sign in sign up
<<
Home , Altai language, Districts of Kazakhstan, Kazakh literature, Khakas language, Kipchak languages, Kumyk language

International Symposium:

Interaction of and Cultures

Abstracts

Saule Tazhibayeva & Nevskaya Irina of : Language Peculiarities

Kazakhstan is a multiethnic and multi-religious state, where live more than 126 representatives of different ethnic groups (Sulejmenova E., Shajmerdenova N., Akanova D. 2007). One-third of the population is Turkic ethnic groups speaking 25 Turkic languages and presenting a unique model of the Turkic world (www.stat.gov.kz, Nevsakya, Tazhibayeva, 2014). One of the most numerous groups are Turks deported from Georgia to Kazakhstan in 1944. The analysis of the language, culture and history of the modern , including sub-ethnic groups of the Turkish diaspora up to the present time has been carried out inconsistently. Kazakh researchers studied history (Toqtabay, 2006), ethno-political processes (Galiyeva, 2010), ethnic and cultural development of Turkish diaspora in Kazakhstan (Ibrashaeva, 2010). Foreign researchers devoted their studies to ethnic peculiarities of Kazakhstan (see Bhavna Dave, 2007). Peculiar features of Akhiska Turks living in the US are presented in the article of Omer Avci (www.nova.edu./ssss/QR/QR17/avci/PDF). Features of the language and culture of the Turkish Diaspora in Kazakhstan were not subjected to special investigation. There have been no studies of the features of the , with its sub- ethnic dialects, documentation of a corpus of endangered variants of Turkish language. The data of the pre-sociological surveys show that the Kazakh Turks self-identify themselves as Turks Akhiska, Turks Hemshilli, Turks Laz, Turks Terekeme. Unable to return to their home country to Georgia Akhiska, Hemshilli, Laz Turks, Terekeme were scattered in many countries. Language variants of sub-ethnic groups are endangered or have already come to the point where there is a need for their revitalization. The situation is aggravated by the fact that all the variants of Turkish language in Kazakhstan are unwritten. In this regard, it is necessary immediately investigate, document, fully explore and give a scientific description of various variants of the Turkish language. Separation from the main ethnic array led, in particular, to the preservation of language and certain elements of traditional Turkish culture. Language of Kazakhstani Turks preserved in the form in which it existed before the Kemal reforms in the Republic of Turkey. At present there are sufficiently rapid processes of cultural assimilation of Kazakhstani Turks (both to Kazakh and Russian-speaking culture). Language and culture, retained by the older generation need to be investigated and fixed by researchers. Documentation of linguistic peculiarities of different dialects of Turkish Diaspora in Kazakhstan is one of the important tasks of Turkic studies in Kazakhstan (Nevskaya I., Tazhibayeva S., 2014). Separately, it should be noted that Turkish representatives consider Kazakhstan as the most comfortable country to preserve the culture, language among all the Central Asian states. Thus, the study of language, culture and self-identification of Turkish diaspora in Kazakhstan is of a double interest: on the one hand, from the point of view of studying the archaic form of the Turkish language, perhaps lost in the historic homeland; on the other hand, in terms of capturing and documenting the heritage which is threatened by the loss due to the process of cultural assimilation and generational change. The globalization processes, the impact of literary Turkish language via satellite TV, mass media destroy a unique culture and language of Kazakhstani Turks with their various sub-ethnic groups. At the same time, the rise of national consciousness of Turks, and their desire to preserve their language and culture for future generations means that there is a social demand for the documentation of these languages. Documentation will have not only scientific, but also a great social importance.

References: Sulejmenova E.D. Shajmerdenova N.Zh., Akanova D.H. 2010.Jazyki narodov Kazahstana. Sociolingvisticheskij spravochnik. – Astana: «Izd-vo Arman-PV», 2007.- 304 p. Itogi nacional'noj perepisi naselenija 2009 goda v Respublike Kazahstan Statisticheskij sbornik /Pod red. A.Smailova/ Astana, - 2010 – p. 297. Altynbekova O.B. Jetnojazykovye processy v Kazahstane. –Almaty: Jekonomika, 2006.–s. 416 Toqtabay A.2006. Tu'rkі hali'qtari'ni'ng e'tnoma'deni''etі. – Almaty: «Tolaghay», 2006. – 328 b; Galiev A.A., 2010. E'tnopoli''ti''cheski''e processi' w tyurkoyazi'chni'h narodov: istoriya i ee mifologizaciya. – Avtoref. di''s… d-ra i''st. nawk. – Almati', 2010. - 25 p. 'brasheva Sh. 2010. Qazaqstandaghi'ori''rіk di''asporasi' (e'tnoma'deni'' damwi'). Avtoref….kand. i''st. nawk.- Almati', 2010.- 32p. Bhavna Dave, 2007. Kazakhstan: Ethnicity, Language and Power - London, Routledge, 2007 Avchi Omer. Understanding the culture of Ahiska Turks in Wheaton Illinois: A case study – www.nova.edu./ssss/QR/QR17/avci/PDF Nevskaya I.A., Tazhibayeva S.J., 2014. Sovremennaja tjurkologija i mezhdunarodnoe sotrudnichestvo na Evrazijskom prostranstve // Global Turk . №1. S.19-34 – Astana, 2014.

Emine Shahingoz & Vanessa Quasnik Linguistic data processing in the framework of the project ‘Interaction of Turkic languages and cultures in Kazakhstan’

Kazakhstan is a multi ethnic country with more than 130 ethnic groups 25 of them are Turkic ones. One of those ethnic groups are the Turkic-speaking minorities, which were deported to during the Stalin era in the year of 1944. The primary objective of the project ‘Interaction of Turkic Languages and Cultures in Post-Soviet Kazakhstan’ is to clear up the sociolinguistic situation of these Turkic ethnic groups in Kazakhstan. The Turkic minorities endure the double pressure of Russian as well as of Kazakh, since they are the dominant languages of today’s Kazakhstan. The Turkic minorities’ languages in Kazakhstan have kept some archaic features and developed innovative ones, triggered by language contact with other Turkic and non-Turkic languages. An often appearing phenomenon for example is the code switching of the speakers of those minority languages. Whilst speaking Russian or Kazakh, they often use elements of their mother and vice versa. Documenting these processes is also a goal of the project. To achieve the goals of the project, there are a few issues we need to pay attention to. These include: - social strategies of Turkic ethnic groups in the new conditions of independent Kazakhstan - assimilation processes vs. retaining the ethnic identities, as well as the main factors influencing these processes - ethnic vs. civic in the mass-consciousness of the Turkic ethnic groups in modern Kazakhstan - the role of the state policies and of spontaneously developing tendencies - reasons for increase and decrease in numbers of certain Turkic ethnic groups during the independence period Apart from that, our goal is to document especially endangered or unstudied Turkic varieties. In the framework of the project fieldworks have been organized, where the fieldwork teams visited many different families and documented their languages. The minorities they got to meet were for example Ahiska, Azeri, Balkar, Karachay, Kumyk, Laz, Nogay, Uzbek, Xemshilli etc. Before even transcribing there were a few tasks, we had to overcome. For example it was fundamental to choose the phonems which appear in the documented languages. Also it would have been very time consuming to always copy the needed phonems, so we created a phonetic keyboard, accessable through shortcuts. While some of the team started transcribing, others archived the metadata we collected with the help of ‘Arbil’. ‘Arbil’ is a program of the Max-Planks-Institute for Psycholinguistics and is specifically programmed to organize linguistic data. Videos and audios, as well as the transcriptions will later on be added to the system. In this way, the data access will be much easier. After all these steps, our next task will be creating a database, based on our converted transcripts and video-/ audio material. Databases in general not only store large amounts of data, but also impose an organization in data, which facilitates access for researchers and applications developers. Our database of Turkic minorities’ languages of Kazakhstan will enable further projects and researches.

Bernt Brendemoen: The Eastern Black Sea (”Laz”) dialects of Turkey

The reason for my participation in the symposium on Turkic population elements in Kazakhstan is the group known as ”Laz Turks”. Since I have been working extensively on the dialects of the Eastern Back Sea Coast of Turkey, and especially Trabzon, I am very interested in the ”Laz” in Kazakhstan and in what kind of connection there is between their dialect and the present Eastern Black Sea dialects in Turkey. (”Laz” is of course originally the name of a group in the Turkish provinces of Rize and Artvin speaking a Kartvelian language, but the designation ”Laz” has been used (alongside with ”Lezghi”) about any population element on the Eastern Black Sea Coast since the Middle Ages, cf. Brendemoen 2002: 23). Thus, my contribution to the symposium will be to give a survey of the main characteristics of the dialects spoken in Trabzon and Rize today. The area can be divided into several sub- from the point of view of archaic features and innovations due to the impact of non-Turkic languages. The most archaic features are the ones in Trabzon where Greek used to be spoken extensively up to the population exchange in 1923, i.e. the districts of Of and Çaykara, and Maçka, Akçaabat, and Tonya (henceforth called ”the nucleus districts”). In the districts of Yomra, Arsin, Araklı, and Sürmene, and also in great parts of Rize, there seems to be an extensive Armenian substrate. In the field of phonology, the mot salient features characterizing the Eastern Black Sea dialects are the following: 1) Backing of / ü / and / ö / and fronting of / ı /. The strength of this phonological mechanism varies both according to the surrounding consonants and the geographical districts. In the ”nucleus areas” it does not take place after velar stops, but in Rize it does. 2) Strong tendency for especially initial stops to become unaspirated and unvoiced in the nucleus areas. 3) Velar stops becoming in front of front vowels in the non-nucleus areas. At the same time, the palato–alveolar affricates / ç / and / c / are dentalized (> / ts /, / dz /). 4) Labial harmony is on a very archaic stage of development in the nucleus areas. In other districts, the degree of development varies considerably. Suffixes ending in a high vowel + / k / tend to have an / / all over the area. In the field of syntax, there are also some significant differences from other Anatolian dialects, such as: 5) The dative is used in a locational tense i.e., where we would have expected the locative, especially in the Eastern part of the area. 6) The suffix {–mIş} does not have the same inferential meaning as in Standard Turkish, but rather expresses a postterminal action, at least in the nucleus areas. 7) Zero anaphora, or pro-drop, which is a rule in Standard Turkish, is not very common, especially in the nucleus districts. 8) Word-order: Subjects, predicatives and objects frequently occur in post-verbal position in spite of being parts of the rhema.

Bibliography: Brendemoen, Bernt: The Turkish Dialects of Trabzon. Their Phonology and Historical Devlopment I-II. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz 2002. Günay, Turgut: Rize İli Ağızları. Ankara Üniversitesi Basımevi 1978.

Rind-Pawlowski in Axiska

The Axiska Turks were deported from the Meskhetia in Georgia in 1944, and were transported to Kazakhstan, , and Kyrgystan. A large number of Axiska Turks still live in these countries nowadays. The Axiska variety of Turkish differs from literary Turkish with regard to some phonologic and morphonologic features, which will be presented in the talk. High vowels (u, ü, ï, i) at the end of words consisting of more than one syllable are pronounced as /i/ . This shift occurs at the auslaut of nouns (quti ‘box’, köpri ‘bridge’, qapi ‘door’ etc.), adjectives (razi ‘content’, toli ‘full’), verb stems i.e. imperatives (oxi! ‘read!’), and also at the auslaut of suffixes (e.g. accusative: buni ‘this-acc’, oni ‘that-acc’, yoli ‘way-acc’ etc., possessive: göli ‘lake-poss.3’, ablasi ‘aunt- poss.3’ etc.), ordinals: üčünǰi ‘third’, onunǰi ‘tenth’ etc., past tense: qoydi ‘put-pst’ qaldi ‘stay-pst’ etc.). Certain suffixes are excluded from vowel harmony. The perfect form –miš only appears with the vowel -/i/. Suffixes ending in –x do not assimilate either, e.g. the infinitive –max, the hortative –ax, the future tense –aǰax, the conditional –sax, the nominalizer –lux, the first person plural –ux, and the participle –dux. Certain suffixes show only labial variation, i.e. the copula –DUr, the causative –DUr, and the aorist – Ur. Present tense is formed by the suffix –(i)yer, which has developed from the dialectal pronunciation of the auxiliary verb yerimek instead of Turkish yorumaq ‘go’ . However, due to the increasing influence of literary Turkish, these peculiarities of the Axiska variety are step by step disappearing.

