not by Turkish words but rather by Euro increasinglyloans became also replaced of Western civilization, Arabic and Persian effort was strongly geared towards ideals Republic. Given that nationalisation this essential nationalisation inthe effort the of elementsern inTurkish as seen was still language policy, but elimination of East in later years in favour of a more moderate hardline purist state was dropped ideology ofuse non-Turkish words inpublic. Turkish!)”Speak campaign prohibited the “Vatandaş,the Türkçe Konuş! (Citizen, over 7,000Arabic and Persian words, and had coined nearly 30,000replacements for and Westernism. Thus, the TDKby 1934, on national modernism based ideology tication’ to express necessary Turkey’s new oldthe realm, and thus lacking ‘sophis the as able to only express state the of mind of Ottoman Turkish’s foreign loans were seen containing only words of Turkish origin. of its Arabic and Persian derivatives, and

(Pure Turkish), alanguage of rid all Ibid., 84. Ibid., 80-81. “Language Çolak, Policy and Offi 24 Towards 23 This - öz öz 22 ------

through effectively eliminatingOttoman andmodernist nationalist inTurkey ideals forms allowed for also enforcement the of state-sponsored Turkish Language Re ‘civilized’the European nations, the strengthening of Turkey’s place among towards of ideals the Western civilization. stead generation gear modern the of Turks lamic and Perso-Arabic heritage, and in to alienate Republican Turkey from its Is Ottoman served past. This further break ish collective consciousness and Turkey’s permanent Turk break modern between state ideology, and consequently created a andmodernism westernism of Republican Turkish national identity inline with the lican elite thus attempted to consolidate a Perso-Arabic loanwords, Turkish Repub alphabet shiftthe in theand replacing of member of Western civilization. Through a way for Republican Turkey to become a away from Ottoman heritage, but as also was not only as a necessity seen to move Thus,transformationthe languageof ish to closer its European counterparts. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999),45. ACatastrophic Success, Language Reform: 25 pre-Republican all virtually manuscripts general writing and meant inspeech that Persian the almost all and Arabic loans in tradition,literary and elimination the of essentially cut offfrom richOttomanthe phabet, generation new the of Turks were ideology. With Latinisation the of al the tity completely separate from Ottoman consolidationthe of national anew iden thought.allowed This further break for Republicanbetween Turkish and Ottoman discourse,sociopolitical causing abreak

Geoffrey Lewis, Lewis, Geoffrey Despite its pivotal role inthe The TurkishThe 25 ------

59 ISSUE XII | 60 NMC JOURNAL | norm completely which replaced Otto all formulation of linguistic anew norm, a Era thus allowed for authoritarian the re past. of its Islamic and Ottoman practicesof the alienating Republic the of Turkey from all 1950, highlighting Kemalist the attempt at Turkish was versionsole the up used until to prayer call the od, was translated into inArabic.called reform the During peri Muslim the ed to prayer call from being manifestedalso decree inthe that prevent not limited to Turkish orthography, and erature as well. Moreover, move this was Ottoman literature, but Arabic Islamic lit Turkish new the generation from not only gious places. notablethe exception of mosques and reli domainsbanned inall of public life, with ofuse Arabic characters were completely As well, 1928Alphabet the per Law, the were inaccessible to Turkish the masses. turc au pied lettre. dela L’invention de«l’alphabet 29 Studies Eastern Nationalism inAtatürk’s Turkey”, Against West: the The Origins Linguisticof 28 ofTurkishJournal Studies L’invention de«l’alphabet turc Szurek, “ 27 Society,tal 1954),20. Turkey Modern 26 and more inclusive definition Ottomanof Tanzimat reform era brought with it a new latein the 19 tions that comprised Ottoman the Empire rality. to heterogeneous Due the mixof na nation of Ottoman thought on plu ethnic representedfurther by effective the elimi forcefulthought sociopolitical shift in was nocentric, and nationalist thought. man discourse with Kemalist secular, eth

”, » 28 TheAlphabet Law theReform of 1. La révolutionLa au pied lettre. dela Caymaz and Szurek, “ Birol Caymaz and Emmanuel İlker Uriel Heyd, 27 th Aytürk, “Turkish Linguists This further aimed further to Thisisolate (Jerusalem: The (Jerusalem: Israel Orien 40, no. 6(2004),1-25. and early 20 Language 6,no. 6(2007).2-3. ”, » th La révolution révolution La century, the Reform in Reform

