Forgotten Past
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
The History and Classification of American Indian Languages: What Are the Implications for the Peopling of the Americas?
The History and Classification of American Indian Languages: What are the Implications for the Peopling of the Americas? IVES GODDARD Dept. of Anthropology Smithsonian Institution Washington, D.C. 20560 LYLE CAMPBELL ;T Dept. of Anthropology q Louisiana State University Baton i, ! JLr , Though the synthesis of linguistic and nonlinguistic data in hypothesized reconstructions of the peopling of the _ ; Americas is a complex task, it is one that can be useful to undertake, provided that the proper techniques are .! (! employed. The most important methodological prerequisite is the use of the well-established techniques of i;! historical linguistics to establish and evaluate the linguistic data. Extreme caution should be exercised in using I linguistic classifications, and conclusions derived from them, that are based on the comparison of superficially I similar words and grammatical elements, such as the method of multilateral comparison employed by J.H. I Greenberg and M. Ruhlen. The linguistic picture as presently known is compatible with a wide range of ! [ possible scenarios for the earliest peopling of the Americas. In exploring the best fit between linguistic and ! [ nonlinguistic hypotheses of New World prehistory, only explicitly historical hypotheses will prove to be of i , value. DO100811 .'i 189 ' 190 Method and Theory for Investigating the Peopling of tire Americas I Goddard and L. Cam;_bell INTRODUCTION viduals cannot acquire new genes or teeth. Languages can become extinct in populations which survive geneti- The history of the world's languages is obviously part of cally. As a consequence, attempts to correlate language the history of the human race, in the Americas as else- groupings with human phylogeny or movements at deep where. -
Iranian Languages in the Persian Achamenid
ANALYZING INTER-VOLATILITY STRUCTURE TO DETERMINE OPTIMUM HEDGING RATIO FOR THE JET PJAEE, 18 (4) (2021) FUEL The Function of Non- Iranian Languages in the Persian Achamenid Empire Hassan Kohansal Vajargah Assistant professor of the University of Guilan-Rasht -Iran Email: hkohansal7 @ yahoo.com Hassan Kohansal Vajargah: The Function of Non- Iranian Languages in the Persian Achamenid Empire -- Palarch’s Journal Of Archaeology Of Egypt/Egyptology 18(4). ISSN 1567-214x Keywords: The Achamenid Empire, Non-Iranian languages, Aramaic language, Elamite language, Akkedi language, Egyptian language. ABSTRACT In the Achaemenid Empire( 331-559 B.C.)there were different tribes with various cultures. Each of these tribes spoke their own language(s). They mainly included Iranian and non- Iranian languages. The process of changes in the Persian language can be divided into three periods, namely , Ancient , Middle, and Modern Persian. The Iranian languages in ancient times ( from the beginning of of the Achaemenids to the end of the Empire) included :Median,Sekaee,Avestan,and Ancient Persian. At the time of the Achaemenids ,Ancient Persian was the language spoken in Pars state and the South Western part of Iran.Documents show that this language was not used in political and state affairs. The only remnants of this language are the slates and inscriptions of the Achaemenid Kings. These works are carved on stone, mud,silver and golden slates. They can also be found on coins,seals,rings,weights and plates.The written form of this language is exclusively found in inscriptions. In fact ,this language was used to record the great and glorious achivements of the Achaemenid kings. -
The Vocabulary of Inanimate Nature As a Part of Turkic-Mongolian Language Commonness