N.G. Shaimerdinova, S.Zh. Tazhibaeva, I.A. Nevskaya, C. Schönig Interaction of the languages and cultures of the Turkic peoples in Northern Kazakhstan and in the Tatar diaspora

In this report, within the frame of our international project, we analyse the interaction of the history, languages and cultures of the Turkic peoples in Northern Kazakhstan. The northern and central areas of Kazakhstan are the home of several Turkic peoples: Tatar, Bashkir, Chuvash, Azerbaijanian, Turkish, Kumyk, Kirgiz, and others. We investigate the historical, cultural and linguistic situation of Northern Kazakhstan, which differs significantly from the South of Kazakhstan: In Southern Kazakhstan, Turkic peoples, like many others, occurred at the beginning of the 20th century as a result of political repression, due to forced relocations in the years of World War II, whereas in the North of the country, the migration of Turkic peoples was voluntary and started much earlier. Besides the indigenous , the are the largest Turkic ethnos in Northern Kazakhstan; they consider themselves indigenous, since their migration took place already in the XVI – XVIII century, and was due to the policy of the tsarist government and the development of trade-economic, cultural and educational relations (opening of madrasas, schools, theaters). The archival material reveals the widespread influence of Tatar mullahs, who played a major role in the developement of the education and the culture of the Kazakh people, and in the expansion of Islam in the steppe from the middle of the XIX to the beginning of the XX century. This report investigates the current ethno-cultural situation of the Tatar people in Kazakhstan. As a result of the processing of the questionnaire data, 632 of the 2155 respondents were Tatar. The analysis was carried out on the most important key issues: age, gender, ethnic identification, marriages and mixed marriages, religious afiliation, internal and external migration, education, proficiency in native, Kazakh and , availability of newspapers and magazines in , interest in TV programs, knowledge of oral folklore of the Tatar people, etc. This report presents the results of the investigation. As for the ethnic identification: The great majority of the respondents self-identifiy with their ethnos (93,3 %); 6,7 % self-identify with a different ethnos (42 people), 3,7 of which self-identify with the Russian (23 people), 1,8 % (11 people) with the Kazakh ethnos. The dominating marker for the definition of ethnicity, regardless of the ethnos, is the maternal line (Kazakh, Russian): The child of a family generally self-identifies with the ethnos of the mother. In this respect, in Kazakhstan, at the current time, as to the formation of consciousness, culture and language, among the Tatars, the mothers have more influence than the fathers. Interestingly, the situation occurs that both parents are Tatar, but the children identify themselves as Russian (1,2% - 8 people). The analysis of the mixed marriages by age and ethnic identification of the children reveals a peculiar picture: The men of the first generation preferred to marry with Russian women, whereas the men of the second generation rather married with Kazakh women. The number of mixed marriages with Kazakh and Russian women in the third and fourth age group are almost equal. In Tatar-Russian families, the number of children who self-identify as Russians, first decreases, with 21 % in the first age group and 5 % in the second and third age group, however rises up to 40 % in the fourth age group. Tatar women prefer to marry with men of their own ethnos, thus preserving their ethnic culture, traditions and mentality. The dominating religion among the Tatars in Kazakhstan is Islam. The Tatars are sufficiently educated: 94 % have secondary or incomplete secondary education, 69 % have higher or incomplete higher education. Important information on language proficiency could be revealed: 568 people consider Tatar to be their native language and are fluent speakers (92%); 440 people are fluent in Kazakh (69 %), 427 people are fluent in Russian (67 %). However, most of the Tatars prefer to speak and write in Russian. 30 % of the informants know Tatar myths, legends, fairy tales, and historical poems.

Literature: 1. Maxmutov Z.: Tatary na Severe Kazaxstana (istorija i sovremennost’). Petropavlovsk, 2004. 2. Severno-kazaxstanskij gosudarstvennyj arxiv (SKGA), f. 158, op. 1, d. 2-5. 3. Valixanov Č.: Sobranie sočinenij v pjati tomax. Vol. 5. Almaty: Glavnaja redakcija Kazaxskoj sovetskoj ėnciklopedii, 1985. 4. Sbornik poslovic i pogovorok kazaxskogo naroda. Almaty, Mektep, 1963. 5. Murzagužinov M.: Tatary v Kazaxstane. In: Naš mir No. 2-6, 2007. 6. Website www.tmk.kz 7. Website www.tuyrki.weebly.com 8. Šaimerdinova N.G., Tažibaeva S.Ž.: Tjurkskie jazyki Kazaxstana: sovremennoe sostojanie. In: “Jazyk i globalizacija”: Sbornik statej XVI meždunarodnoj naučno-teoretičeskoj konferencija. Almaty, KazNU, 2013, pp. 58-61. 9. Šaimerinova N.G., Tažibaeva S.Ž., Nevskaja I.A., Šenig K.: Tatarskaja diaspora Kazaxstana: pervye resul’taty sociokul’turnogo analiza. In: “Qazaq leksikografijasy tarixy, täžiribesi, bolašaġy” attï xalyqar. ġyl.-teor. konf. Almaty: “Eltanym baspasy”, 2015, pp. 199-203.

Gulzat Iskakova The situation of the women of the Turkish in modern Kazakhstan: a sociological analysis

The Turkic world is a wide space at the intersection between and Asia, with a rich cultural heritage and a great economic potential, which, since the days of the Silk Road, united civilizations and provided the world with advances in science and masterpieces of art, and gave rise to great people and great countries. Yes, at one time, the Turkic world fell into decay and was on the verge of extinction as a distinct civilization, but now we are witnessing a rapid process of its revival [1]. The worldwide trend of globalization and the integration of ethnic groups contributed to the wide dissemination of the Turks far beyond their historical homeland. As a result of resettlements and alignements between different ethnic groups, there are changes which cover various aspects of life: - the preservation of native culture, traditions, language - the attitude towards religion, its role in the family and in the society - interethnic relations - the formation and preservation of the institution of family, etc. Kazakhstan is the home of about 130 ethnic groups, 25 of which are Turkic. Within the frame of the project “Interaction of Turkic languages and cultures in post-soviet Kazakhstan”, sociologic research has been conducted in order to assess the socio-cultural interaction of Turkic ethnoses, their languages and cultures. By means of a questionnaire survey, the ethnic groups have been investigated for various aspects of life and for characteristic features of their respective ethnos. One of the large groups among the Turkic ethnoses are the , who were resettled to Kazakhstan during soviet times for several reasons. As for the preservation of traditions, culture, language, etc, the women in the family play an important role. A child first hears and understands the native language through the words of the mother and her lullabies. Within the study on the situation of Turkish women, we have also investigated the socio- cultural changes and the degree of influence as internal factors (changes inside the familty) and external factors (influence of the external environment). Moreover, we have investigated several aspects of the present life situation and current trends with regard to Turkish women in several districts of Kazakhstan, namely: - ethnic identification according to the passport, according to self-determination, tribal affiliation, etc.; - the level of education, the access to it and the priority given to it depending on tribal affiliation, the possibility of language learning, the availability of and periodicals in the native language, etc.; - labor activities, especially the choice of profession and fields of activity, the influence exerted on this by the prevailing national traditions and culture, etc.; - territorial distribution, factors that exert an influence on this choice (historical, labor, migration, political etc.), the degree of adaptation and satisfaction of the respondents etc.; - the native language, its role in the family, the importance and the need to improve the native language, the degree of fluency and relevance in each generation, the factors affecting its condition and use, the role of the Kazakh and Russian language in the life of the ethnic group, etc.; - the importance of ethnicity when choosing a spouse, the role of women in mixed marriages, in preserving the culture and traditions of the ethnic group, etc.; - methods of transmitting the ethno-specific traditions to the younger generation, the role of women in their preservation, the existence of general traditions among Turkish and indigenous people, the degree of influence exerted by the Kazakh culture, etc.; - religious affiliation, its role in the life of women and of the ethnic communities, etc.; The results of this sociological research, which are based on primary sources, provide a multi-faceted assessment of the socio-cultural situation of women of the Turkish ethnos in modern Kazakhstan, and can be used by scientists in various fields of science, e.g.: linguistics, sociology, social economics, political science, history, philosophy.

Literature: 1. Firdaus Xisamitdinov: Vozroždaja tjurkskij mir. In: Kazaxstanskaja pravda, 01.10.2014.

Zhazyra Sajyn Traditional culture of the Turkic ethnoses of Kazakhstan (illustrated by the example of the )

The study and understanding of the traditional culture raises various questions, which are related to the processes of globalisation in the modern world, where global changes are going on every day. It should seem that the interweaving of the countries with regard to economy, information and culture would unite the fates of the nations into one single global fate. However, the expected unification of mankind does not occur. Civil wars are going on in many countries, millions of civilians are seeking refuge from the tyranny of their fate. Also Kazakhstan, as a part of this world, finds itself in the process of globalisation and is undergoing certain changes. Of course, thanks to the policy of our President, our country maintains the atmosphere of stability, friendliness and tolerance. It is our task to preserve and transmit this atmosphere to the next generation. In order to achieve this goal, we should take good care of all the ethnoses that live on the territory of our vast Republic, who naturally desire to preserve their traditional culture. After all, the traditional culture is the basis of the culture of any society. “Tradition is not only the basis for the entire practical experience of mankind, but also for the creation and development of rules of social relationships (family, community, labor, intergenerational, gender and age), and for the well-ordered relationship and communication of the various ethnic groups with the surrounding world.” [1, с.109]. With this in mind, we can say that “maintaining their fundamental, traditional culture until nowadays has to be considered the most important characteristic of their ethnic experience, which finds expression in the historical path of each nation.” [1, с.109]. History has shown that the neglect and the loss of national traditions might lead to a collapse of the ethno-cultural ties (in the first place, between the generations) and to the loss of national immunity against an education which is of an alien nature to the ethnos and not normal in the life of that society. In the frame of this article, I would like to highlight the traditional culture of the Azerbaijani people of Kazakhstan. The are one of the major ethnic groups of our country. At the moment, the mass media are publishing contradictory statistics about the number of this ethnic group, ranging from 110,000 to 300,000 people. According to the data of the Kazakh Agency of Statistics of the year 2009, there are 85,292 Azerbaijanis in Kazakhstan, 48 % of which are living in villages [2]. As we can see, the Azerbaijanis show a positive dynamics of growth, which can be explained by their tradition of having large families in the rural area. The formation of the Azerbaijani diaspora in Kazakhstan began in the thirties of the twentieth century. The first wave came in the end of the 1930s, then there was a second phase of mass resettlement of Azerbaijanis in the year 1944, who had lived on the territory of the Georgian SSR. Finally, the third cycle of resettlement took place in the middle of the 50s, during the agricultural project “Virgin Epic”. At present, the development of the traditional culture of the Azerbaijanis is characterized by a synthesis of the traditional and the new. Moreover, there is a process of Azerbaijani-Kazakh ethno-cultural interaction. Most Azerbaijanis speak Russian and Kazakh besides their native language. The traditional occupation of Azerbaijanis is growing cereals, cotton, horticulture, viticulture, the cultivation of industrial crops, as well as breeding sheep and cattle. Their traditional crafts are carpet weaving, goldsmithery and jewelry production, manufacturing forged small utensils, pottery, the processing of wood and stone, the weaving of wool, silk and paper, felting wool, tanning leather, manufacturing lace, knitting socks and others. Their traditional interior decoration consists of carpets, rugs, bedding (mattresses, blankets, pillows), stacked on a special shelf, as well as copper and pottery, placed along the walls. In the yards, there are usually outbuildings and sheds for the storing of agricultural equipment and wood, and for keeping cattle and poultry. As for Azerbaijanian folklore, their charateristics and plot structures ressemble the folklore of the in many respects. Tales about magic, everyday life, animals etc. are very widespread. In Kazakhstan, the public national association of Azerbaijanis is very active. Thus, on May 29th 1992, the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Kazakhstan in Almaty registered the Azerbaijani Cultural Center (ACC) "Turan". In the statutes of the ACCs, the following main objectives were delineated: to contribute to the improvement of ethnic relations in the Republic of Kazakhstan and to promote the active involvement of Azerbaijanis in all spheres of social and cultural life. Within a short period of time, ACCs were founded also in other . There is the ACC “Azeri” in the Zhambyl district, the ACC “Vatan” in the Pavlodarskij district, “Gejdar” in the Kostanajskij district, and “Dostluk” in the Mangystauskij district. Futher ACCs were opened in the districts of Atyrau, Karaganda, East Kazakhstan, North Kazakhstan, West Kazakstan, and Kyzylorda. In the year 2000, according to the decision of the general meeting of the Almaty Society of Azerbaijanis “Ozan”, the “Tashkent Azerbaijanian Cultural Center” and the “Bishkek Azerbaijanian Cultural Center”, the Azerbaijanian Cultural Center “Turan” was transformed into the Congress “Turan”. Since June 2007, the newpaper of the Azerbaijanian diaspora “Vatan” has been published. The objective of its publication is to create conditions for a harmonious and friendly neighborhood between all the peoples of Kazakhstan.