Middle European 29 This - 26 ------turc au pied lettre. dela L’invention de«l’alphabet 31 accessing pluralist during the the ideology ation of Turks inRepublican Turkey from Ottoman Turkish stopped gener new the preventionthe of Turks from learning published using alphabet,Latin the and propagated through journals and articles public.al taughtbeing and displayed to gener the apart from Turkish were prevented from of national their identity, and languages citizens were considered Turks regardless ethnocentrism. In Republic, new the all with it values of Turkish nationalism and late Ottoman and instead period, replaced Ottomanism that were widespread inthe prevented propagation the of of ideals normical in 1928however, completely zimat era. pluralism that flourished theduring Tan never managed to eradicate of ideals the Ottomanthe empire, however CUP the gave way to a more Turk-centred of view society. CUPera,Ottomanism the During thus were participating equal members of regardless of language and religion, and subjects ofall empire the were Ottomans subjects. To eyesof the Ottoman the elite, the Modern Middle East, the Middle Modern East, 30 allowed Turkish the elite to control na all writing and Republican writing further Ottomanbetween Era. The disconnect during Ottoman the discussed ideals ical compositions and therefore sociopolit the generation of Turks from accessing the of Turkish deliberately prevented new the purgingthe of Perso-Arabic the lexicon Turkish language’, alphabet Latin the and of Turkey through creation the of a‘new modernizationthe and Westernization Tanzimat era.Therefore, concurrentwith

”, » 5-7. Caymaz and Szurek, “ Cleveland and Bunton, 31 30 Nationalist were ideals further The change the of orthograph 81-103. La révolution révolution La A History of A History ------to Turkish the mass. by presenting asingle nationalist ideology tionalist discourse Republic, inthe there 33 turc au pied lettre. dela L’invention de«l’alphabet 32 Kemalist viewpoint of nationalism and can heritage, the allowing to them solidify narrativetheir of Turkey’s Pre-Republi Republicanthe elite were able to construct norance (cehalet) of Ottoman the past, away from fanatism the (taassup) and ig branding language the change as astep Kemalists tothe define norm. changebet of event 1928 was a critical for well asstructure, political and alpha the attempted to overhaul Turkish as society tafa Kemal’s wide-reaching reform agenda Afterthe founding theRepublic, of Mus from forming during 1920’s the and 1930’s. mation of any potential opposition parties Party through effectivelythe crushing for thoritarian of People’s the rule Republican allowed for strengthening the of au the Turkish masses. Furthermore, reforms the therefore nationalist among ideology) the strengthen position the of Kemalist (and voicesthe of opposition all groups and Kemal and Republican the Elite to quell thus provided an opportunity for Mustafa try. within coun the dialogue sociopolitical all andterritory Republican hegemony over homogenizationthe of Turkish national society. This controlultimately allowed for lican and Kemalist within Turkish ideals enforcement and consolidation of Repub Language Reforms allowed for further the course of Ottoman the Turkish era,the

32 »”, 1. Orthography and lexicon change Ibid. 4-5. Caymaz and Szurek, “ Through eliminatingthe dis all La révolution révolution La 33 Through ------alist claim over its linguistic territory. The with its independence and lexical nation was thus to Turkish refuse new the nation, alphabetnew and subsequent the reforms mogenous national identity. To refuse the consolidation of normative anew and ho of Republic, the thereby allowing for the Kemalism to become only the principle bet. scripts written Perso-Arabic inthe alpha ist Republic no longer could read manu scholars inTurkish schools of Kemal the ‘Kurdishnized alphabet’, since Kurdish writers were obligated also to create aLati afteralphabetthe 1928 reform, Kurdish among peoples the of Republic. the phabet however forced mold unitary anew Kemalists over normalization the of al the Hebrew). The hegemonic control the of system millet (e.g.the Armenian, Greek, scripts respective intheir languages under of empire the were able to produce manu Ottoman lands, many the diverse nations obligatorytheir language In policies. the as ahomogenous national entity through Kemalists were able also to portray Turkey ethnocentrism within Turkish society. 36 35 turc au pied lettre. dela L’invention de«l’alphabet 34 mer group and alienated from them the away reading the competence of for the of public schools), since it suddenly took public State (the functionaries, students medresses) elite with new the of Re the eliteclerical (imams, students hocas, of onesLatin provoked areplacement of the The shift from Perso-Arabic characters to hierarchy with that of Republican the one. replacementin the of Ottoman the state alphabetshift in also played adecisive role