ISSN 2039-2117 (online) Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences Vol 6 No 6 S2 ISSN 2039-9340 (print) MCSER Publishing, Rome-Italy November 2015 The Vocabulary of Inanimate Nature as a Part of Turkic-Mongolian Language Commonness Valentin Ivanovich Rassadin Doctor of Philological Sciences, Professor, Department of the Kalmyk language and Mongolian studies Director of the Mongolian and Altaistic research Scientific centre, Kalmyk State University 358000, Republic of Kalmykia, Elista, Pushkin street, 11 Doi:10.5901/mjss.2015.v6n6s2p126 Abstract The article deals with the problem of commonness of Turkic and Mongolian languages in the area of vocabulary; a layer of vocabulary, reflecting the inanimate nature, is subject to thorough analysis. This thematic group studies the rubrics, devoted to landscape vocabulary, different soil types, water bodies, atmospheric phenomena, celestial sphere. The material, mainly from Khalkha-Mongolian and Old Written Mongolian languages is subject to the analysis; the data from Buryat and Kalmyk languages were also included, as they were presented in these languages. The Buryat material was mainly closer to the Khalkha-Mongolian one. For comparison, the material, mainly from the Old Turkic language, showing the presence of similar words, was included; it testified about the so-called Turkic-Mongolian lexical commonness. The analysis of inner forms of these revealed common lexemes in the majority of cases allowed determining their Turkic origin, proved by wide occurrence of these lexemes in Turkic languages and Turkologists' acknowledgement of their Turkic origin. The presence of great quantity of common vocabulary, which origin is determined as Turkic, testifies about repeated ancient contacts of Mongolian and Turkic languages, taking place in historical retrospective, resulting in hybridization of Mongolian vocabulary. -
On the Influence of Turkic Languages on Kalmyk Vocabulary
Asian Social Science; Vol. 11, No. 6; 2015 ISSN 1911-2017 E-ISSN 1911-2025 Published by Canadian Center of Science and Education On the Influence of Turkic Languages on Kalmyk Vocabulary Valentin Ivanovich Rassadin1 & Svetlana Menkenovna Trofimova1 1 Kalmyk state University, Department of Russian language and General linguistics, Elista, Republic of Kalmykia, Russian Federation Correspondence: Valentin Ivanovich Rassadin, Kalmyk state University, Department of Russian language and General linguistics, Pushkin street, 11, Elista, 358000, Republic of Kalmykia, Russian Federation. E-mail: [email protected] Received: October 30, 2014 Accepted: December 1, 2014 Online Published: February 25, 2015 doi:10.5539/ass.v11n6p192 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/ass.v11n6p192 Abstract The article covers the development and enrichment of vocabulary in the Kalmyk language and its dialects influenced by Turkic languages from ancient times when there were a hypothetical so called Altaic linguistic community in the period of general Mongolian linguistic condition and general Oirat condition. After Kalmyks moved to Volga, they already had an independent Kalmyk language. The research showed how the Kalmyk language was influenced by the ancient Turkic language, the Uigur language and the Kirghiz language, and also by the Kazakh language and the Nogai language (the Qypchaq group). Keywords: Kalmyk language vocabulary, vocabulary development, Altaic linguistic community, general Mongolian vocabulary, ancient Turkic loanwords, general Kalmyk vocabulary, Turkic loanwords in Derbet dialect, Turkic loanwords in Torgut dialect, Turkic loanwords in the Sart-Kalmyk language 1. Introduction As it is known, Turkic and Mongolian languages together with Tungus-Manchurian languages have long been considered kindred and united into one so called group of “Altaic languages”. -
Medieval Turkic Nations and Their Image on Nature and Human Being (VI-IX Centuries)
Asian Social Science; Vol. 11, No. 8; 2015 ISSN 1911-2017 E-ISSN 1911-2025 Published by Canadian Center of Science and Education Medieval Turkic Nations and Their Image on Nature and Human Being (VI-IX Centuries) Galiya Iskakova1, Talas Omarbekov1 & Ahmet Tashagil2 1 Al-Farabi Kazakh National University, Faculty of History, Archeology and Ethnology, Kazakhstan 2 Mimar Sinan Fine Arts University Faculty of Science, Turkey Correspondence: Galiya Iskakova, al-Farabi Avenue, 71, Almaty, 050038, Kazakhstan. Received: November 27, 2014 Accepted: December 10, 2014 Online Published: March 20, 2015 doi:10.5539/ass.v11n8p155 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/ass.v11n8p155 Abstract The article aims to consider world vision of medieval (VI-IX centuries) Turkic tribes on nature and human being and the issues, which impact