Literature 1. Savina N.V.: Tradicionnaja kul’tura naroda kak rešajuš’ij faktor samosoxranenija ėtnosa pri vxoždenii ego v global’nyj mir. Dis.kand. filosofii: 09.00.11 – social’naja filosofija. N. Novgorod, 2009, 157 pp. 2. Nevskaya, I., Tazhibayeva, S. Sociolinguistic situation of Turkic ethnicities in Kazakhstan / Proceedings of VI International “Conference Building Cultural Bridges”. – April 24-26, 2014.-Vol. II. – SDU, 2014. – 219-227. www.sdu.edu.kz 3. Ėlektronnyj resurs – režim dostupa: el.kz/m/articles/view/content-21423

Aydin Zhalmyrza Kazakh-Kumyk interethnic relations: Some questions on language, culture and worldview

The Kumyk Turks, who formed as a nation in the X–XI century, are one of the Turkic peoples of . The main settlement area of this ethnic group is the Republic of Dagestan in the Russian Federation, more exactly , Babayurt, Kyzylyurt, Buynak, Derbent, Kaytag, Kayakent, and the district Karabudagkent. Besides, there are further settlement areas in Ichkeria, North Ossetia, Stavropol, and there is a Kumyk diaspora in Turkey, , , and the the Southern districts of Kazakhstan as well. At this time, this ethnic group comprises approximately 400000 members. As for the antropologic affiliation of the , they belong to the European type, the balkan- caucasian group, caucasian subgroup. According to the classification of Turkic languages of N.A. Baskakov, the , together with Karachay-Balkar and Nogay, belongs to the - Polovets subgroup of the Kipchak group. Kumyk language is spoken in the Republic of Dagestan, in North , in the district Mozdok in North Ossetia, and as well in Turkey and in several coutries of the . The Kumyk Turks speak their national Kumyk language, and they are a nationality with a well-developed literary language. Their literary language, which was formed on the basis of the dialects of Buynak and Khasavjurt, is one of the six literary languages of Dagestan. According to the census of 2010, 426212 people speak Kumyk there. Until now, a historical periodisation of Kumyk language has not yet been established. The language is considered to have formed approximately until the XIII century. From the XVII century on, Kumyk language was used as a language of interethnic communication and became the official language in negotiations with the Russian authorities. Until the beginning of the XIX century, Kumyk language served as a in the mountainous areas of Northern Dagestan. After the collapse of the , Kumyk language continued to be the language of interethnic communication there. Many peoples of Dagestan and the Northern Caucasus used Kumyk for their communication with other ethnic groups. Also the Russian, who had come to this area, had to learn this language. It is surprising that the language of this small ethnos served as a language of interethnic communication. Before 1928, the Kumyks adopted the alphabet. In the years 1928-38, they used Latin letters, and in 1938, they changed to Cyrillic. The Kumyk alphabet has 38 letters and 6 additional letters: гъ (ʁ), къ (q), нъ (ŋ), оь (¬ɞ), уь (ɤ), ж (ʒ). Kumyk language has 8 vowels: а, е, ы (ə), и, о, оь, у, уь, some loan words display the vowel ə (æ). Kumyk language consists of 5 dialects: Khasavyurt, Boynak, Kaytak, Tauly and Ter. The Ter dialect is spoken in Chechnya, Ingushetia and Ossetia. The dialect that differs most from the others is Kaytak. Some dialects reflect the long-lasting influence of Caucasian languages, which can be detected most notably in the typically Caucasian long consonants. The founder of the Kumyk dialectology as a science is the well-known turkologist N.K. Dmitriev. I.A. Kerimov, N.Kh. Ol’mesov and other scientist contributed considerably to its developement. The majority of Kumyks follow the sunni islam. The talk will investigate the settlement history of the Kumyks on the territory of Kazakhstan, the integration of Kumyk people into the Kazakh nation, and also various aspects of historic, linguistic, and ideological development. The sources of this investigation are the fieldwork materials collected in 2014 within the frame of the international project “Interaction of Turkic Languages and Cultures in Post-Soviet Kazakhstan” carried out by the Institute of of the Faculty of International Relations at the Eurasian National University named after L.N. Gumilev.

Literature: Aliev K.M. 1990: Iz istorii kumykskogo jazyka. Lenin jolu, 10 March 1990. Afanas’ev M.G. 1893: Russko-kumykskij slovar. Sbornik materialov dlja opisanija mestnostej i plemen Kavkaza. Vol. 17, Tivlis. Baskakov N.A. 1984: Vvedednie v izučenie tjurkskix jazykov. Moskow. Baskakov N.A. 1952: Klassifikacija tjurkskix jazykov v svjazi istoričeskoj periodizaciej ix razvitija i formirovanija. Trudy Instituta jazykoznanija AN SSSR. T.I. . Dimitriev N.K. 1940: Grammatika kumykskogo jazyka. Moscow-Leningrad. Ibragimov M.-R.A. 1976: Dinamika čislennosti narodov Dagestana (po materialam perepisej naselenija 1926, 1959 i 1970 gg.). Nekotorye problemy ėtnogeneza i ėtničeskoj istorii narodov mira. Moscow. Kerimov I.A. 1967: Očerki kumykskoj dialektologii. Maxačkala. Korjakov Ju.B. 2006: Atlas kavkazkix jazykov. Moscow. Nacionalnyj sostav i vladenie jazykami, graždanstvo. 2010 g. http://www.gks.ru/free_doc/new_site/perepis2010/croc/vol4pdf-m.html Ol’mesov N.X. 1985: Fonetika kumykskogo jazyka (sistema glasnyx). Maxačkala. Portal Vserossijskaja perepis’ naselenija, 2010 g. http://www.gks.ru/free_doc/new_site/perepis2010/croc/perepis_itogi1612.htm Potockij Jan. 2003: Putešestvija v Astraxanskie i Kavkazkie stepi v 1797-1796 gg. Kumyk_Merke_25032014_NIA_V01 Audio zapis: Kumyk_Merke_25032014_NIA_V02 Audio zapis: Kumyk_Merke_25032014_NIA_V03 Audio zapis: Kumyk_Merke_25032014_NIA_V04

Ė.D. Sulejmenova The Kazakh area within the Turkic ecumene: Languages and ethnic groups

Mobility of the linguistic and the ethnic Turkic substrate in the country during the recent years, presented on the basis of the census of the Republic of Kazakhstan and of materials of the Statistics Agency. The Great Steppe, where “superethnoses flared up and faded away, is not only delimited by the power of its rivals, but also invisible on a map of geographic frontiers.” (L. Gumilev), and still today, it is the center out of which, even though less intensively and with different incentives, scales and directions, developement impulses of of the Turkic ecumene are applied; for example, the dispersion of Azerbaijanian language outside Azerbaijan, or Turkish in the Mediterranean and Germany. The persistent mobility of the Turkic world has made it necessary again to study the civilizational activities, the processes of language maintenance and loss, and the ethnic identities. The quantitative assessment of the Turkic ethnic groups is contradictory: In 1990, 132.8 million, in 2007, 200 million [13], in 2010, 197.9 million [12] people were recorded as Turkic. The number and proportion of Turkic ethnic groups in Kazakhstan is showing a steady upward trend [2-6; 7].

1970 1979 1989 1999 2009 Total population 13 026 274 14 709 508 16 222 324 14 981 281 16 009 597 Number of Turkic ethnoses 5 476 552 6 182 533 7 533 108 9 055 386 11 309 741 Proportion of total (%) 42.0 42.0 46.5 60.4 70.7

According to the official documents, 24 different Turkic languages could be identified, which are spoken by 27 ethnic groups [7]. There is a numerical mismatch because the Karachay and the call themselves “Karachay-Balkars”, the Krim Tatars and the Krimchak both denominate themselves as Krim Tatars, and the both Turks and denominate their mothertongue as Turkish. Depending on demographic risks and the status of Turkic languages in Kazakhstan and in the respective main countries of residence, these languages can be devided into exogenous languages, “which are spoken by a minority in Kazakhstan, but which are majority languages in a different country” (Azerbaijani, Altai, Bashkir, Tatar, Tuvan, Turkmen, Uzbek, Uyghur, Khakhas, Chuvash, Jakut), and endogenous languages, “which are spoken by a minority in Kazakhstan, and which do not have the status of a majority language in any other country either” [11] (Dolgan, Karaim, Krim Tatar, Tofa). Between 1970 and 2009, on the background of an increasing population in Kazakhstan (13026274 16009597 people), as for eight languages – Kazakh, Azerbaijani, Karaim, Karakalpak, Kyrgyz, Turkish, Uzbek and Uyghur – the nine respective ethnoses increased; as for fifteen languages – Altai, Bashkir, Gagauz, Dolgan, Karachay-Balkar, Krim Tatar, Kumyk, Nogay, Tatar, Tuvan, Turkmen, Khakhas, Chuvash, Shor, Jakut – the population of the seventeen respective ethnoses decreased; disappeared completely [2-6; 7-10]. Not only the languages of the second group are exposed to a demographic risk, the speakers of which represent only a small percentage of the population and are therefore critically endangered of extinction, such as the Karaim (the number of Karaims in Kazakhstan in the 2009 cencus is rather dubious) – one of the endangered languages among the ethnic minorities in [1]. Nevertheless, the Turkic substrate is increasing at the expense of the first group, the most intensive in this regard is the developement of the and ethnos. Today, the Turkic substrate is represented by 20 % of the languages and 26 ethnoses, which make up 70,7 % of the Kazakh population. The languages and ethnoses have been drastically regrouped. Kazakh language moved into the foreground, receiving full support of the state and the society. The demographic processes of the recent years have turned Kazakhstan into a country with a growing Turkic population and a shrinking Slavic population, dominated by the Kazakh population, whereas the Russian population is decreasing.

Literature 1. Edinij perečen’ korennyx maločislenix norodov Rossijskoj Federacii (2010) [Unified list of indigenous peoples of the Russian Federation (2010)] http://www.minnac.ru/minnac/info/13884.html 2. Itogi Vsesojuznoj perepisi naselenija 1989 g. [Results of the nationwide population cencus of the year 1989], Almaty – Vol. 2, 1996. 3. Qazaqstan Respublikasy xalqynyŋ ulttyq quramy. Qazaqstan Respublikasyndaġy 1999 žylġy xalyq synaġynyŋ qorytyndylary. Vol. 1-2. Almaty, 2000. 4. Nacionalnyj sostav, veroispovedanie i vladenie jazykami v Respublike Kazaxstan. Itogi nacionalnoj perepisi naselenija 2009 goda v Respublike Kazaxstan. Statističeskij sbornik . Astana, 2010, pp. 3-297. 5. Statističeskij sbornik po otdel’nym pokazateljam Vsesojuznyx perepisej naselenija 1939, 1959, 1979 i 1989 gg. Alma-Ata, 1991. 6. Statističeskij sbornik po otdel’nym pokazateljam Vsesojuznyx perepisej naselenija 1939, 1959, 1970, 1979 i 1989 gg. Alma-Ata, 1992. 7. Sulejmenova Ė.D., Šaimerdinova N.Ž., Akanova D.X.: Jazyki narodov Kazaxstana. Almaty: Arman- PV, 2007. 8. Sulejmenova Ė.D.: Jazykovye processi i politika. Almaty: Qazaq universiteti, 2011. 9. Sulejmenova Ė.D., Šaimerdinova N.Ž. i dr.: Turco-Slavica: jazyk, ėtnos, kul’tura v edinom prostranstve. Petropavl. 2011. 10. Sulejmenova Ė.D., Šaimerdinova N.Ž., Nasilov D.M. i dr.: Tjurkskie jazyki i ėtnosy: jazykovye i ėtnodemografičeskie processy. Almaty: Qazaq universiteti, 2015. 11. Trudgill P. Glossary of Social Society. – Bloomington, USA, 2004 12. www.cia.gov/world-factbook 13. www.turkist.org