36 »”, 13. This allowed This for Turkish-centered Ibid., 16. Ibid., 4. Caymaz and Szurek. “ La révolution révolution La 35 Thus, 34 ------

61 ISSUE XII | 62 NMC JOURNAL | enforcing Kemalist new this and nation mostthe organs critical responsible for Within nation the however, undoubtedly portant of was which Turkish nationalism. ofto ideals the Republic, the most the im administrative sphere aunilateral fidelity Latinization consequently on imposed the form of toideals Republic. new the the The purge of individuals all didnot who con alphabetthe authorized an administrative alphabetnew ability their ten exam to certifying read the functionaries were obliged to pass awrit and 25 the haul of Republic the 8 the itself. Between concurrent with administrative the over haul Turkish in the public life was also ism and populism. The ideological over and were primed of with ideals national through government-sponsored channels of Republic the were thus educated only public sphere form,” 678. of Turkey’sExperiences 1928Alphabet Re 39 38 turc au pied lettre. dela L’invention de«l’alphabet 37 well as of instilling ideals Turkish anew homogenizing national the as territory generation of Turkish citizens, thereby stratumtive and social composed of anew and hegemony to create an administra Republicanthe elite with supremacy the TheAlphabet Law thusof 1928 provided onimposed by them Republican the elite. pletely devoid of thoughts other than those generationnew of Turkish children com and thus schools the produced an entirely loyalwere highly to those Kemalism, also of Turks, administrators of Mektepler the with ‘alphabetizing’ generation new the tion Schools). werealist ideal Mektepleri Millet the (Na

»” , 21. Ibid., 25-30; Ibid., 13. Caymaz and Szurek. “ th of October, of all Turkey’s state 38 39 37 . In way, this reform the of As cultural tasked milieus . The new legal citizens. The legal new Yilmaz, “The Social Yilmaz,Social “The La révolution révolution La - th ------

igin needed to be replaced to be by needed igin Turk their that wordsbelieving all of non-Turkic or reinventionthe of Turkish the lexicon, pursued ahardline purist approach with creation of TDK, the Republican the elite country’sthe Ottoman heritage. Afterthe provided otherwise bytorical legitimacy lian peoples, thereby providing his the regarding ancient the Turkic and Anato andthoughtological pseudo-scientific Turkish national identity on myth based through could consolidate they which the publican elite produced medium anew overhaul of Turkish the language, Re the landmass of Turkey. Thus,through the in order legitimacy ical to itself tie to the to provide needed also for itself ahistor and However, modernism. state new the man with Westernism, ideals secularism, it allowed for replacement the of Otto key’s administrative sphere, and social as transformation of Republic the of Tur were consequential ideological inthe Republic. national identity citizens within all of the 41 80-82. Early in RepublicanOfficial Ideology Turkey,” 40 proach to language the overhaul, allowing statethe adopted amore moderate ap themselves. infindingficulties new words toexpress ‘pure’ Turkish, and most dif people faced nearly impossible to communicate inthis tion of foreign loans meant that it became absence of centuries of accumula lexical words inTurkish. Perso-Arabic and evenEuropean loan was created to provide alternatives for all Türkçeye Karşılıkları Söz Tarama Dergisi ish counterparts. Thus,the

Ibid., 82. “Language Çolak, Policy and The Turkishlanguage reforms 41 Thus, the endby of 1935, 40 However, sudden the Osmanlıcadan ------tified withthe concurrent tified rise of a new inTurkish.used was policy jus This new for words of non-Turkish be origin to still form: ACatastrophic Success, form: 44 43 Ideology inEarly Republican Turkey,” 42 Era. ish intelligentsia of Early the Republican Turkish national identity within Turk the allowed for consolidation the of astrong ment of perceived Turkish superiority were superior to This them. re-establish abic, rather Turks the and language their guages of culture’ such as Persian and Ar borrowed extensively from perceived ‘lan nation was not one language whose had In Republican the erathus, Turkish the ing for cultural the superiority of Turks. attempted to push forward notions argu tongue for an independent nation, but also Turkishthe language as an independent also strived to not Theory only present es of hardline purists, Sun-Language the pragmatic reasoning of silencing voic the from Turkish the language. Apart from its Perso-Arabicfy’ and European elements itself, there then was to no need ‘puri borrowings were ultimately from Turkish languages from Turkish which took lexical basis of linguistic studies. and Latin’, at which made time the up the and thus was root the of Sanskrit, Greek, firstthe and oldestlanguage the in world, guage theorists argues that Turkish ‘was descendants of Turkish. Turkish Sun-Lan andpean branches, Semitic were infact guages, including of those Indo-Euro the world, and postulated lan that modern all of was work, presented theory the to the TeorisiDil (Sun-Language Theory). the Güneşcalled theory pseudo-scientific