on the emergence of their world image on nature, human being as well as their perceptions in this case. In this regard, the paper analyzes the concepts on territory, borders and bound in the Turks` society, the indicator of the boundaries for Turkic tribes and the way of expression the world concept on nature and human being of above stated nations. The research findings show that Turks as their descendants Kazakhs had a distinctive vision on environment and the relationship between human being and nature. Human being and nature were conceived as a single organism. Relationship of Turkic mythic outlook with real historical tradition and a particular geographical location captures the scale of the era of the birth of new cultural schemes. It was reflected in the various historical monuments, which characterizes the Turkic civilization as a complex system. -
Türkmen'in Temel Yolu Ya Da Damga Alfabe Hakkinda
29 TÜRKMEN'İN TEMEL YOLU YA DA DAMGA ALFABE HAKKINDA Doç. Dr. Mehmetdurdı SARIHANOV Türkmenistan Bilim ve Teknik Yüksek Kurulu Mahtumkulu Dil ve Edebiyat Enstitüsü Başkan Vekili ÖZET XVII-XVIII. asır Türkmen klâsik şairleri Andalip, Şakandî, Şeydaî eserlerinde Oğuz Alfabesi hakkında ilgi çekici bilgiler verirken özellikle Andalip bilimsel özellik taşıyan görüşler ortaya koymuştur. Andalip "Oğuzname"adlı eserinde Oğuz Han'ı medenî kahraman olarak tanıtarak onun "tagma alfabeyi yani bir dönem için hem damga hem de alfabe olarak hizmet eden işaretleri bulduğunu kıvançla ifade ediyor. Türkmen klâsik şairlerinin eski alfabemiz hakkında ne tür bilgilere sahip oldukları veya bu konuda nasıl fikir yürüttükleri henüz açık değil. Fakat halkının muhteşem geçmişiyle iftihar eden Andalip, değerli eserini yazmak için hem halk arasındaki, hem de resmi tarihlerdeki Oğuznameleri inceleyerek bunlardan neticeler çıkarmış ve Oğuzların tarihini yazmıştır. Klâsik şairlerimizin özellikle Andalip'in eserinde belirtilen ve diğer ilmi çalışmalarda yer alan bilgiler çerçevesinde bundan birkaç yıl önce damga alfabeyi tekrar gündeme getirmek konusunda girişimlerde bulunan âlimler oldu. Andalip ile Şakandî 24 harfli, Şeydaî ise 25 harfli alfabeden söz ediyor. Türkmen klâsik şairlerinin gündeme getirdikleri alfabe, aslında Kaşgarlı Mahmut'un zamanında Uygur yazısı adını almaya başlayan Türk alfabesidir. Divanü Lügati't-Türk'te Türk yazısının 25(18+7) harfi olduğu belirtilirken, Kaşgarlı Mahmut, Uygurların yazısından söz ederken Türk alfabesi ile ilgili bilgilere başvurarak -
Bibliography
Bibliography Many books were read and researched in the compilation of Binford, L. R, 1983, Working at Archaeology. Academic Press, The Encyclopedic Dictionary of Archaeology: New York. Binford, L. R, and Binford, S. R (eds.), 1968, New Perspectives in American Museum of Natural History, 1993, The First Humans. Archaeology. Aldine, Chicago. HarperSanFrancisco, San Francisco. Braidwood, R 1.,1960, Archaeologists and What They Do. Franklin American Museum of Natural History, 1993, People of the Stone Watts, New York. Age. HarperSanFrancisco, San Francisco. Branigan, Keith (ed.), 1982, The Atlas ofArchaeology. St. Martin's, American Museum of Natural History, 1994, New World and Pacific New York. Civilizations. HarperSanFrancisco, San Francisco. Bray, w., and Tump, D., 1972, Penguin Dictionary ofArchaeology. American Museum of Natural History, 1994, Old World Civiliza Penguin, New York. tions. HarperSanFrancisco, San Francisco. Brennan, L., 1973, Beginner's Guide to Archaeology. Stackpole Ashmore, w., and Sharer, R. J., 1988, Discovering Our Past: A Brief Books, Harrisburg, PA. Introduction to Archaeology. Mayfield, Mountain View, CA. Broderick, M., and Morton, A. A., 1924, A Concise Dictionary of Atkinson, R J. C., 1985, Field Archaeology, 2d ed. Hyperion, New Egyptian Archaeology. Ares Publishers, Chicago. York. Brothwell, D., 1963, Digging Up Bones: The Excavation, Treatment Bacon, E. (ed.), 1976, The Great Archaeologists. Bobbs-Merrill, and Study ofHuman Skeletal Remains. British Museum, London. New York. Brothwell, D., and Higgs, E. (eds.), 1969, Science in Archaeology, Bahn, P., 1993, Collins Dictionary of Archaeology. ABC-CLIO, 2d ed. Thames and Hudson, London. Santa Barbara, CA. Budge, E. A. Wallis, 1929, The Rosetta Stone. Dover, New York. Bahn, P. -