Henryk Jankowski Kazakh graffiti writings – an example of cultural interaction

Modern graffiti is a new phenomenon in Kazakhstan. It has come to Kazakh public space under the Russian influence. Scribbles, scratches with inscribed, engraved or painted words and phrases started to appear on a larger scale at the end of the 1990s, predominantly in Almaty. Now techniques imported from the west such as tagging and spray paint writing are constantly spreading. As in most cases in the Kazakh public sphere, Russian prevails in graffiti writing, though English gains more and more popularity. However, at some places Kazakh writings can also be seen. The present article shows Kazakh graffiti writings photographed in Aqtaw, Shymkent province and Almaty. The graffitis recored were placed on walls, building walls, columns and detached rocks. Most of them were inscribed or painted by the youngsters to express their love and friendship. This is the case with a park in south Kazakhstan and the coast of the in Aqtaw where young people, especially being in love, meet. Texts are seldom encountered, they include such phrases as (1) (Мен) сүйем сені/ Мен сені сүйем ‘I love you’ (2) Мен сені ұнатамын ‘I like you’ (3) … жаным ‘… my darling’. One graffiti was a greeting with the formula (4) туылған күніңнен ‘Happy birthday!’, which seems to be calqued from Russian с днем рождения. In most cases, there are only the names, often painted with the heart or two hearts as the symbol of love, sometimes with abbreviations and dates. There is also a frequent pattern of the type (5) KAZAKH GIRL NAME + KAZAKH BOY NAME =ЛНВ or similar, in which ЛНВ is the abbreviation of Russian любовь на века or любовь навсегда ‘love for ever’. English words and phrases include (6) love and (7) we are the best. Only once a political slogan has been spotted, (8) Қажы Амантай аттан! аттан! ‘Qajı Amantay, forward, forward!’ This is the slogan of Amantay Qajı Asılbekov, leader of the political movement Attan Qazaqstan ‘Forward, Kazakhstan’, tolerated by the authorities with no real political influence. No Kazakh racist slogans were detected. Most of graffiti writings were written in , sometimes erroneously and carelessly, with typical abbreviations, but Roman characters were also quite often. Only one painted inscription was in , unfortunately only partly seen from snow. There was no example of graffiti writing in Uzbek and Uyghur at two places examined, densely inhabited by these two minorities, i.e. Sairam near Shymkent and the Uyghur Region on the Ili. Historical graffitis are also known in Kazakhstan. The most famous site is the underground Shaqpaq Ata mosque in Mangystaw with many inscriptions in Arabic, Persian and Eastern Turkic, the dated ones from the period between 1708/9 and 1929 (Muminov and Nurmanov 2009: 13). As is known, the rock art from the Scythian times discovered in Kazakhstan at such places as Tamghaly, Arpa Özen, Eshki Ölmes and Aqbawyr cave (e.g. Yesmakhanov ed. 2001: 5–7) does not contain inscriptions and the Turkic runic inscriptions from Iyirsuw, Qarataw, on the Sir-Daria and other places of Kazakhstan (Musabayev, Mahmutov and Aydarov 1971) are not considered graffiti, although the graffiti seen in Shaqpaq Ata mosque, engraved by various pilgrims and custodians, cannot be regarded as made illicitly. However, it must be stressed that modern graffiti is unrelated to historical graffiti and is a phenomenon of recent cultural interaction. Unfortunately, as all over the world some graffiti makers devastate historical petroglyphs, as it is seen in Uzbekistan (Rozwadowski 2004: photos 28–30). The author of this lines, despite examining graffiti, condemns this form of popular art when practised illegally and regards most cases of it as defacement and devastation. However, it would be correct to assign some places to the youngsters where they could express their emotions publicly.

Bibliography Muminov, A. K., A. Sh. Nurmanov. 2009. Shaqpaq-Ata. Inscriptions of the underground mosque and necropolis. Almaty: Daik-Press [published in Kazakh with an English and a Russian translation]. Musabayev, Mahmutov and Aydarov 1971 = Мұсабаев, Ғ., А. Махмұтов, Ғ. Айдаров. 1971. Қазастан эпиграфикасы. 1 шығуы. Эпиграфика Казахстана. Выпуск 1. Алма-Ата: Академия Наук Казахской ССР. Институт Языкознания (Алматы: Қазақ ССР-інің «Ғылым» баспасы). Rozwadowski, Andrzej. 2004. Symbols through time. Interpreting the rock art of Central Asia. Poznań: Institute of Eastern Studies, Adam Mickiewicz University. Yesmakhanv, Askar. 2001. Heritage of Kazakhstan. Vol I. Almaty: Didar.

Marcel Erdal Kāshgharī as an informant

The paper will concentrate on Maḥmūd ibnu ’l-Ḥusayn, the author of the Dīvān Lughāti ’t-Turk, not as a lexicologist, encyclopedist and dialectologist but as a Turkic speaker formed by the complex circumstances of his life. He was an aristocrat from the eastern branch of the Khāqānī dynasty, whose center was in Kāšghar, whence the common nisba al-Kāshgharī; he says (fol. 625) that his father was from Barsghan (on the southern shore of the Issiq Köl). The Khāqānī state formed towards the end of the 10th century from Qarluq, Uyghur, Chigil and Yaghma elements ‒ thus spelling the loss of dialect identity and at least a partial dialect fusion; but Kāshgharī also contributes to the sociolinguistic aspect of the topic by identifying Khāqānī language features as such, what Brockelmann has called the Hofsprache. He was born in the first half of the 11th century, a period of incessant quarrels and battles among the Khāqānī political elite, which caused him to flee his home country. The brilliant military successes of his age belonged to the Selchük Turks, who vanquished the Ghaznavids in 1040 and in 1055 saved the Sunni khalīfa, residing in Baghdād, from the rule of the Shīci Buyids, who were proudly Persian (though in fact Daylamī, i.e. Zaza). During Maḥmūd’s life, this Oghuz group ‒ illiterate from the point of view of a Khāqānī intellectual ‒ not only became the dominant power in the Islamic world, but in 1071 also vanquished Byzantium, the most important Christian state of the time. Maḥmūd set out to write his work in 1072 in the Selchukid realm, in the year its greatest ruler Malik Shah came to the throne. Maḥmūd is strongly aware that it is the Oghuz dialect which will be most important for his Arab readers to learn, not the dialect he personally appreciates. The paper will concentrate not on grammatical aspects of the dialects, but on Maḥmūd’s esthetic and other appreciative and depreciative remarks about them, and on their background, in an age of great socio-political and sociolinguistic change in the Muslim Turkic world.

Feyza Tokat The Influence Of On The Chaghatai Turkish Translation Of Tezkire-I Sheikh Safi

“Tezkire-i Sheikh Safi” is a religious, Islamic mysticism literary work of Chagatai Turkish in which the life and mystical character of Sheikh Safi Ardabili, who is the founder of the Ardabil Safeviyye Lodge and the ancestor of the family that had established the Safevi State, is narrated. This work is a translation of “Safvetu’s Safa” of Ibn Bezzaz written in Persian. It is translated to East Turkish by Neshati in XVI. century. Although “Tezkire-i Sheikh Safi" belongs to the Chagatai Turkish that is the last period of the Middle Turkish, in this work the influences of Old Anatolian Turkish can be occasionally observed. In this study, the influence of Old Anatolian Turkish on “Tezkire-i Sheikh Safi” is investigated in terms of phonetic, suffix and vocabulary.

Amina Memtimin Eynu and its contact with Uyghur dialects

The Eynu or Abdal are an ethnic minority with some Roma-type activities and low social status (though not necessarily low living standards) in various towns and villages in Xinjiang. Eynu speech attracted the attention of scholars since the 19th century because it is widely lexified with Persian and other (largely unidentified) lexical stock. The paper looks at Eynu speech in the south of Xinjiang from linguistic and sociolinguistic points of view, based on recent field work. When switching to a more ‘normal’ life style, Eynu people show increasing interaction with Uyghur dialects of their respective surroundings, in Kashghar and Khotan. We also found differences between the speech of Eynu living in different dialect areas.

Dybo Once more about language contacts in Middle Age Xinjiang

The vocabulary of Turkic languages recorded in the dictionary of Mahmud al-Kashgari comprises is a significant number of loanwords. Sometimes, we come across these words in the wide dissemination of the Turkic languages. Some of these words, however, do not occur anywhere in the further course, only in the monuments associated with the Qarakanid tradition, sometimes also in monuments and in the modern Turkic languages spoken on the territory of Xinjiang. The analysis of the origin of such words shows that these are local borrowings, apparently geographically restricted to the territory of Xinjiang and close areas. First of all, there are Khotan- borrowings, some narrowly local Sogdian borrowings, and some narrowly local Tokharian borrowings. Besides, there is some New Indian vocabulary, which indicates trade relations, Middle Chinese borrowings, and some New Persian words. There is also a range of borrowings from some Middle Mongolian language (Khitan?), which has not taken root in any other Tukic languages either. As for the semantic fields, the vocabulary is mainly related to the sphere of local political life, or to the economic sphere. This article investigates those of the supposed borrowings, which have been a matter of debate in the scientific literature during the last decade. It emphasises the necessity to assess the supposed borrowings through their etymologization in the supposed source language.