44 It allowed for further presenta the Lewis, Lewis, Ibid., 77. Çolak, “LanguageÇolak, Policy and Official In August of 1936,after months The TurkishThe Language Re 43 57-75. If therefore all , 83-84. 42

------over nations the all had pre to they which and argued for cultural their superiority Turkish the solidify nation’s independence tionalists of Republican the Era.It helped vation into viewpoint the of Turkish na provides still ory obser us with a crucial linguistic studies, Sun-Language the the Turkish in both demise and International well. as theory the linguists that Mustafa Kemal abandoned by rejection of Europeansal theory the amongst intellectual circles. promotedes of theory the its proliferation as well,of and theory the early inthe stag ry. proclamation of Sun-Language the Theo (nation)as millet after inhis speeches the words of Persian and Arabic origin such Kemal himself, beganto who re-establish promotion was Mustafa of theory this world’s countries. Consequential to the a blank slate to redefine itself amongthe influences,giving the new Turkish nation pletely independent of previous all foreign tion of Turks and heritage their as com form: ACatastrophic Success, form: 46 Ideology in Earlycial Republican Turkey,” 84. 45 ly-established origins and ancestry. By it to ahuman has which previous body to establish a nation-state is by comparing alism’, she postulates that one of ways the ty. In Sommer’s ‘Archaeology and Nation Turkish the could solidify national identi with a historical background onto itwhich civilizations provided Republican the elite search into ancient Anatolian peoples and of Turkish, extensive archaeological re explaining linguistic the theory ancestry developmentthe of Sun-Language the viously subjugated. been Concurrent with

45 He was at also first a genuinebeliever Lewis, Lewis, “Language Çolak, Policy and Offi It was only afterthe near-univer The TurkishThe Language Re 46 Despite its ultimate 65-70. ------63 ISSUE XII | 64 NMC JOURNAL | rehaul of Turkish the language furthered ing to ancient the peoples. Phrygian kabir’ near an archaeological site belong tion of Mustafa Kemal’s mausoleum ‘Anıt instancethrough the solidified construc epitome of Republican this was for belief to territorial their legitimacy claim. Anatolians, thereby providing ahistorical Turks modern tween the and ancient the Republican elite created acultural be link ancientthe Anatolian civilizations, the ping up of many museums dedicated to archaeological excavations and prop the civilization. Therefore,through extensive grounding point for Turkish modern the as Hittites the and Lydians the provided a Anatolian peoples prior of millennia such ly Republican Turkey, of rich history the ter and arich history. such as an origin point, anational charac assumed to have same the characteristics, implication therefore, nation the is then eton University Press, 1970),25-26. Building Types 49 Ideology inEarlycial Republican Turkey,” 77. 48 UCL Press, 1971),166-168. Archaeology, and Nationalism,” in 47 were widely spread using syn newly the try’s Ottoman heritage.theories These provided otherwise bygitimacy coun the gave Turkish the nation historical the le entific partly historicand thattheories vations pseudo-sci permitted the use the thus, promotion the of archeological exca Together with Sun-Language the theory civilizations that had preceded Turks. the on Anatolian the based origin story al permitting creation the of nation anew Persian and Arabian civilizations, thereby cultural of link Turkish the people to the by theories these eliminating socio the