The Carian Language HANDBOOK of ORIENTAL STUDIES SECTION ONE the NEAR and MIDDLE EAST
The Carian Language HANDBOOK OF ORIENTAL STUDIES SECTION ONE THE NEAR AND MIDDLE EAST Ancient Near East Editor-in-Chief W. H. van Soldt Editors G. Beckman • C. Leitz • B. A. Levine P. Michalowski • P. Miglus Middle East R. S. O’Fahey • C. H. M. Versteegh VOLUME EIGHTY-SIX The Carian Language by Ignacio J. Adiego with an appendix by Koray Konuk BRILL LEIDEN • BOSTON 2007 This book is printed on acid-free paper. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Adiego Lajara, Ignacio-Javier. The Carian language / by Ignacio J. Adiego ; with an appendix by Koray Konuk. p. cm. — (Handbook of Oriental studies. Section 1, The Near and Middle East ; v. 86). Includes bibliographical references. ISBN-13 : 978-90-04-15281-6 (hardback) ISBN-10 : 90-04-15281-4 (hardback) 1. Carian language. 2. Carian language—Writing. 3. Inscriptions, Carian—Egypt. 4. Inscriptions, Carian—Turkey—Caria. I. Title. II. P946.A35 2006 491’.998—dc22 2006051655 ISSN 0169-9423 ISBN-10 90 04 15281 4 ISBN-13 978 90 04 15281 6 © Copyright 2007 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands. Koninklijke Brill NV incorporates the imprints Brill Hotei Publishers, IDC Publishers, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, and VSP. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission from the publisher. Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use is granted by Brill provided that the appropriate fees are paid directly to The Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 910, Danvers, MA 01923, USA. -
Sumerian Lexicon, Version 3.0 1 A
Sumerian Lexicon Version 3.0 by John A. Halloran The following lexicon contains 1,255 Sumerian logogram words and 2,511 Sumerian compound words. A logogram is a reading of a cuneiform sign which represents a word in the spoken language. Sumerian scribes invented the practice of writing in cuneiform on clay tablets sometime around 3400 B.C. in the Uruk/Warka region of southern Iraq. The language that they spoke, Sumerian, is known to us through a large body of texts and through bilingual cuneiform dictionaries of Sumerian and Akkadian, the language of their Semitic successors, to which Sumerian is not related. These bilingual dictionaries date from the Old Babylonian period (1800-1600 B.C.), by which time Sumerian had ceased to be spoken, except by the scribes. The earliest and most important words in Sumerian had their own cuneiform signs, whose origins were pictographic, making an initial repertoire of about a thousand signs or logograms. Beyond these words, two-thirds of this lexicon now consists of words that are transparent compounds of separate logogram words. I have greatly expanded the section containing compounds in this version, but I know that many more compound words could be added. Many cuneiform signs can be pronounced in more than one way and often two or more signs share the same pronunciation, in which case it is necessary to indicate in the transliteration which cuneiform sign is meant; Assyriologists have developed a system whereby the second homophone is marked by an acute accent (´), the third homophone by a grave accent (`), and the remainder by subscript numerals. -
An Amerind Etymological Dictionary
An Amerind Etymological Dictionary c 2007 by Merritt Ruhlen ! Printed in the United States of America Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Greenberg, Joseph H. Ruhlen, Merritt An Amerind Etymological Dictionary Bibliography: p. Includes indexes. 1. Amerind Languages—Etymology—Classification. I. Title. P000.G0 2007 000!.012 00-00000 ISBN 0-0000-0000-0 (alk. paper) This book is dedicated to the Amerind people, the first Americans Preface The present volume is a revison, extension, and refinement of the ev- idence for the Amerind linguistic family that was initially offered in Greenberg (1987). This revision entails (1) the correction of a num- ber of forms, and the elimination of others, on the basis of criticism by specialists in various Amerind languages; (2) the consolidation of certain Amerind subgroup etymologies (given in Greenberg 1987) into Amerind etymologies; (3) the addition of many reconstructions from different levels of