Literature and sources Aalto, P.: Iranian Contacts of the Turks in Pre-Islamic Times. Studia Turcica. pp. 29 -37. Budapest: Akademiai Kiado, 1971. Adams D.Q.: A dictionary of Tocharian. – Amsterdam; Atlanta, 1999. Aštarin N.I.: Slovar‘ čuvašskogo jazyka. ; Čeboksary, 1928-1950. Ed. 1-17. Atebet — Edib b. Mahmud Yükneki. Atebetü’l-Hakayık / Reşit Rahmeti Arat. – Istanbul, 1959. Bailey H.W.: Dictionary of Khotan Saka. – Cambridge etc., 1979. Bartholomae Chr.: Altiranisches Wörterbuch. – Strassburg 1904; Berlin, 1961. Benveniste E.: Mots voyageurs en Asie Central // JA. CCXXXVI. 1948. Fasc. 2. Bol’šoj akademičeskij mongol’sko-russkij slovar’. Vol. 1-4. Moscow, 2001. Bol’šoj kitajsko-russkij slovar’. Vol 1-4. Moscow, 2983. Clauson G.: An Etymological Dictionary of Pre Thirteenth Century Turkish. – Oxford, 1972. Dybo A.V.: Turco-Tocharica and Turco-Sakica Renewed // Proceedings of the 45th Meeting of the PIAC (Budapest, 2002). – Budapest, 2003. Dybo A.V.: Mongolizmy u Maxmuda Kašgarskogo? In: Altaica X. IV RAN, Moscow, 2005, pp.51-60. Dybo A.V.: Lingvističeskie kontakty rannix tjurkov. Moscow, 2007. Dybo A.V.: Tjurkosko-toxarskaja kontaktnaja leksika. In: Aspekty altajskogo jazykoznanija. Moscow, 2007 (a), pp. 80-108. Ėdel’man Dž.I.: Osnovnye voprosy lingvističeskoj geografii. Na materiale iranskix jazykov. Moscow, 1968. Egorov V.G.: Ėtimologičeskij slovar’ čuvašskogo jazyka. Čeboksary, 1964. Eker S.: Divanu Lugâti't-Türk ve Iran Dillerinden Kopyalar Uzerine I / International Journal of Central Asian Studies V. 13, 2009. Pp. 233-283. ĖŠIJa – Rastorgueva V.S., Ėdel’man Dz.I.: Ėtomologičeskij slovar’ iranskix jazykov. Ed. 1: Moscow, 2000, Ed. 2: Moscow, 2003, Ed. 3: Moscow, 2007. ĖSTJa 2000 – Ėtimologičeskij slovar’ tujrkskix jazykov. Obš’etjurkskie i mežtjurkskie osnovy na bukvu “Қ”. Avt. L.S. Levitskaja, A.V. Dybo, V.I. Rassadin. Moscow, 2000. Frejman A.A.: Xorezmijkij jazyk. Moscow-Leningrad, 1951. Frejman A.A.: Opicanie; publikacii i issledovanie dokumentov s gory Mug. Moscow, 1962. Gharib B.: Sogdian Dictionary. – Tehran, 1995. H I — Rachmati G.R. Zur Heilkunde der Uiguren // SPAW. 1930. XIII. Hansen O.: Tocharisch-iranische Beziehungen. //Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft. – Leipzig 1940. B. 94, H. 2 S. 139-164. Hauenschild, I.: Die Tierbezeichnungen bei Mahmud al-Kaschgari, eine Untersuchung aus sprach- und kulturhistorischer Sicht. Turcologica 53. Wiesbaden. 2003. IM –Battal Aptullah. Ibnü Mühenna lûgati. – Istanbul,1934. Kent R.G.: Old Persian Grammar: Texts, lexicon. – New Hawen, 1950. Malov S.E.: Jazyk želtyx ujgurov. Alma-Ata, 1957. Man. — Le Coq A. von. Türkische Manichaika. – B., 1921–1922. I–III. Mayr. EWAIA — Mayrhofer M. Etymologisches Woerterbuch des Altindoarischen. – Heidelberg, 1986. Bd. I; 1996. Bd. II. MK - Solvar’ Maxmuda Kašgarskogo. Osnovy iranskogo jazykoznanija. Sredneiranskie jazyki. Moscow, 1981. Poucha —Poucha P. Institutiones linguae tocharicae. Pt.1: Thesaurus linguae tocharicae, dialecti A. – Praha, 1955. QB — «Кутадгу Билиг». Räsänen M.: Versuch eines etymologisches Wörterbuchs der Türksprachen. – Helsinki, 1969. Rybatzki, V.: Die Personennamen und Titel der mittelmongolischen Dokumente eine lexikalische Untersuchung. Helsinki. Publications of the Institute for Asian and African Studies 8. 2003. Rybatzki, V.: Mongolische Lehnwörter bei Mahmud al-Kašgari? Türk Dilleri Araştirmalari Dizisi : 63. İstanbul 2011. SS. 367-380. Sravnitel’no-istoričeskaja grammatika tjurkskix jazykov: Leksika. Moscow, 1997 / 2000. Sravnitel’no-istoričeskaja grammatika tjurkskix jazykov: Pratjurkskij jazyk-osnova- Kartina mira pratjurka. Moscow, 2006. Starostin S.A.: Rekonstrukcija drevnekitajskoj fonologičeskoj sistemy. Moscow,1989. Steblin-Kamenskij I.M.: Očerki po istorii leksiki pamirskix jazykov. Nazvanija kul’turnyx rastenij. Moscow, 1982. Steblin-Kamenskij I.M.: Ėtimologičeskij slovar’ vaxanskogo jazyka. Sankt-Petersburg, 1999. Suv. — Suvarṇaprabhāsa. Šervašidze I.N.: Fragment obš’etjurkskoj leksiki. Zaimstvovannyj fond, VJa 2; 1989. Tekin 1997 — Tekin T. Notes on some Chinese loanwords in // Türk dilleri araştırmaları. – Ankara, 1997. 165-173. Tezcan 1997 — Tezcan S. Additional Iranian loanwords in early Turkic languages // Türk dilleri araştırmaları. – Ankara, 1997. 157-164. TMN —Doerfer G. Türkische und mongolische Elemente im Neupersischen. – Wiesbaden, 1963. I; Wiesbaden, 1965. II; Wiesbaden, 1967. III. TT (VI–X) — Bang W., Gabain A. von, Rachmatı G.R. Türkische Turfan-Texte. VI: Das buddistische Sūtra Säkiz yükmäk // SPAW. 1934. X; Rachmatı G.R. Türkische Turfan-Texte. VII // APAW. 1936. №12; Gabain A. von. Türkische Turfan Texte. VIII Texte im Brāhmīschrift // ADAW. 1952. №7; Gabain A. von, Winter W. Türkische Turfan-Texte. IX. Ein Hymnus an den Vater Mani auf „Tocharisch“ B mit alttürkischer Übersetzung // ADAW. 1956. №2; Gabain A. von. Türkische Turfan-Texte. X. Das Avadāna des Dämons Āt.avaka. Bearb. von T. Kowalski // ADAW. 1958. №1. Turner R.L.: A Comparative Dictionary of the Indo-Arian Languages. Fasc. I–IV. – L., 1962–1964. Uig — Müller F.W.K. Uigurica. I–IV // APAW. 1908; 1910; 1922; 1931. USp — Radloff W. Uigurische Sprachdenkmäler: Materialien nach dem Tode des Verfassers mit Ergänzungen von S. Malov herausgegeben. – Л., 1928. Zieme P.: Indische Wörter in nichtbuddhistischen alttürkischen Texten. // Indien und Zentralasien. Sprach- und Kulturkontakt. Vorträge des Göttinger Symposions vom 7. bis 10. Mai 2001, ed. by Sven Bretfeld and Jens Wilkens, Wiesbaden 2003, 153-163. Zieme P.: Maḥmūd Al-Kāšγarī‟s Dīvān Luγāt-it-Türk and Foreign Elements. // Türk Dilleri Araştırmaları Dizisi: 63. . İstanbul 2011. SS. 23-32.

Ju. V. Normanskaja & А. V. Dybo The chronologie of the Turkic loanwords in the Finno-Ugric languages

The analysis of the adaptation of Turkic loanwords into Finno-Ugric languages, in some cases, provides additional information on the history and the developement of the phonetic system of the source language. Thus, the analysis of loanwords from Tatar into Mordovian, Mari, and Udmurt helps to clarify the development stages of vowels from early to modern Tatar. Based on the analysis of borrowings into Mordovian and Mari, we can assume that the change in the vowel system: *i > e, *e > i, *u > o, *o > u, *ü > ö, *ö > ü, the process of “refraction”, began with the middle vowels: *o > u (Mord.) and *ö > ü (Mar.). Research on loanwords in common Udmurt and northern Udmurt dialects reveals that the last step of this transition was the shift of narrow vowels (in particular *u > o). The analysis of loanwords into Mansi provides interesting data. It turns out that, at the time of borrowing, the change of common Tatar guttural consonant: *k > k, g, x, ɣ; *g > g, v, had not yet taken place, since the loanwords into Mansi reflect the common Tatar consonants. On the basis of these data, we can assume that this shift of the Tatar guttural consonants must have occurred rather recently, after the contacts with Mansi. The study of and Bulgar borrowings into Mari (according to the dictionary [ESChYa 1996], there are about 400 such loanwords), provides new, invaluable information on the history of the formation of the . Chuvash is the most archaic, and the one that separated earliest from the other Turkic languages. The data on its history is still limited to a very small amount of Volga and Bulgar epitaphs. The hypothesis proposed by us, that the source language of the loanwords into Mari was the ancestor of the Volga and Bulgar epitaph languages, is in full compliance with the archaeological data and opens a new chapter in the study of the Bulgarian branch of the Turkic languages. The material of Turkic loanwords into Hungarian is an invaluable source of information on the early shape of Old Bulgar, and it is almost the only source for the early dialect Dunai Bulgar. The second important source for Dunai Bulgar is provided by loanwords from this language variety into the South Slavic languages. It is obviously possible to track the development history of the vowel and consonant system from Proto Turkic through Old Bulgar via Dunai Bulgar and Volga Bulgar to the present state of Chuvash quite exactly. Interestingly, the development of Dunai Bulgar differs from Volga Bulgar, which is the proto-language of Chuvash.

Figen Güner Dilek Interactions Between The Dialects Of Altai Turkish

The written language of Altai Turks who live in Southern area, within the borders of the and dispersedly in is Standard Altai Turkish. In literature, the Northern area dialects are Chalkandu, Kumandy, Tuba and the Southern dialects are Altai Kiji which is the main dialect on which the written language is based, Telengit and Teleut Kiji. The living areas of the speakers of these dialects are not of homogenous structure. For the speakers of this language area, Russian is the dominant language and the Altai Kiji dialect on which Altai Turkish standard language is based is in the position of high variety. The first settlement order of the speakers of Altai Turkish dialects has been scattered and the demographic structure has been destroyed. This complex and disorderly settlement manner appears as the most important aspect which affects the native speakers of the dialects, creates and feeds the dialect chaos. Today, it is possible to define the language environment where the majority of the Altai Turks are present as both bilingual and as diglossic or polyglossic. In this assertion, the relationship between Chalkandy Kiji, Kumandy Kiji, Tuba Kiji, Telengit Kiji dialects and Altai Kiji dialect which is in a position of high variety will be analyzed in terms of interaction. The differences between the dialects will be handled in the phonetical, morphological and lexicological levels. The corpus of the study has been mostly compiled by myself in 1998 and consists of texts prepared as doctorate studies (2005) and other texts from the same language variants compiled by other researchers (ErdaI, Nevskaya et. al 2013; Kokoşnikova, Nikolina et. al 2003). We may briefly give examples for the inter-dialects belonging to the speech chain of the native speaker of the Chalkandu Kiji dialect as follows:

[Boynuñ üyü cok, gaddı yok, balazı yok.] “kendisinin karısı yok, karısı yok” [“he does not have a wife, does not have a wife”] (Güner Dilek 2005: ÇK-1, 113)

(Here the word üy “wife, spouse” belongs to the high variety and the /c/ (

[Boyumnıñ äkı ūlçak äkı ōlaş] “Kendimin iki oğlan, iki oğlan” [“two sons of mine, two sons”](Güner Dilek 2005: ÇK-1, 97-98)

(In this example as well, while the word ūlçak “little boy, son” belongs to the high variety, the word ōlaş with the same meaning belongs to low variety and is used by the same informant.)

Aiiana Ozonova Interaction of Northern Altai varieties with Shor and Khakas and literary Altai

In my talk, which is based on the work of my colleages and predecessors, and on my own materials collected during expeditions, I will focus on the question of the influence of the Altai literary language, which has been developed on the basis of the southern Altai-kizhi dialect, on the northern dialects (Chalkandu, Kumandy and Tuba), and also on the phenomena that these languages have in common with the neighboring Shor and Khakas languages. It should be noted that it is not always possible to tell whether these phenomena are due to the influence of the Altai literary language or other neighboring Turkic languages, or whether they are part of a general area-specific process. Since the times when N.A. Baskakov documented and investigated the northern dialects [1965; 1966; 1972; 1985], there have been changes at almost all levels of these languages, which have occurred because of several reasons including the influence of the Altai literary language. The following changes bring these dialects closer to the Altai literary language, and therefore also to the southern dialects. 1. There is tendency towards the loss of the final γ / g in Chalkan: alyγ ~ alu ‘foolish’, suγ ~ su ‘water’; the instability of the final γ is also noted for the Kumandin and for the Tuba dialect γ ~ w ~ u: taγ ~ taw ~ tuu ‘mountain’ [Seljutina 1983; Sarbasheva 2004]. In Chalkan words, the loss of the final γ does not occur after long vowels, but only after short vowels: su ‘water’, u ‘house’, alu ‘foolish’. In some words, a transition of the final γ to y occurs when possessive singular suffixes are attached, e.g.: suγ ‘water’ – suyï ‘his water’, u / uγ ‘house’ – uyïm ‘my house’, uyïmnïŋ ‘of my house’. 2. Chalkan is in a process of the displacement of the č, similarly to the , displaying the occlusive t’: čer → t’er ‘earth, place’, čarïš → t’arïš ‘competiton’, čït → t’ït ‘smell’ [Fedina 2010, p. 10]. 3. In Kumandy, according to the data of the researcher I.Ja. Seljutina, the corresponding consonants š’ ~ č are realized both according to the northern and to the southern type: šanak ‘sledge’, but čekpen ‘cloth’; as for the word internal position, the southern Altaic č is used instead of the northern Altaic ž: qačan ‘when’, pyčak ‘knife’. With regard to the vowels u ~ o Kumandy follows the southern Altaic type: ol ‘he, she, it’, oro ‘pit’. As for the corresponding front vowels ü ~ ö, i ~ е in cognate words, both variants are possible in different dialects of Kumandy, but their realization with the low vowels ö and e occurs more often, just like in the southern Altay languages: börü ~ mürö ‘wolf’, pörük ~ pürük ‘cap’, pek ~ pik ‘strong, robust’ [Seljutina 2010, p. 96].

The northern Altaic dialects have a lot in common with the neighboring Turkic languages Shor and Khakas: 1) There is an inconsistent adherence to labial harmony in case of low rounded vowels: chalk. ködörö → ködrе ‘all’; 2) There is a tendency to spirantization of affricates: č > š (alt. üč, chalk. üš’, khak. üs, shor. üš ‘three’); 3) There is -n in the beginning of the genitive and accusative affixes after voiced sounds. In Chalkan and Khakas, the genitive and accusative case suffixes maintain their nasal onset after a voiced consonant, whereas in literary Altai, the first consonant in this position loses its sonority. For example: chalk. t’ïïl=nï, khak. čïl=nï, alt. d’ïl=dï. 4) a directive case form –sar/-zar/-sa/-za has emerged out of the directive postposition saarï /zaarï ‘towards’; 5) the auxiliary verb t’at- ‘lie’ is actively used in analytical constructions and is a part of secondary synthesized forms, contrary to the verb tur- ‘stand’ in the Altai literary variety, etc.