Nikolaus Peysner, “Language Çolak, Policy and Offi Ulrike Sommer, “Archaeology ed. Gabriel Moshenska, (London, (Princeton, Princ New Jersey: Key Concepts in Public inPublic Concepts Key 47 In of case the Ear A History of A History 48 49 The The The The ------Turks thus arguably strongest the became abic Islamic heritage. Thelanguage the of and away from Ottoman their Perso-Ar ism, modernity, and Western civilization with an outlook towards national ethnic to produce nation anew of Turkish people ish language was strategically engineered of what it means aTurk. to be The Turk ‘backwardness’ to adefining characteristic ing asymbol of Ottoman orientalism and ish language was transformed from be western-oriented government, Turk the grams of Mustafa Kemal’s and modernist ing. ThroughLanguagethe Reform pro language process inthe of nation-build most significant examples the of use of Turkishthe language represents one of the idation of nation the it, and speaks which it is atool for unification the and consol is as much for adevice communication as lastly Anatolian their homeland. sition among nations, other modern and Turkishthe nation and language, po their strengtheningfurther bond the between andthesized purified Turkishlanguage, form programs of Kemalist the regime, much debate has resurfaced about re the findings the of Anatolianpeoples. Today, as well as promotion the of archeological proclamation of Sun-Language the theory aboutideas origins the of Turks, with the flourishing of pseudo-scientific nationalist Turkishnew language allowed for also the Early inthe curred Republican era.The orthography and change lexical that oc cannot looked at be only interms of the world.the Thelanguage reforms, however, independent place amongst nations the of it allowed nation-state the of Turkey an independent and evensuperior tongue, tion, and through its promotion as an defining characteristic the of Turkish na Language in the modern worldLanguage modern inthe ------heritage, Ottoman Turkish has resurfaced creasingly aware of Turkey’s Ottoman and with ayoung Turkish generation in versity Press, 2013),50. Turk Nation” in 50 cussions today. country inthe assume forefront the dis of sociocultural of Turkey’s Ottoman cultural heritage to for debates surrounding importance the toğlu, andof rise AKParti the has allowed of Prime rule the Minister Ahmet Davu Turkish reached a zenith especially under circles.lectual The discussion Ottomanof as atopic of study inschools and inintel

(Princeton, Princeton New Jersey: Uni Jenny White, “Islam and the Muslim Nationalism andthe New 50 Howev ------modern world. erate andsynthetic language change inthe one of the most successful cases of delib engineering ofmodernTurkishremains regarding theTurkishlanguage,and in1928and enacted policies 1930’s inthe one today argues for reversion the of the of Early Republican Turkey, no virtually criticism of some of reform the agendas er, despite increasing the skepticism and - 65 ISSUE XII | 66 NMC JOURNAL | Lewis, Geoffrey. Heyd, Uriel. Gallagher, CharlesF.“LanguageReformandSocialModernizationinTurkey.”In Çolak, Caymaz, Birol,andSzurek,Emmanuel.“ Bunton, Martin,Cleveland,WillianL. Aytürk, Bibliography Y Yılmaz, Jenny White,“IslamandtheNation”in Tachau, Frank.“LanguageandPolitics:TurkishLanguage Reform”, T Spolsky, Bernard.“LanguageinitsSocialContext,” Ulrike, Sommer,“ArchaeologyandNationalism,”inK ıl maz, Hale. “The Social Experiences of Turkey’s 1928 Alphabet Reform,” Yilmaz. “LanguagePolicyandOfficialIdeologyofEarlyRepublicanTurkey”, Hale. B İlker. “TurkishLinguistsAgainsttheWest:TheOriginsofLinguistic Hawai’i Press,1971. Joan RubinandBjörnH.Jernudd,152–69.Honolulu,Hawaii:Universityof Language BePlanned?SociolinguisticTheoryofDevelopingNations, Middle EasternStudies de «l’alphabetturc Westview Press,2012. 1-25. Nationalism inAtatürk’sTurkey.” al JournalofMiddleEastStudies ly RepublicanTurkey. eton, NewJersey:PrincetonUniversityPress,2013. Politics (2005): 254-272. gy, University Press,1999. 1954. edited byGabrielMoshenska,London,UCLPress,1971. L anguage ReforminModernTurkey. ecoming Turkish:NationalistReformsandCulturalNegotiations inEar 26,no.2(1964),191-204. The TurkishLanguageReform:ACatastrophicSuccess ».” Syracuse, NewYork:Syracuse UniversityPress,2013. European JournalofTurkishStudies 40,no.6(2004):67-91. A HistoryoftheModernMiddleEast, Muslim NationalismandtheNewTurk. La révolutionaupieddelalettre.L’invention 43,no.4(2011):677-697. Middle EasternStudies Jerusalem:IsraelOrientalSociety, Journal ofBalticStudies ey ConceptsinPublicArchaeolo 40,no.6(2004): 6,no.6(2007). he Reviewof . Oxford:Oxford Internation Boulder: 36, no.3 editedby Princ Can - - - -