Amerind, based on a comprehensive database of all known reconstructions for Amerind subfamilies; and, finally, (4) the addition of a number of new Amerind etymologies presented here for the first time. I believe the present work represents an advance over the original, but it is at the same time simply one step forward on a project that will never be finished. M. R. September 2007 Contents Introduction 1 Dictionary 11 Maps 272 Classification of Amerind Languages 274 References 283 Semantic Index 296 Introduction This volume presents the lexical and grammatical evidence that defines the Amerind linguistic family. The evidence is presented in terms of 913 etymolo- gies, arranged alphabetically according to the English gloss. -
IRK BİTİG Ve RUNİK HARFLİ METİNLERİN DİLİ
TC YILDIZ TEKNİK ÜNİVERSİTESİ SOSYAL BİLİMLER ENSTİTÜSÜ TÜRK DİLİ VE EDEBİYATI ANABİLİM DALI TÜRK DİLİ DOKTORA PROGRAMI DOKTORA TEZİ IRK BİTİG ve RUNİK HARFLİ METİNLERİN DİLİ FİKRET YILDIRIM 07725202 TEZ DANIŞMANI PROF. DR. MEHMET ÖLMEZ İSTANBUL 2013 Created by trial version, http://www.pdf-convert.com ÖZ IRK BİTİG ve RUNİK HARFLİ METİNLERİN DİLİ Hazırlayan Fikret Yıldırım Aralık, 2013 Kâğıda yazılı Eski Türkçe runik harfli metinleri ele aldığımız bu çalışmada öncelikle bu metinlerin bir envanteri hazırlanmıştır. Şu an Almanya, İngiltere, Japonya, Rusya ve Fransa’da bulunan toplam 46 adet katalog numaralı yazmanın transliterasyonu, transkripsiyonu ve Türkçe çevirileri verilmiştir. Bu yazmalar içinde en hacimlisi olan fal kitabı Irk Bitig üzerine açıklamalar da yapılmıştır. Bu açıklamalarda hem Irk Bitig’in hem de bununla bağlantılı olarak Eski Türkçenin kimi dil özellikleri üzerinde durulmuştur. Çalışmanın sonunda mevcut bütün kâğıda yazılı Eski Türkçe runik metinlerin sözlüğü verilmiştir. Anahtar Kelimeler : Irk Bitig, Eski Türkçe, Runik Metin, Envanter, Sözlük iii ABSTRACT IRK BİTİG and THE LANGUAGE of RUNIC MANUSCRIPTS Prepared by Fikret Yıldırım December, 2013 In this study, I dealt with Old Turkic runic manuscripts. Firstly, I prepared the inventory of Old Turkic runic manucripts. Now, there are 46 Old Turkic runic manuscripts with catalogue numbers which are preserved in Germany, England, Japan, Russia, and France. Also, I gave the transliteration, transcription and the Turkish translation of these manuscripts. Among these manuscripts, the voluminous one is the omen book, Irk Bitig. I also gave some remarks on this book. In these notes, I dealt with linguistic features of Irk Bitig parallel to Old Turkic. At the end of this study, I gave the vocabulary of Old Turkic runic manuscripts. -
Second Report Submitted by the Russian Federation Pursuant to The
ACFC/SR/II(2005)003 SECOND REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 25, PARAGRAPH 2 OF THE FRAMEWORK CONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION OF NATIONAL MINORITIES (Received on 26 April 2005) MINISTRY OF REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION REPORT OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF PROVISIONS OF THE FRAMEWORK CONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION OF NATIONAL MINORITIES Report of the Russian Federation on the progress of the second cycle of monitoring in accordance with Article 25 of the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities MOSCOW, 2005 2 Table of contents PREAMBLE ..............................................................................................................................4 1. Introduction........................................................................................................................4 2. The legislation of the Russian Federation for the protection of national minorities rights5 3. Major lines of implementation of the law of the Russian Federation and the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities .............................................................15 3.1. National territorial subdivisions...................................................................................15 3.2 Public associations – national cultural autonomies and national public organizations17 3.3 National minorities in the system of federal government............................................18 3.4 Development of Ethnic Communities’ National