Formation of secondary synthetic verb forms on the basis of aspect-temporal analytical constructions with the verb čat-/t’at- is a process characteristic for all the languages of this area: for Altai and its dialects, for Khakas, and ist dialects, and for Shor [Широбокова 2005, с. 233]. A comparative analysis of several lexical groups of verbs (verbs of activities, speaking, mental perception) has shown that there are many parallels between the northern varieties of the Altai language (except Tuba) and Khakas and Shor. The Tuba dialects has more common verbs with literary Altai than with Khakas and Shor. The verb of speaking chalk. t‘ooqta, kum. čooqta, khak. čooxta, shor čooqta ‘speak’ is a specific feature of this area; this verb is encountered only in the languages of this area. These varieties (Shor dialects Mras and Kondoma alongside the Shor dialect of the ; Chalkan, Kumandy, Tuba) also form a specific area where the semantics ‘to put harness on a horse’ is expressed by the verb qopta not represented outside the area. Other Turkic languages of Siberia (Southern Altai dialects, Bachat Teleut, dialects of , the Kyzyl dialect of Khakas) have the lexeme d’ek= in various phonetic variants, also used in Kypchak languages. The languages of this area can together develop specific semantics of all-Turkic verbs. Thus, the verb saγ- that is encountered in many Turkic languages in the meaning ‘milk’, in Kumandy, Tuba, Chalkan, Shor has the meaning ‘gather berries’. Chalkan aŋna= / an’na= / an’da=, kum. aŋna= / an’na= / an’la=/ an’da=, Shor aŋna= has the following semantics: 1) hunt; 2) catch fish; while this verb in other languages has only semantics ‘hunt’ [Материалы 2013, с. 11, 41].

Literature Baskakov N.A. Altajskij jazyk: vvdednie v izučenie altajskogo jazyka i ego dialketov. Moscow: izd-vo AN SSSR, 1958. Baskakov N.A. Severnye dialekty altajskogo (ojrotskogo) jazyka: Dialekt černevyx tatar (tuba-kiži). I. Teksty i perevody. Moscow: Nauka, 1965. Baskakov N.A. Severnye dialekty altajskogo (ojrotskogo) jazyka: Dialekt černevyx tatar (tuba-kiži). II. Grammatičeskij očerk i slovar’. Moscow, 1966. Baskakov N.A. Severnye dialekty altajskogo (ojrotskogo) jazyka: Dialekt kumandincev (kumandy-kiži). Grammatičeskij očerk, teksty, perevody i slovar’. Moscow: Nauka, 1972. Baskakov N.A. Severnye dialekty altajskogo (ojrotskogo) jazyka: Dialekt lebedinskix tatar-čalkancev (kuu-kiži). Grammatičeskij očerk, teksty, perevody, slovar’. Moscow: Nauka, 1985. Baskakov N.A., Seljutina I.Ja. Dialekty altajskogo jazyka. In: Dialekty tjurkskix jazykov. Red. A.V. Dybo. Moscow: izdatel’stvo firma “vostočnaja literatura” RAN, 2010; p. 83-109. Kirsanova N.A. Konsonantizm v jazyke čalkancev (po ėksperimental’nym dannym) Novosibirsk: Sibirskij xronograf, 2003. Materialy k sravnitel’nomu slovarju glagolnoj leksiki tjurkskix jazykov Sajano-Altaja. Red. N.N. Širobokova, O.Ju. Šagdurova. Novosibirsk, 2013. Petrušova M.B. Kratkaja grammatika kumandinskogo jazyka. Učebno-metodičeskoe posobie. Novosibirsk, 2005. Sarbaševa S.B. Fonologičeskaja sistema tuba-dialekta altajskogo jazyka (v sopostavitel’nom aspekte). Novosibirsk: Sibirskij xronograf, 2004. Seljutina I.Ja. Kumandinskij konsonantizm: Ėksperimental’no-fonetičeskoe issledovanie. Novosibirsk: Nauka, 1983. Seljutina I.Ja. Kumandinskij vokalizm: Ėksperimental’no-fonetičeskoe issledovanie. Novosibirsk: Sibirskij xronograf, 2005. Tematičeskij slovar’ severnyx dialektov altajskogo jazyka. Red. N.A. D’ajym. Gorno-Altajsk, 2004. Tubalarskie ėtjudi. Red. S.G. Tatevosov. Moscow: IMLI RAN, 2009. Fedina N.N. Fonetičeskie i morfologičeskie osobennosti sovremennogo čalkanskogo jazyka (v sopostavlenii s xakasskim, šorskim i altajskim jazykami): Avtoref. dis. ...kand. filol. nauk. Novosibirsk, 2010. Šagdurova O.Ju., Ozonova A.A. Šagdurova O.Ju, Ozonova A.A. Glagoly rečevoj dejatel’nosti v tjurkskix jazykax i dialektax severa Sajano-Altaja. In: Sibirskij filologičeskij žurnal. Novosibirsk, 2014, No. 2; p. 157-163. Širobokova N.N. Otnošenie jakutskogo jazyka k drugim tjurkskim jazykam Južnoj Sibiri. Novosibirsk: Nauka, 2005. Širobokova N.N., Tjumenševa E.V., Šagdurova O.Ju., Ozonova A.A., Fedina N.N., Bajyr-ool A.V. Izučenie glagoloj leksiki v tjurkskix jazykax i dialektax Sajano-Altaja. In: Alkïš Bitig. Scripta in honorem D.M. Nasilov. Sbornik statej k 80-letiju D.M. Nasilova. Moscow: OOO “Izdatel’stvo MBA”; p. 152-160. Jazyki korennyx narodov Sibiri. Vyp. 15. İalkanskij sborni. Novosibirsk, 2004. Jazyki korennyx narodov Sibiri. Vyp. 17. İalkanskij sborni. Novosibirsk, 2005. Schӧnig C. Zur Stellung der Čalqandu innerhalb des südsibirischen Türkischen. In: // Jazyki korennyx narodov Sibiri. Vyp. 15. İalkanskij sborni. Novosibirsk, 2004; p. 4-32. Handbuch des Tschalkantürkischen. Teil 1: Texte und Glossar. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag, 2013.

Makasheva Saltanat Zholdasbekovna The Russian Language Literature Of Kazakhstan

The problem of studying creative works of writers using the Russian language and bilingual writers is becoming more actual not only because of the necessity of studying the dynamics of language processes. The Russian language literature of Kazakhstan not only follows the traditions of the Russian classical literature when depicting the reality of nowadays but also develops them. Unfortunately, to our opinion, in Russia they do not pay enough attention to studying the Russian language literature of Kazakhstan. However the modern Kazakh literature is an original and bright phenomenon of the universal literary process. The conceptual culture paradigm declared by Oldges Suleimenov defines the ontological, gnoseological and axiological directions in the search made by the Kazakh arts: “There is neither East, / Nor West, / There is a sunrise and a dawn, / There is a huge word – the Earth / Which is huge in all the languages” [6, p. 63, 64]. The modern Kazakh literature in this sense is a unique phenomenon. It effectively functions both in the Kazakh and the Russian languages. In the monograph by B.U. Joldasbekova it is said that the modern literature of Kazakhstan is a kind of synthesis of social cultural realities and basic tendencies of the Kazakh and the [1, p. 5]. Kazakh researchers are constantly working on systematizing and studying the Russian language literature. The evidence of it is a book recently published in Kazakhstan called “The anthology of the Russian language literature of Kazakhstan”, which presents many authors whose creative projects are being successfully realized in both languages [2, p. 270]. An example of bilingual activity can be found in the creative work of a talented Kazakh writer Aslan Zhaksylykov who published his trilogy “Dreams of damned” / “Sny okayannykh” in Russian. The first book of the trilogy called “Singing stones” / ”Poyuschiye kamny”, published in 1997, put the base of a series of novels dealing with the existential problem of creative being of a person. As for the novel “Singing stones” / ”Poyuschiye kamny”, the focus of its plot is the problem of relations between a person and nature. The key image of the novel is a stone pellet on which nature itself printed a female portrait and the yin-yang symbol – it is perceived as a metaphysical message of nature to a human. What is the sense of the message? It may be about a great responsibility of a human to his artistic gift? Is the birth of a person a link in a chain of biological processes or is it a difficult try of nature to express its sacred idea. To different degrees the issue is important for all the characters of the novel who seem to be absorbed by the every-day routine reality. In this context we should mention the scene where an old Chinese man who sells stones gives a precious pellet stone back to his lodger that is a tramp and says: ‘I would beat you if you hid some other stone <…> A person who has found such a stone cannot be a slave. Buddha himself protects him”. “It seems that the great dragon is waking up” – the old man added thoughtfully [4, p. 68]. The following actions of the old man seem to be illogical. He washes, dresses up and feeds his lodger, cleans after him and honors him. The old Chinese suddenly realizes his share of responsibility to the creative emancipation of nature which revealed to him in a person that was taken to his doorstep by the bitter fate. The refrain is the repeated words of a boy living next to the Semipalatinsk military ground (“We were growing up and falling ill, falling ill and growing up <….> When the illness was strong enough that we could not stand up mother started treating us with ointments and extracts made from local herbs. She did not know the herbs were poisoned too” [4, p. 40, 41], – it sound as a charge on de-stroying activity of humankind. In the conception of the author of this trilogy a man was chosen by nature for artistic creating but not for destroying no matter if it concerns a man himself or nature. The motif of being chosen is described in the novel in quite an interesting mode. A man is chosen by nature to realize its creative potential following the system of values formed by people. All religious revelations – let them be Buddhist, Muslim Christian or Judaic are just a road fork where the way of personal development starts. The antinomy of “evolution - destruction” is central in other novels of the trilogy “Dreams of damned” / “Sny okayannykh” not only in “Singing stones” / “Poyuschiye kamny”, for instance in the novel called ‘The other ocean” / “Drugoy okean” the writer tells out his image of a man and his place in the world in a different way but not less sincerely. It should be mentioned that brilliant knowledge of both the Russian and the Kazakh languages allows to A. Zhaksylykov to work as a translator and a researcher. His scientific research of the ancient Turkic writing is an obvious contribution to the development of science [5, p. 84]. The novels by Aslan Zhaksylykov are in some degree corresponding to the writings of Yury Dombrovsky whose artistic way was very closely connected with Kazakhstan. Almost all of his writings are centered on the problem of artistic existence, as it was noted by Kazakh literature scholars: “Yu.O. Dombrovsky belonged to those writers of the 20th century who dealt with arts, culture, and readiness to creative work as the most important conditions of human existence. For almost all of his life he wrote about ‘unnecessary things” during the reformation epochs – about the power of arts to change things, about the skills of a creator to fight with the absence of time by the power of his spirit…” [3, p. 99]. In the Russian language literature of Kazakhstan, especially nowadays there are a lot of bright and original writers. Russian readers unfortunately are not familiar with creative works by A. Zhaksylykov, N. Verevochkin, B. Kanapyanov, G. Bel`ger. It is the consequence of many reasons (failures of publishing houses etc.), but the Russian language literature of Kazakhstan should be studied not only by Kazakh literature scholars but also by Russian ones to see the dynamics of literary process. Modern Kazakh literary scholars fairly say: “The Russian language literature of Kazakhstan is an integral part of the literary process of Kazakhstan as well as of Russia and it is closely connected with the Eurasian idea” [2, p. 3].

References 1. Joldasbekova, B.U. The Russian language literature of Kazakhstan (Russkaya literature Kazakhstana) / B.U.Joldasbekova. – Almaty: Kazakh University, 2008. – 358 p. 2. Joldasbekova, B.U. The anthology of the Russian language literature of Kazakhstan (Antologiya russkoyazychnoy literatury Kazakhstana): a monograph research / B.U.Joldasbekova, N. Tomanova, Zh. Bayanbayeva, A. Azyzova, K. Tattimbetova. – Almaty: Kazakh University, 2014. – 272 p. 3. Joldasbekova, B.U. The original discourse of the prose by Yu. O. Dombrovsky in the context of modern Kazakh prose devoted to a writer (avtorsky discours sovremennoy Kazakhskoy prozy o pysatelye) / B.U.Joldasbekova, N. Sarsekeyeva. – Almaty: Kazakh University, 2013. – 213 p. 4. Zhaksylykov A. Zh. Dreams of damned: a trilogy (Sny okayannykh: trilogiya) / A. Zh. Zhaksylykov. – Almaty: The Almaty publishing house, 2006. – 526 p. 5. Zhaksylykov A. Zh. A comparative typology of images and motifs of religious contents in writings of the Kazakh literature. Esthetics, genesis (Sravnitelnaya tipologiya obrazov y motivov s religioznoy soderzhatel`nostyu v proizvedeniyakh Kazakhskoy literaratury. Estetica, genesis. / A. Zh. Zhaksylykov. – Almaty: Kazakh University, 2013. – 362 p. 6. Suleimenov, O. Selected writings (Izbrannoye) / O.Suleimenov. – Moscow: Khudozhestvennaya literatura.

Arman Eleusin On some contact-induced features of the Mishar Tatar subdialects

The Mishar Tatar was formed in the basin of the rivers Tsna and Mokša in the Meščera area, which was populated by and other Turkic tribes not later than at the end of the 13th century. The language demonstrates some characteristics of Western . Till the end of the 16th century it is not possible to detect any significant linguistic exchange between Mishar and Kazan Tatars. The intensification of ethnolinguistic relations occurs only with the later resettlement of into the territory of Middle Volga. The dialects located more eastern and exposed to the strong impact of Central (Kazan) Tatar gave up some phonetical and morphological features and adapt new characteristics, e.g. the volitive construction -GI kĭla- is interfered with the Central Tatar -(A)sI kil- to produce new forms like - (A)sI kĭla-, -(A)sI kila-. The obtaining of new linguistic features and elements occurred mainly in the dialects in the vicinity of the Chuvash, on the territory of the Republic of and Stavropol' area. But also in the west, Mishar dialects were influenced by the Bastan dialect of Central Tatar. In this paper we describe borrowed linguistic features which are not characteristic of the Mishar Tatar in the following dialects: MBayk. (North Bashkortostan), MSter. (South Bashkortostan), MV. (Volgograd and Stavropol' area), MTaw. (), MKrsn. (Ulyanovsk area), MCna. (Ryazan, Tambov area). MBayk. and MSter. show forms of personal and demonstrative pronouns typical for the local dialects of the Central Tatar: miya/miyarga ‘to me’, siya/siyarga ‘to you’, anaw ‘that’, minaw ‘this’, the realization variants of the clitic preterite copula idĭ with the palatal /y/ instead of /d/ as iyĭ/iyi/iy/iy/y. In MBayk. we can also find the imperative suffix -(I)ŋ for the second person plural. MSter. possesses the uvular allophones of the phonemes /k/ and /ɡ/. Some sub-dalects of MV. demonstrate the verbal suffix -(A)yAk for expressing the future tense, the cliticon -čI to enhance the statement, the interrogative pronoun ni zat ‘what’ and many lexical elements typical of Noghai. The language variety of the Mishar Tatar people of Podberez’ye shares morphological forms representative for Chuvash, e.g. the verbal suffix -mAllI or -mAčIr. Another examples of the Chuvash influence on Mishar Tatar is present in MKrsn. This dialect actively uses the participle form -(A)slIk. The Mishar dialects situated in far west show common features with the Bastan dialect of Central Tatar: the infinitive suffix -mAGA/-mA, the dative forms of personal pronouns maga, saga and the demonstrative pronouns based on the Old Turkic directive form -gArU: bigari, bigar(i)da, bigar(i)dan, šigari, šigar(i)da, šigar(i)dan, agari, agar(i)da, agar(i)dan.

References Berta, A. 1989: Lautgeschichte der tatarischen Dialekte, Szeged. Makhmutova, L. 1978. Opyt issledovanija tjurkskich jazykov. Mišarskij dialekt tatarskogo jazyka [An attempt at researching the Turkic languages. The Mishar dialect of the Tatar language], Moscow. Ramazanova, D. & Khayretdinova, T. (eds.) 2008. Tatar xalık soylaşlare, Berence kitap [Tatar folk dialects, vol. 1], Kazan. Ramazanova, D. & Khayretdinova, T. (eds.) 2008. Tatar xalık soylaşlare, İkence kitap [Tatar folk dialects, vol. 2], Kazan. Tenishev E. 2002: Sravnitelno-istoričeskaja grammatika tjurkskich jazykov [The comparative-historical grammar of Turkic languages], Moscow.

V.N. Yevseyev The Kazakh text of the lyrical poetry by Nina Yushchenko

Nina Dmitriyevna Yushchenko- Svyazhenina, a poet, a journalist, a member of the Union of Jour-nalists of Russia since 2006, an author of the 10 collections of lyrical poems, fictional-publicistic prose, lives and works in the town of Ishim. The main topics of her artistic works are a personal fate on the background of the history of our country, memory, the life of people and nature of her native Ishim river district. Russian, Kazakh and Ukrainian people live here together for many years; the Ishim river district steppe is a mother land for all of them. Multinational character of the region which was formed by histor-ical processes made them tolerant, able to respect different ethnic cultures and striving to understand its originality and its contribution to the fund of general cultural values. N. D. Yushchenko- Svyazhenina wrote a number of sketches devoted to the culture and everyday life of the Kazakhs, they were published in her original book “The land of hope” / “Zemlya Nadezhd”: “Letters to the republic of Kazakhstan” / “Pys`ma v respubliku Kazakhstan”, “The life around is so good – I want to live” / “Khorosho vokrug – Zhyt` khochetsya”, “Following the inheritance of the great ancestor” / “Po zavyetam velikogo predka”, “Beck-Bulat” [see: 3, 80-82; 82-83; 83-85; 86-89]. Initial phrases of the sketches are symptomatic, they very definitely express the sense of the relations of representatives of different ethnic groups, who live in neighborhood on their native land, which is single to all of them: “have you ever been to the Ishim river district? Have you stayed with my respectable fellowmen the Isenovs, the Akzhanovs, the Zhanbekovs or in other respectable Kazakh families?” [3, 80]. For the Tyumen region the Kazakh people are a native ethnos, they compactly live in its southern parts. The Kazakhs of the Ishim River district keep their national traditions, especially rural residents, for then it is common to demonstrate a traditional spirit of hospitability, which is “raised to the level of a law by the national jury” [2, 142] and which originates from their nomadic life. Kazakh settlements of the re- gion are included into the system of rural economy with its dairy and meat cattle breeding and arable farming, at homes they produce and process wood, knit shawls socks and other things from goat down [6, 14]. The Kazakhs living not in villages and countries where there are a lot of ethnic minorities but in sep- arate small settlements called “steppe auls” are closer to the traditional national way of life; such settle- ments exist for many years in the that are near the border with Kazakhstan, especially in the Kazansky district of the Tyumen region, which is motherland of Nina Yushchenko. Being very well aware of the Kazakh way of life once allowed to Nina Yushchenko to start writing and make a sketch of life of a steppe aul in the lyrical poem “evenings in the steppe aul…” (1979):

Yesterday in the steppe aul They treated us with koumiss. The dogs were barking loudly. They were selling shawls. Young Kazakh women Were whispering hiding in curtains; It was blowing with bitter smoke... Solemnly and with authority An old woman repeated: - Salam Aleikum, children, She herself was spinning a bit. She was scarcely moving, But so sharp in words. The Sun was burning down In a silent river. But it seemed to me that it has already happened to me: There was a steppe and a foal, And a dairy mare. Young Kazakh women Were putting carpets to guests, And the Sun in the blue sky Was firing very much; Feather-grass was bowing to the ground It was smelling with bitter smoke. And the heart was beating, As a seagull above a break [6, 28].

In the book called “National images of the world” G.D. Gatchev tells that nature defines the national im-age and national psychology is expressed in material things, wealth and the fruits of one`s work [1, 47; 41]. If we regard it in a broader way the national culture reflects in its world outlook, living and language. Nina Yushchenko depicts the picture of living of the Kazakhs from the aul and their social and natural space with the help of expanded images; she thoroughly chooses the key words, which reflect the specific character of the Kazakh world in the most complete way: aul, steppe, feather-grass, shawls, carpets, foal, dairy mare, koumiss and the national salutation Salam Aleikum. These images gather into a complex pic- ture by means of light and precise strokes of the author; they contain dominant social cultural and natural existential characteristics of the ethnic world: jobs, diligence of the Kazakh people (cattle breeding, spin- ning carpets, knitting shawls), their hospitability (They treated us with koumiss; Were putting carpets to guests). She tells about communicativeness, openness, liveliness of the national character (She was scarcely moving, But so sharp in words), slow movements and solemn grandeur of an old Kazakh woman, who makes warm (close) relations with people around her: Solemnly and with authority / An old woman repeated: / Salam Aleikum, children, / She herself was spinning a bit. Some certain details and characteristics of the national way of life are gathered as in a focus in the central image of the steppe space: But it seemed to me that it has already happened to me: / There was a steppe and a foal, / And a dairy mare. / <…>And the Sun in the blue sky / Was burning very much; / Feather-grass was bowing to the ground / It was smelling with bitter smoke. There are meny things essential for the “morphology” of the image: the light shadow and colors, the “temperature” of the world surrounding you, your body (“...The Sun was burning down”; “And the Sun in the blue sky Was firing very much”; “Feather-grass was bowing to the ground”), objective contents (koumiss, carpets, shawls, curtains, foal and mare – it is dairy as the Kazakhs usually have it), dynamics in nature (“...The Sun was burning down”; firing very much”; “Feather-grass was bowing to the ground”), The picture needs a lively movement – a gesture, flexibility of a man`s movement (treating, selling, whispering, repeating, scarce in moving, were putting carpets). A lively sound grows into the image (Dogs were barking loudly, were whispering), in the real world we are surrounded by smells (It was smelling with bitter smoke), the world is full of sensitive perception (...And the heart was beating, As a seagull above a break). The last image the heart was beating, As a seagull)is a metaphor of the gentle way in which the Slavic soul touches un-explainable mystery of the Kazakh life style which it sees in the very depth of the human space existence, which you suddenly feel (while seeing some exterior attributes) with your nerves as a sacral being that is close to your soul. In some essential things the life of the Kazakh aul amidst the steppe occurred to be close to the look out of N. Yushchenko. The steppe under the scope of the sky is an initial natural (and existential) space of the Kazakh ethnos, which, if to explain it in an academic way, includes the landscape, which feeds people, forms their idea of time and space and their axiology – the system of values. It is just like in Nina Yushchenko`s lyrical poetry the Ishim steppe is the main space character, it is impossible to imagine and understand “the space” of her poetry without it. Steppe is the freedom of soul for the whole natural and human world: There at nature the sky is brighter / And the grass is higher along the roads («The Song», 1995) [6, 29]. In steppe you can see far around yourself, above the steppe – under the scope of the sky – birds are flying, their flight expands the living space and the horizon. When Nina Yushchenko creates the picture of life of the Kazakhs of the river Ishim district, she takes the Ishim steppe in summer state, on the top of the Sun activity; in this way she models the original that is their southern warn motherland (do not forget that the word “Nature”/ “priroda” in Russian derives from the words “with my family”, “with my motherland”). The ishimian steppe is a native land and a relative sphere for Nina Yushchenko as well as for the steppe Kazakhs (“And here are only steppes and horses”1969):

And here are only steppes and horses, As well as dark-skinned shepherds, Here old ladies Watch at me holding their hands above the eyes [6, 90].

In steppe a man is absolutely transparent for other people, he is open both for distance and for the horizon, open to the Sun and the wind, which burn his face and make his skin dry. The poetess`s feature is to peer at the specific character of the Kazakhs life, a respectful attitude to the values of other ethnic cul- ture, the essence of her poetic methodology is to penetrate into the existential dimensions of the world, including the ethnic one. The main things are intuition and knowledge, the ability to choose the key pa- rameters of the ethnic world (metaphorical and linguistic) when you give up temporal features. It is not the landscape as a background for the everyday life of the Kazakhs but nature as a source of national life, national world order as being is in the key characteristics. The central position in the chronotope (which is a system of spatial and temporal images) of poems devoted to the Kazakhs plays steppe – a boundless steppe. The image of the steppe valley is presented in the lyrical poem called “What a name is Saltanat…” (2002):

What a name is “Saltanat”: It means a warm house and a rich garden In the valley among the mighty mountains, And there is a marquee of the bright ancient times– Everything is in these sounds. Saltanat – And horse tabuns are flying, And they raise dust. As well as someone`s glance Which is hot and it burns through the ages, And a quick river boils. The aryk is purling. And a proud cry of a strong bird, And a moment of life! [6, 38].

The poem is devoted to Saltanat Makasheva. S.Zh. Makasheva is a Doctor of Science (Philology), a professor, she has been working for higher educational institutions of the Tyumen Region for almost twenty years. She was born not in the northern but in the southern Kazakhstan, in the foothills of Ala-Tau (the Jambul Region), that is why there is the image of mighty mountains (when you move from the valley of Kopsan to the south-east the height of mountains is rising. But here once again the central image is not mountains but the valley among the mighty mountains; to the north of the foothills there is a velley of Kopsan and next to it in the south west there is the Chuyskaya Valley. A valley is the same with steppe and the Kazakh steppe in the lyrical poetry of Yushchenko is an image of the location of the ethnos in the Universe, it is a cradle and the alma mater of the Kazakhs. In the steppe space the Sun is rolling as a yel- low melon ( a ripe melon) in the middle of the southern valley – a garden and in the feather grasssteppe – a foal and a dairy mare, hobbled horses (‘Kyzyl Zhar”, 1997):

«Kyzyl Zhar» – is a customs post. It is also feather grass and a boundless steppe. It is the same as it used to be, it is quite common: A wild kite is melting in the sky; Tangle of wormwood is drawing; The Sun is rolling in a lazy way (As the Kazakh yellow melon It will fall to the fields in the evening, Which is silver because of the heat). It is hot. Above the steppe there is only the wow Of the wind that pushes the clouds And hobbled horses [6, 50].

In the height there is the hot summer Sun and a bird that is flying in the sky, from such height a nomad can mentally look the horizon of his being around: A wild kite is melting in the sky; And a proud cry of a strong bird. In steppe the flight is only possible on a horse; that is why the steppe space is marked by the ancient symbol of settling and conquering the space: And horse tabuns are flying, And they raise dust; we can compare it with steppes and horses, hobbled horses, and a foal, and a dairy mare. From the ancient times “…we expect to get distance from a horse and its litter (koumys) is not the most important thing…” – it was said by G.D. Gatchev who compared a nomadic horse with a cow that is a farm animal for settled arable people and that is “stable as the ground” [1, 65]. In the steppe life style life always looked more “cosmic” [1, 61]. It has been constructed in ac- cordance with the rhythms of the steppe world order and formed the opinion of the Kazakhs about space and time, their customs and outlook. In the poems by Yushchenko devoted to the Kazakhs the features of modern life are left away; if there are some images of a warm house, a rich garden (they are images of a settled life which is now typical for the Kazakhs) there are also the symbols of the great steppe – horses, tabunes of horses and tents next to them, though it is mentioned that they are from the bright ancient times. She emphasizes the epical might of the steppe and natural (since the ancient times) flow of the steppe life with its width and openness. A warm house is a symbol of changes, but they are of an every-day character, it is an external flow of life, but in the bottom of the genotype memory there is steppe and horses and a tent. The examples of the Kazakh ethnical world in the lyrical poetry of Yushchenko are given eternity in the contrast to shallow characteristics of the progress: the Kazakh world is marked with “space characters” and ‘atoms” of the national life, if we use the terminology of Geogre Gatchev [1, 70-80]. The cosmic characters of the Kazakh ethnical world – steppe (as a saddle and aura of the Kazakh be-ing and culture), flying birds, wind and clouds and (if we remember the words of G. Gatchev) “the space itself which is heat and the Sun…” [1, 80]: And the Sun in the blue sky / Was burning tremendously / It is hot. Above the steppe there is only the wow / Only the wind is pushing clouds; The feather grass steppe. Not quickly / The sun wind is going as a wave. The subjects and “atoms” of this world are nomadic shep-herds, horses, tents, the sense of hospitability. Emphasizing the cosmic character of the steppe life leads to giving eternal features to the characteristics of the steppe ethnic world. Space dominates here i.e. steppe distances and widths which are open to the sky and look, while time either has a cyclic character or somehow stopped its flow; the smells of steppe are also considered to be eternal as many centuries ago the wind was carrying a bitter smell of wormwood creating the whole bunch of smells: It is also feather grass and a boundless steppe/ It is the same as it used to be, it is quite common: / A wild kite is melting in the sky; / Tangle of wormwood is drawing; [6, 50]. If a poet penetrates into the world outlook of steppe people he should see the world in the same way as they do, feel and listen to just as they did it; it is the sensibility of “a former nomad” (a Kirgiz, a Kazakh) “to herbs and smells…” [1, 62]. When characterizing the mentality of the steppe Kirgiz people and their ability to perceive existence in spatial but not temporal categories G. Gatchev emphasized: “a Kirgiz does not perceive in steppe the traces of their ancestors but they remember that they are flying there, they feel their presence and see them with internal eyesight” [1, 61]. In lyrical poems of Yushchenko there is also a try to model “the internal eyesight” of a Kazakh which was formed by the cosmic character (eternity) of steppe: Попытку моделировать в системе образов стихотворения «внутреннее зрение» казаха, сформированного космичностью (вечностью) степи, наблюдаем и в стихах Ющенко: But it seemed to me that it has already happened to me: / There was a steppe and a foal, / And a dairy mare / It is the same as it used to be, it is quite common: / A wild kite is melting in the sky; / Tangle of wormwood is drawing; / And horse tabuns are flying, / And they raise dust. As well as someone`s glance / Which is hot and it burns through the ages, / And a quick river boils. /The aryk is purling. / And a proud cry of a strong bird, / And a moment of life! The life of a person is short but it is within the steppe eternity which is the same with the eternity of a family. Poets strive to look into the other reality with internal eyesight but more often they model it and put it into a contrast to the given one which is not ideal and quite prosaic. The steppe poems by Nina Yushchenko may be a run away from the reality to the other culture as to the exotic “country”. For the first sight there is such a “runaway” depicted by Nina Yushchenko in a poem “Oh, the farm head, it is familiar for ages…” (1991) which is an imaginary visit of the two Russians “to see” the Kazakhs from Ishim:

Oh, the farm head, it is familiar for ages: We have a woe from wit. Look what a severe winter Is in the town this year. But we were waiting the more severe... Oh, those your jokes! What are the deputes chosen by us Constantly discussing in the town council?.. But years, our best years are running away. Isn`t it better, I am sure I am right– Both for the right and for the left ones – Is not it better for the two of us – in a new car Go to the Ishim district, to the Kazakhs having put on a coat? There is koumys and a lot of unleavened patties there, And the sunset which is bright as a flag [6, 54].

The hospitability of the Russians and the Kazakhs … And the image of the lack of order, an argue between the left and the right ones … In that time in 1991 there was a way out when you looked at another lifestyle, another ethnical culture. A person taken from his job position, from urban environment (from civilization in general) and sent among the others to steppe, to natural space then the real price of his personality will be opened, as here – G. Gatchev wrote, - “there is only a natural authority: the author-ity of mind, skills, power and character – and they differ from artificial authority of a social position titles, documents, words and money” [1, 76]. Of course there are a lot of changes in the modern life of Kazakhs but they go on keeping traditions of hospitability. The nomadic character of living dictated in any way the rules of peacefulness. In steppe you are open to all directions; you cannot fortify all the nomadic routes that is why you are not protected, the only condition of safety was to keep good relations with neighbors, knowing their origins, respect and hospitability. When comparing the Russian and the Georgian hospita- bility, George Gatchev came to the conclusion that the Georgian feast is “an alleluia” (“honor to the God”). A toast at a Georgian feast should have honored the best in a man (a Platonic idea of you in the best way”) in reality, after a person heard his best characteristics at a feast, he should have wanted to prove them in everyday life. The Russian people at a feast, as G. Gatchev said, more often want not “hon-or the God” but the opposite – “God, bless us!”: at a Russian feat they start “to confess, to beat their hearts, to become sad…” [1, 422]. Perhaps the researcher somehow exaggerates, but the sense of it is demonstrated very well. We should also add that “beating oneself to the heart and crying bitterly” is deeply rooted in a personal culture of a Russian person, which originates from a permanent life disorder in Rus` and the Orthodox tradition of a concentrated religious evaluation of one’s thoughts and actions by a person himself. This very model of self-assessment is presented in the first part of the poem “Oh, the farm head, it is familiar for ages…”, it demonstrates our Russian-like “sad complaining”. The first part of the poem is a thesis and the second one carries the antithesis and the synthesis:

Let`s forget the debates And cries of deputies Let forget them just for a moment, for an hour. Our host who is a Kazakh, a bearded aksakal, Will pour some sweet tea to us All the talk will flow peacefully And we will recall that all of us are brothers! [6, 54-55].

The Russians are at a Kazakh tea ritual ceremony. During a Kazakh feast they have a calm (wise) talk where they find some ways to compromises between different points of view but the opposite ones. At the Kazakh tea ceremony just like at a religious rite there is the realm of respect to its participants and the ones about whom the participants think (the relatives who are far away and are dead). They quietly discuss common business, wish health and wealth to each other and make presents. Guests should be treated paying him respect, a guest brings presents: a nomadic life style brought up a belief that a treat- ment and a gift “made with all one`s heart” will be paid back tenfold; in this way they generated positive energy, a kind beginning both in common being and in ‘the fate of each person” [6, 15]. Everything is close to the scale of real being, but not the imaginary one. When the two Kazakh people meet each other for the first time at tea after greeting each other they first of all find out what are their relations. This identification which finishes in a few minutes, quickly (as they list the branches of a rich family tree) builds a system of blood relations or distant family relations which are brother-like in their origin. In Nina Yushchenko`s poetry we find one more very important image of a tea ceremony – a hospitable host, whom she calls a bearded aksakal. The word aksakal (which originated from a Turkic word “ak” which means “white” and “sakal” meaning “beard” and a word-by-word translation is “a white beard”) means the head of a family, the oldest man, a respectful and wise man. The image is on the top of the picture of the Kazakh tea ceremony, it proves possible and real etalons of interpersonal communication. Debates and cries are opposed with national etiquette in which friendliness dominates. A close acquaintance with values of other culture enriches your own culture too and enlarges its positive potential. Familiarizing the values of other ethnic culture expands the horizon of being; it is not a pursuit for “exotics” or a run away to other reality but a spiritual necessity to improve your personal culture. The “steppe” poems of Nina Yushchenko are marked with the ability to catch immediately a lot of details / but at the same time to fix (in the image system of poems and their linguistic material) not momentary in the Kazakh life but the things that are co-natural and co-relative being, which was growing up for ages and which reflect the scales of the Kazakh steppe (they are stateliness and the world order) as well as typical characteristics of every day life and ethnic being, its values which have universal human meaning.

1. Gatchev G. National images of the world (Natsional`niye obrazy mira) / G. Gatchev. – Moscow: So- vetsky pisatel, 1988. – 448 p. 2. Karabulatova I.S. the Kazakhs (Kazakhy) / I.S. Karabulatova // The Tyumen Region: nations, lan- guages, culture: an encyclopedia reference book (Tyumenskaya oblast`: narody. yazyky, kultura: entsi- klopedichesky spravochnik) / ed. by I.S.Karabulatova. – Tyumen: IEC “Express”, 2007. – P. 141-145. 3. Svyazhenina N.D. The land of hope (Zemlya nadezhdy) / N.D.Svyazhenina. – Shadrinsk: «Shadrynsky Printing house”, 2004. – 232 p. 4. Chaukerova G.K. Traditional culture of the Kazakhs of the Tyumnen Region (Traditsionnaya kultura kazakhov Tyumenskoy oblasty) / G.K. Chaukerova // National cultures of the region: research and me- thodical, repertoire and informational almanac (Natsional`nyeye kultury regiona: nauchno- metodichesky y repertuarno-informatsionny almanakh). – Issue XVIII: The Kazakhs in the Tyumen district. – Tyumen: “Agat Publishing House”, 2008. – P. 14-17. 5. Yushchenko, N. “Pure Bells…”: a book in a book (“Zvony chistyey…”: knyga v knyge) // Svyazhenina N.D. Women. The Energy of Creation (Zhenshchyny. Energiya sozidaniya). – Tyumen: “Tyumen Pub- lishing House”, 2010. – P. 140-164. 6. Yushchenko, N.D. “And the moment of life…”: poems (“Y Zhyzny mig…”: stikhy” / N.D.Yushchenko,. – M: Sovietsky Pistal`, 2004. – 104 p.